Big loss for the DOJ

[Demosthenes]

Not guilty on the Kahre case in Las Vegas.

U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
District of Nevada

LAS VEGAS CONTRACTOR, RELATIVES AND EMPLOYEES
CHARGED WITH TAX EVASION
-Indictment Alleges Over $114 Million in Wages Not Reported to IRS-
LAS VEGAS - - A Las Vegas man who owns and operates several different businesses in Las Vegas, including painting, drywall and tile companies, has been indicted by the Federal Grand Jury on conspiracy and tax evasion charges, announced Daniel G. Bogden, United States Attorney for the District of Nevada.


ROBERT DAVID KAHRE, of Las Vegas, is charged in two separate criminal indictments with 20 counts of Willful Failure to Collect or Pay Over Tax, two counts of tax evasion, and two counts of Conspiracy to Attempt to Evade or Defeat Tax. Twenty-four other individuals, including his girlfriend, DANILLE CLINE, his mother, MYRA L. BUONOMO, his sister, LORI A. KAHRE, his brother, JOHN W. KAHRE, and numerous employees of his businesses, all Las Vegas residents, are also charged in the Indictments with various counts of Conspiracy and Attempt to Evade or Defeat Tax.1 If convicted, the defendants are facing up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each count charged.


According to the court records, ROBERT DAVID KAHRE operates businesses in Las Vegas known as Production Air Conditioning, Production Plumbing, Sherman Tile and Marble, and Wright Painting and Drywall. KAHRE had many employees, many of whom worked as laborers at his businesses. KAHRE also provided payroll services for other businesses in Las Vegas.


From 1998 through 2003, it is alleged that ROBERT DAVID KAHRE paid his employees, and the employees of the other businesses with whom he contracted, in the form of gold, silver, and/or cash. KAHRE allegedly maintained an office at 6270 Kimberly Avenue in Las Vegas, where cash, gold, or silver payments were made to the employees. No federal tax withholdings were made from the paychecks, and the wages were not reported to the IRS. During the course of the conspiracy, it is alleged that KAHRE paid over $114 million in unreported cash wages to employees, including approximately $19,934,416 in cash wages to his employees, and approximately $94,810,817 in cash wages to the employees of other contractors with whom he had agreed to provide payroll services.


The Indictments also charge that ROBERT DAVID KAHRE attempted to evade income tax owed by him for the years 1992 and 1993 in the amount of $1,000,453, and that he attempted to conceal his income in calendar years 1996 through 2005 by using straw buyers to purchase various pieces of real property, and by placing the properties in the names of his girlfriend, his mother, his sister, and step-father. The properties include commercial property at 6049 Boulder Highway in Las Vegas; a ranch at 62436 Mink Lane, in Summerville, Oregon; homes at 6385 and 6295 North Grand Canyon Drive in Las Vegas; a home at 5680 Ruffian Road in Las Vegas; and real property at 590 Sugar Leo Circle in St. George, Utah.

The defendants were summoned to appear before a United States Magistrate Judge on April 18, 2005, for an Initial Appearance and Arraignment.


The case is being investigated by Special Agents with IRS Criminal Investigation, and prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney J. Gregory Damm.


The public is reminded that an indictment contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[webhick]

What the hell went wrong?!

(Thanks for posting the indictment, btw)

[Demosthenes]

I have some still incomplete followup info. While I don't think there were any "guilty" counts, some of the hung jury counts may be important enough for a retrial.

More to come.

[Demosthenes]

The final tally

Robert Furman - Not Guilty all charges
Ronald Ruggles - Not Guilty all charges
Myra Buonomo - Not Guilty all charges
Joel Axberg - Not Guilty all charges

Debra Rosenbaum - Not Guilty 8 counts 7201, Hung on 371
Danielle Alires - Not Guilty 371, Hung on Bank fraud and 7201

Robert Kahre - Hung all counts
Lori Kahre-Rasmussen - Hung all counts
Alexander Loglia - Hung all counts

[Dezcad]

The final tally

Robert Furman - Not Guilty all charges
Ronald Ruggles - Not Guilty all charges
Myra Buonomo - Not Guilty all charges
Joel Axberg - Not Guilty all charges

Debra Rosenbaum - Not Guilty 8 counts 7201, Hung on 371
Danielle Alires - Not Guilty 371, Hung on Bank fraud and 7201

Robert Kahre - Hung all counts
Lori Kahre-Rasmussen - Hung all counts
Alexander Loglia - Hung all counts

Given the civil suits Robert Kahre has filed and the general PITA that he has become, it would seem that a retrial is almost a certainty.

[The Observer]

If I understand it all correctly.

No, you don't understand it correctly. This is all about conspiracy, necromancy and the Illuminati. We only *pretend* to cling to the principles of law and order, logic, truth and reason to befuddle, confuse and mislead the TPs out there so we can keep sticking it to them. This was all taught in your Introduction to the New World Order class which you evidently have forgot. Do we need to requure you to surrender your secret decoder ring?

[Dezcad]

And, if I understand correctly, the hung juries or acquitals do not release them from the civil side of things, where they still owe the taxes, interest and penalties.

The hung juries don't release them from the criminal side either, as they are still subject to retrial on those charges.

[LPC]

That's going to be an ugly post-mortem in the prosecution's office.

Doubtful.

Jury verdicts are often a surprise, and lawyers don't usually spend a lot of time beating themselves up over unexpected verdicts.

And there's not likely to be any recriminations or finger-pointing, either. By the time a case like this goes to trial, the prosecution lawyers have discussed trial strategies ad nauseum, and have usually reached a consensus, so everyone shares whatever blame there might be.

Finally, even if one of the prosecution lawyers had ideas that were rejected or ignored, saying "I told you so" wouldn't really help his/her career, so he/she is better off keeping quiet or staying positive.

There's going to be some re-thinking and re-hashing before any retrial, but I very much doubt any of it will be "ugly."

[ASITStands]

That's going to be an ugly post-mortem in the prosecution's office.

I wonder, was it a great defense, a lousy prosecution, the complexity of the issues (with no appropriate graphic aids), or a dumb jury? My guess is the middle two come into play, but I could be waaaay off.

It sounds to me like it was the complexity of the issues in conjunction with the element of willfulness.

I see no mention of the "dollar" versus "FRN" issue, alleged by Christopher Hansen, other than the remark about market value of gold and silver coins. Any more insight in that issue?

[ASITStands]

Presumably, there were nine defendants because of the conspiracy charge. However, it might have been better to have prosecuted the defendants individually, or in smaller groups, so as to present a better case in regard to one charge or another.

Just my opinion. At this point, the number of defendants have been reduced because of the acquittals.

[Quixote]

That's going to be an ugly post-mortem in the prosecution's office.

I wonder, was it a great defense, a lousy prosecution, the complexity of the issues (with no appropriate graphic aids), or a dumb jury? My guess is the middle two come into play, but I could be waaaay off.

It sounds to me like it was the complexity of the issues in conjunction with the element of willfulness.

I see no mention of the "dollar" versus "FRN" issue, alleged by Christopher Hansen, other than the remark about market value of gold and silver coins. Any more insight in that issue?

I was curious about that myself. Someone on Lostheads claims a government witness testified on cross examination that a $1 FRN is not a dollar, but that a $1 silver coin is. That seems unlikely.

[ASITStands]

I was curious about that myself. Someone on Lostheads claims a government witness testified on cross examination that a $1 FRN is not a dollar, but that a $1 silver coin is. That seems unlikely.

Las Vegas Christopher Hansen, as opposed to San Diego Christopher Hansen, wrote about it here:

http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=663

He's the brother of Joel Hansen. He also wrote about the testimony here:

http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=534

Took me a while to find that one.

He's been conducting an ongoing discussion of gold/silver and FRN issues on the IAP website. Some of the links:

http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=542
http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=572
http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=643

And, don't miss this comment:

http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=581

[Quixote]

Quote:
I was curious about that myself. Someone on Lostheads claims a government witness testified on cross examination that a $1 FRN is not a dollar, but that a $1 silver coin is. That seems unlikely.


Las Vegas Christopher Hansen, as opposed to San Diego Christopher Hansen, wrote about it here:

http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=663

He's the brother of Joel Hansen. He also wrote about the testimony here:

http://www.independentamerican.org/blog.php?blog=534

Took me a while to find that one.

The second article contradicts the Lostheads assertion. Hansen says the witness was never asked the question.

[webhick]

PLEASE NOTE: Following recent statements by the DOJ, most of the content of the WTP websites (including our on-line store) has been fully restored for public access. The "6700" case is currently being appealed to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Ahem, isn't that violating the Injunction? I thought he lost his appeal (it's really hard to keep track of this stuff - I don't know how Demo does it).

[The Observer]

Just do what I do - whatever a TP says, assume that the opposite of that is truly what happened.

[notorial dissent]

Again, it is more of a case of wishing it said something it didn’t. I have seen several versions and all only sort resemble the actuality.

I don’t think the trial attorneys did a very good job presenting the case and I think they did a very poor job presenting the difference between specie and bullion coin and the fact that bullion was not meant to be used as tender. At the very least they did a poor job of showing that the intent was to evade taxes which was the whole purpose of the trial, and that is their fault.

The case didn’t speak to the legality of taxes or any of the other nonsense that the tp crowd has been trying to ascribe to it, just that they jury didn’t believe the prosecution about them conspiring to evade taxes. They still owe them and will have to pay the full amount regardless of this “win”.

[.]

Las Vegas Christopher Hansen, as opposed to San Diego Christopher Hansen

Van Pelt's version of Christopher Hansen is probably more interesting than either.

[LPC]

To this day, with exception of the single article by the Review Journal, no major media entity has published a news story regarding the outcome of this important federal criminal tax case.

It's possible, just possible, that major media know that jury verdicts don't mean much unless you're the defendant, or you know or are for some reason interested in the defendant (e.g., Paris Hilton or O.J. Simpson). Jury verdicts for or against Joe Schmo have all the mass media appeal of English cricket scores.

The censorship of this important news story is, unfortunately, not unexpected ...

Schulz twice refers to this story as "important" but never explains *why* it is important.

[SteveSy]

The censorship of this important news story is, unfortunately, not unexpected ...

Schulz twice refers to this story as "important" but never explains *why* it is important.

Of course if the IRS won a case concerning $114 million dollars in income it would make the papers....not front page but it would make it. It's never important enough to make the papers when the government loses, except maybe a few obscure one's.

What's important about it is, it shows that some juries don't buy in to the "they're bad guys and the world would end as we know it if the don't pay their taxes. You pay yours don't you, they should too." crapola the government uses.

When the government actually has to prove their case they lose. They've been so successful with the “He’s a bad guy and getting out of the suffering like the rest of us” tactic, they don't even try to prove their case. Maybe cases like this are a sign that some average people aren't buying into the government propaganda anymore. Maybe they're realizing the government is their real burden as are the people who use it for their own personal gain at the expense of everyone else. Maybe it’s a sign that being a “tax expert” is as about as meaningful as being an “extortion expert”. “How to comply with the extortionist without losing your shirt. I’ll tell you that and more for a mere $150.00 an hour.”

[notorial dissent]

Knowing full well, that it is an exercise in futility, I ask with bated breath.

Do you actually even know what the case you are venting so much of your surplus effluvium over is about?

If you did, I can’t imagine why you are wasting so much of your precious mental resources on it.

Schulz’s blather not withstanding, it was an incredibly boring case, not newsworthy except on the deadest of news days, and so boring and tedious that is put everyone involved to sleep, and was so poorly explained that the jury returned a verdict that the defendants were obviously too dumb to have come up with anything resembling the scheme as outlined (poorly) by the DOJ.

The jury returned a verdict of too dumb to walk and chew gum at the same time, not innocent of tax evasion. They are still going to get hit with all the back taxes and late fees, which will be hefty, so hardly a win for anyone involved. Similar to Cryer’s not guilty on tax evasion. He wasn’t acquitted of owing the tax, just of not being smart enough to attempt to evade it. Hardly a stirring recommendation or ringing endorsement of ones abilities.

But do rant on Stevie, it wouldn’t be the same without you.