Dear Vicky, Thank you for your response, however I really need to get this straight, because your answer confounds me. You are asserting when Larken Rose buys full page ads in several major newspapers http://theft-by-deception.com/challenge.asp stating that he is not filing because of certain reasons after he has sent letters to the IRS DOJ and every congressman regarding certain issues of the tax code without response to the said questions. Then he went ahead and produced a 20,000 Cd's outlining the law and why he is not required to file see www.861.info And then the IRS / DOJ brings him and his wife to separate trials to court to basically have that couple silenced. In this case they are demonstrating the IRS is making people file their income taxes FRAUDULENTLY, and that is not relevant to the people in the area? Now if that is not the silliest and most absurd thing that I have ever heard I don't know what is. Don't you find it amazing that out of all the media outlets in this supposed "free" country, only one SINGLE outlet has any information about the trial of the century!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You might conduct a poll using your supposed "news" media outlet, and ask the people in your area if they would be interested in a case involving the IRS and DOJ where someone is actually challenging the government regarding the misapplication of the tax code to coerce the people of this county to hand over to the government their hard earned money WHEN THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO SO! With that information in hand I am sure you will see that your opinion is FALSE! Being you and the other 'news" outlets refusing to give this important trial no coverage clearly indicates that your company is EMBEDDED with the government and therefore part of the problem.
"Benchimol, Vicky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: because its not local to our area -----Original Message----- From: Rocky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 12:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Why are you not covering this case??????? http://triallogs.blogspot.com/ Wow 04 libertarian candidate Mike Badnarik comments on the Larken rose case. After doing several searches finally I found a main stream media that is covering the case, Ding ding ding! http://www.phxnews.com/fullstory.php?article=24057 if you have the time foward this to your local media outlet and ask them why they are not covering the story. Larken Rose Trial, Day 2 Posted by markyannone on Wednesday August 10, 2005 at 6:03 pm MST [ Send Story to Friend ] Tuesday, August 9, 2005 The prosecution started its case at 9 a.m. by calling Mary Sonna. Mary has been an IRS custodian of records for 32 years. She went through a number of exhibits with the prosecution to show that Larken and Tessa Rose had not filed and paid federal income taxes for 1997 through 2003, except that they had paid over $2,000 for 1997. In addition, she showed that in 2000, Larken and Tessa had filed amended returns for 1994, 1995, and 1996 with explanations based on the 861 argument. This was all unnecessary, since Larken was willing to stipulate that they had not filed or paid federal income taxes for these years! In addition, two different letters were sent to Larken by the IRS that stated that "gross income" includes "compensation for services." The IRS sent many computer-generated letters to Larken, asking him to file income tax return forms and to call or write the IRS if he believes that he is not required to file. None of these letters refer to section 861 of the IRS Code. Instead they mention Sections 61 through 64, if any. At 10:35 a.m. this testimony ended and after a 10-minute break, the next witness, Barbara Thompson took the stand. She verified that the medical group that she worked for paid Tessa for doing their medical transcriptions. Then the prosecutor read the stipulation of the parties that the medical transcription services were allocated to Larken. At 11:20 a.m. the next government witness, a lady named Cathy Lee Spalding who worked for IRS's Small Business/Self-Employed section of the IRS and was a revenue agent for three years and an auditor for eight years. She was assigned to Larken's case at the end of 1999 and met Larken after April 15, 2000. IRS's position was based on Section 61 of the IRS Code, and Larken's position was based on Section 861 of the Code. Both parties recorded this meeting. She told Larken that she would do some research on the issue. She made a referral for technical advise, from the National Office of the IRS in Washington, DC, for the first time ever, based on Larken's request. The IRS National Office refused to take up Larken's case. On June 8, 2000, the IRS denied his 1040X return's claim for refund. Cathy handled Larken's 1994 and 1995 1040X tax returns, and someone else handled the 1040X for 1996. In September 2000, she met with Larken and in that meeting he accused of her of denying him his Constitutional rights. Cathy responded that she was only trying to do her job. Under cross-examination, Cathy said that Larken and the IRS recorded the April and September meetings. One IRS letter referred to an 11th Circuit Federal Court of Appeal decision named Coleman. Coleman disagreed with people who claim "wages are not income," that "only gold is money," or that "the 16th Amendment was never ratified." Agent Cathy admitted that Larken never brought up any of these issues. Agent Cathy said she felt so threatened by Larken's tone of voice and body language that she called the police! She admitted that nothing bad came of it, and that it was just a concern she had. The judge said that whatever part of the tape that would challenge her assertion about his tone of voice could be played to the jury. She read the first part of a letter that Larken had written to her. In his letter Larken quoted the IRS regulations and had Agent Cathy read on the stand the part that stated that Section 861 is to be used to determine the taxable income of a U.S. citizen from domestic source income. At 12:25 p.m. the judge announced a lunch break till 1:30. When I (Peymon) got back to court, the testimony of Agent Cathy was about to finish. Ross told me that she had said nothing of significance in the afternoon. At 2:05 a new witness was called: Charles Judge, supervisor and manager of Agent Cathy Spalding and IRS agent for 32 years. Larken's 1040X refund tax return claims were assigned to his group in April 2000. In a September 2000 manager's conference, Charles and Larken met to go over Larken's case. Agent Charles told Larken that per Section 61 of the IRS Code, all income is taxable, unless specifically excluded. Agent Charles had never dealt with the 861 issue before. Charles stated that he had read IRS Code Section 861 and that his understanding of it is that it is about a person who has income from within and without the United States. Larken sent a letter and a video to Agent Charles, marked "personal" on the outside, in which he invited Charles and possibly his wife to dinner to go over it. Agent Charles reported to the IRS inspector general about this upcoming meeting, per the rules of conduct of IRS agents. Agent Charles then secretly tape recorded the meeting. Charles said that Larken said he was being clobbered by the income taxes and started studying the law. Then another agent, named Dianna, referred his case to CID. At the September 2000 meeting, Larken acknowledged receipt of the income from the transcription business. Charles once again told Larken that based on IRS Code Section 61, ALL income is taxable unless otherwise excluded. Larken gave Agent Charles the 861 regulations. At the meeting, Charles told Larken that they could not at that time address Larken's points on the 861 issue. IRS NEVER answered Larken's questions on the 861 issue. IRS did not tell Larken that the IRS was going to tape Agent Charles' conversation with Larken. Agent Charles stated that Larken said that at one point in the past, he was a tax protester and had trouble paying his bills. This was the end of testimony of IRS Agent Charles Judge. At 2:43 p.m. a new government witness named Stanley Escher took the stand. Agent Stanley is currently the Senior Program Analyst of Abusive Tax Transactions that shuts down these types of organizations and entities. Back in 2000 when he met Larken, he was a group manager. Agent Stanley met Larken as a witness in the audit of John Hoffman. Hoffman had filed a 1997 tax return form and later filed an amended return seeking a refund of the money that he had given to the IRS. Hoffman and Larken wanted Agent Stanley to answer twelve questions about the 861 issue. At this meeting, Larken stated that per Section 861 of the IRS Code, the domestic income of Mr. Hoffman is not taxable. They wanted Stanley to answer the twelve questions that he eventually answered for them. Stanley tried to make it clear to them that Section 861 did NOT apply and that Section 61 is the applicable code section. In addition, he said that the 861 Section is about when someone or a corporation has income from within the United States as well as income from outside the United States, like China, the person or corporation could get a tax credit for the taxes that they had paid to the foreign government. Throughout his testimony, Stanley had his hands tightly clenched together, as if to hide his nervousness. Larken asked Stanley if the words "tax credit" were used in Section 861. Stanley said, "Yes." Larken showed Stanley a copy of Section 861, then Stanley was not so sure about his last statement. The judge allowed a word search on the computer. The words "tax credit" were mentioned in the text of Section 861 under "dividends" ONLY. IRS procedures say that frivolous issues do not go to the national office of the IRS. We had a break for about 10 to 15 minutes, and at 4:15 p.m. prosecutor Miller read the stipulations of Larken and the IRS, which stated that Larken and his wife Tessa operated a medical transcription service and that at least 50 percent of its income would be attributable to Larken. The IRS's last witness of the day was their best witness, Department of Justice lawyer Evan John Davis, who is a senior civil trial attorney of the tax division of the DOJ. Davis met Larken as a result of his work on the Thurston Bell abusive tax shelter injunction case. For the last four of five years, Davis has been shutting down wholesale tax scams. Davis was working the Thurston Bell case and had heard Larken's name mentioned. Davis wanted to know what the relation was between Larken and Thurston Bell and what Larken might testify to about the Bell case, if they go that far. This is as far as we could go on today's report. We will finish it tomorrow. Day 3 will be sent separately. Yours in truth, freedom and justice, Peymon, Ross, Harry, and Ken Edited by Mark Yannone Audioblog: http://flogcast.blogspot.com/2005/08/trial-logs-coverage-of-larken-and.html Thomas "Rocky" Costanzo Windsor Capital Mortgage 1.95% fixed payment loan that pays off in 25 years. DROP your payments, get CASH out of your home and REDUCE the term! "One Idea 10% better is worth a million Dollars" Brian Tracy 888-848-8781 Voice / 561-450-5546 Fax www.Toddsloans.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] WHO IS JOHN GALT? --------------------------------- Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page Thomas "Rocky" Costanzo Windsor Capital Mortgage 1.95% fixed payment loan that pays off in 25 years. DROP your payments, get CASH out of your home and REDUCE the term! "One Idea 10% better is worth a million Dollars" Brian Tracy 888-848-8781 Voice / 561-450-5546 Fax www.Toddsloans.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] WHO IS JOHN GALT? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> <font face=arial size=-1><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hde75ur/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705060682:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1123789953/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992 ">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font> --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
