Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Former IRS Agent Acquitted of Tax Fraud And Conspiracy

Discussion in 'Legal' started by JitsuGuy, Jun 26, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JitsuGuy

    JitsuGuy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2003
    Messages:
    223
  2. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Sure does help to know the WHOLE story.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/24/b...r_ag=B_Protesters_Win_Case_Over_IRS_cn=062405

    So while the government couldn't prove Bannister prepared false returns, they most certainly proved their case about income tax being required by law, and convicted his clients. Big difference between being the preparer, and the person who actually is required to withhold or pay the tax. I find it amusing that Bannister is well known to pay his own income tax, despite telling his clients they are not required to do so.

    What that all means is, your assertion about the "bottom line" is a bald face lie.
     
  3. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Just in case the NYT tale of Thompson's fate isn't enough for you, here is what the USAO in the Eastern District of CA had to say in the press release after the conviction: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cae/PRESS/pdf_2005/04-13-05thompson.pdf

    The government sure proved it's case about income tax to that jury.
     
  4. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    Indeed. But that doesn't change the fact that income tax is an evil tax system which requires government to spy on those who make money. And with that, IRS agents and BATF agents are just as slimy.

    Rick
     
  5. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    Cash and barter are such wonderful things...
     
  6. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    The only moral of this story is that money you make on the books you better pay taxes on it. Evading tax and then telling the IRS about it on your 1040 or 1099 or whatever is retarded. If all they have to do is break out the calculator before arresting you, you did something wrong.

    The best way to protest the IRS is by following the example of the 11 million mexicans in this country and working off the books. Of course it helps to work in a field like auto repair, restaurants or haircutting where people mostly pay cash.

    I unfortunately work in the heavily documented field of medical device manufacture and pay every cent I am obliged to.
     
  7. JitsuGuy

    JitsuGuy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2003
    Messages:
    223
    DMF, that's not entirely accurate....

    Government Unable To Prove U.S. Law
    Requires Income Tax Withholding or Filing
    Sacramento California -- On Thursday June 23, a federal jury found former IRS Criminal Investigative Division (CID) Special Agent and CPA Joseph Banister not guilty of all counts alleging criminal tax fraud and conspiracy related to actions he took on behalf of a California business owner who had openly defied the IRS over several years by stopping withholding of all income and employment taxes from the paychecks of his workers.

    During the trial the Department of Justice was unable to put forth any evidence that Banister had either engaged in a conspiracy or had acted unlawfully when he shared legal research with business owner Al Thompson concluding that he had no legal obligation to withhold taxes from his workers or when he (Banister) prepared corrected tax returns for Thompson claiming his taxable income was, under U.S. law, zero.

    During the trial, Banister's former supervisor at IRS’s San Jose CID office, Robert Gorini (who testified via video recording) when pointedly asked, was unable to cite any U.S. law that required Banister to pay income taxes.

    Banister, who was forced to resign in 1999 after questioning IRS officials about their legal authority, gave Thompson’s worker’s a presentation in 2000 which reviewed his detailed investigative research of U.S. tax law which concluded that not only did the IRS lack any authority to impose income taxes on the workers, but there was no legal requirement for the business to withhold any taxes from the worker's paychecks.

    Banister is part of a nationwide effort seeking to force the U.S. Government to respond to a series of detailed legal Petitions for Redress of Grievances directly challenging the authority of the IRS. Last summer, the We The People Foundation initiated a landmark lawsuit with 2000 plaintiffs against the government because it has refused to answer the Petitions.

    The Right-To-Petition lawsuit, of which Banister is a plaintiff, is the first time in history that U.S. courts have been asked to define the meaning of the final ten words of the First Amendment.

    Court documents for the RTP lawsuit and scholarly research regarding the Right to Petition can be downloaded from the Lawsuit Information Center on www.GiveMeLiberty.org.

    Following the verdict, Banister was greeted by a throng of WTP supporters and members of his family.

    Tomorrow, WTP will publish additional details of this important news and stream video of post-verdict interviews of Banister & several of the jurors.
     
  8. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Actually everything I provided is entirely accurate, but the same cannot be said of what you posted. For example:
    You realize Bannister was NOT charged with evading income taxes, but rather he was charged with preparing fraudulent returns for his clients. Ergo, the question of Bannister's requirement to pay taxes is irrelevant to this case. I have serious doubts that the above quote is anything close to an accurate depiction of Gorini's questioning and testimony.

    Also, in the other cases (to include Bannister's clients like W. Thompson), where the government has secured a conviction for income tax fraud/evasion, the government has specified the relevant portions of Title 18 and Title 26 of the US Code that were used in the complaint or indictment, and the charges at trial or the plea agreement. The judge reviews those charges and rules on whether to accept a plea, or instructs the jury as to the elements of the crime for the specific statute the defendant is charged, and informs the jury that the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants actions met the elements of proof for the particular statute, or the jury must acquit.

    Again, the information you have posted is distorting what Bannister was actually indicted for, and ignoring the fact that Bannister actually reports, and pays, income tax, despite advising his clients they are not required to, which has resulted in the criminal convictions of clients like Walter Thompson. Also, interesting to note Bannister's propaganda highlights Thompson's case with regard to his employees' withholdings, but doesn't even mention the 3 counts on which Thompson was convicted related to his personal income tax. Do you think there might be a reason for that glaring ommission?

    Since you're a fan of "the bottom line," here it is. This issue has been addressed in the courts, and it's clear that the 16th Amendment is valid, Congress has the power to tax income, and has chosen to do so via Title 26 of the US Code, and there are defined criminal and/or civil penalties for violating the statutes of Title 26 and Title 18 of the US Code affecting income tax. The government is perfectly capable of both providing the statutory requirement, but also securing many convictions for violations of those statutes.

    In addition the IRS has conveniently provided on their website a nice neat bebunking of the BS scams that Bannister and his lackeys try to push. Take a gander here:

    http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf

    References to the various statutes and CFRs, or references to case law, which will contain the applicable statutes and CFRs, are provided.

    So if you want to buy into this crap sack up and stop paying your taxes, but at least be a man about it and call a press conference explaining your reasons, and challenging the government to prove it's case.

    I look forward to seeing you on the news, at least twice. ;)

    If you don't like income tax vote for politicians who will reduce or elminate taxes, but don't buy into this tinhatted nonsense about income tax is not required by law.
     
  9. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    Well, DMF is right and wrong. Bannister wasn't being tried for tax evasion so the acquittal has no serious value. That being said, the FedGov has never actually cited the law that requires people pay income taxes. They never will. It doesn't exist, merely a lot of statutes codifying what can be done to you if you don't.

    As I said about what Skyamalian posted elsewhere, accurate, and utterly useless in the real world. If they want you they will get you. Of course the fact is that if any government functionary wants you or anything you have at any moment they will get it. Some other paid functionary will cite chapter and verse to justify it, the sheep will all bleat their approval and you, well...what exactly will you do about it?

    Oh yeah, not a damn thing.

    That's these United States of America in the bold new century. :banghead: :barf:
     
  10. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    He testified via video recording? What a coward.

    The income tax is an evil system which violates the 5th Amendment, and anyone who enforces that bastardized law is equally scummy.

    I continue to fight for the day when it (the income tax, not the 5th Amendment) is repealed. The USSC is already working on neutering the 5A.

    Rick
     
  11. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    Who was it that went on a hunger strike a while back demanding the FedGov agree to anwer just a few simple questions about the tax code? And finally the government agreed...only to recind the agreement after he ended the hunger strike?

    The government doesn't answer questions, and why should they? As I asked above, what are we going to do about it...?

    Ah well. Like I said above, cash and barter are wonderful things. :neener:
     
  12. EVIL5LITER

    EVIL5LITER Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Messages:
    378
    Location:
    Mobile, AL
    So who can tell me about the scam (or legit plan) that goes about with you filing some paperwork and never having to pay taxes again?
     
  13. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Yet, you expect people to take your comments seriously. :rolleyes:

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/26/subtitles/a/toc.html
    Title 26, Subtitle A, has it all. I'll admit it's long, boring, and little complicated, but it's all in there. Title 26 most certainly create an income tax, as allowed for by the 16th Amendment to the Constitution.

    Now the criminal offenses and penalties you spoke of are in a separate portion of Title 26, and short and uncomplicated. So the tax protest scam artists point to the short and uncomplicated penalties, and try to tell people that the actual law requiring the tax doesn't exist. Knowing many won't bother to actually look up and read the other portions of Title 26.

    Those are all in Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 75. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/26/subtitles/f/chapters/75/toc.html

    Hey I don't enjoy paying taxes either, but they are real, and they are legitimate based on the 16th Amendment, and Title 26 of the US Code. Anyone who believes otherwise is many cards short of a full deck.

    Again, if you think I'm wrong sack up and stop paying your taxes, but at least be a man about it and call a press conference explaining your reasons, and challenging the government to prove it's case.

    I look forward to seeing you on the news, at least twice. ;)
     
  14. Ian

    Ian Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,857
    If you believe that the income tax is being illegally enforced, then you believe that the Feds don't feel at all restrained by the actual letter of the law. Now, if you believe that, why on earth would you trust them to give you a fair trial over the matter? Bannister and the WTP folks have guts, for sure, but for the average you or I (like beerslurpy said) it's pretty stupid to defy the IRS and throw it in their face. Successfully evading an evil government agency with a zillion-dollar enforcement budget (and a crapload of guns) requires at least a modicum of discression.
     
  15. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Yeah, you're right it's impossible to get a fair trial, which is why Bannister got convicted . . . Oh wait, that's right Bannister got a fair trial and got acquitted. So I guess your little conspiracy theory about the feds not giving people a fair shake is just as much BS as the idea that income tax isn't in the US Code. :rolleyes:
     
  16. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    DMF,

    I read your source material. None of them go to the central themes of Mr. Bannister. The code doesn't define the terms. The source you cite argues the point by saying "go to this link and read all 'bout it." It doesn't answer questions by pulling any quotes.

    So, just as they reneged on answering questions of the hunger-striker.

    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=23746
    Imagine that, fed.gov lied and/or obfuscated...just like you. Was that covered in the KSAs for your job interview?

    What cowardice and arrogance and slight. Are these like contagious diseases at fed.gov or requirements for employment?

    Rick
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2005
  17. Sylvilagus Aquaticus

    Sylvilagus Aquaticus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,170
    Location:
    Dallas, Texas
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page