Walker Todd

[fortinbras]

WIth regard to the Cheek defense, I spotted some mountebank, about 6 years ago, who would, for a few hundred dollars get (supposedly bona fide) lawyers and accountants to write letters addressed to you that would "advise" that tax laws were ambiguous about something, mostly the significance of FRNs or "income", thereby supposedly being the ammunition for a Cheek defense. I never heard of this actually working because the judge would ask something like "This guy lives a thousand miles away. Is he really your lawyer/acountant? How long have you known him?"

I don't think the mountebank made refunds either.

[Demosthenes]

It just keeps getting better. The footnotes are keepers.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

DANNY TRUE,
a/k/a/ DARBY, Defendant

CRIMINAL NO. 08-271

GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO STRIKE WALKER TODD AFFIDAVIT EXHIBITED IN GOVERNMENT’S
MOTION IN LIMINE

The United States of America, by and through undersigned counsel, submits the
following Motion to Strike from the record of this case the affidavit of Walker Todd, proposed
expert witness for defendant True. Specifically, the government asks that Exhibit A of its
Motion in Limine to Preclude Untimely Noticed Testimony of Walker Fowler Todd (Doc. # 256-
2) be stricken because Mr. Todd has contacted counsel for the government and asserted that the exhibited affidavit is not authentic.1

The government cited the affidavit as Exhibit A of its Motion in Limine in a footnote
observing “Mr. Todd’s affidavit is distributed on dozens of websites devoted to bizarre
strategies to purportedly pay off debt.” (Doc. # 256 at 3.) Prior to using the exhibit, counsel for the government had checked the online docket of the Oakland County Michigan Circuit Court and determined that case number 2003-047448-CZ existed, and that affidavits had been filed shortly after the purported affidavit’s December 5, 2003 execution date. Counsel for the
government were further deceived by the inauthentic affidavit because it appeared consistent
with Mr. Todd’s known expert testimony in criminal cases.2

For the foregoing reasons, the government respectfully requests that the Court strike the
exhibit in question (Doc. # 256-2) from the record of this case. A proposed order is attached.

Respectfully submitted,
JOHN A. DICICCO
Acting Assistant Attorney General,


1 Specifically, in an email to government counsel dated April 29, 2010, Mr. Todd asserted “The purported affidavit of mine that you introduced as an exhibit was bogus--it was self-evidently pieced together by . . . internet scammers . . . Look carefully at the last page of text before the signature page, then look at the signature page. They clearly come from two different copies of the document. The entire text that precedes the signature page is the heavily edited (not by me) text that scammers posted on the internet originally without my knowledge or consent and have been massaging over the years to get it to a point where now it even lures in DOJ attorneys into thinking I supported that version of the affidavit.”

2 Defendant True’s Opposition (Doc. #284) to the government’s Motion in Limine complains that “this affidavit as it appears online has never been entered into the record of any court, until the Government made it part of the public record at this proceeding.” In fact, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia was recently presented with the affidavit by pro se defendants who claimed they did not have to repay a loan and observed “[t]he Todd Affidavit manifests itself throughout internet web sites offering advice about problematic or unpaid loans.” Virginia Community Bank v. Fisher, No. 3:09cv354, 2009 WL 4430282, at 3n.9 ( E.D.Va, Dec. 1, 2009).

[Demosthenes]

And from another new gov filing:

On April 28, 2010, Mr. Todd provided counsel for the government with an updated
“Biographical Summary” that states “Mr. Todd has eleven years as a seasonal associate (tax preparer) with the H&R Block office at Sears North Randall, North Randall, Ohio 44128. His current title is Tax Specialist II. His experience and course concentrations include retirement income and business income and expenses.” The government is at a loss to discern a connection between preparing income tax returns at H&R Block and knowing how an Internal Revenue Service Center processes tax payments. Given his previous employment at the Federal Reserve, Mr. Todd may be familiar with the treatment of financial instruments at the “Discount Window” of the agency. However, defendant True was not sending fake checks to the Federal Reserve, he was sending fake checks to the Internal Revenue Service. Accordingly, Mr. Todd’s proposed testimony on the inner workings of the Internal Revenue would lack an adequate basis.

[grixit]

Can't the judge impose a summary fine on someone, even a pro se, who submits a bogus statement?

[notorial dissent]

???

It appears he published many papers while working for the Federal Reserve in Cleveland.

All I can say is that when I tried to verify his past, or any employment for that matter, with FRB Cleveland through their personnel office, the response was "Who?, no such person on our list as far back as we can check."

[fortinbras]

Allegedly, he was the General Counsel of the Federal Reserve Bank in Cleveland, circa 1993.

see page 3 of:
http://jec.senate.gov/republicans/publi ... 042610.pdf

He has published a flock of articles, mostly about "unfunded liabilities", for the Economic Research Bureau, which evidently is a conservative or Republican think tank.

[Demosthenes]

01/07/2004 AFF AFFIDAVIT FILED (3 pages)
http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/dave1.pdf

01/21/2005 AFF AFFIDAVIT FILED WALKER TODD (1 page)
http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/dave2.pdf

09/13/2007 AFF AFFIDAVIT FILED WALKER TODD (14 pages)
http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/dave3.pdf

[LPC]

01/21/2005 AFF AFFIDAVIT FILED WALKER TODD (1 page)
http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/dave2.pdf

09/13/2007 AFF AFFIDAVIT FILED WALKER TODD (14 pages)
http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/dave3.pdf

Okay, that's weird.

The dave2 "affidavit" is only the first page, and is typed single-spaced instead of double-spaced.

The dave3 affidavit is what I think of as the "enhanced" version we've already seen, with the bolding, italics, underlining, etc., except that the signature page is different, and has no signature (or notarization).

Why (and how) would someone file an unsigned affidavit?

Could the Todd affidavit been filed as part of the defendant's opposition to the motion for summary judgment? That was 31 pages filed on 12/10/2003, and it would be natural to attached the affidavit to that kind of a pleading.

[fortinbras]

Apparently, the Dave3 affidavit, judging from the bar code sticker and rubberstamps, is the one filed in court by the Daves .... but it is unsigned. As an affidavit it is virtually useless as evidence, and if Todd showed up to testify in person, he'd probably be cross-examined about this affidavit, at which point he'd denounce it as a fake and the Daves would go down to an ugly defeat.

Contrary to good secretarial practice, the signature line for Todd is at the beginning of a separate page. This is contrary to recommendations in secretarial texts because it's just too easy to take such a signature page and attach it to a completely different document. If a signed version of this page exists, remember the possibility that all the preceding pages were different when Todd signed it.

[Demosthenes]

The judge denied Walker Todd's testimony in the Eddie Kahn/Danny True trial:

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/kahn2_295.pdf

[Demosthenes]

I'm reading through the court filings in this case and am really enjoying the defense counsel's main theme that Bills of Exchange are so stupid and so obviously fake that no one, including the IRS, could possibly have been fooled by them. Therefore, the defendant shouldn't have been charged with trying to pass fake checks...

It's like arguing that a defendant really didn't attempt to murder his spouse because he was such a bad shot, he couldn't hit the side of a barn.

Good times.

[Judge Roy Bean]

I'm reading through the court filings in this case and am really enjoying the defense counsel's main theme that Bills of Exchange are so stupid and so obviously fake that no one, including the IRS, could possibly have been fooled by them. Therefore, the defendant shouldn't have been charged with trying to pass fake checks...
...
Good times.

"Your honor, my client is dumber than the government. And so am I."

[Pottapaug1938]

"Your honor, my client is dumber than the government. And so am I."

I'm reminded of when I was first practicing law, and I was representing the female half of a divorcing couple. She was, shall we say, the perfect punch line for those idiotic "dumb blonde" jokes. She thought that she was entitled to more spousal support than the court was willing to grant her, so she started raising the support checks.

Of course, she got nailed, and it took a lot of work to keep her out of jail. In an unforgettable scene in my office, with rivers of mascara running down her cheeks, she admitted to being a "bad girl" and promised never to raise her ex's checks again. Well, you can all guess what happened next; and when the husband's attorney called to give me the bad news, he assured me that, if I continued to represent this woman, neither he nor any member of the local bar would think any the less of me for continuing to do so. Luckily, I was able to prevail on my immediately-filed ex-parte Motion to Withdraw....

[notorial dissent]

So, I guess my question then in all of this would be, has Todd ever actually testified or been allowed to testify in any case before a real court?

I have seen numerous instances where his name, or the "affidavit" have been mentioned, and all to the same end of nothing of significance happening. And is there actually a "real" affidavit, or is that just more wishful thinking on someone's part?

[Demosthenes]

Todd has testified in at least two recent cases: Wahler and Buhtz.

As for the lack of non-tampered affidavits, that's not surprising. I've worked as an expert witness for 15 years, and have never prepared an affidavit for any my cases. Generally, the only stuff I write that appears in the court record is my cv, a brief outline of what general topics I'm prepared to testify on, and I usually prepare the exhibits that counsel uses when they question me (graphs, charts, spreadsheets, etc.) If I prepare a comprehensive report, it's because the two sides are moving in on a settlement, and the side that hired me wants to put their cards on the table.

[wserra]

Demo - have you ever been crossed about not preparing a report?

[Demosthenes]

Demo - have you ever been crossed about not preparing a report?

No. But then again, the cases I've worked on rarely go to trial. Since all I do is civil work, they all tend to settle after deposition. Literally all of the cases where I've prepared a report have ended up settling. It's the nature of the civil beast.

[wserra]

Since all I do is civil work, they all tend to settle after deposition. . . . It's the nature of the civil beast.

For the last dozen years, all I've done is civil work too. I've tried lots of cases. Half of what I do is medmal, though, and from my highly unscientific observations more of those tend to go to trial than other types of cases. In addition, from what I know of your practice I would guess that most (or all) of your work is commercial; equally unscientifically, I think very few commercial cases are tried.

Or we could just be greedy. Still, if we are, greed is good (Gordon Gekko) for us and our clients.

[notorial dissent]

OK, we have verifiable proof that the great W F Todd actually did testify in two verifiable cases. Is there any record as to what he actually testified about?

[Demosthenes]

OK, we have verifiable proof that the great W F Todd actually did testify in two verifiable cases. Is there any record as to what he actually testified about?

I have transcripts that I'll post tomorrow.