Springer/Stilley criminal trial

[blind]

Here is the story in the Tulsa World. I can't wait to see the jury decision on this...

Tax-fraud defendant details mission to eliminate IRS

By DAVID HARPER World Staff Writer
Published: 11/11/2009 2:26 AM
Last Modified: 11/11/2009 4:05 AM

A man on trial in a federal income-tax conspiracy case testified Tuesday about how his tax woes led him to travel around the country on a mission to get rid of the Internal Revenue Service.

Lindsey Kent Springer told a Tulsa jury that his "walk" began in the early 1990s after the IRS persistently sought to collect more than $100,000 from him after the failure of a collision repair center for which he had been a corporate officer.

Springer said he became confused by language in the 1992 federal tax instruction manual that he said thanked people for paying their taxes voluntarily while indicating elsewhere that they had a legal duty to pay.

He told the jury that he began to visit with others in the Tulsa area who had questions about the tax system.

Before long, he said, he was reading a lot of related legal materials and was traveling extensively to speak about the subject.

"People say I'm charismatic and passionate about what I do," Springer said, adding that a hat would be passed for contributions to his ministry.

Springer and Oscar Amos Stilley of Fort Smith, Ark., are on trial after being charged March 10 with conspiring to defraud the United States.

According to the indictment, Springer used the name Bondage Breakers Ministry to solicit and receive money.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Kenneth Snoke told the jurors during his opening statement Oct. 27 that Bondage Breakers Ministry was not a legitimate charity or church.

Snoke said Stilley
and Springer, both of whom are in their mid-40s, began working as a team about 10 years ago to help people who have been accused of violating tax laws.

Besides the conspiracy charge, Springer faces five counts alleging criminal violations of the federal tax laws earlier this decade.

Springer told the jury Tuesday of his belief that the IRS' Form 1040 during the years in question violated the federal Paperwork Reduction Act.

U.S. District Judge Stephen Friot has rejected that legal argument previously, but he is permitting Springer to introduce some evidence on the topic because of its bearing on whether he willfully broke the law.

Although not a lawyer, Springer is representing himself, and his testimony — which is set to continue Thursday — is taking the form of a narrative instead of the traditional question-and-answer format.

Springerquestioned Stilley, who also is representing himself, when Stilley took the stand.

Stilley, who is accused of aiding and abetting Springer in two tax crimes, told the jury earlier Tuesday that he "100 percent" supports the mission of getting rid of the IRS.

However, he denied that he ever had any discussions with Springer about defrauding the tax agency.

"Absolutely not," Stilley said. "Such an idea never entered my mind."

Stilley testified Tuesday that he believes that Springer did not charge people for his services but instead merely accepted donations to his ministry.

The indictment alleges that Stilley, while practicing as an attorney, assisted Springer's purported tax evasion through a variety of means.

The pair are accused of using a trust account and various other devices such as cashier's checks, check-cashing services, money orders and cash to conceal Springer's actual income and avoid creating the usual records of financial institutions.

[notorial dissent]

Sounds like the judge is giving Springer a little bit of latitude, or else letting him test fly the rope that may well hang him. The only problem I can foresee is that if they have been working together for 10 years, I think it is going to be difficult for them both to plead stupid. And I still don’t see how Stilley is going to wiggle out of this one way or another.

My personal feeling is that they are both going to talk too much and end up hanging themselves.

[Dezcad]

From the mysterious blogger:

Closing Arguments will be made today (Friday), and the Jury will begin its deliberations.

[LPC]

Blog entry on jury deliberations:

The case was given to the Jury before noon!

We received two notes from the Jury in the 2PM hour.

One asked for copies of the instructions they had read in the Jury Box to supplement the "official" instructions given them at deliberation. The other asked for a list of the exhibits to use as an index.

In the 4PM hour we received a note asking, "If we have not come to a verdict before 5PM, are we allowed to return Monday?"

Judge Friot answered, "Yes." He also offer Saturday.

Juries are hard to read. Keep on PRAy'ng!

[Dezcad]

Blog entry on jury deliberations:

The case was given to the Jury before noon!

We received two notes from the Jury in the 2PM hour.

One asked for copies of the instructions they had read in the Jury Box to supplement the "official" instructions given them at deliberation. The other asked for a list of the exhibits to use as an index.

In the 4PM hour we received a note asking, "If we have not come to a verdict before 5PM, are we allowed to return Monday?"

Judge Friot answered, "Yes." He also offer Saturday.

Juries are hard to read. Keep on PRAy'ng!

UPDATE

At 5:40PM, the Jury indicated some had obligations. Judge Friot admonished the Jury once again then dismissed until 9AM Monday.

[Judge Roy Bean]

UPDATE

At 5:40PM, the Jury indicated some had obligations. Judge Friot admonished the Jury once again then dismissed until 9AM Monday.

I hate to say it, but admonishing a jury in today's 'net driven world is fraught with exposure to all manner of mischief.

[Dezcad]

Latest from the blogger:

Monday, November 16, 2009
Latest News
Just received word from Oscar.

The Jury appears hung at the noon hour.

Judge Friot is encouraging them to reach a modified verdict. More details when available.

UPDATE

Judge Friot gave the Jury an Allen Charge.

It appears they are hung on the conspiracy charges.

In the first Whitey Harrell case, the Jury reversed itself twice.

The first vote was 9 to 3, "guilty," then 3 to 9, "not guilty," and finally, they voted unanimously, "not guilty."

Whether this Jury is ready to find Lindsey "guilty," and Oscar "not guilty," or reverse itself completely is unknown at this hour.