Hendrickson Guilty!

[iplawyer]

http://www.detnews.com/article/20091026 ... tor-guilty

[webhick]

Also, i seem to recall that SteveSy and Demo had a bet going regarding whether or not Pete would be convicted. SteveSy was considering yielding when the indictment came down, but now SteveSy has definitely lost whatever bet he had with Demo.

I could have sworn that was over the Liberty Dollar. Could be wrong.

[Famspear]

And now for a drive down memory lane. Let's look at what the Einsteins at losthorizons.com had to say after Peter Hendrickson was indicted.....

On 13 November 2008, "Nof" wrote:

All he [Peter E. Hendrickson] is saying is he did not earn "wages" as defined. It looks as though they [the federal prosecutors] are trying to make him there [sic] tax terrorism target for '09. That and they drag up the mailbox issue again [Hendrickson's prior conviction in connection with a bomb at a U.S. postal facility] to label him a bad apple.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=1100

On 13 November 2008, "continental army" wrote:

The Federal Prosecutors better bring their A-Game. There's not a jury around that won't see through this BS. This is the same old rehashed garbage they spewed in their previous press release. It doesn't even address the issue. Pathetic. In the meantime, I've turned lots of people on to this information and they all "see it." Sorry dirtbags . . . the cat's out of the bag.

Referring to Hendrickson's prior conviction in connection with the bombing at a U.S. postal facility, user "Tparty76” wrote on 13 November 2008:

I never knew about this. Kinda humorous. I hope this backfires on them bigtime. I trust Pete can handle himself well enough.

We really need for those who are successful to organize and speak out. I sense they just keep quiet so as not to jinx their own good fortune.

On 13 November 2008, Patrick ("every time we lose it proves Pete is right") Mooney wrote:

Fellow Warriors,

This news is not bad news! Many of us know that the only way we are going to have a breakthrough is to get our cases into the Courts. And who better to have the first crack at the IRS in a completely public forum than Pete himself?

Unless this is a prearranged Masonic ritual, and there is no rule of law, then Pete is absolutely going to wipe the floor with the IRS in front of a jury.

Our job as warriors will have to be to defend Pete's good name, because you know the mainstream media is going to have a field day slinging mud to their ignorant readers. Be vigilant and root for Pete and other warriors who are taking up the mantle of this struggle by entering the arena of the courtrrom![sic]

On 13 November 2008, user "Richardf614" wrote:

This is not a surprise and is only the next link in the chain. The good news is that it will be in front of a jury.

I am surprised that the DOJ would attempt this now with the current state of affairs within the country. By the time this trial comes about[,] the country will be further down the tubes and the so called bailout will have given more of the citizen's tax money to the banker's bonuses. Any person on the jury will already be highly pissed off, maybe unemployed or in foreclosure.

This will be interesting as the tax rate will surely be raised to replenish the treasury[,] as the revenue stream is drying up as we speak. In the next few months it will be hard to find a person in Michigan that has a job[,] let alone paying taxes. Good timing for Pete, bad timing for the DOJ.

I find it interesting that they have not indicted Doreen, she had a 1099-MISC. They have focused on the W-2 wages argument. The entire case will be around "Wages". Interesting.

It ain't over til the fat lady sings! Squaters [sic] had better wait to dance until the verdict is in, they misread Cryer's outcome. 12 jurors and it only takes one, I'll take those odds.

On 13 November 2008, user "Richardf614" quoted from the press release on Hendrickson's indictment:

"An indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. A defendant is entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government's burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

And then Richard stated:

Why even say this in the press release? Sounds like the one who wrote it does not believe the charges to begin with. I find it counter productive to their position.
Like saying your [sic] a crook, but just by us saying it proves nothing; we still have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

I find this statement interesting.

--Apparently Richard had never read one of these news releases before. This is standard verbiage found in these kinds of news releases.

On 13 November 2008, Weston White wrote:

Objection, I have not received any such so-called wages at anytime from my employer during the listed years of 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006, I did however receive remuneration in exchange for my personal time from my employer during those same years. Being as such is only taxable as a 'Capitation Tax', the Federal Income Tax being in the form of an Indirect Excise Tax fails to meet the requirements imposed therein the Internal Revenue Code, need I further elaborate such facts, for the record your Honor?

Bam, case closed, thanks for coming everybody, it was fun IRS and DOJ peeps, most certainly.

On 13 November 2008, John Gault wrote:

This current indictment is in reality the exact same battle PH is currently fighting in the Appeals Court with a different spin and from a different direction. It should be seen for what it is; nothing more then [sic] a shabby, blatant, breathtaking, Orwellian attempt on behalf of the Federal Government to dictate the content of one's sworn testimony.

The ultimate and most inconvienient [sic] question that the Court must address in this affair is; Can the Federal Government, or anyone for that matter, dictate the sworn testimony of another?

If one's testimony is and were not central to the current "income" tax regime then why even have a jurat on the return at all? Why not just send everyone a bill on April 15th and simply do away with filing altogether? I think all in this forum know the answer to these questions.

Although I sincerely regret and find it sickening that PH is burdened with defending himself against yet another feeble attempt at forcing him back down on all fours, for me, the best part of this is that the IRS and DOJ are the ones that have opend [sic] this door with the filing of their indictment.

We don't prefer the testimony you have rendered under oath particularly since it does not agree with testimony we wish you to render so we will once again try to compel the testimony we prefer by use of the Court since we are now desperate and have no other means of defeating you.

I wish them luck in trying to prove that PH did not actually believe the facts that he has sworn to on all the returns they cite. This is the legal point this indictment will and should actually turn on and the Government's monumental burden. On top of considering themslves [sic] omnipotent they now must include clairvoiant [sic] among their awe inspiring powers.

I believe they have blundered greatly and will live to regret this current course of action. Just my two cents worth

On 13 November 2008, "Nof" wrote:

This indictment reads like a bad joke! How in the hell can the Gov prove beyond a reasonable doubt that PH did not "believe" his own testimony or records?

Whats [sic] there evidence? The fraking [sic] psychic hotline? A voodoo witchdoctor? They saw it in a fortune cookie????? Good grief..

John Gault wrote:

I pay absolutely no attention to the IRS apologists and mouthpieces at Quatloosers. I refuse to dignify them with any attention whatsoever for I have come to know them for what they are. That they are even entertained by the shabby ploy represented by this indictment speaks volumes.

On 14 November 2008, "Chex" wrote:

Therefore, no American can have any income subject to an income tax, since the word income, for tax purposes, means a corporate profit. If anything, we have a Profits Tax, not an income tax. In addition, if the income tax were mandatory, it would have to be declared "void for vagueness" by any legitimate court, since no one can understand our income tax laws.

All IRS seizures in payment of income tax are illegal, and not provided by law. By statute, the IRS is only an administrative agency, and unlike the BATF, does not have any enforcement powers. Combining Section 7608 and the job description for Special Agents from the IRS Code, proves that the IRS agent has no more authority to seize property and impose IRS liens than some clerk who works for the Department of Education. Since the public does not read the law and are generally misinformed, the IRS makes about three million illegal seizures and liens each year.

All IRS tax liens are filed illegally. All States require that federal tax liens be certified by either the Secretary of the Treasury or someone with the delegated authority to certify such liens. Such federal tax liens are never certified, nor signed by the Secretary of the Treasury, or anybody else for that matter with the delegated authority to do so. Instead, these liens get recorded in violation of both federal and state law.

The federal income tax represents the most extensive program of organized deceit and extortion ever conceived by man, and proves that, in America, organized crime begins with the federal government.

On 14 November 2008, user "MN Stix" wrote:

Anyway, I'm not concerned with Pete getting into trouble. That guy is way to [sic] well versed and has an exceptional eye for detail.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... c&start=30

On 14 November 2008, JohnGault wrote:

The government is not trying to prove that what PH [Peter Hendrickson] filed was false and fradulent [sic]. They are claiming that he did not actually "believe" that the documents filed and which are the subject of the indictment were "true and correct as to every material matter". This is an entirely different issue altogether and should prove to be a very steep hill for the Feds to climb.

In my opinion they would have had an easier road with fasle [sic] and fradulent [sic] then [sic] with what PH actually believes particualrly [sic] given the shear [sic] volume of PHs writings and speeches.

More from JohnGault:

To put a finer point on the issue, the burden is not what PH should have believed and which is alluded to in the DOJ filing. This is a straw man and a plainly obvious attempt at misdirection by the DOJ lawyers. The burden is what PH actually believed and not what the DOJ thinks he should have believed. This is nothing more than an attempt to dictate PH's testimony.

PH is under no lawful obligation to testify to facts that the [Internal Revenue] Service thinks he should believe.

On 14 November 2008, Weston White wrote:

It seems to be that these sick people [the regulars at the Quatloos.com forum] are actually banking on PH getting sentenced and are virtually praying for “30 years in prison and fines of over $1,000,000”, well at least they will not be complaining about the taxes needed to jail him during that time, laff. BTW, how much time does one do for 1st Degree Murder? Facing 30-years and $1,000,000 FRN’ all because of an IRS claim of $20,000 FRN paid out in taxes. Oh yea that is not skewed at all.

I mean that or either these “Q” people are just paid trolls, I mean seriously if you do not legitimately care about tax rights or governmental injustices taking place, or you believe that the XVI Amendment truly changed “the game”, then why would you spend you free time debating tax issues about it with anybody, let alone make over 16,000 posts on the subject on your own forum that is dedicated to opposite issues, then spend your time discussing the latter issues (or poking fun at them in a juvenile capacity, anyways), why? This is not normal behavior to participate in. Rather, such an individual would simply pay their taxes by April 15th each year and go about their life, correct? But hey though, they knew about this long before any of us did, so what does that really say about us all, err… us “lost-heads” that is?

On 14 November 2008, user 'hughg" wrote:

I used to check out the quatloos forum. I pretty much got tired of it. Whenever a topic is posted, the conversations quickly devolve into name calling and insults. They're pretty much a group of through and through statist [sic; probably should read "statists"]. To them, I believe, the government can do no wrong. Enough of that topic.

On 14 November 2008, user "MX Stix" wrote:

Quatalaharaloo whatever, appears to be a private site set up as a Taxpayer Advocate Service site

However sad and demented this place [Quatloos] is, it is nice to see a few routes to not attempt. The people at this site remind me of all the so called economy experts (Ben Stein included) who laughed and scoffed at Peter Schiff for saying we are on the verge of a recession. I wonder if any of those people swallowed their crow. Much the same as the people at the quataloo (whatever) site just up the road.

I did <read> a post from someone who was wondering if PH would give up the list of names here at this site. I wish that would happen for me, I want my damn money back!

On 14 November 2008, user "Chex" wrote:

I too check out the quatloos forum. These people really have truly no idea about the rights they have or used to own. I think they fear standing up on their own two feet and represent[ing] themselves, more or less even want to read what their entitled to.

Even as explained in the tax codes who are “employees”, who is “employers”, who receive "wages", who participates in a "trade or business" and who receives "compensation for services" written there lawfully in black and white, but so twisted so the average man/woman can’t understand it and they simply cave in and cooperate.

I [would] like to see some collective explanation from the quatloos forum [about] the facts of PH’S disagreement and the laws and DOJ and Irss are going by?

But that’s why we have shows like Jerry Springer, Maury, etc demonstrate the intelligence of the people in this country who don’t care about themselves, their rights and the laws and that preside over them. This is what government perceives in most people, trailer trash, stupidity, and entertainment where people can’t defend themselves.

Nevertheless when it comes to a tax code and when you have to flip through hundreds of different pages to explain one certain definition and who it applies to, where it applies at, that’s where peoples interest go dormant and some post pictures and cartoons of their cats in their justification, others just don’t want to deal with it.

Most citizens with any intelligence they would try to break it down because its [sic] now about them, to see where this case has relevancy to the twisted codes, the defense of your constitutional rights the forefathers of this country setup, not where these fresh out of collage [sic] frats lawyers try to manipulate and twist laws into a frivolous position where they see fit.

One day the same derision people [sic] who[se] rights get violated are going to be bit right in their carcass. They will be looking stupid and they will be searching for the CTC book and asking what the laws said.
If the tax codes were written [in] plain and simple language there would be no arguments, tax courts, or disagreements[;] there would be plain and simple laws. Why do you think when politicians try to change the constitution people come out of the woodwork to stop this from happening!

The Congress is aware of the damage the tax code is doing to America. And the Congress knows how to fix the problem. But the Congress has thus far refused to do it.

Post-script: Good job on the predictions, CrackHeads!

[Judge Roy Bean]

I can almost guarantee the appeal will be based on the utterly specious nonsense that the Judge's instructions to the jury on what the law is were somehow contestable.

When the law is clearly against their dubious view, Hendrickson and his ilk would rather have jurors wander off into the goof-ball wilderness of do-it-yourself interpretation.

I wonder how many people who would support the theory of jury nullification realize how it could, depending on the makeup of the panel, backfire on them.

But hey, his new legal team has something to keep them busy, and after all, every day he's not behind bars is a victory, right?

[Demosthenes]

In open court, on cross examination, Pete stated that he had no intent to comply with Judge Edmund's order in the civil case requiring him to pay back the erroneous refunds issued in 2002 and 2003 and to file amended returns.

[Famspear]

In open court, on cross examination, Pete stated that he had no intent to comply with Judge Edmund's order in the civil case requiring him to pay back the erroneous refunds issued in 2002 and 2003 and to file amended returns.

Cool move, Pete. What an Einstein.

EDIT: Sounds like the PeterMeister didn't do himself any favors in his defense.

[wserra]

In open court, on cross examination, Pete stated that he had no intent to comply with Judge Edmund's order in the civil case requiring him to pay back the erroneous refunds issued in 2002 and 2003 and to file amended returns.

Which order, of course, the Sixth Circuit affirmed and on which the Supreme Court denied cert. "Good faith misunderstanding", indeed.

One never knows what a jury will do, but that one answer should have sealed it.

[Famspear]

Multiple choice. As a result of the guilty verdicts in his latest federal criminal tax trial, PeterEricBlowhardMeister Hendrickson will:

A. Slap himself on the forehead and exclaim, "What a dolt I was!", replace everything on his losthorizons web site with an admission that he is completely wrong and that he is the world's worst narcissist, but end with a statement that he's working every day to get better and better.

B. Change his middle name to "Megalomania."

C. Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and, when he loses there, file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court and, when that petition is denied, file a petition for rehearing with the Supreme Court and, when that petition is denied, declare another "victory" for his Cracking the Code tax scam by asserting (1) that the Supreme Court fearfully "dodged" addressing the "merits" of his tax scam, (2) that the guilty verdicts at his trial were "bogus," and (3) that the Federal prison system that will (by that time) be his home is also "bogus."

[Judge Roy Bean]

C.

But if they get around to it soon enough, he'll have to do it from a prison cell.

[Imalawman]

Amazingly, it's already posted at LostHorizons.

Although the only comment so far is inordinately optimistic:

smudge

Joined: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 79
Location: Ontario, California
Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:41 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, we may have lost this battle, but we haven't lost the war, not by a long shot!

I think the IJN said the same thing after the Marianas Turkey Shoot.........

Considering Hendrickson faces a maximum of 30 years, anyone care to guess what he might actually get? Probation? A nickel? A dime? Or full long time?

About 2 years, but less than three.

[webhick]

D. Take up competitive squirrel tossing and argue with the judges about how they screwed up the scoring because the book says "one point must be deducted for flying squirrels, including flying squirrel hybrids" which means that they cannot deduct a point from his score for his use of a full-blood flying squirrel because only those who use flying squirrel hybrids are subject to the penalty.

[Famspear]

Webhick, I love it when you talk dirty.

[Famspear]

ZappppPowww......!!!


What was that??!!?

Look! Up in the sky!

It's a bird!

It's a plane!

No....!

It's......

Recidivist Blowhard Pete!

Yes, it is time now for another episode in the adventures of......

Recidivist Blowhard Pete!!!

[cue the fanfare....]

Strange visitor from another planet who came to Earth with powers and abilities faaaaarrrr beyond those of mortal men!

Recidivist Blowhard Pete!

Who can:

-----change the meaning of Mighty Tax Laws!

-----bend ordinary rules of logic and statutory construction with his bare hands!

And who, disguised as the World's Foremost Authority on Federal Income Taxation,
fights a never-ending battle for PeterTruth, PeterJustice, and the PeterBlowhardAmericanWay!!!!

[webhick]

Webhick, I love it when you talk dirty.

I know. I've heard that you're the only guy who pays $5 per minute for phone nookie girls to read the IRC and any court cases on the subject.

[Famspear]

Webhick, I love it when you talk dirty.

I know. I've heard that you're the only guy who pays $5 per minute for phone nookie girls to read the IRC and any court cases on the subject.

Yikes! How did she know?

[Doktor Avalanche]

But seriously...was this a surprise?

From the "Let's Throw Enough Sh*t Against A Wall And See If It Sticks" Department...

We MUST support Pete and the work he has done if we are to ever be free men and women again. This is a government gone mad. I am sure Pete will need monetary, legal, and moral support. If each of us donate a mere $10.00. There are 20,000 members in this forum. The math is simple. The road will be much easier for Pete if we all chip in.
JUST DO IT !!!
I did.
-C

And now for some refreshing honesty....

19,700 of whom are spammers. Better make it a larger contribution.

And this from Weston White I have to take a parting shot at:

I mean that or either these “Q” people are just paid trolls, I mean seriously if you do not legitimately care about tax rights or governmental injustices taking place, or you believe that the XVI Amendment truly changed “the game”, then why would you spend you free time debating tax issues about it with anybody, let alone make over 16,000 posts on the subject on your own forum that is dedicated to opposite issues, then spend your time discussing the latter issues (or poking fun at them in a juvenile capacity, anyways), why? This is not normal behavior to participate in. Rather, such an individual would simply pay their taxes by April 15th each year and go about their life, correct? But hey though, they knew about this long before any of us did, so what does that really say about us all, err… us “lost-heads” that is?

It says that you LostHeads are about as dumb as a sack of hammers - and it also says we're right (as usual).

C'mon, my fellow Quatloosians - can't we be wrong just one time?

[LPC]

Perhaps it's time for Petey to start thinking about filing those amended returns.

And I wouldn't be at all surprised if the judge didn't have the same idea, and want to see those returns filed *before* sentencing.

[Imalawman]

Perhaps it's time for Petey to start thinking about filing those amended returns.

And I wouldn't be at all surprised if the judge didn't have the same idea, and want to see those returns filed *before* sentencing.

Yup, if those returns aren't filed and Petey doesn't show a modicum of remorse, he's looking at the outside of the maximum of 27 months for his convictions.

This case was a slam dunk like we've not seen in a while. About a day and half of trial and conviction on all counts. I know PH is naive, but that's got to be a blow to the ol' ego.

[bmielke]

Multiple choice. As a result of the guilty verdicts in his latest federal criminal tax trial, PeterEricBlowhardMeister Hendrickson will:

C. Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and, when he loses there, file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court and, when that petition is denied, file a petition for rehearing with the Supreme Court and, when that petition is denied, declare another "victory" for his Cracking the Code tax scam by asserting (1) that the Supreme Court fearfully "dodged" addressing the "merits" of his tax scam, (2) that the guilty verdicts at his trial were "bogus," and (3) that the Federal prison system that will (by that time) be his home is also "bogus."

C

How could not be a victory, the judge and jury were afraid of the big bad IRS. If you buy that then I have a large red bridge in San Fransisco and I will sell it cheap.

[Pottapaug1938]

C'mon, my fellow Quatloosians - can't we be wrong just one time?

Yeah -- we are wrong when we treat the LoserHeads like they have the ability to view the law with a rational eye.