Doreen Hendrickson Retrial Set for July 21, 2014

[Famspear]

I checked, and Doreen's reference is indeed to Mark E. Cedrone of the firm of Cedrone & Mancano, LLC in Philadelphia. At Mr. Cedrone's suggestion, Doreen attached, to her Motion, a copy of a letter from Cedrone dated December 5th that explains the realities of the limitations imposed on her by asking for help on such short notice.

[wserra]

If she is talking about tax lawyer Mark E. Cedrone of Philadelphia, I think that would be heavy-duty legal representation.

She is, and it would be indeed. Mark Cedrone, however, is not about to spout Hendricksonian bullshit. While this could get interesting, it will all be moot if Judge Roberts refuses to continue the sentencing - which she may well do.

[Famspear]

The guilty verdict came back on July 25th.

On July 28th, sentencing was set for November 20th.

On October 24th sentencing was re-set for Wednesday, December 10th.

Now, two days before the re-scheduled day, Doreen is telling the Court that she is "overwhelmed".

Where is her hubby in all this? Blowhard Hendrickson still claims:

Pete Hendrickson is possibly the most effective lawyer in history, even while never having set foot in a law school, nor ever being a card-carrying member of "the bar"....

Where's her copy of his book, Cracking the Code? The reason she is facing jail time is because of her adherence to his tax theories, right? Blowhard Pete has claimed that his "analysis" of federal tax law is:

. . . . the most comprehensive and sophisticated research and analysis of the common, Constitutional, statutory and "case" law related to the American tax system in general and the "income" tax in particular ever conducted.

And, as Blowhard Hendrickson has written, it doesn't stop there:

But it doesn't stop there, either. Since the initial publication of CtC [Cracking the Code] [ . . . ] thousands of Americans who have gone to the trouble of putting aside their pre –conceptions and their skepticism and carefully read CtC have duplicated the first of my historic accomplishments . . . . EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE AMERICANS IS SIMPLY THE NEXT ONE ACCOMPLISHING SOMETHING NEVER ACHIEVED IN THE HISTORY OF THE INCOME TAX UNTIL CtC REVEALED THE TRUTH.

And, isn't avoiding jail time for using Hendrickson's CtC method/non-method relevant to the "income" tax subject? What has Blowhard Hendrickson written about that?

Oh, here it is:

ANYTHING THAT IS RELEVANT TO THE "INCOME" TAX SUBJECT WILL BE FOUND ACCURATELY AND APPROPRIATELY ADDRESSED IN CtC AND/OR ON THIS [losthorizons dot com] WEBSITE. ANYTHING NOT FOUND ADDRESSED IN CtC AND/OR ON THE WEBSITE IS NOT RELEVANT TO THE "INCOME" TAX SUBJECT, AND WILL INTERFERE WITH YOUR ACCURATE COMPREHENSION OF THE SUBJECT.

[Famspear]

If she is talking about tax lawyer Mark E. Cedrone of Philadelphia, I think that would be heavy-duty legal representation.

She is, and it would be indeed. Mark Cedrone, however, is not about to spout Hendricksonian bullshit. While this could get interesting, it will all be moot if Judge Roberts refuses to continue the sentencing - which she may well do.

Wes, do you have an opinion on what the odds might be that the Court grants her this continuance?

[LPC]

While this could get interesting, it will all be moot if Judge Roberts refuses to continue the sentencing - which she may well do.

I've never practiced criminal law, and so this is pure speculation on my part, but I think it's possible that the standards for 6th Amendment rights in a sentencing hearing aren't quite as high as the rights in the trial itself, and a defendant who insists on a course of conduct during a criminal trial isn't going to get a lot of sympathy/indulgence in asking for a last-minute delay in sentencing in order to bring in new counsel.

On the other hand, the judge might not care that much about when sentencing happens, and doesn't want to create an issue for appeal, and so might grant the continuance, consistent with the principle of least bother.

So, my money would say that a continuance is more likely than not.

[wserra]

Neither granting nor denying an adjournment of the sentence would come close to an abuse of discretion. It's strictly up to Judge Roberts, and I don't know her.

If I had to put my money down, it would be on "sentence adjourned" - but only because that's what most judges I do know would do.

[Famspear]

....my money would say that a continuance is more likely than not.

....If I had to put my money down, it would be on "sentence adjourned" - but only because that's what most judges I do know would do.

Thanks.

[wserra]

Today's two docket entries:

12/09/2014 120 NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Mark E. Cedrone appearing for Doreen M. Hendrickson (Cedrone, Mark) (Entered: 12/09/2014)

12/09/2014 TEXT-ONLY NOTICE: Sentencing Hearing on 12/10/2014 at 1:30 PM is Adjourned; new date to be set as to Doreen M. Hendrickson (CPin) (Entered: 12/09/2014)

[Dr. Caligari]

Neither granting nor denying an adjournment of the sentence would come close to an abuse of discretion. It's strictly up to Judge Roberts, and I don't know her.

If I had to put my money down, it would be on "sentence adjourned" - but only because that's what most judges I do know would do.

I don't know Judge Roberts, either, but I agree with Wes. If a reputable attorney wants to sign on, the judge is very likely to give him some time to come up to speed.

[Famspear]

Docket entry on Dec. 17, 2014:

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings as to Doreen M. Hendrickson: Sentencing reset for 4/9/2015 10:30 AM before District Judge Victoria A. Roberts - Defendant's sentencing memo due: 3/13/2015; Response due: 3/27/2015 (CPin) (Entered: 12/17/2014)

[wserra]

Mark Cedrone has filed his sentencing memo on behalf of Doreen. It is what you would expect - top-flight. Cedrone makes it clear that he doesn't buy into the bullshit without putting Doreen down. He marshals the legal Guideline arguments thoroughly, and presents Doreen personally in the best light possible. Were I the judge, I would not send her to jail.

Judge Roberts, however, may have had all she can take of these nitwits.

[Burnaby49]

Mark Cedrone has filed his sentencing memo on behalf of Doreen. It is what you would expect - top-flight. Cedrone makes it clear that he doesn't buy into the bullshit without putting Doreen down. He marshals the legal Guideline arguments thoroughly, and presents Doreen personally in the best light possible. Were I the judge, I would not send her to jail.

Judge Roberts, however, may have had all she can take of these nitwits.

Well maybe he goes a little over the top here;

"Doreen Hendrickson is a model citizen - a veritable Jeffersonian ideal of civic virtue."

[Judge Roy Bean]

Interesting read.

Something bothers me about the idea that "One cannot commit fraud by doing nothing."

My sense is that if you are made aware of a fraud that just happens to be to your economic advantage and you do nothing but reap the rewards, you have indeed, "done something."

[LPC]

Cedrone makes it clear that he doesn't buy into the bullshit without putting Doreen down.

Page 1, second sentence of the Introduction: "Essentially, Mrs. Hendrickson will be
sentenced for having the temerity to stand behind her convictions and not cower to the
government’s efforts to silence her in expressing her sincerely held views concerning the Internal Revenue Code."

No, that is NOT why Doreen will be sentenced, and that quote sounds like Petey wrote it.

No one has ever tried to silence Peter or Doreen. As Judge Easterbrook pointed out: “The government may not prohibit the holding of these beliefs, but it may penalize people who act on them.” Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68, 69 (7th Cir. 1986).

Doreen is not being penalized for believing or expressing views concerning the Internal Revenue Code, but for continuing to act on them even after being told by the court that they were wrong.

Were I the judge, I would not send her to jail.

Page 2: "Nonetheless, the Court should not impose a sentence that includes any period of incarceration, but rather sentence Mrs. Hendrickson to [a] period of probation that includes whatever conditions the Court deems appropriate." (Emphasis added.)

At the very least, "appropriate" conditions would include the condition that Doreen file correct tax returns.

[Famspear]

....At the very least, "appropriate" conditions would include the condition that Doreen file correct tax returns.

Absolutely. Great point.

[notorial dissent]

I think over the top is the kindest thing I can say for it. I would have irreversibly biased after reading the introduction, with the sure and certain knowledge someone was trying to shine me. I realize that Cedrone is trying to do the best he can for his client, but there is a point at which it ceases. He is a quite a good writer if this is any indication, but it doesn’t alter the fact that he is trying to dress the pig up in a silk party dress, and it isn’t going to change the pig one bit. It will be interesting to see what the court does now.

[The Observer]

If there is the opportunity for Doreen to address the court prior to the sentence being handed down, this might be the point where Doreen might end up sending herself to jail. One can only wonder if Cedrone will have any influence in convincing Doreen to control her remarks or, even better, declining to make any comments at all.

Well maybe he goes a little over the top here;

"Doreen Hendrickson is a model citizen - a veritable Jeffersonian ideal of civic virtue."

Yeah, I thought that Cedrone was really stretching here in trying to redeem Doreen; the last adjective I would have used to describe Doreen would have been "Jeffersonian." And virtuous? Law-abiding? This was the woman who helped secure the ingredients for Peter's mail bomb, no?

[LPC]

Doreen Hendrickson is a model citizen - a veritable Jeffersonian ideal of civic virtue.

Yeah, except for the lying on the tax returns and criminal contempt of court parts. Otherwise, ideal.

She is committed to her Country and has an abiding faith in its laws, including the Internal Revenue Code.

Except for the parts she has chosen to disregard.

In its Sentencing Memorandum, the government seems to propose that the offense in this case be viewed as a "tax fraud crime," yet the acts of criminal contempt alleged in the compound single count of conviction involved no such crime. There was no fraud and certainly no tax fraud involved in any of Mrs. Hendrickson's actions.

She filed returns reporting that she had no income even though she had income. That's fraud.

The orders Mrs. Hendrickson ostensibly violated

"Ostensibly"? A jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that not only violated the orders, but violated them willfully.

make no reference whatsoever to fraud and are accompanied by judicial findings - which led to the issuance of those orders - that do not recognize any suggestion of fraud. To the contrary, Mrs. Hendrickson took explicit steps to ensure that no one, including the United States, could possibly have been deceived or suffer from any misunderstanding of anything she did relevant to this case.

Sounds like the old "my lies were so obvious that no one could possibly have been deceived" defense.

Further, Mrs. Hendrickson did not fail to file any return required under any tax statute,

Actually, she did. Her returns were so frivolous that they weren't considered to be returns at all.

nor say anything on any tax-related document that she does not believe to be true, complete and correct to the best of her knowledge and belief, all of which was thoroughly established at her trial.

What was also thoroughly established at her trial was that her returns were false, and were in contempt of the court orders directed to her.

Nor did the acts alleged in the Indictment occasion or intend any loss to the government.

Of course a loss was intended. Doreen Hendrickson refused to admit that any tax was owed. If that is not intended to be a loss to the government, then what's the point?

Finally, although Mrs. Hendrickson does not seek to re-litigate her innocence herein, the Court in dispatching its sentencing duties should consider the fragility of her conviction.

Perhaps. But shouldn't the court also consider her arrogance, her self-serving posturing to evade taxes, and her contempt for the rule of law?

[notorial dissent]

I will go with both Observer and LPC here. The absolute last thing Cedrone can possibly want if for Doreen to open her mouth or otherwise address the court, at which point she would be sending herself to jail.

I'm not sure, even with the glowing statements of Mr Cedrone that it will, or should for that matter, make any difference. I can't imagine the judge forgetting her prior behavior in court, and since I doubt if she has really reformed, I really don't think she is due any favors. And anything at all should be predicated on her properly and legally filing the returns she has so far refused to file.

[wserra]

Well maybe he goes a little over the top here

he is trying to dress the pig up in a silk party dress

Yep. That's what a defendant's sentencing memo does.