Here's the scoop.
Day One
09/12/2005
Jury Selection
From what has been said, it appears the defense isn't thrilled with the final pick of the jury as it seems they were "pre-screened" by the government. Irwin would have liked more of the jurors to be a bit older and wiser, but...
Out of about 80 potential jurors in the pool they selected 12 and 2 alternates.
Cindy said she would have liked to have them all participate.
I haven't heard anything yet from Larry and his take on the proceedings so far.
Opening Statements
The government presented their opening statements. From what I have gathered, the prosecutor went on and on for hours making Irwin look like the bad guy via accusations and bringing up his prior (unlawful) convictions. The US Attys theme for the trial is "trouble is on it's way" and/or "more trouble is coming" however the prosecutors didn't say the trouble came by IRS's silence and secret administrative processes. They made it sound like the trouble was coming if you followed Irwin Schiff's teachings. They are pretending that the people got in trouble for filing zero returns. To make the jury think that Irwin caused it. Prosecutions attorneys are Jeff Nieman and David Itnae and Sam Holland and Adam Steiner were also sitting at the prosecutors table. Jeff Neiman said to the jury, nobody likes this process but the law requires us to have this process... He said the defendants were aware of the law and chose to violate it and live off the profits and that they are obstructing the IRS and exploiting the customers and preventing the IRS from performing their functions. The prosecutors said to the jury that Irwin et al filed false tax returns and filed bogus lawsuits. Thomas Minaw (spelling?) took Wiley Davis's place (Remember him? He is the IRS agent that physically assaulted Ken Nickelson when he was in attendance at another IRS meeting) and is going to be testifying against Irwin. The prosecutor said that Thomas Minaw told Irwin et-al "here is the law" which is a lie. Cindy has the tape of that conversation. The prosecutors said Irwin prevented the customers to enter into offers and compromises with the IRS and was operating a scheme to defraud the government. They also said in opening statements that Irwin et al told people to use false social security numbers (which is a lie!) They said that Irwin didn't put any warnings in the Federal Mafia (check page 159) page (63) and page 67) The judge allowed more than he should have from the government, and it is very clear from the majority of the statements, from those I've spoken to, that the judge is going to allow whatever the prosecutors want in, regardless of whether it is relevant, truthful, legal or not. Overall feelings of some of the court watchers is that the judge and the prosecutors are downright hateful in their demeanor and appearance towards Irwin.
continued at message 2
Continued from message above.
They mentioned Irwin's broadcast and said they were more like infomercials and seminars. They accused Irwin of trying to get the medias attention to cover his position and what the government is doing. And about the web site. They said the 2 page attachment was a misinterpretation of the law and that they waved refund checks around and the defendants knew trouble was on its way? Defendants Knew? If I recall, no one was ever charged under penalty of perjury. Or told they were doing something wrong.
Irwin presented, or should I say, attempted, to present his opening statement. But, every time Irwin spoke, either the government or the judge for the government, objected, so Irwin was only allowed to get-in maybe 20 minutes of his opening statement.
Irwin is not an attorney. He should be given the leeway afforded a pro per litigant. As provided for in court decisions that I won't cite here.
Guido, one of the spectators and a long time admirer of Irwin's, was cited for jury tampering. He said he was speaking to a woman in the hallway and had no idea she was a potential juror. I believe he mentioned something about not having to do what the judge advises them to do or something of that nature. It's called jury nullification. He had to attend an OSC hearing this morning (9/14/05) and has to return in 30 days to show why he shouldn't be held in contempt.
Witness examination
The first witness was called to the stand. A Toni Mitchell, I believe her name is. She had volunteered and later worked for Irwin Schiff at Freedom Books. The consensus is the prosecution led her to make statements regarding her zero return that Irwin clarified when he had his turn to cross examine her. The government is trying to make it look like Irwin twisted her arm... Apparently she filed zero returns, but later had to file bankruptcy so she had to file amended returns to clear up that matter. She still emphatically stated that there is no law that she could find that requires her to pay the income tax and stated that she was never told what she was doing was illegal. frivolous maybe, but not illegal. (she may be called back by the defense) She turned out to be a very good witness for the defense and handled herself very well.
Irwin wanted to make sure he got the "attachment" to the zero return entered into evidence as the grand jury was only shown a sample of Irwin's zero return "without" the attachment which shows the law to back-up the position that the income tax is an illegal tax when it pertains to the average America. The cross examination continued the next day.
Day Two
09/13/2005
The feeling was that the judge was calmer and not as angry as the day before.
Irwin continued with his cross of the witness Toni Mitchell and it apparently went well.
Day Three
09/14/2005
About 30 people showed up for support (thank you)
Peymon of Freedom Law School was attending the trial but was threatened with arrest i
Continued from above
if he didn't leave the premises. Apparently he had his laptop with him in the courtroom and the thing beeped on the first day. It annoyed the judge. The security at the court house said he led them to believe he was the press and then the next day he said he was a lawyer. Peymon said he was out in the parking lot when the judge came out and saw him there. The judge called security and made them tell Peymon to first move back, but the judge wanted him removed so they made him leave. He flew home that evening. Many thanks to Peymon for his efforts.
There was then a bit of tension as we all know Irwin is not a lawyer and doesn't perform according to the proper procedures; rules of the court, or jump through their hoops as they'd like...
There was a bit of a fight at the sidebar with Irwin and judge and judge said "your position is bogus!" Which told all the attys and the watchers, this case is over.
The judge said to Irwin, "you are cherry picking phrases out of these old cases". The law in this case is what the 9th circuit said and is going to apply the law from in re Becraft. One attorney for the defense said the whole thing should stop right now and Irwin should file an affidavit to recuse the judge because it is obvious that the judge has a hate for Irwin and that it's blatantly obvious that Irwin isn't going to get a fair trial with Judge Dawson presiding over it.
Toni Mitchell was called again for testimony. She has done her own research and is very knowledgeable about the law she turned out better for the defense than for the prosecutors.
They proceeded to listen to testimony of a woman from the east coast named Ann Kennedy. Her husband recently passed away and in this most vulnerable time, the government chose her to testify against Irwin regarding issues from 1983. She said that the only argument she ever had with her husband was over the illegality of the income tax (boo hoo...) although she failed to mention that she filed her own returns without the 2 page attachment simply because she believed she wasn't liable for the tax. She could have done whatever she wanted. Irwin could have cleared up the matter on cross, but went on to other questions.
Continued from above
Today 09/15/2005 witness testimony continues with a Ted Wedje a retired CID agent and Mel Lewis who has turned on Irwin. Also there will be 3 under cover Agents with testimony from wearing a wire and recording conversations at Freedom Books and Irwin and Cindy's seminars and meetings. Their names are Doug Malone, Doug Mc Cune and Sandy Iayers. Next will be the testimony of Bill Thomas who ran the shipping dept out Evansville Indiana for Irwin, who has now turned on Irwin. This will be a very interesting testimony.
Below are some articles that came up on search. I haven't had a chance to read them yet, but am sending them for your perusal.
My apologies for the choppiness of this update, but I'm not there yet so I am relying on what the folks there are saying. I hope this helps. Also do google and Yahoo Searches every day keyword "Irwin Schiff" to get the latest from the pulp media.
Also Check the trial audio blogs for more. But please scrutinize the rhetoric from the facts.
Here http://triallogs.blogspot.com/ and Here http://irwinschiff.blogspot.com
If you can go to Vegas to participate as a court watcher, it would be greatly appreciated.
Keep the prayers and light coming,
Angela
IS News www.taxfreedomnow.com
www.paynoincometax.com
Jury hears opening arguments in Las Vegas tax rebel trial
KESQ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 1:48 PM PDT
http://www.kesq.com/Global/story...y.asp?
S=3845309
LAS VEGAS A federal jury in Las Vegas is hearing opening statements today in the tax evasion trial of Irwin Schiff -- a proponent of a theory that paying federal income taxes is voluntary.
Las Vegas Tax Rebel Goes on Trial
AP via Yahoo! News Tue, 13 Sep 2005 7:57 PM PDT
http://news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=...x_rebel_trial_1
An author went on trial Tuewho claims that paying federal income taxes is voluntary sday on federal charges including tax evasion and aiding in the filing of fraudulent tax returns.
Defendant maintains anti-income tax stance
Las Vegas Sun Wed, 14 Sep 2005 10:11 AM PDT
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbi.../
519354568.html
The defendant in a tax evasion trial that began on Tuesday said he is innocent of the charges against him because there is essentially no law that requires people to pay income tax.
Guido the Wireman had it right...making the general public aware of what jury nullification is would help everyone in this country.
Getting people to see that it is their duty to review the law, the evidence, and also whether justice is being carried out would also help this country immensely. Some basic history concerning juries ...
The only reason the government can convict brave folks like these is because juries are no longer selected by random lot for some reason, people do not know that they have no obligation to believe that the law is what the judge states it is, and people do not realize the power of jury nullification.
Here is hoping that at least one jury member does understand this and that a verdict of not guilty is properly reached.
Commenting by HaloScan
