Speaking tour?

[Demosthenes]

Judge throws out suit against journal
News-Leader Staff • October 7, 2008

A federal judge has dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed against the Springfield Business Journal and two Branson businessman by an Oklahoma tax protester who had accused the publication of libel and slander.

The lawsuit stemmed from a Nov. 26, 2007 article in SBJ that profiled Martin R. Dingman and Shane O. Grady, a pair of Branson businessmen who had pleaded guilty to federal charges of failing to file tax returns.

After being sentenced to probation, the two men went on a speaking tour for the government to discourage others from becoming involved in illicit tax protests and tax-evasion schemes.

In their interview with SBJ, the men referenced attending a seminar by Lindsey K. Springer, of Tulsa, an anti-tax advocate who has been involved in several failed lawsuits challenging the legitimacy of the Internal Revenue Service and federal tax system.

Springer sued SBJ, reporter Matt Wagner, Dingman and Grady after the article's publication, seeking $1 million in damages from each for libel, slander and defamation.

U.S. District Court Judge Sarah W. Hays dismissed the suit Thursday, finding the statements at issue were not defamatory.

[LPC]

You and I must have the same Google searches set up, because I was about to post a link to the article: http://www.news-leader.com/article/2008 ... 007/NEWS01

[Dezcad]

The lawsuit stemmed from a Nov. 26, 2007 article in SBJ that profiled Martin R. Dingman and Shane O. Grady, a pair of Branson businessmen who had pleaded guilty to federal charges of failing to file tax returns.

Does anyone have a link to that original article in SBJ?

[LPC]

I don't want to quote the original (allegedly libelous) article in full because it's copyrighted. (You can find the original by going to sbj.net, registering--for free, and searching for "Lindsey Springer.") These are the passages that mention Springer:

Dingman and Grady first learned about the anti-tax movement through two deacons at Dingman’s church in Branson.

Both men decided to attend a seminar led by Lindsey Springer, a “charismatic” Tulsa, Okla., man who had filed a class-action lawsuit against the IRS alleging that federal income tax is unconstitutional. Springer is the founder of Bondage Breakers Ministries.

“He did a great job informing you how you were not legally required to file a personal tax return,” Dingman said. “He played on the two things that were probably the dearest to many of us: faith … and also on your love of America, your patriotism.”

Both men said the message resonated with them, and they continued to attend seminars that urged them to defy the government by refusing to file tax returns and establishing “asset-protecting” trusts.

They then hooked up with Eddie Kahn, with somewhat predictable results.

Fortunately, Dingman and Grady woke up, but a little late. Looking back:

“I don’t feel like a victim,” Dingman said. “… Looking back, I should have sought more counsel. The reason (this happened is) we acted from emotion. And when you act from emotion, pragmatism goes out the window.”

While Kahn has been indicted for alleged tax fraud and is in a Florida jail awaiting trial, Springer and other alleged co-conspirators in the Branson area remain free, Dingman and Grady said. IRS officials would neither confirm nor deny whether those individuals are under investigation.

“We are trying to get the promoters and put them out of business,” [IRS spokeswoman, Special Agent Bonnie] MacLeod said.

Dingman and Grady have forgiven the perpetrators who persuaded them to participate in the bogus movement, but they said the ordeal has taken a financial and emotional toll on their families.

I tend to agree with the judge. It's hard to see any libel there.

[LPC]

A later story, also from the Springfield Business Journal, was published on 1/30/2008 and 2/4/2008 about the sentencing for Dingman and Grady (they had cut a deal with the IRS and got probation), and included the following:

Dingman and Grady told SBJ they learned about the anti-tax movement through two deacons at Dingman’s church in Branson.

Dingman and Grady said they attended a seminar led by Lindsey Springer, a Tulsa, Okla., man who – along with more than 70 plaintiffs – sued the U.S. government in 1996, alleging that federal income tax is unconstitutional. Springer is the founder of Bondage Breakers Ministries.

In February 1998, a federal judge granted summary judgment against Springer and his fellow plaintiffs and imposed sanctions against them, and a year later, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment and assessed additional sanctions against Springer and the other appellants, according to court documents.

After Dingman and Grady shared their stories with local media, Springer filed a defamation lawsuit against SBJ, Dingman, Grady and IRS Special Agent Bonnie MacLeod, an agency spokeswoman. The case is pending in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

[wserra]

If anyone ever needs the capsule summary of how thoroughly Springer gets thrashed when he goes to court, the opinion pretty well lays it out.

[ASITStands]

The last two entries in the docket:

10/02/2008 23 ORDER - ORDERED that the Motion of Defendants SBJ Publishing, Inc. and Matt Wagner to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint and/or for Summary Judgment (doc. #9) and the Motion of Defendants Martin Dingman and Shane Grady to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint and/or for Summary Judgment and Defendants Suggestions in Support Thereof (doc. #11) are granted and all claims brought against defendants SBJ, Matt Wagner, Martin Dingman and Shane Grady are dismissed. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Continuance Regarding Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. #14) is denied. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Defendants Conjoined Reply Memorandum in Support of Both Its Motions to Dismiss and Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Continuance (doc.#18) is denied as moot. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah W. Hays on 10/2/2008. (Gicinto, JoRita) (Entered: 10/02/2008)

10/02/2008 24 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - ORDERED that plaintiff is directed to show cause, within twenty days from the date of this Order to Show Cause, why defendant Bonnie MacLeod should not be dismissed from this action. Show Cause Response due by 10/26/2008. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah W. Hays on 10/2/2008. (Gicinto, JoRita) (Entered: 10/02/2008)

The Court dismissed Counts I-IV on the basis they either did not refer directly to Springer or did not rise to the level of defamation. Seems to be some confusion between comments referring to Springer and comments referring to Kahn. Count V remains against MacLeod.

It's as though Springer is smeared with the same brush used to smear Kahn.

Count V alleges IRS Special Agent Bonnie MacLeod "put them up to it." It ain't quite over yet.

[Doktor Avalanche]

He only brought this suit on the advice of his attorney, Larsen E. Whipsnade.

[jg]

If anyone ever needs the capsule summary of how thoroughly Springer gets thrashed when he goes to court, the opinion pretty well lays it out.

From page 22 of the opinion:

In this case, the undisputed facts include plaintiff’s many unsuccessful challenges to the legitimacy of the IRS and the tax system, which are matters of public record; multiple holdings by the Tenth Circuit publicly declaring plaintiff’s views as to the IRS and the tax system frivolous and sanctionable; and statements by plaintiff that the defendants in this case have accurately summarized his views. Given these facts, even if the statement at issue is found to refer to plaintiff, it is hard to determine what could be defamatory with respect to the statement that Dingman and Grady were encouraged to defy the government by failing to file taxes and by establishing asset protecting trusts.
It is unclear whether plaintiff actually advocated the establishment of asset protecting trusts, but his advocacy against the IRS and the constitutionality of the tax system clearly prevents him from seeking damages for defamation with respect to the statements described in Count One of the Complaint.