Ed and Elaine Brown will forego appeal

Post by **Joey Smith** » Wed May 23, 2007 10:19 pm

The Connecticut Valley Spectator (New Hampshire) reports that Ed and Elaine Brown, tax protesters from Plainfield, N.H., have said that they do not plan to appeal their convictions on federal tax evasion charges.

The Browns, who had filed a notice of appeal, say, according to the Spectator, that they now have rejected "man's law" and will follow only what the Bible says. Ed Brown, quoted in the Spectator, said, "Only God knows the timeframe, and no matter how it ends, it will be good. It doesn't matter. If they do something to us, they'll make martyrs out of us."

The Browns, who haven't filed a federal tax return since 1995, are asking the government to show them a law that requires U.S. citizens to pay income taxes. "They have never done so, and the reason they have never done so is because no such law exists," said Elaine Brown.

The Browns appealed their case to the U. S. Supreme Court, but the Supreme court refused to hear them. During the trial which found the Browns guilty of tax evasion, the presiding judge, Steven McAuliffe, did not allow the Browns to argue whether or not the charges against them had a legal basis.

The couple, who have some property in West Lebanon, NH, were tricked into federal custody by federal agents and Lebanon police, who claimed that there was some problem at the property. The Browns have contended that the city should collect only the amount of money in taxes needed to run the city. According to the Spectator, Ed claims that he is not getting a good return on his taxes-only fire protection and having his road plowed.

Other than the poor return on their taxes, the Browns also object to paying money so that "public schools can teach 'communism and homosexuality,' according to the Spectator.

The Browns know that all they have to do to get rid of their tax problems and to avoid any possible harm from the government is to pay their taxes, but it's not that simple, say the Browns. "Nobody would be that stupid to get into this kind of pressure and anxiety every day," unless they really believed in what they were doing, said Mr. Brown. They've been sentenced to five years in prison. "Principle is very expensive," Elaine said, "In many ways, we're finding that out."

Source:

http://www.cvspectator.com/

Dr. Caligari · Post by **Dr. Caligari** » Wed May 23, 2007 10:32 pm

The couple, who have some property in West Lebanon, NH, were tricked into federal custody by federal agents and Lebanon police, who claimed that there was some problem at the property.

What? They were taken into custody? When?

Post by **Demosthenes** » Wed May 23, 2007 10:41 pm

Relax. This took place when they were indicted.

Nikki · Post by **Nikki** » Wed May 23, 2007 11:20 pm

What appeal did they have in front of the Supremes? After all, they didn't even appeal the verdict in their trial.

Could it be that this reporter is somewhat lax when it comes to getting her facts straight?

Post by **Demosthenes** » Thu May 24, 2007 1:19 am

A couple of weeks after the January verdict, they filed an appeal with the Supreme Court in attempt to leap frog over the appellate court and have their case magically dismissed.

Post by **Demosthenes** » Thu May 24, 2007 1:20 am

Nikki wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:A couple of weeks after the January verdict, they filed an appeal with the Supreme Court in attempt to leap frog over the appellate court and have their case magically dismissed.
Do you have a copy of that one? It should be worth a laugh or two.

Not yet.

Post by **Demosthenes** » Tue May 29, 2007 4:51 pm

Newest entries on Brown appellate docket:

5/25/07 Mail returned as undeliverable to Elaine A. Brown for Appellant Elaine A. Brown in 07-1724. Copy of case opening forms dated 5/9/07. "Returned to Sender-Refused" "No one here by that name". I am unable to find a new address. (lina) [07-1724]

5/25/07 Mail returned as undeliverable to Edward Lewis Brown for Appellant Edward Lewis Brown in 07-1724. Copy of case opening forms dated 5/9/07. "Returned to Sender" "No one here by that name". I am unable to find a new address. (lina) [07-1723]

Cobalt Shiva · Post by **Cobalt Shiva** » Tue May 29, 2007 4:52 pm

Nikki wrote:What appeal did they have in front of the Supremes?

Mary Wilson has refused to comment.

Post by **webhick** » Tue May 29, 2007 5:04 pm

I am unable to find a new address.

Is this person living under a rock? There is no new address. They have to try a different name. Body of the Lord or whatever that nonsense was. And just to note, I imagine that the body of the lord is in better condition and a lot less wrinkly than what they've got going.