Hendrickson Contempt Motion, thread #3

[Pottapaug1938]

Maybe he'll turn, next, to a "Common Law Court", where his (ahahaha) legal scholarship will be recognized the way he wants it to be....

[Imalawman]

Maybe he'll turn, next, to a "Common Law Court", where his (ahahaha) legal scholarship will be recognized the way he wants it to be....

I think he might just go "sovereign" after this and while he's in prison. We'll see.

[Gregg]

Realistically, what is Pete going to have when he gets out, in terms of assets? Someone said he owns a home, I can only assume that's going to go cheap on the courthouse steps some day soon, he doesn't have any viable marketable skills that I know of, he's a 2 time felon with a really bad attitude which I can imagine are really good things in job interviews and after a few years locked up most of the suckers from his following will long have moved on to the next guru, not to mention that a big part of them are going to follow him down the same loser path he took, at least in civil if not criminal cases and won't have much in the way of ready cash themselves in this lifetime?

Think about it, Pete is, well, screwed....

[grixit]

He'll end up on welfare-- Victory!

[Famspear]

Realistically, what is Pete going to have when he gets out, in terms of assets? Someone said he owns a home, I can only assume that's going to go cheap on the courthouse steps some day soon, he doesn't have any viable marketable skills that I know of, he's a 2 time felon with a really bad attitude.....

I wonder whether Doreen works at the present time. If the house were already fully paid for, that would be a big help.

Pete and Doreen filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy back in 1996 (case no. 96-54793, U.S. Bankr. Court for the Eastern District of Michigan), and received their discharge in 1997. Depending on the amount of their general unsecured debts, another bankruptcy might eventually be something they consider. Bankruptcy won't help the federal income tax problems, though.

[Imalawman]

Realistically, what is Pete going to have when he gets out, in terms of assets? Someone said he owns a home, I can only assume that's going to go cheap on the courthouse steps some day soon, he doesn't have any viable marketable skills that I know of, he's a 2 time felon with a really bad attitude.....

I wonder whether Doreen works at the present time. If the house were already fully paid for, that would be a big help.

Pete and Doreen filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy back in 1996 (case no. 96-54793, U.S. Bankr. Court for the Eastern District of Michigan), and received their discharge in 1997. Depending on the amount of their general unsecured debts, another bankruptcy might eventually be something they consider. Bankruptcy won't help the federal income tax problems, though.

Well, bankruptcy can help some with the tax debt (they'll have to file first). They'll probably have to wait a couple years, but that's probably the best option for them eventually.

[Gregg]

Even the penalties etc???

[Famspear]

Well, bankruptcy can help some with the tax debt (they'll have to file first). They'll probably have to wait a couple years, but that's probably the best option for them eventually.

I don't remember what Pete's situation is for each year, but for any years for which he owes tax for which he made a "CtC" return, the unpaid tax would probably be non-dischargeable under the fraudulent return rule.

Similar rule for any year for which he willfully attempted to evade or defeat the tax. Filing a CtC return would almost certainly be considered a willful attempt to evade or defeat the tax.

EDIT: If I recall correctly, Pete has already filed CtC returns for several years. Even if he were to wise up tomorrow and file amended returns that correctly report his income, I'm not sure the filing of the amended returns would "cure" the fraudulent original returns or erase the willful attempt to evade or defeat the tax.

[ashlynne39]

What I notice in the motion is that he takes offense at the judge just signing a judgment written word for word by the Plaintiff. As if that is out of the ordinary or some sign of corruption. I spent my morning drafting orders for a judge to sign today at my afternoon hearings. For someone who thinks he so knowledgeable in the law, he can't even grasp simple procedural practices.

[notorial dissent]

I am willing to be that even if ole Petey has a come to reality meeting, he is so far in debt at this point that he won't live long enough to pay it off, could be wrong, but I doubt it, and with Pete's ego, he'll never be able to admit he was wrong, so he'll just go on his self destructive way.

Just as an aside, I keep wondering if he is reporting his lack luster book sales and donations as income, since they certainly aren't exempt?? I'm sure not, since they have "NO FEDERAL NEXIS" or whatever the phrase is he is so fond of.

[Harvester]

Thanks for the admission ashlynne39. I would also like to thank y'all for the selective moderation. By censoring certain posts I'm discovering which areas are a little too troothy for publication. A little too difficult to be revealed, or perhaps defended against.

.. Since you refuse to try to back up what you write, it is understandable that you feel frustrated. It is also obvious that you are projecting your feelings of frustration onto other people.

HA! Oh it's backed up alright, heh, with solid gold, 3 ½ tons. It's just that you refuse to accept it, to believe it. And that's OK, that's your right. And I'm sorry to hear of your frustration. That I'm immune to the master of deception must be quite frustrating for you; that nothing in your magic bag of tricks has it's intended effect. In fact it appears to be backfiring - it emboldens me to spread more tax-truth everywhere. More sheeple are waking up every day. And, your side is running out of money. And the turncoats are comin' outta the woodwork. Really Lord Famspire, you need to start preparing yourself. I'm serious. A BIG sea change is coming and you're headed for a hard landing, and I do mean hard as in crash.

Oh and the Hendrickson's will be just fine, you'll see. God bless 'em.
Be joyous! The restoration of our country is nigh! STAND TALL WARRIORS!
____________________________________________________________________
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

[ashlynne39]

I'll be honest, I just can't grasp this mindset (thank God). I was looking at the losthorizons messageboard tonight and what I can't grasp is how given Pete's situation, facing jail time, these people still don't get that they are wrong. How is that possible. They like to use the term "sheeple." I think they're the best example of sheeple. It's just crazy.

[LPC]

Hendrickson has also filed a notice of appeal from the contempt order:

06/21/2010 | 70 | NOTICE OF APPEAL by Doreen M. Hendrickson, Peter Eric Hendrickson re 68 Order on Motion for Contempt, 67 Order on Motion to Vacate. Receipt No: DET020686 - Fee: $ 455 - Fee Status: Paid. (NHol) (Entered: 06/22/2010)

Stupid waste of time (and filing fees).

Being the idiot that he is, Hendrickson probably thinks that an appeal of the contempt order will prevent the contempt order from being enforced.

From what we've seen of Judge Edmunds, I'm quite sure that a government request for an arrest warrant for civil contempt will not sit on her desk very long.

[Duke2Earl]

That I'm immune to the master of deception must be quite frustrating for you

The only thing you are immune to is actual reality

[Nikki]

For those who have Harvester on IGNORE, you are missing the ever-widening scope of his Internet research.

He has just discovered, and is now citing,

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of California, Federal Witness, Private Attorney General, Author and Webmaster of the Supreme Law Library

For those who are not familiar with him, PAM is yet another self-styled legal scholar with a court record even worse than SFBFKADMVP.

There have been some threads here concerning him, but they have probably disappeared into the abyss of server crashes.

[Famspear]

Thanks for the admission ashlynne39. I would also like to thank y'all for the selective moderation. By censoring certain posts I'm discovering which areas are a little too troothy for publication. A little too difficult to be revealed, or perhaps defended against.

Oh, wait, let me get this straight: You've been posting blather here for months and months, but now that you're on moderated status, you've finally come up with all sorts of super-secret double-naught spy knock-out revelations that are "a little to troothy for publication," eh? A "little to difficult to be revealed", eh? A little too difficult for the Quatloos regulars to "defend against," eh? And those mean ol' Quatloos moderators just won't let you get the truth out, eh?

HA! Oh it's backed up alright, heh, with solid gold, 3 ½ tons.

HA! Oh, of course it is...... HA!

It's just that you refuse to accept it, to believe it. And that's OK, that's your right. And I'm sorry to hear of your frustration.

Gee, it's hard to "refuse to accept" or "believe" your supposed revelations, Harvester, since you have yet to "reveal" them. And, no, projecting your frustration onto me and other Quatloos regulars ain't gonna accomplish nuttin'.

That I'm immune to the master of deception must be quite frustrating for you; that nothing in your magic bag of tricks has it's intended effect.

There's that word again: "deception." Yet, you have yet to cite even one instance where you believe I am engaged in deception. Go back and read Millon's analysis of the Paranoid personality, Harvester.

"Magic bag of tricks." Ah, yes, to someone like yourself, the actual law does appear to be a "magic bag of tricks." You feel frustrated because you can't seem to come up with meaningful responses to overwhelming points of law. Your hero, Pete Hendrickson, is going back to prison. Neither he nor any of his followers has ever won on any of his goofy arguments in a court of law. It all seems like "magic" to you.

In fact it appears to be backfiring - it emboldens me to spread more tax-truth everywhere. More sheeple are waking up every day. And, your side is running out of money. And the turncoats are comin' outta the woodwork. Really Lord Famspire, you need to start preparing yourself. I'm serious. A BIG sea change is coming and you're headed for a hard landing, and I do mean hard as in crash.

Oh, I know, and it's sooooo "frustrating" for me, 'cause you know I wanna prepare myself, but I don't know how to do that -- because the genius Harvester, the great predicter of future events, won't tell me what exactly is going to happen and when it's going to happen. Kinda hard to prepare myself for something when Harvey won't even tell me what it is. Oh, boo-hoo! I'm so sad!

No, genius, a big sea change is not coming, and no I'm not headed for a hard landing. And do you want to know how and why I know that? Because if you, Harvester, somehow knew that a "big sea change" were coming, etc., etc., you would have the guts to come out and be specific, instead of talking in vague code. The reason you are talking in code and in vague terms about some mysterious bad thing that you supposedly believe is going to happen is that you are unsure of yourself. You don't believe what you're writing. You've been burned so many times before with your idiotic predictions -- about Hendrickson not being sentenced or not going back to prison, for example -- that you're gun shy.

Well, come on, Harvester: toughen yourself up! Stand tall, warrior! Tell us exactly what is going to happen to "decepticons" like me. Come on, genius, let's hear it!

Oh and the Hendrickson's will be just fine, you'll see. God bless 'em.

Oh, and by that I suppose you mean that he'll be winning another "victory" by going back to federal prison? Or are you predicting that he won't be going back to prison? Or, he'll be just fine in prison? Come on, Harvester! Stand Tall, Warrior!

Be joyous! The restoration of our country is nigh! STAND TALL WARRIORS!

Attaboy! More delusional ranting! Be joyous! The restoration is nigh! Stand tall warriors! Whoopie! Why should Harvester respond in any meaningful way to what we write, when he can write things like "be joyous" and "stand tall warriors!" and "the restoration is nigh!"

You go get 'em, Harvester! Whoooooopppieeeeeeeee!

[webhick]

I would also like to thank y'all for the selective moderation. By censoring certain posts I'm discovering which areas are a little too troothy for publication. A little too difficult to be revealed, or perhaps defended against.

Yeah, off-topic song lyrics are too troothy for publication.[/scarcasm]

[LPC]

For those who have Harvester on IGNORE,

I've also started ignoring his messages awaiting moderator approval.

[Imalawman]

Well, bankruptcy can help some with the tax debt (they'll have to file first). They'll probably have to wait a couple years, but that's probably the best option for them eventually.

I don't remember what Pete's situation is for each year, but for any years for which he owes tax for which he made a "CtC" return, the unpaid tax would probably be non-dischargeable under the fraudulent return rule.

Similar rule for any year for which he willfully attempted to evade or defeat the tax. Filing a CtC return would almost certainly be considered a willful attempt to evade or defeat the tax.

EDIT: If I recall correctly, Pete has already filed CtC returns for several years. Even if he were to wise up tomorrow and file amended returns that correctly report his income, I'm not sure the filing of the amended returns would "cure" the fraudulent original returns or erase the willful attempt to evade or defeat the tax.

Once he files the correct returns (assuming he does), those returns should start the running of the time frame for a bankruptcy. I do not think that past fraud would prevent discharge once the fraud is corrected by filing correct returns. I have some similar cases, but not quite on point. I haven't looked this up, its just my assumption.

[Famspear]

......I do not think that past fraud would prevent discharge once the fraud is corrected by filing correct returns. I have some similar cases, but not quite on point. I haven't looked this up, its just my assumption.

Yeah, I can't remember a specific case where someone filed a fraudulent return, then filed a correct and honest amended return, etc., and then had the dischargeability issue litigated with respect to that tax. So, I don't know for sure.