Kent Hovind Since Sept 2013

[ArthurWankspittle]

Off topic-ish but Hovind related:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/scie ... 4030784397

Seems he was nearly right after all.

[Paths of the Sea]

Alexander Otis Matthews,
Plaintiff,

v.

The RationalWiki Foundation, et al,
Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

On PACER, the above case is filed as an Amended Complaint to another unrelated case that Matthews filed and carries the case number of:

Case 1:14-cv-00207-LO-TRJ

It looks like they have worked out that problem and the Matthews v. RationalWiki case now has been given it's own account:

The new number is:

Case 1:14-cv-00257-LO-TCB

Sincerely,
Maury Enthusiast!

[Paths of the Sea]

Gea Ambrosia's latest Hovind interview can now be found at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4lNFQRXNVo

Starts off with Kent talking about his RationalWiki lawsuit and his run-in with PZ Myers.

Sincerely,
Maury Enthusiast!

[Paths of the Sea]

It's official; Kent's U.S. Tax Court appeal re-instated.

------------------------------------

(LETTER)

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

ELBERT PARR TUTTLE COURT OF
APPEALS BUILDING
56 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303

John Ley Clerk of Court
March 26, 2014

Robert R. Di Trolio
U.S. Tax Court
400 2ND ST NW
WASHINGTON, DC 20217

Appeal Number: 13-12520-FF
Case Style: Kent Hovind v. Commissioner of IRS Agency
Docket Number: 4245-10

The referenced appeal was dismissed on 11/08/2014.

Enclosed herewith is a certified copy of this
court's order reinstating this appeal.

Appellee's brief is due 30 days from the date
of this letter.

Sincerely,
JOHN LEY
Clerk of Court

-------------------------------------------------------

(ORDER)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-12520-FF

KENT E. HOVIND,
Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

COMMISSIONER OF IRS,
Respondent - Appellee.

Petitions for Review of a Decision of the U.S.Tax Court
Before: TJOFLAT and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

Appellant’s motion to reinstate the appeal is
GRANTED.

Date Filed: 03/26/2014

-------------------------------------------------------

[darling]

And here's a link to Kent's appeal brief, filed the same day as the order.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/bjt0rq

In which - among other things - he conflates self-employment taxes and income taxes; cites 508(c)(1) as proof that he is a mandatory exception, while ignoring what the exception pertains to; and and appears to use material he demanded the IRS place in his master file as proof that his IRS master file says he owes no taxes.

[Paths of the Sea]

And here's a link to Kent's appeal brief,
filed the same day as the order.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/bjt0rq

I am looking forward to the Government's reply, after which I think the Court might act swiftly to dispose of the appeal, sustaining the Tax Court determination or maybe remanding it for some reason or another.

The following was also posted by his on-line girlfriend yesterday who appears to be moving in a different direction now:

https://www.facebook.com/geena.ambrosia ... 0673230383

From: "Evangelist Gea" (aka "Gea Ambrosia")
Date: Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Mark Harrison is the Newest Co Host and
Member of Truth Serum Talk Radio Show
and Club Creation Evangelism Team !

I will b postn a video on Friday to update
everyone as well as my final interview with
Dr. Hovind since Mark is taking over NEXT
WEEK!

Thanks for your endless prayers and support
during this trying time in my life!

POWER TO THE PEOPLE;
C U AT THE FINISH LINE!

--------------------------------------------------

[Samphire]

In these proceedings Kent also seems to be attempting to overturn the judgment against his wife who chose to have her trial held separately. She is long out of time to enter any appeal.

Is it correct to say, Darling, that even in the extremely unlikely that Kent managed to get the entire judgement against him overturned, that against Jo would still stand and she would still be liable for the payment over to the IRS of their entire wealth so nothing of a material nature is to be gained by Kent's current appeal?

Secondly, under para 12 of the pleadings Kent claims that none of the disputed income or property belonged to him personally but, later in the request for relief, he asks that it all be returned to him. Whoops!

Doubtless, it is also significant that although Kent purported to sign over his properties to the trust/corporation sole (or whatever) the mortgages remained in his own name. Whoops!

What fun.

[Paths of the Sea]

The Hovind interview comes early!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNvSiZV ... e=youtu.be

[Samphire]

From page 50:

https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcDockInq/ ... ID=5865552

Petitioner also contends that any fraudulent intent during the years at issue was attributable to Mr. Hovind.

The petitioner in this case was Jo Hovind. It cannot help your case when, in her own legal defence, your own wife accuses you of fraudulent intent. But were you there at the family breakfast, lunch and dinner tables throughout those years when Kent tediously and unceasingly discussed his tax avoidance schemes, Jo? Indeed you were. I wonder if Kent is even aware of the document.

In the current interview with Club Creation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNvSiZV ... e=youtu.be

Referring to the RationalWiki lawsuit Kent says at 8:40 -

Apparently, they don't know how the law works.

Well, Kent is an expert in such matters so he should know. Over the past few years he has served around 15 lawsuits - and lost every one.

[Paths of the Sea]

But were you there at the family breakfast,
lunch and dinner tables throughout those
years when Kent tediously and unceasingly
discussed his tax avoidance schemes, Jo?

Indeed you were.

If only Oprah could get to Jo and get her to talk!

For now, it looks like folks are making sure Jo is kept quiet in order to protect the family business and make like the relationship with Kent is just fine.

Jo may be needing a lot more help than Kent.
Maybe she is getting some.
Maybe not.

Sincerely,
Maury Enthusiast!

[Samphire]

For now, it looks like folks are making sure Jo is kept quiet in order to protect the family business and make like the relationship with Kent is just fine.

Poor Jo, an innateley honest and decent woman I am sure but now branded for the rest of her life as a common criminal for having served her husband in submission as her fundamentalist beliefs dictated.

She must be both desperately conflicted and very, very angry. Should she have remained silent as the bible dictates in 1 Tim 2:12 -

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

while Kent crazily ranted on over the years over the legal difference between Kent Hovind and KENT HOVIND (there isn't one) or should she have complied with the wiser teaching of 1 Peter 2:13 -

Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;

If she didn’t know then she certainly does now.

In the unlikely event that Kent wins his current libel suit he could then strut around (and strut around he would) telling one and all that he had never been jailed as a criminal fraud all the while his wife having to suffer for the rest of her life the ignomy of her tax court judgment declaring her to have acted in her dealings with the IRS “with fraudulent intent”.

Until Kent recants I suspect their marriage is doomed.

[darling]

Is it correct to say, Darling, that even in the extremely unlikely that Kent managed to get the entire judgement against him overturned, that against Jo would still stand and she would still be liable for the payment over to the IRS of their entire wealth so nothing of a material nature is to be gained by Kent's current appeal?

If only Jo was liable then the IRS could only go after her assets. Those in Kent's name would be safe. Joint assets, I think, would be safe too. It's outside my area of knowledge though.

So I suppose Kent hopes to protect all assets in his name and owned jointly with his wife. Although he also claims to own no property so there is really nothing to protect.

Secondly, under para 12 of the pleadings Kent claims that none of the disputed income or property belonged to him personally but, later in the request for relief, he asks that it all be returned to him. Whoops!

... returned to him or its rightful owners.
Well, the rightful owners should be asking for it back, not Kent.

Doubtless, it is also significant that although Kent purported to sign over his properties to the trust/corporation sole (or whatever) the mortgages remained in his own name. Whoops!

Kent treated the trust/corporation sole as his alter ego, so will the government.

[AndyK]

IF Kent wins (so unlikely as to be laughable) and recovers some financial resources, Jo would have fairly strong grounds for a civil suit to recover her damages from him.

One can only hope

[Paths of the Sea]

Until Kent recants I suspect their marriage is doomed.

We may never know.

It may well be that the marriage was over a long time ago, but there are practical matters (i.e., the family business) that may have prevented Kent and Jo and the rest of them from admitting to it.

Meanwhile, Eric Hovind is busily planning this years Grand Canyon vacation under the guise of business trip, of course!

Sincerely,
Maury Enthusiast!

[.]

We may never know.

I hope we don't. And, who cares, anyway?

This idiot scammer has been turned into a whining pauper. He's lost. Decisively. Over and over. He's less interesting than Ed Brown, who will die (thankfully, quietly) in prison.

Hovind was never much of a TP, he's more of a religious nut-case who just won't shut up. I don't get your incessant posting (you account for about half of all posts on this combined thread) regarding this clown every time he or one of his acolytes takes finger to keyboard. Did he do you some injustice along the way?

Don't get me wrong, you can post all you want about him and his infantile adventures within the limits of board moderation tolerance, it's just that I don't see the point of it -- this guy is a big nothing-burger. Not to mention totally boring. If I never read another word about him it would be too soon.

[Samphire]

IF Kent wins (so unlikely as to be laughable) and recovers some financial resources, Jo would have fairly strong grounds for a civil suit to recover her damages from him.

Agreed - that's a very big IF.

[AndyK]

...
I don't get your incessant posting (you account for about half of all posts on this combined thread) regarding this clown every time he or one of his acolytes takes finger to keyboard.
...

Each legitimate post referring to Kent Hovind raises this thread higher on the various search engine hit lists.

Better people should learn about him hear than from less objective sources.

[The Observer]

Did he do you some injustice along the way?

As far as I can figure out, PotS has taken exception to the fact that Hovind has creationist beliefs and had the audacity to promulgate those views through his non-profit organizations and to claim that these beliefs were correct as opposed to scientific views. The fact that Hovind decided to adopt tax protester beliefs in an effort to further evade paying income tax is probably what brought PotS to our fabled halls. The fact that it is extremely rare to see PotS posting to a non-Hovind thread makes it probably safe to say that he/she would have never came to Quatloos if Hovind had stayed off the Kool-ade barrel.

I understand that certain people are not happy with people of religious beliefs getting exemptions from tax, especially if these religious figures are making a ton of money. I am not happy with the situation either, and I suspect that people like Hovind, the Bakers, Oral Roberts and the like have fueled that fire. And I suspect that this is what drives PotS to continue to hammer away at Hovind despite the fact that Hovind is pretty much up the creek without the proverbial paddle. Sort of like watching vultures picking over the last few bones.

In any event, if you look at the Forbes links that PotS has put up in the past, there is a certain individual who tried several times to inject Hovind's name and situation into the topics at hand. I think the one where I saw this was the thread regarding Irwin Schiff and his son. This person kept trying to equate what Schiff did with Hovind. I don't know who this individual was but it showed the desperation this particular person had in trying to keep Hovind's name in the public eye; any person familiar with Schiff's history would not find anything at all similar with Hovind's antics. And I think that is reflected in the thread since no one else responded to the posts and no one else mentioned Hovind's name - including the original blogger of the thread.

I agree with you - that PotS does have the right to continue posting about Hovind here as long it is somehow related to his tax-denier issues - even if it is at the risk as becoming as irrelevant as Hovind. But we won't allow this thread to turn into a religious topic of any sort, so Hovind's creationist beliefs are not up for discussion.

[grixit]

POTS also resents that Hovind and other creationists have coopted the memory of his personal hero, Maury, even going so far as to lie about his epitaph.

[AndyK]

Paths of the Sea joined Quatloos on January 10, 2005, making him one of the most senior residents of Quatloosia.

Of his 400+ posts, only 86 are on the Kent Hovind thread.

PotS, although concentrating recently on Kent Hovind, has shown, in the past, equal intolerance for many other forms of stupidity.

And, to disagree somewhat, his creationist activities are fair game in the sense that they were little more than a front for a massive tax evasion scheme.