New Garbage from Springer

[notorial dissent]

So does this mean that they aren't contemplating any jail time, or is this in contemplation of them eventually getting out of jail?

[wserra]

The latter.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

The latter.

Evidently he is doing something right.

[Famspear]

The latter.

Evidently he is doing something right.

If you're talking about Humdinger ("I got my Lindsey caught in a wringer") Springer, yes. He hasn't been caught doing anything that would result in the death penalty or in a life sentence. So, evidently he is doing something right.


PS: Federal tax crimes are not punishable by the death penalty or life in prison, so as long as Humdinger Springer continues to focus his illegal activity on committing only federal tax crimes (which I presume is his focus), he will have a good shot at getting out of prison, eventually.



Sentencing scheduled for April 21, 2010.

[Judge Roy Bean]

The latter.

Evidently he is doing something right.

Actually, no. The reason the court is giving consideration to those restrictions is at least in part due to Springer's propensity to file nonsense pleadings, some of which simply help promote his frivolous theories and waste judiciary resources.

If doing something right includes making it almost impossible to find anything other than very simple manual-labor work post-incarceration, then I guess you could say that.

[Dezcad]

The latter.

Evidently he is doing something right.

If the "he" in your sentence is referring to Judge Friot, then I agree wholeheartedly.

Or, if the "he" refers to Wes and his right answer, the same applies.

Otherwise, not so much.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

The latter.

Evidently he is doing something right.

If you're talking about Humdinger ("I got my Lindsey caught in a wringer") Springer, yes. He hasn't been caught doing anything that would result in the death penalty or in a life sentence. So, evidently he is doing something right.

the death penalty would be against the federal guidelines for punishment, as well as unconstitutional (heavens no, lest not forget the constitution) in his case.

PS: Federal tax crimes are not punishable by the death penalty or life in prison, so as long as Humdinger Springer continues to focus his illegal activity on committing only federal tax crimes (which I presume is his focus), he will have a good shot at getting out of prison, eventually.

fortunately for defendants of US tax cases, the Nazis are not in power.

Sentencing scheduled for April 21, 2010.

Thanks. I've been wondering when his date was.

[Dr. Caligari]

fortunately for defendants of US tax cases, the Nazis are not in power.

Nor is George Washington.

Washington had the organizers of the Whiskey Rebellion (the TPs of their day) indicted for, and convicted of, treason. Fortunately, Washington left office before the sentences were carried out, and President Adams commuted the sentences to imprisonment. Jefferson eventually pardoned them.

[bmielke]

Whiskey Rebellion was an actual Violent Rebellion...

Although I do wish TP's would get longer sentences, we need a charge like Obstructing the Courts or something that's a 5-7 per offense sentence.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Whiskey Rebellion was an actual Violent Rebellion...

Although I do wish TP's would get longer sentences, we need a charge like Obstructing the Courts or something that's a 5-7 per offense sentence.

I would differentiate promoters of schemes from other types of TP/TD behavior. If you've gone to the effort to register a URL and created a web site and especially where you offer to accept payment to learn the magic words, you're doomed - there should be upward departures for those convicted of not only participating in it, but promoting it for financial gain.

The next tier down would be multi-year participants who wind up with appeals and other delaying tactics, then downward departures for the typical dim-bulb that tries something like a zero-return style attempt at gaming the system on one year.

But, as I have indicated before, penalties (especially the financial risks) may have little or no effect on the garden-variety clown without an asset to his name who falls for the magic words gibberish. At that stage, they have nothing to lose and every dime they keep from going to the IRS ads to their hoard for beer, cigarettes and ammunition.

[Nikki]

G&SE:

What happened? Get tired over at Sooey?

Or did their excuse for what passed for logic and legal analysis fall below even your standsrds?

[Dezcad]

Latest denial of the nonsense filed by Springer:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

Plaintiff, )

vs. ) Case No. 09-CR-0043-SPF

LINDSEY KENT SPRINGER, and )
OSCAR AMOS STILLEY, )

Defendants. )
ORDER
Defendant Lindsey Springer has moved to dismiss counts one through six of the indictment. (Doc. no. 295.) Defendant Oscar Stilley has joined in the motion. Defendant Springer refers to this motion as his “thirteenth motion to dismiss.” The motion asks the court to dismiss the charges against the defendants on the grounds that federal regulations upon which the charges are based were not promulgated in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553 et seq. The motion has been fully briefed and is ready for determination.
The motion is denied for several reasons.
First, the motion is untimely. The motion purports to be brought now, based on the fact that it challenges a line of this court’s order of January 28, 2010, which states that “the requirement to file a tax return is mandated by statute, not by regulation, and such explicit statutory requirements are not subject to the PRA.” (Doc. no. 293, p. 6, citations omitted.) Defendants’ motion states that “[t]his is the first time an order has contained these words in this case.” (Doc. no. 295, p. 4.) True enough, but the basic argument the motion sets out could have been raised by May 15, 2009, the date on which all motions to dismiss were required. (Order, doc. no. 43.) And see, Rule 12(b)(3)(B), Fed. R. Crim. P. (a motion alleging a defect in the indictment must be brought before trial, although a motion claiming the indictment fails to invoke the court’s jurisdiction, or that the indictment fails to state an offense, may be brought at any time while a case is pending). The court finds that the motion
is untimely. fn 1
Second, although presented as a part of a new argument, defendants’ motion reprises an old argument, previously addressed and rejected by this court several times, which is that the charges are defective because Internal Revenue Districts have been abolished. More specifically, the motion states: “Springer’s Motion herein addresses the notion that because Springer is alleged not to have lived in any ‘internal revenue district’... because they were abolished...Springer lodges [his] claim that to the extent 1.6091-2 encompasses the theory of Springer’s ‘requirement to file’ a return by delivering it according to the rule set forth in 1.6091-2 (2005), these regulations are not in accord with the Administrative Procedures [sic] Act.” (Doc. no. 295, pp. 6-7.)
Third, courts that have considered arguments like the one made here -- that the Administrative Procedure Act can be a defense to a tax evasion or willful evasion to file charge -- have rejected those arguments. See, e.g., United States v. Bentson, 947 F.2d 1353, 1355-56 (9th Cir. 1991) (in a willful failure to file income tax returns case, the circuit court noted that “the district court denied the defendant’s motion for dismissal based on the APA as untimely,” and the circuit court stated that “whether or not it was untimely, the legal theory on which the motion was based has no merit”); United States v. Bowers, 920 F.2d 220, 222 (4th Cir. 1990) (defendants’ arguments based on failure of the IRS to publish the forms it requires to be used to report income and instructions for filling out those forms were not a defense, because it is the statutes themselves that require the payment of the tax and the filing of the return; noting the duty to pay taxes is manifest on the face of the statutes without any resort to IRS rules, forms or regulations). This prosecution is for violation of tax statutes, not violation of a regulation, and the criminal statutes in question are clear.
Accordingly, defendants’ motion is rejected on its merits.
After careful consideration, defendants’ motion is DENIED.
Dated this 25th day of February, 2010.


fn1 1The court’s order at doc. no. 290 stated a deadline of February 1, 2010, for motions
that would terminate this case short of sentencing. That order, however, did not extend the
deadline for motions which were already untimely because they should have been filed much
earlier in these proceedings.

[Judge Roy Bean]

I suspect Springer is aware of this or I wouldn't bring it up, but Friot has experience with nutball cases, including the silliness that went on a couple of years ago with one of the fake tribe arbitration scams out of Utah that wound up in his court.

Imagine having to put up with this kind of idiocy:

http://patrickpretty.com/wp-content/upl ... ndutah.pdf

[Pottapaug1938]

I suspect Springer is aware of this or I wouldn't bring it up, but Friot has experience with nutball cases, including the silliness that went on a couple of years ago with one of the fake tribe arbitration scams out of Utah that wound up in his court.

Imagine having to put up with this kind of idiocy:

http://patrickpretty.com/wp-content/upl ... ndutah.pdf

For me, the funniest thing is that this "tribe" of Indians calls themselves Wampanoags; but the Wamps are strictly a New England group.

[Dr. Caligari]

For me, the funniest thing is that this "tribe" of Indians calls themselves Wampanoags; but the Wamps are strictly a New England group.

A few years ago I had the misfortune of having to litigate against some of those "Western Arbitration Council" folks (they had entered a fake arbitration award against a company my then-firm represented) and started getting pleadings asserting thet they had "tribal immunity." I wound up getting an affidavit from the Chief of the real Wampanoag tribe in Massachusetts, who said they were not real Wampanoags.

[Famspear]

For me, the funniest thing is that this "tribe" of Indians calls themselves Wampanoags; but the Wamps are strictly a New England group.

A few years ago I had the misfortune of having to litigate against some of those "Western Arbitration Council" folks (they had entered a fake arbitration award against a company my then-firm represented) and started getting pleadings asserting thet they had "tribal immunity." I wound up getting an affidavit from the Chief of the real Wampanoag tribe in Massachusetts, who said they were not real Wampanoags.

I would like to think that I would know a real Wampanoag when I see one.

EDIT: I think it would be hard to compose a limerick on the subject of the term "Wampanoag". If I ever do, I'm sure that readers of this forum will be the first to see it, though.

[Judge Roy Bean]

...
EDIT: I think it would be hard to compose a limerick on the subject of the term "Wampanoag". If I ever do, I'm sure that readers of this forum will be the first to see it, though.

At the very real risk of further encouraging Famspear:

There once was a poster named Famspear
Who opined that the forum would soon hear
His limerick on the term Wampanoag
Without realizing upon it we'd all gag.

[Famspear]

...
EDIT: I think it would be hard to compose a limerick on the subject of the term "Wampanoag". If I ever do, I'm sure that readers of this forum will be the first to see it, though.

At the very real risk of further encouraging Famspear:

There once was a poster named Famspear
Who opined that the forum would soon hear
His limerick on the term Wampanoag
Without realizing upon it we'd all gag.

I just don't think I can come up with a limerick using "Wampanoag."
Heck, I can't even say "Wampanoag."

[Judge Roy Bean]

In most non-written aboriginal languages, the words we have derived from them over the years are essentially phonetic representations of the sounds heard by white people. Thus, in pronunciation don't leave anything out.

Waam-pah-noh-agg.

That help?

[Famspear]

In most non-written aboriginal languages, the words we have derived from them over the years are essentially phonetic representations of the sounds heard by white people. Thus, in pronunciation don't leave anything out.

Waam-pah-noh-agg.

That help?

Umm...... Instead of a limerick, maybe I'll just try to work the word into casual conversation at dinner parties.


Wait, when was the last time I even went to a dinner party?