Is Hendrickson soliciting hearsay?

[Quixote]

From the LostHorizons Newsletter for 9/25. http://www.losthorizons.com/Newsletter.htm#PageOne

The Truth Goes On Trial On October 20.

The chief means being used by the law-defiers to stop the spread of the liberating truth about the "income" tax is the bogus indictment absurdly alleging that I didn't believe what I said on my filings made during late 2002 through early 2007. Please help me decisively slap this crap down.

The trial is set to begin at 9:00 AM. It will be held in the courtroom of Judge Gerald Rosen, Rm. 733 of the Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse, 231 W. Lafayette Blvd. in Detroit, Michigan. The company of any CtC Warrior during this likely-three-or four-day affair (or any part thereof) will be most welcome.

I also ask once again for everyone's financial support (and most gratefully thank those who have contributed in that regard thus far) to help with what have been enormous legal expenses. You can donate by PayPal here or mail donations to me at 232 Oriole Rd., Commerce Twp., Michigan 48382. Any level of support that you can afford will be most appreciated.

Finally, I ask for a particular kind of help that only the CtC-educated can provide: Please send me an email with "light-bulb moment" in the subject line telling me what single fact that you learned when reading CtC most made the light-bulb of understanding-- the light-bulb of paradigm shift-- fire-up for you.
Also, tell me what single concept you came to understand when reading CtC that you most needed to grasp to overcome your previous conditioning on the subject of the income tax.

That is, if you could communicate only ONE fact and ONE concept to another person that would most help them have THEIR "light-bulb moment", what would you choose?

(Emphasis added)

Is PH just looking for moral support or does he think he can get those e-mails into evidence?

[cynicalflyer]

Is PH just looking for moral support or does he think he can get those e-mails into evidence?

I think he is planning defense strategy. My guess is he is trying to come up with the one sound-bite that he can get in the jury's ears (before being overruled) that will be a "silver bullet" and win him the case.

Look at how he phrases it

That is, if you could communicate only ONE fact and ONE concept to another person that would most help them have THEIR "light-bulb moment", what would you choose.

He knows he will or already has been shut down in his efforts to argue the law to the jury. So instead, he is going to try and get it in "accidentally" on purpose and is trying to gauge what one thing most often gets people to "see the CtC truth" or whatever.

[LPC]

My guess is he is trying to come up with the one sound-bite that he can get in the jury's ears (before being overruled) that will be a "silver bullet" and win him the case.

That's my guess also.

Which means that [Warning: Mixed Metaphor ahead] he knows he's about to go down for the third time and is grasping at straws.

Think about it: The self-proclaimed genius who first cracked the code and then wrote "Cracking the Code" is asking his *readers* to give him a very brief and very insightful explanation into his own explanation.

"Please tell me why I'm right" is one way to put it. Although "Please tell me what I said" might be more accurate.

[Thule]

already has been shut down in his efforts to argue the law to the jury. So instead, he is going to try and get it in "accidentally" on purpose and is trying to gauge what one thing most often gets people to "see the CtC truth" or whatever.

He's going to argue "greed"?

[The Observer]

He's going to argue "greed"?

Think he'll get up in court and quote Michael Douglas' character from "Wall Street?":

Greed, for lack of better term, is good

[fortinbras]

I think the sound bite explanation is the most likely.
Although he might be trying for Santa Clause defense (i.e., from Miracle on 24th Street, with sacks of mail attesting to his virtues).

[Arthur Rubin]

Which means that [Warning: Mixed Metaphor ahead] he knows he's about to go down for the third time and is grasping at straws.

Shouldn't someone going down for the third time grasp at a straw (or snorkle)?

[Red Cedar PM]

The 20th? Too bad - I was looking forward to driving down to the D to watch this unfold. I think too much of my time off in the next few months or so will be spent watching my football team implode and also hopefully shooting copious amounts of waterfowl. Maybe if it's bad weather for hunting that week I will be able to make it down there for half a day or so.

Anyone else planning on attending the trial?

[Demosthenes]

I can't go.

[Bashful]

All those letters may be a good way to get a client list.

[Pottapaug1938]

All those letters may be a good way to get a client list.

... or a new list of suckers. Anyone clueless enough to stick with Petey, at this point, is clueless enough to fall for his malarkey again.

[ASITStands]

All those letters may be a good way to get a client list.

... or a new list of suckers. Anyone clueless enough to stick with Petey, at this point, is clueless enough to fall for his malarkey again.

Yep. I also agree with 'cynicalflyer' and 'LPC' as to the reason he's soliciting these.

[Nikki]

DoJ really appreciates Pete's publishing his intentions for trial.

It makes it much easier to file the appropriate preliminary motions and to determine what to watch out for at the trial.

[LPC]

I can't go.

Ack, puke.

Really?

All we'll have are the reports of the "supporters" who will talk about how Pete is really smokin' em, really burying them alive, which will be evidenced by all the rulings by the judge against Pete, showing how scared the judge is, and then the jury will be out for only about 4.5 minutes, showing how scared the jury is, before they return the death penalty.

And what fun is that?

[Pottapaug1938]

Don't forget that the appellate courts are so knock-kneed terrified of the consequences of having to rule in favor of Petey-Boy, so they'll just dismiss his appeals and claim that he had no ground to bring them....

[The Observer]

You forgot to mention how intimidated the Supreme Court will be and horrified that they cannot deny the CtC method - so much so that they will actually decline to hear any appeal from Pete.

[Imalawman]

I can't go.

Ack, puke.

Really?

All we'll have are the reports of the "supporters" who will talk about how Pete is really smokin' em, really burying them alive, which will be evidenced by all the rulings by the judge against Pete, showing how scared the judge is, and then the jury will be out for only about 4.5 minutes, showing how scared the jury is, before they return the death penalty.

And what fun is that?

I'd go, but I need to figure out how I could bill a client for it...

[ASITStands]

I'd go, but I need to figure out how I could bill a client for it...

Typical lawyer-speak! (chuckle, chuckle)

Oh, wait a minute. Why don't you volunteer to represent Hendrickson? He needs help. Of course, that might not actually pay anything. I just don't know how you're gonna make it.

Maybe you should just stay home and watch football on the weekends!

[Pottapaug1938]

I'd go, but I need to figure out how I could bill a client for it...

Typical lawyer-speak! (chuckle, chuckle)

Oh, wait a minute. Why don't you volunteer to represent Hendrickson? He needs help. Of course, that might not actually pay anything. I just don't know how you're gonna make it.

Maybe you should just stay home and watch football on the weekends!

If I were still practicing law, you'd better believe that I would expect to be paid -- and paid extremely well -- for the pain of having to put up with a high-powered idiot like Petey. Just as it was with the :Browns, I can't imagine any fee that would adequately compensate me for taking such a case, or pay for the treatment for the alcoholism that I would surely develop as a consequence.

[Quixote]

I'd go, but I need to figure out how I could bill a client for it...

Typical lawyer-speak! (chuckle, chuckle)

Oh, wait a minute. Why don't you volunteer to represent Hendrickson? He needs help. Of course, that might not actually pay anything. I just don't know how you're gonna make it.

Maybe you should just stay home and watch football on the weekends!

If I were still practicing law, you'd better believe that I would expect to be paid -- and paid extremely well -- for the pain of having to put up with a high-powered idiot like Petey. Just as it was with the :Browns, I can't imagine any fee that would adequately compensate me for taking such a case, or pay for the treatment for the alcoholism that I would surely develop as a consequence.

What about the satisfaction of a job well done? Isn't pro bono work its own reward?