Ditto!notorial dissent wrote:
I do think this is going to get much more interesting, and messy as it plays further out. The indictment just looks line a train wreck waiting to happen for Hovind, and I think it is all of his own work.
The difference being that Jo had no choice whereas Eric has seen the light. Being invited in is one thing; accepting the invitation and participating another.Doesn't mean he didn't invite him along for the ride without telling him, after all, look at the favors he did his wife, Eric's just his son.
The levity is usually carefully disguised. Hard to do with a Hanson "Mmm-bop" joke.Samphire wrote:P.S. to darling. Your previous posts have tended to suppress levity. Is it your birthday?
Try reading what I wrote. I didn't imply Eric was along voluntarily or knowingly. And Jo had a choice, she could have and should have told him NO!!!Samphire wrote:The difference being that Jo had no choice whereas Eric has seen the light. Being invited in is one thing; accepting the invitation and participating another.Doesn't mean he didn't invite him along for the ride without telling him, after all, look at the favors he did his wife, Eric's just his son.
I managed to read it all right; it was understanding it that was the problem. If you weren't implying that Eric acted voluntarily then the inference must be that, if Eric went along with the scheme at all, he did so involuntarily. But what on earth does that mean? Eric had served a lien on his own house some time ago as a result of which the government backed away from its claim so Eric knew very well from his own previous experience the effect of a lien notice. So in what possible scenario could it be alleged that he might have served the liens involuntarily?Try reading what I wrote. I didn't imply Eric was along voluntarily ......
How could Eric serve a lien notice unknowingly using his father's signature?......or knowingly.
Perhaps you underestimate the working of the fundamentalist religious mind, especially one married to an arrogant male dunderhead. A friend of Jo's wrote:And Jo had a choice, she could have and should have told him NO!!!
In any event, I don't think that it has ever been proved that Jo was aware of the law relating to structuring. Jo's uncross-examined evidence was that she did not know of the offence although I would have to agree that the circumstantial evidence is that, at best, she acted extremely naively.At her sentencing hearing John a CSE employee stood up with his Bible and read Ephesians 5;22 – “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.” John explained that this verse was the foundation of a Christian woman’s mind, that this verse determined how Jo made decisions in life because she based her life on the Word of God and the Bible tells her to submit. She didn’t do what she did to break the law; she did it to obey the Lord by obeying her husband.
Yeah, but why does he keep pulling up to the toll booth every single time?grixit wrote:Just when everyone thought he was getting out, Hovind pulls himself back in!
I recently ran across a website dedicated to dealing with survivors of narcissistic abuse.Samphire wrote:
Perhaps you underestimate the working of the fundamentalist religious mind, especially one married to an arrogant male dunderhead.
I do. Anybody acquainted with even the basics of *********ary theory (as Kent claims to be) and who states interminably "I'll believe in ********* * when a dog gives birth to a non-dog" is very stupid indeed.Or maybe he's just plain stupid, I just don't know, .........
It would make sense for him to stick with his current federal defender who is, at least, already up to speed with the contempt aspects of Kent Hovind's new indictment.Paths of the Sea wrote:So, I guess Kent is presently without a federal public defender to represent him. I wonder if he will go for a new one for his new case or if he or his family or his supporters to get him a private lawyer?
Paths of the Sea wrote: ...
Dismissal Order in Hovind Criminal Contempt Case
Filed October 28, 2014
CASE NO.: 3:14mc53/MCR/EMT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
KENT E. HOVIND,
Defendant.
ORDER
This criminal contempt action is scheduled to be tried by a jury on November 3, 2014, but the Court has received notice of a pending related criminal case, United States v. Kent E. Hovind and Paul John Hansen, No. 3:14cr91-MCR (N.D. Fla.), in which a Grand July returned a six-count indictment on October 21, 2014.
The Government has now advised the Court that this criminal contempt action should be dismissed in light of the criminal indictment (see doc. 19). The Court agrees.
Accordingly, t This case is DISMISSED. All pending motions are moot, and the Clerk is directed to close the file.
DONE and ORDERED this 28th day of October, 2014.
M. Casey Rodgers
M. CASEY RODGERS
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-------------------------------------------------------------
How long before Kent (or one of his followers) starts saying that the new indictment is "double jeopardy"?Judge Roy Bean wrote:Victory!
I'm sure that is the way it will appear for/to Kent, but then he has been a master at seeing things that aren't there for a very long time. He'll just be in for further irritation when he gets hauled back in for arraignment on the whole new laundry list of charges they've come up with.Judge Roy Bean wrote:How it will appear in some people's minds:
Victory!