Quatloos!

From: legality-of-income-tax@yahoogroups.com [mailto:legality-of-income-tax@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. Tom
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 3:17 PM
To: legality-of-income-tax@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [legality-of-income-tax] Pathetic

Demo wrote:

More nonsense, of course, and particularly interesting nonsense coming from
a man who will likely be indicted in the near future. Of course, last time
you were hit with criminal tax evasion charges, you pled guilty and
testified against a tax protest promoter in exchange for no prison time.

You're a real work of art. You have no idea what you are talking about. You make threats and then you result to incorrect personal information; this is what somebody does that has NO IDEA what the law says.

I will not be indicted because I have broken no laws, but more importantly, if I go down, the White House, Treasury Department, and DOJ go down; the public gets to SEE all my letters to these agencies for over FIVE YEARS. AND it gets to see the non-responses from them. That is the exciting part; to SHOW how the government lawyers BULLSHIT the public and when the public won't go away, they act behind the scenes to try and shut them up. But if you haven't already figured it out, I have ACCELERATED my efforts to inform the public. I am not stupid, the law is written correctly, and the proof is clear that most Americans have been defrauded.

For the record, I did not know the law in 1995-96, so I thought that the government knew something about the law that I didn't. I thought that the government was HONEST! Stupid me, now I know better.

But it gets better; the public gets to see the behind the scenes CRIMINAL efforts by the IRS and DOJ to force me into paying taxes that would have been discharged in bankruptcy. And I did NOT testify against the trust promoter; pissed them off too. I was not going to be dishonest and I wasn't. But then YOU don't understand that; honesty is not in your vocabulary.

It was real stinky, but not for me; it SHOWS how government lawyers are CRIMINALS who will do anything for the state (like you); like SS Storm Troopers; ignoring the Constitution and criminal statute that exist to PROTECT the public from government lawlessness.

Instead of substance, do you have any more threats or insults, government shill?

You are PATHETIC in your ignorance.

Tom Clayton, MD

Judge Roy Bean wrote:How long will he be under supervision?

December 15, 2006

HOUSTON AREA RADIOLOGIST SENTENCED TO FEDERAL PRISON ON TAX CHARGES

United States Attorney Johnny Sutton and the Department of Justice announced that Charles Thomas Clayton, MD, of The Woodlands, was sentenced to five years in federal prison for tax crimes relating to the claim that his domestically-earned income was not taxable.

In addition to the prison term, United States District Judge Sam Sparks ordered that Clayton pay a $50,000 fine plus $7,455.98 to cover certain costs associated with the prosecution of the case and be placed under supervised release for a period of one year after completing his prison term.

“The obligation to pay taxes is not negotiable,” stated United States Attorney Johnny Sutton.

On August 29, 2006, a federal jury convicted Clayton of eight tax charges. The jury found that Clayton filed false amended tax returns for the calender years 1997 and 1998, claiming a refund of over $160,000 for those years. The jury also found that Clayton failed to file timely federal personal income tax returns for calendar years 1999-2004, despite receiving over $1.3 million in gross income during those years.

Between at least 1996 and 2001, Clayton practiced radiology in Nacogdoches, Texas. He subsequently moved to The Woodlands, Texas, and currently practices in the Houston area.

Clayton’s defense at trial centered on the so-called “861 argument” – a claim that domestically-earned income is not taxable. Evidence at trial revealed that Clayton disregarded multiple written notices from the Internal Revenue Service informing him that his 861 argument was without merit. He had also been told the same thing by two Certified Public Accountants.

....I will not be indicted because I have broken no laws, but more importantly......

.......if I go down, the White House, Treasury Department, and DOJ go down; the public gets to SEE all my letters to these agencies for over FIVE YEARS.....

As a result of Applicant's conviction, Applicant was sentenced to 60 months incarceration and one year supervised release, fined $50,000, and ordered to pay costs of prosecution in the amount of $7,455.98. In May 2012 the U.S. District Court received a report that Applicant was at the end of his term of supervised release but had paid less than 2% of the $50,000 fine and had not paid any of the costs of prosecution despite reporting an annual income of $120,000. On June 19, 2012 the U.S. Attorney's Office fiked a Motion to Revoke Applicant's supervised release. On August 8, 2012, Judge Sam Sparks of the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Texas revoked Applicant's supervised release and re-sentenced him to an additional 11 months and 22 days of supervised release.

Clayton's testimony at the SOAH hearing also suggests that some of his current financial arrangements remain questionable. Clayton testified that he had received over $100,000 in loans from Richey [the owner of the company Clayton worked for], including $65,000 to pay his fine and prosecution costs as well as a $4,400 monthly loan. Clayton said these loans were neither documented nor due by a particular date and that he planned to pay them back "[w]hen [he] can." Despite acknowledging that the loans "might never get paid back", Clayton categorically denied owing taxes on the monthly $4,400 payment because "{i}t's a loan."

At another point in his testimony, Clayton said he had a written promissory note with Richey that included the $4,400 monthly payments. Clayton testified that the note did not include the $65,000 Richey loaned him to pay off the fine and prosecution costs stemming from his convictions.

Clayton also testified that he currently owes approximately $450,000 in back taxes. Clayton said he was currently paying $150 a month towards this liability. Clayton testified that, according to "what the IRS says," he will no longer have to back his back taxes once the "two years remaining on the Statute of Limitations" run.