Cryer Trial

Post by **LPC** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:52 pm

The trial of Tommy Cryer started Monday, and reportedly the government dropped the evasion and proceeded to trial on two counts of willful failure to file. A jury was selected, and testimony was to begin on day 2.

From triallogs.com:

om Cryer Trial - Day Two
Written by djahn
Wednesday, 11 July 2007
Here is an update we received from those in attendance.
###

Day Two started with the government presenting its case in the morning session and Tom taking the stand and offering his direct testimony until the close of yesterday's proceedings...

The government first brought an IRS supervisor to the stand... her testimony established the paperwork flow and indicated that Tommy filed "employer" documentation for his "employee" but did not file his individual returns.

Next was Tommy's secretary... she did not show up as a hostile witness towards the prosecution... but in the same breath, she did not give the government any help when she testified that she fills out all of her own IRS forms required of the employer, and even writes and signs most of the checks!

The DOJ tried to get in a point in that area... and she said that Tommy gave her the option to file or not-- then he abruptly stopped her... then on another question... she added that it was her choice to file even after she found out that there was no law making her liable-- where of course, he cut her off again.

The CPA took the stand and testified to profit and loss statements related to Tommy's practice of law... he simply established the numbers but never stated with authority to the lawful and legal definition of income... Larry was able to establish that the CPA had only a very insignificant understanding of the IRC.

The government's final witness was an IRS "special agent" in the Criminal Investigation Division who testified to the 'audits' of Tom's business and on Larry's cross-exam made it clear that the 'Code" is enormous and he only knew small bits and pieces of some of it... The IRS used Section 61 of the IRC to prop up its claim of liability to file and pay income taxes... but failed to clarify the first three words of Section 61... which state, "Unless otherwise provided..."

After lunch Tom took the stand...

There were some fireworks during Tom's testimony and the judge was clearly aggravated with the rule of law being presented in 'his' courtroom... and several times stopped Tom's testimony. One of those times the judge brought up the "Cheek" ruling where Larry and the judge went around and around on Tom's right to present his beliefs to the jury.

The judge overruled an objection of the prosecutor on another occasion but also warned Larry about the "very narrow" path he's taking the case and will not allow Tom to argue that the IRS is unconstitutional... which of course Tom never intended to do and has not done in the least.

Day Two ended with the judge calling counsel into the judge's chamber and unloading... venting his frustration mainly aimed at Larry and Tom taking over the courtroom and plowing ahead with getting the Internal Revenue Code... the Code of Federal Regs, the Constitution and a plethora of Supreme Court cases in front of the jury.

At the close of yesterday's hearing... the judge ordered Larry to turn over Tom's notes and research to the DOJ as the court believed that Tom's notebook filled with law and supporting Supreme Court cases was "discovery" and therefore the DOJ was entitled to it...

Larry quickly agreed to that and even told the court that it would be a very good thing for the prosecutor to read and urged the prosecutor to read it carefully and essentially looked forward to seeing more of it in the record and presented to the jury during cross-examination of Tom's beliefs.

Day three promises to be very interesting! The parties will meet prior to the start to discuss jury instructions before the jury is brought in and seated. The DOJ opens day three with cross-examination and Larry's re-direct may well occur before noon and closing arguments will surely take place before the close of today's proceedings...

Please let everyone know that http://www.truthattack.org will be providing you with exclusive MP3 audio interviews with Larry, Tommy (if possible) and attendees of the court proceedings and anyone else that I can get my microphone in front of today!

Discuss Topic (0) Discuss this article in the Forum
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 11 July 2007 )

Imalawman · Post by **Imalawman** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:00 pm

This is already posted on the TP Promoter's forum. Should we discuss here or there?

Post by **Demosthenes** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:58 pm

Imalawman wrote:This is already posted on the TP Promoter's forum. Should we discuss here or there?

Here.

Post by **Joey Smith** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:04 am

ih8theIRS

32 Posts
Posted - 07/11/2007 : 7:23:09 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--- THIS FROM WE THE PEOPLE ---

NOT GUILTY!

Tom Cryer and Becraft Best the DOJ

According to our court-watcher we can tell you the following:

At the start of the trial the DOJ withdrew the felony charges, leaving two counts of willful failure to file.

The Constitution and the law were allowed into the courtroom. Although Cryer was able to tell the jury what he read, he was not allowed to show the jury what he read. Cryer was also able to tell the jury what he did not read in the law because he could not find it in the law - the law that made him liable to file and pay the federal income tax.

Tom did a good job of explaining to the jury what he read in the Brushhaber, Stanton and Eisner Supreme Court cases about the legal meaning of the word "income" and what he read in the Internal Revenue Code - everything but the law that required him to file. Tom had asked the IRS to show him the law that made him liable but the IRS did not respond.

Larry Becraft's closing arguments were "flawless."

Compared to the judges in the Simkanin and Schiff cases, Cryer's judge was "Cinderella."

Congratulations Tom and Larry. We are looking forward to your full report.

ErsatzAnatchist · Post by **ErsatzAnatchist** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:32 am

Nothing on Pacer tonight.

Post by **grixit** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:42 am

Is it just me, or did they declare victory without waiting for the jury to come back?

Post by **LPC** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:53 am

It's very strange to me that I can't find any current commentary in which anyone talks about a jury verdict. All I'm reading and hearing is celebrating by brain-dead people who think that Cryer's testimony was persuasive. But I'm not reading or hearing anyone say that the jury has actually rendered a verdict.

Post by **webhick** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:30 am

Well, if they announce the Not Guilty verdict before the jury comes back with any verdict, they can claim that they had inside sources on the jury that said that the verdict was not guilty, but the government intervened and forced the jury to render a guilty verdict.

iamfreeru2 · Post by **iamfreeru2** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:17 am

You will hear it tomorrow for sure, but the verdict by the jury after 3 hours of deliberation is NOT GUILTY. There was an eyewitness at the trial that reported the verdict. So much for Tommy Cryer losing, eh? You guys are pathetic.

Post by **webhick** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:25 am

From the text that started the topic:

Tom Cryer Trial - Day Two
Written by djahn
Wednesday, 11 July 2007

Day three promises to be very interesting! The parties will meet prior to the start to discuss jury instructions before the jury is brought in and seated. The DOJ opens day three with cross-examination and Larry's re-direct may well occur before noon and closing arguments will surely take place before the close of today's proceedings...

Since when do juries deliberate and hand down verdicts before closing arguments? Am I being ignorant from too many years of watching Law & Order?

iamfreeru2 · Post by **iamfreeru2** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:33 am

Closing arguments were today and then given to the jury. I do not know why the post above said what is said, but I can tell you it is a victory for Tommy Cryer. Press releases will be issued tomorrow.

Post by **Joey Smith** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:44 am

iamfreeru2 wrote:Closing arguments were today and then given to the jury. I do not know why the post above said what is said, but I can tell you it is a victory for Tommy Cryer. Press releases will be issued tomorrow.

Well, just remember that it is a jury acquittal of the criminal charges, not any finding by the court that Cryer did not have a legal duty to file and pay taxes. About once a year or every couple of years, some TP will avoid prison. But, just like Vernice Kuglin and Lloyd Long, etc., Cryer will still have the outstanding tax liability meaning that he may not go to prison, but his quality of life will not be substantially better.

So, even if Cryer won a jury acquittal, it was at best a wash because he didn't get out of the civil liability.

Some of the regulars here have expressed over the years that unless somebody is a promoter, it is a waste of resources to send somebody to prison and instead the government should spend its energy making sure that the TP pays as much as possible.

BTW, just like Vernice Kuglin, Cryer will also have to pay his attorney's fees to defend his case, so in the end he will probably be worse off than if he had just paid his taxes in the first place, so count it as a "win" if you want to, but it isn't much of a win.

iamfreeru2 · Post by **iamfreeru2** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:54 am

You are to much!! The law was introduced in the case and all there saw that the income tax is misapplied. Most people in this country are not required to file or pay. This is a big win and more people will know what is happening to them. This is why I hate coming here to post. You guys are not interested in truth. This forum is a joke. Have fun spewing your lies.

Post by **Joey Smith** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:44 am

iamfreeru2 wrote:You are to much!! The law was introduced in the case and all there saw that the income tax is misapplied. Most people in this country are not required to file or pay. This is a big win and more people will know what is happening to them. This is why I hate coming here to post. You guys are not interested in truth. This forum is a joke. Have fun spewing your lies.

Just like the acquittal of Vernice Kuglin kept Irwin Schiff, Larken Rose, Tom Clayton and probably 50 other TPs who came later out of the joint.

Post by **LPC** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:58 am

If Cryer was acquitted (and I'm still saying "if" because there is no underestimating the stupidity and dishonesty of the tax denial crowd), that makes three (count them, *three*) known acquittals: Lloyd Long (1993), Vernice Kuglin (2003), and Tommy Cryer (2007). That's one about every seven years. (I'm not counting Joe Banister because willfulness was not an issue in his case.)

And those who were acquitted were still liable for the taxes, which were enforced in civil court.

Meanwhile (in alphabetical order), William Benson, Edward Brown, John Cheek, Robert Clarkson, Tom Clayton, Ward Dean, Peter Hendrickson, Kent Hovind, Eddie Kahn, John Kotmair (both of them), Phillip Marsh, Lynne Meredith, Eduardo Rivera, Larken Rose, Irwin Schiff, Richard Simkanin, Steve Swan, Walter Thompson, John David Van Hove (aka "Johnny Liberty"), and many, many, others (who have I left out?) are either now in prison or have served time in prison, some more than once, and some will soon be on their way back to prison.

I think I'll stick to obeying the law that exists instead of the law they imagine.

iamfreeru2 · Post by **iamfreeru2** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:22 am

This will be my last post in this thread. You forgot one that was acquitted, Fred Allnutt.

The difference in this case is the law was allowed in and Cryer was well prepared. He was able to show the jury why he did not file or pay by using S. Ct. cases, IRC, etc. to prove his position. The jury came back with the not guilty verdict.

Some of the people posted that were convicted were railroaded, IMO. When you are not allowed to show the law, because some black robed thug thinks he is god and does not allow the law in "his" courtroom, then it is a directed verdict and a sham.

Am I saying all courts are corrupt? I do not know, but I know that there are judges that are and I have first hand knowledge. If the lie is exposed, however, the house of cards falls. Unfortunately, there are many judges that love their kickbacks and there "power" more than the truth.

It is pathetic when the ones that are supposed to uphold truth and the law cover it up just to protect the system and their precious FRNs. This site is one of those that would rather keep the lies going than to tell the truth about the "Income Tax."

Have a nice life

Post by **LPC** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:52 am

iamfreeru2 wrote:You forgot one that was acquitted, Fred Allnutt.

That appears to be correct. He was acquitted of tax evasion charges in 1996.

So there's an acquittal about once every five years.

But Allnutt was convicted of willfully failing to file Maryland tax returns in 1983, so maybe it's a wash.

John J. Bulten · Post by **John J. Bulten** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:21 pm

QuestForFairTrialInConcordNH.blogspot.com wrote:Thursday, July 12, 2007
Confirmed: Tom Cryer, NOT GUILTY

Dear Subscriber,

Well, the title pretty much says it. Tommy Cryer was indeed acquitted today of the bogus charges against him (two counts of "willful failure to file").

So sometimes justice does prevail (no thanks to the misnamed "Department of Justice"). What I'm most interested in hearing now is the story from the perspective of the JURORS. But I don't know when, or if, that wil ever happen. Anyway, I'm betting Mr. Cryer will get a VERY good night's sleep tonight, and in case this e-mail finds its way to him, THANK YOU, Mr. Cryer, for doing what is right, when it was dangerous to do so.

Sincerely,
Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com

posted by The Freedom Fellowship at 12:53 AM

I guess the Cryer Belief was provably a good-faith belief system after all.

Imalawman · Post by **Imalawman** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:46 pm

Well, that's too bad. But the civil side won't be so nice to Mr. Cryer. My guess is that he'll continue to not file taxes and will be in court again in the future. Better luck next time. Seriously, how bad do you have a mangle a trial against Mr. Cryer to lose on both counts?

Post by **Famspear** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:02 pm

I just spoke with an employee in the office of the Clerk of the Court in Shreveport. As of approximately 9:10 am Central time, Thursday, July 12, 2007, no verdict has been docketed in the Cryer case. The individual I spoke with indicated that if a verdict had been rendered late yesterday afternoon, it would probably already be on PACER. As of a few minutes ago, there was nothing on PACER.