Yahoo groups/Windows will not permit the following article to be accessible as a file for their groups. You figure.
************************************************************************
Revised 2/2010
INCOME TAX INDICTMENTS ARE BOGUS
Claims that there is no law that establishes liability for an individual income tax have been made for years. Nevertheless, the courts have repeatedly ruled indictments for income tax prosecutions are valid with United States v Vroman, 975 F2d 669 (9th. Cir. 1992) being a prominent example. This academic writing is a challenge to the indictment for failure to allege a crime. It has been formatted as a Motion to Dismiss the Indictment based upon an analysis of the Vroman opinion with an adaptation for an ongoing Section 7206 prosecution (adaptable to other prosecutions). The conclusions of the Vroman court are proven to be spurious and do not concur with Supreme Court adjudication for Due Process, a Case, or the requirements for a valid indictment. Direct inconsistencies with Supreme court opinions is fertile area for SC review.
Constitutional rights are only available to a belligerent claimant. If an individual does not demand his Rights, the courts have no requirement to acknowledge them.
*************************************************************
Court caption
MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT
FOR FAILURE TO CHARGE AN OFFENSE
REQUEST FOR WRITTEN RULING
WITH CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The defendant is aware that on numerous occasions in various income tax cases challenges that income tax indictments were flawed have been presented to their courts---and the courts have denied the motions as frivolous and have imposed sanctions. If this analysis is frivolous, the defendant is certain the court will identify the error in logic or law and properly chastise this imprudence.
Opinions by courts to uphold indictments are similar, as are the allegations made within the indictments. Indictments typically rely upon IRC §7201 or §7203 as imposing an income tax and make numerous conclusions of law. Because of the similarity, an appellate court Opinion will be examined as representative of the grounds this court might use to dismiss a challenge to the instant indictment.
A bellwether case that compiles considerable discussion is United States v Vroman, 975 F2d 669 (9th. Cir. 1992). The grounds identified and analyzed by the Vroman court to uphold the conviction are similar to other circuits. But this is a colossal understatement. Vroman has been followed in the First Circuit, the Sixth Circuit, the Eighth Circuit, the Tenth Circuit, in IRS publications, along with copious citations in the Ninth Circuit as authority for the validity of an income tax indictment without the necessity of alleging a statutory duty. Vroman appears to be single-handedly negating an 800 year bulwark against government oppression, neutering Due Process, directly contradicting Supreme Court adjudication, and extending jurisdiction beyond the constitutional limits of a Case.
The Vroman court concluded:
1) the indictment alleged a known legal duty for an income tax by citing 26 U.S.C. §7203;
2) the defendant was proven to be a taxpayer required to file an income tax return;
3) the defendant was not prejudiced by failure to cite 26 U.S.C. §6012; and
4) F.R.Cr.P. 7(c)(3) condones an indictment that alleges an erroneous offense.
*******************
[The Motion exceeds the 20000 character limit for posting and has been snipped. It is attached as a Word document.] maybe not. After BROWSE, I cannot find UPLOAD.
Full text is presently here:
http://www.synapticsparks.info/misc/motion.html-- Admin.
