🚀 go-pugleaf

evansdb@netaxs.com@netaxs.com  (Dan Evans) writes:

>In <58tqpd$o38@cardinal2.Stanford.EDU>, jgadams@leland.Stanford.EDU (Joseph G. Adams) writes:
>>
>>Daniel J. Lavigne <taxfree@planeteer.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Gee if income tax were legal why in 1991 did the 
>>>>Supreme Court rule that if you honestly believed in 
>>>>"not" paying income tax you cannot be sent to prison?
>>
>>That person was refering to Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991).
>>In that case, the Supreme Court held that a good faith misunderstanding
>>of the tax laws may prevent the court from finding that the defendant
>>acted willfully, which is necessary to convict the defendant of
>>criminal tax evasion.

>And it should never be forgotten that John Cheek won the battle but lost
>the war, because he was retried and convicted the second time as well,
>probably because he had spent so much time in litigation with the IRS 
>and so much time studying the tax laws that it would have been almost
>impossible for any jury to believe that he did not understand that the 
>law required him to file a return.

>So one of the ironies of the "Cheek" defense is that if you know enough
>to know about it, you probably know too much to use it.


And don't forget to mention Dan, that when he was tried and convicted that
second time, he appealed using the same tired arguments (i.e.  Salaries
and wages were not taxable income; income taxes were unconstitutional,
etc., etc., etc., ad naseum) trying to get his conviction overturned and
he was slapped and slapped hard for making frivolous arguments, thereby
wasting the Appeal Court's time.

-- 
                                    Paul M.