Noah wrote:Thanks for the added insight, but this is a higher profile case than the usual and the fact that the first motion to continue was a joint motion signifies a change in position/positions however small. Maybe I am looking too fine.
You are "looking too fine."
By the way, Noah: Cryer is the one asking for the delay here, not the government. Cryer is the one who is ostensibly not ready for a January trial. It doesn't make much sense to try to imply that the government is somehow afraid of Cryer's case, when it's Cryer who brought the case and Cryer who is asking for the delay.
Aside from the benefits to both sides that may accrue from a postponement, in terms of giving both sides additional time to prepare this case (and to handle other pressing cases in the mean time), there is a separate benefit to Cryer -- in that this puts off the date on which he will ultimately have to cough up some money for the tax.
Cryer might not be in quite the difficult position he is in today if he had just filed correct tax returns in the first place. The notices of deficiency issued by the IRS might well have overstated Cryer's tax liabilities -- simply because Cryer has not provided complete and accurate information to the IRS. The IRS probably computed the taxes based on the limited information available to the IRS. Cryer might have lots of deductions not included in the IRS computations and, of course, it's Cryer's responsibility to file tax returns that include those deductions if Cryer wants the tax to be computed correctly.
...why is anyone in this [losthorizons] community paying the least attention to...'Larry Williams' [Famspear], or other purveyors of disinformation from...quatloos? – Pete Hendrickson, former inmate 15406-039, Fed’l Bureau of Prisons