Rehearing the Bleedin' Obvious (Hendrickson)

[wserra]

A new online petition! Huzzah!

And the CtC crowd again strives mightily to make 1+1=3. Forget how dumb it is to believe that the Supreme Court should consider a "petition". Perhaps someone should ask "databrain" whether, if he was litigating a case, the presiding judge should stop proceedings to hear the opinion of someone who wandered in off the street. This is, of course, exactly why the law contains a procedure for filing amicus briefs.

In any event, though, it is difficult to see how anyone could believe that the "petition" makes any sense at all:

An agency of the federal government is seeking authority (power) from the courts to compel individuals to change their sworn testimony, both now and in the future. Such testimony is to be made under penalty of perjury, yet as government dictated testimony, it would not be their belief and would, in fact, be perjury.

Pete apparently believes that no one can tell him what "income" means. In other words, that police report in which I accused my elderly neighbor of trying to kill me is not false, because I define "kill" as "give chocolate chip cookies", that's what she tried to do, and that should end the matter.

It truly is a cult.

[Thule]

I guess Hendrickson must be glad to have a follower like Dodobrain. Running a cult can be time-consuming, and you don't want your marks to have to much idle time, they might start to think. But Hendricksons Halfbaked Heroes actually manages to find pointless tasks to keep themselves occupied on their own.

[Famspear]

In filing tax returns willfully using the Cracking the Code scam, they're engaged in criminal activity. I give them this credit, though: On these court filings at the Supreme Court, at least, they're working within the system.

With a few people in the tax protester-tax denier community, I've seen threats of violence from time to time.

[Nikki]

A new online petition! Huzzah!

And the CtC crowd again strives mightily to make 1+1=3.
.....

I'm trying to keep score on Pete & Co, but I'm getting confused.

Does the failure of the letters to the Court to accomplish anything (and the similar impending failure of the petition) count as separate losses, or are they just ancillary parts of Pete's case which has lost many battles on the way to losing the war?

[Joey Smith]

Pete really thought that he could stretch out his Supreme Court appeal and use the fact that it was pending in his criminal trial, but now he's totally screwed.

Sorry Pete, but you are getting ready to go to trial in a case where the prosecution can prove that the U.S. Supreme Court gave you the thumbs down. Thanks for playing.

[Famspear]

A new online petition! Huzzah!

And the CtC crowd again strives mightily to make 1+1=3.
.....

I'm trying to keep score on Pete & Co, but I'm getting confused.

Does the failure of the letters to the Court to accomplish anything (and the similar impending failure of the petition) count as separate losses, or are they just ancillary parts of Pete's case which has lost many battles on the way to losing the war?

Hey, each letter is a separate, ancillary VICTORY!

[cynicalflyer]

Pete really thought that he could stretch out his Supreme Court appeal and use the fact that it was pending in his criminal trial, but now he's totally screwed.

Sorry Pete, but you are getting ready to go to trial in a case where the prosecution can prove that the U.S. Supreme Court gave you the thumbs down. Thanks for playing.

He can still try. That's the beauty of his stalling so late. Now, the motion to rehear won't be filed until July. The Court won't find against it until mid-October. So, he can still try to push "still under review by the Supreme Court". I say try.

[Imalawman]

Pete really thought that he could stretch out his Supreme Court appeal and use the fact that it was pending in his criminal trial, but now he's totally screwed.

Sorry Pete, but you are getting ready to go to trial in a case where the prosecution can prove that the U.S. Supreme Court gave you the thumbs down. Thanks for playing.

He can still try. That's the beauty of his stalling so late. Now, the motion to rehear won't be filed until July. The Court won't find against it until mid-October. So, he can still try to push "still under review by the Supreme Court". I say try.

I predict that more than once you will hear, "pending before the Supreme Court" in Pete's trial - and it won't be by the prosecution.

[Judge Roy Bean]

...
He can still try. That's the beauty of his stalling so late. Now, the motion to rehear won't be filed until July. The Court won't find against it until mid-October. So, he can still try to push "still under review by the Supreme Court". I say try.

While the trial court can't actually view the SCOTUS denial as an opinion sustaining the extant appellate ruling, I think the fact that about 99% of cases are never granted certiorari is compelling enough to deny any motion for a delay.

But in the "court" of sycophant public opinion, they believe they can somehow sway four of the Justices to rethink their denial and that Hendrickson's current trial shouldn't proceed.

[Famspear]

At losthorizons, user "Richardf614" writes:

[ . . . . ] This thread will be on going, it has a purpose. The purpose will be revealed in the near future. Follow the messages contain in the thread and those with the eyes to see will understand. All is not as it appears.

Prediction: The Supreme Court WILL rehear Pete's case and overturn the lower court's decisions. Plus, the court will scold them for their blatant disregard of the law. Mark this date on your calendars.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 12e8#18753

[jkeeb]

The date is already marked as "Holiday, July 4 observed"

[wserra]

At losthorizons, user "Richardf614" writes:

[ . . . . ]The Supreme Court WILL rehear Pete's case and overturn the lower court's decisions.

[fortinbras]

I am sure that someone can provide a solid statistic, but a motion for rehearing is practically kneejerk after a denial of cert, and, I feel almost sure, almost never successful. I do not recall hearing of even one case which, having been denied certiorari, was snatched up on a motion for rehearing.

[wserra]

I do not recall hearing of even one case which, having been denied certiorari, was snatched up on a motion for rehearing.

I know of one - Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. ___ (2008), the Guantanamo case. I believe (without doing the research) that it is the only such case in a very long time.

You mean you don't think Hendrickson's is in the same class?

[Nikki]

At losthorizons, user "Richardf614" writes:

[ . . . . ]The Supreme Court WILL rehear Pete's case

and overturn the lower court's decisions.

edited to highlight each of Richard.24601's claims

[LPC]

I do not recall hearing of even one case which, having been denied certiorari, was snatched up on a motion for rehearing.

I know of one - Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. ___ (2008), the Guantanamo case.

You're right, it did happen. The docket can be seen at http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/06-1195.htm

However, it should be noted that, when cert. was originally denied, there were written dissents from the denial of cert., which shows that the issue was contested. In Hendrickson's case, no one dissented from the denial of cert., and there is no evidence that even a single justice voted for cert.

Which suggests that, in order for a petition for rehearing to succeed, you need to have at least one or two justices publicly declaring that the case should be heard.

[wserra]

Our buddy Richardf614 has posted a link to the final scene in the Disney movie Hercules, showing Hercules' triumphant return to Mount Olympus.

These guys are really losing it.

[Gregg]

Our buddy Richardf614 has posted a link to the final scene in the Disney movie Hercules, showing Hercules' triumphant return to Mount Olympus.

These guys are really losing it.

that's not even the good stuff. read the "Warning" thread

The cheese is given freely to the mouse, until the mouse applies the right amount of pressure for the trap to activate. The arrogant mouse believes that he is invincible and can continue to steal the cheese, even as we speak the arrogant mouse has been shown the arrogance of his ways.

The arrogant mouse must make a decision, will he continue to harass the innocent or turn from his arrogant ways and look within and face his devious behaviors. The choice is his! Turn now from your ways of darkness or suffer the wrath that shall surely fall upon him. You have been warned! Decide NOW!

did someone run out of his medication?

[Famspear]

Our buddy Richardf614 has posted a link to the final scene in the Disney movie Hercules, showing Hercules' triumphant return to Mount Olympus.

These guys are really losing it.

that's not even the good stuff. read the "Warning" thread

The cheese is given freely to the mouse, until the mouse applies the right amount of pressure for the trap to activate. The arrogant mouse believes that he is invincible and can continue to steal the cheese, even as we speak the arrogant mouse has been shown the arrogance of his ways.

The arrogant mouse must make a decision, will he continue to harass the innocent or turn from his arrogant ways and look within and face his devious behaviors. The choice is his! Turn now from your ways of darkness or suffer the wrath that shall surely fall upon him. You have been warned! Decide NOW!

did someone run out of his medication?

Apparently so. Richardf614 also states:

Prediction: Pete's up coming criminal trial and the Supreme Court rehearing will take place the week of July 12th.

The Supreme Court's decision has already been revealed in above post.
Pete will be found NOT GUILTY in his criminal trial.

Mark this date on your calendar!

The light will not be held back!

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 8784#18784

Earth calling Richardf614....... Pete's trial will begin the week of July 12th? That would be a neat trick, since Pete Hendrickson's trial isn't even scheduled to begin until October. And how does he figure that the Supreme Court will even grant Pete's petition for rehearing, much less rehear Pete's petition in that same week of July 12?

I have this vision of men in white coats dragging Richard away to a safe room with nice, soft walls.

[Thule]

that's not even the good stuff. read the "Warning" thread

The cheese is given freely to the mouse, until the mouse applies the right amount of pressure for the trap to activate. The arrogant mouse believes that he is invincible and can continue to steal the cheese, even as we speak the arrogant mouse has been shown the arrogance of his ways.

That story really works on the CtCers, arrogantly filing "educated" returns, getting some cheese in return, and claiming they are invincible, even as the IRS starts demanding the money back.