Saladino / Fuselier criminal trial 11/3/2009

[Demosthenes]

Did you guys know that Richard Fuselier pled guilty in September?

Also, Saladino has been ordered to undergo a psych eval at the prosecutor's request since his defense lawyer has filed a notice announcing that he intends to blame his acts on a "mental condition."

[Demosthenes]

The trial is about to start. Is anyone here going?

[Dezcad]

Trial is over and jury deliberations have startedd.

11/19/2009 320 Minutes of Proceedings:Jury Trial day 12 before Judge Anna J. Brown as to Joseph Oquendo Saladino, Marcel Roy Bendshadler, Michael Sean Mungovan, Richard J Ortt. Closing Arguments completed. Jury instructed and retires for deliberations. Jury Trial is RECESSED until 11/20/2009 at 08:30AM before Judge Anna J. Brown.Counsel Present for Plaintiff: Allan Garten, Michelle Kerin.Counsel Present for Defendant: Ronald Hoevet, Celia Howes, Lynne Morgan, Laurie Bender, Nancy Bergeson.(Court Reporter Amanda LeGore) (sm) (Entered: 11/19/2009)

[Famspear]

From Bob Hurt and his "lawmen" web pages, posted on Saturday Nov. 21, 2009:

Marcel Roy Benshadler [sic; should read "Bendshadler"] just called me to inform me that USDC just sent to the jury the IRS tax fraud case against FCP (Freedom Privacy Committee) leaders.

The charge: Violation of 18 USC 371 preparing fraudulent returns under 26 USC 1341
Marcel expects the jury to return its verdict before Thanksgiving.

Marcel thinks the jury will unanimously acquit him, Joe Saladino, Michael Goldman, and Richard Ortt.

I took the following notes of the phone conversation we had:

The Defense rested Wednesday. Prosecution closing argument Wed afternoon 2.5 hours, Ms. Cristen [sic] let jurors know they heard from 30 witnesses they had called and they should only pay attention to testimony given during direct exam and ignore answers during cross.
Defense team turned, during cross, all DOJ witnesses in favor of defense, and, apparently all but 2 of the jurors.

Conspiracy to commit fraud - the DOJ never actually presented evidence showing the defendants committed fraud. DOJ provided two expert CPA IRS agents. During cross, Defense asked how many of 1300 examinations had 6663 violations (fraud) in them. They said NONE.
DOJ did closing, 2.5 hours. Defense did their closing. Mr. Garton [sic; reference is to Allan M. Garten] of DOJ did rebuttal closing, first words out of mouth he lied, "I'll be mercilessly brief" - 45 minutes later he finished.

Administrator Brown [sic; Bob Hurt's reference is to Judge Anna J. Brown, the U.S. District Court Judge] cannot be judge when she participates in DOJ's fraud against the court. She asked "are you going to testify?" Marcel told her 10 for minutes that she would not allow Marcel to testify because she had already instructed jury they would not let them hear the law, and they would consider law only as she explained it.

Marcel explained to court how, numerous times in this country, jurors refused to convict under unjust laws and that allowed them to change the law. Slavery ended because jurors refused to convict under fugitives from slavery act because law itself was unjust. Today was modern version of fugitives from slavery act. They were on the record, but not in front of jury.
Defendant Richard F (sp) [the reference is to Richard Fuselier] turned Benedict Arnold and took a plea bargain.

FCP showed the plea agreement to jury during his cross exam - he never admitted guilt to anything and has a stay out of jail free card. He got permission to sue government under 1341 in same court before same judge after this trial, and his plea bargain prohibits him from getting sentenced till he's done litigating the case - probably 10 to 15 years. Took him 2 days to get lawsuit in to the court. Lawsuit contends that 1341 is crap and its unlawful to impose frivolous filing penalty for following 1341.

Page 2 of frivolous filing letters tells you that you can sue in USDC or UC Court of Claims. FPC Freedom Privacy Committee did multiple lawsuits. The courts ignored them, and instead of answering their questions, the IRS sent more frivolous filing letters. What they did was akin to making deposit to bank, and bank returns deposit and tells you your deposit was frivolous and you can go to admin proceeding without telling you what was frivolous about the filing.
FCP turned all DOJ witnesses into Defense witnesses, and so the DOJ stopped calling witnesses, and FCP got to cut some of their witnesses to save time. Jury got case last Thursday, and still have it and are deliberating.

Only Defense Attorney Nancy [referring to Nancy S. Bergeson, attorney for Marcel Roy Bendshadler] acted like she believed in Marcel's innocence.

Other 3 counsel referred to Marcel as one of many kooky people out there who are kooks but didn't commit a crime.

Judge Brown struck all but one DOJ motion in limine, and she committed fraud upon the court by not striking that one which sought to hide what the law is. One of the motions if granted would have prevented FCP from making a defense.

Marcel will propound 4 counts of fraud against the court, 3 against Brown for knowing or should have known the DOJ committed fraud against the court.

http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/b ... 30e9f8407e

[Demosthenes]

Deliberations continue:

11/20/2009 Minutes of Proceedings:Jury Trial day 13 before Judge Anna J. Brown as to Joseph Oquendo Saladino, Marcel Roy Bendshadler, Michael Sean Mungovan, Richard J Ortt. Jury Deliberations. Jury is RECESSED until 11/23/2009 at 08:30AM before Judge Anna J. Brown.Counsel Present for Plaintiff: Allan Garten, Michelle Kerin.Counsel Present for Defendant: Ronald Hoevet, Celia Howes, Lynne Morgan, Laurie Bender, Nancy Bergeson.(Court Reporter Amanda LeGore) (sm) (Entered: 11/20/2009)

[Demosthenes]

Marcel thinks the jury will unanimously acquit him, Joe Saladino, Michael Goldman, and Richard Ortt.

Or not.

Federal jury finds three guilty of $9 million tax evasion scheme
By Bryan Denson, The Oregonian
November 23, 2009, 12:25PM

A Portland jury this morning found three men guilty of defrauding the U.S. government of more than $9 million as part of a tax-resistence scheme they sold to hundreds of Americans in more than 40 states.

Joseph O. Saladino, 62, Marcel R. Bendshadler, 48, and Michael S. Mungovan, 66, were convicted of conspiracy to defraud the U.S. by interfering with the IRS's ability to accurately assess and calculate income taxes. A fourth defendant, Richard Ortt, was acquitted.

A fifth man involved in the scheme, 62-year-old Richard A. Fuselier, pleaded guilty to the crime in September.

The guilty men offered a tax evasion service from 2001 to 2005 in which they prepared more than 1,000 tax returns based on the theory that compensation for personal labor is not taxable, according to Assistant U.S. Attorney Allan Garten.

"So let's assume for a moment that you would get a W2 that said $40,000," Garten said. "(The guilty men) would list as income $40,000, and then they would deduct the value of your labor of $40,000 ... so that you paid no taxes."

That's illegal, he said.

"The argument that compensation for personal labor is not taxable income is both frivolous and has been rejected consistently by the courts and the IRS," Garten said.

As a matter of policy, the Internal Revenue Service seeks to recoup taxes not properly paid to the government through such schemes.

The four guilty men are scheduled for sentencing early next year before U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown. They face maximum sentences of five years in prison and fines of $250,000.

[Nikki]

A Portland jury this morning found three men guilty of defrauding the U.S. government of more than $9 million as part of a tax-resistence scheme they sold to hundreds of Americans in more than 40 states.

DUH

Why am I SO not surprised

[Pottapaug1938]

Marcel thinks the jury will unanimously acquit him, Joe Saladino, Michael Goldman, and Richard Ortt.

Or not.

C'mon, now -- if Marcel is such a highpowered fool that he thinks that his positions have the slightest shred of legal merit, why would he not think that the truth of them is so obvious that a jury could do anything BUT unanimously acquit him?

[bobhurt]

I want to know what's going on with Nancy S. Bergeson, Marcel Roy Bendshadler's federal public defender. Marcel told me that she seemed newly enlightened by many of the things he told her, and that a lot of skullduggery went on in the case, with ONLY NANCY (exclusive of the other attorneys) acting like she thought her client bore no guilt. What will she do now for her client, and how will she deploy that enlightenment to fight against the injustice of tax crime proceedings?

Marcel said the jury seemed quite friendly and interested before they departed for deliberations, and then they handed over the guilty verdict. Strange. Sherry Jackson's jury behaved similarly till the DOJ had a chance to suborn them after discovering the identities of the IRS employee witnesses against her.

I believe criminal skullduggery abounds in the ranks of the DOJ and IRS in all tax crime cases. What will the DOJ or IRS do to Nancy Bergeson for acting like she believed in Marcel's innocence?

[bobhurt]

What do you want to bet that the DOJ wrote that article in the Oregonian?

[Dezcad]

What do you want to bet that the DOJ wrote that article in the Oregonian?

If I was convinced that you actually had anything of substance to wager, I'd happily take that bet.

[bmielke]

What do you want to bet that the DOJ wrote that article in the Oregonian?

They may have, it would be called a press release, usually the news paper picks it up and uses it to write the article. Some times it is printed word for word, the DOJ would not have "written" the story juat parts of it.

[bmielke]

What do you want to bet that the DOJ wrote that article in the Oregonian?

If I was convinced that you actually had anything of substance to wager, I'd happily take that bet.

Yeah I agree, my other post was sarcastic. Who is this guy anyway?

[Dezcad]

What do you want to bet that the DOJ wrote that article in the Oregonian?

If I was convinced that you actually had anything of substance to wager, I'd happily take that bet.

Yeah I agree, my other post was sarcastic. Who is this guy anyway?

http://bobhurt.blogspot.com/

http://groups.google.com/group/Lawmen

[LPC]

I want to know what's going on with Nancy S. Bergeson, Marcel Roy Bendshadler's federal public defender. Marcel told me that she seemed newly enlightened ... ONLY NANCY (exclusive of the other attorneys) acting like she thought ... Marcel said the jury seemed quite friendly and interested ....

I believe that most tax deniers are delusional, and delusional people see what they want to see. Marcel thought that various people "seemed" enlightened or friendly or interested because that's what he wanted to see.

To paraphrase what an experienced social worker once told me, "If I hadn't believed it, I never would have seen it."

[Famspear]

I want to know what's going on with Nancy S. Bergeson, Marcel Roy Bendshadler's federal public defender. Marcel told me that she seemed newly enlightened by many of the things he told her, and that a lot of skullduggery went on in the case, with ONLY NANCY (exclusive of the other attorneys) acting like she thought her client bore no guilt. What will she do now for her client, and how will she deploy that enlightenment to fight against the injustice of tax crime proceedings?

Marcel said the jury seemed quite friendly and interested before they departed for deliberations, and then they handed over the guilty verdict. Strange. Sherry Jackson's jury behaved similarly till the DOJ had a chance to suborn them after discovering the identities of the IRS employee witnesses against her.

I believe criminal skullduggery abounds in the ranks of the DOJ and IRS in all tax crime cases. What will the DOJ or IRS do to Nancy Bergeson for acting like she believed in Marcel's innocence?

Welcome to Quatloos, Bob!

I want to know whether you're the same Bob Hurt who has posted here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BobHurt

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bobhurt

and here:

http://groups.google.com/group/Lawmen

If so, your reputation precedes you, Bob.

As an aside, Bob, I recall that you're a veteran of the submarine service. Since we last interacted, I have to tell you that my young nephew has joined the Navy, has gone through basic training AND has graduated from the submarine school in Connecticut, and is now assigned to an Ohio-class Trident nuclear sub (fleet ballistic missile sub), and we are very proud!

[bobhurt]

Marcel just sent me his side of the story to correct the errors in the Oregonian article:

A Portland jury this morning found three men guilty of defrauding the U.S. government under 18 USC 371. The amazing thing about the verdict is that no injured party came forward to make a claim of harm against them. Even Assistant U.S. Attorney Allan Garten in closing statements said that none of the people he called to testify during the 12 day trial were victims, indeed, one was asked directly if he had been defrauded and the answer was "Yes, but not by Mr. Bendshadler."

In a clear case of jury-subornation the Attorney General introduced fraudulent documents, incomplete accounting (when they took the time to actually do some accounting) and multiple cases of hearsay documents, all over the objections of defense. It is clear that today's "Justice System" can be manipulated so that "victims" can be created out of thin-air leaving one with no defense since it is impossible to cross-examine a piece of paper to see if the information contained on it has any accuracy whatsoever.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Allan Garten claimed that the U.S. Treasury "lost" more than $9 million, yet as Defense Counsel Hoevet stated during closing, every single witness the DoJ called was assesed penalties and interest that exceeded any perceived lost by three to five times, as Hoevet reminded the jurors, the IRS actually made money on this, they should be giving the defendants a cut of the excess profits.

During the trial 30 witnesses were called, and of those not one claimed a loss to the IRS under 6663 of the IRC which covers Fraud. Without Fraud being shown, there is no conspiracy to defraud. The most dramatic testimony was of Ms. Emminger, an accounting specialist for the IRS called in from Utah to examine and testify about the 1300 returns the IRS processed as a result of FPC and CC activities. She clearly stated that not one of the 1300 returns were found to be Fraudulent under 26 USC 6663.

Joseph O. Saladino, 62, Marcel R. Bendshadler, 48, and Michael S. Mungovan, 66, were convicted of conspiracy to defraud the U.S. by interfering with the IRS's ability to accurately assess and calculate income taxes. A fourth defendant, Richard Ortt, was acquitted.

A fifth man involved in the scheme, 62-year-old Richard A. Fuselier, took a phony-plea "bargain" in which he admited no conspiracy and in fact testified that there was no conspiracy. As part of his "bargain" Mr. Fuselier was given a "pass" to sue the IRS for the very same thing they were trying the other four defendants for "conspiring" against the Government for.

[Famspear]

I want to know what's going on with Nancy S. Bergeson, Marcel Roy Bendshadler's federal public defender. Marcel told me that she seemed newly enlightened by many of the things he told her, and that a lot of skullduggery went on in the case, with ONLY NANCY (exclusive of the other attorneys) acting like she thought her client bore no guilt.

Wow, only one person acted like she thought that Marcel Roy Bendshadler was innocent. Well, I guess that proves there must be some kind of skullduggery!

What will she do now for her client, and how will she deploy that enlightenment to fight against the injustice of tax crime proceedings?

What injustice would that be?

Marcel said the jury seemed quite friendly and interested before they departed for deliberations, and then they handed over the guilty verdict. Strange.

Ooooooh. Skullduggery!

Sherry Jackson's jury behaved similarly till the DOJ had a chance to suborn them after discovering the identities of the IRS employee witnesses against her.

Oooooh!! Skullduggery!

I believe criminal skullduggery abounds in the ranks of the DOJ and IRS in all tax crime cases.

Well, then you should consider seeking therapy. Sounds like you're not thinking rationally, Bob. Sure, there are bad apples in almost every barrel. But you honestly "believe" that "skullduggery abounds" with personnel at the Department of Justice AND the IRS in ALL TAX CRIME CASES???!!??

You're not thinking clearly, Bob.

What will the DOJ or IRS do to Nancy Bergeson for acting like she believed in Marcel's innocence?

Bob, why do you think the DOJ or the IRS care about what Marcel's defense attorney believes or "acts like she believes" with respect to her client's guilt or innocence?

[Famspear]

For more background on the wit and wisdom of Bob Hurt, see:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=2243&p=34661&hilit=racism#p34661

(You may have to scroll around a bit on that page.)

[Famspear]

More regarding Bob Hurt:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=3138

and:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=3137

and:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=3266

and:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=3156