Simkanin guilty of 29 counts of tax violations

FORT WORTH - After deliberating for more than 13 hours over two days, a federal jury Wednesday convicted Bedford businessman and tax protester Richard Simkanin on 29 counts of violating U.S. income tax laws.

The jury of six men and six women delivered its verdict shortly after 8 p.m. They remained deadlocked on two counts within the indictment, leading U.S. District Judge John McBryde to declare a mistrial on those charges.

Simkanin stood silently with his hands behind his back, showing no emotion, as a court clerk read the 29 guilty verdicts. Some supporters in the courtroom dabbed their eyes; others glared at the judge.

Simkanin, 59, is scheduled to be sentenced April 30, Assistant U.S. Attorney David Jarvis said. He can get up to five years on each of the 25 felony counts and up to a year on each of the four misdemeanor charges.

"Justice was served, and we're pleased that the jury understood that no one is above the law," Jarvis said.

Arch McColl, the Dallas lawyer representing Simkanin, said his client was denied a fair trial because McBryde did not allow him to present key evidence on whether Social Security, Medicare and income taxes are voluntary.

McColl said he expects to win on appeal, but he added that it is time for Americans to pay attention to what happened in court.

"I'm terribly disappointed," McColl said. "It was not a fair trial in accordance with the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution that includes the fundamental right to present evidence on your own behalf."

Robert Schulz, founder of We the People Foundation for Constitutional Education, a group that questions the validity of the nation's tax laws, told Simkanin's supporters that the defendant was prepared for the worst.

This is the second time Simkanin has gone on trial. In November, McBryde declared a mistrial when jurors who deliberated for eight hours said that they were deadlocked and could not reach a unanimous verdict.

Simkanin is almost considered to be a political prisoner by groups that question the validity of the nation's tax laws. They contend that most Americans are not required to pay income taxes.

They are particularly hostile toward the Internal Revenue Service, an agency that, they say, is not an official government entity.

Simkanin's supporters came from around the country. They held a vigil at the courthouse, at one time praying in the hallway. They often gave him a thumbs-up gesture as he entered the courtroom. Once, Simkanin got a standing ovation.

During the trial, Simkanin testified that he didn't withhold employees' taxes for Medicare and Social Security benefits because his research did not produce a law showing that participation in the programs was mandatory.

But Simkanin backed away from some of his anti-government comments, saying they were a mistake. He once wrote to the U.S. Treasury secretary saying that he had repatriated himself from the United States to the "Republic of Texas."

When McColl tried to query witnesses on legal definitions of "employee" and "wages," McBryde cut him off. The judge told jurors they could not question the constitutionality of the tax code.

Prosecutors put 11 witnesses on the stand to show that Simkanin knew what he was doing when he stopped withholding and paying taxes. Under federal tax laws, ignorance of tax codes can be used as a legal defense.

They asked for legal definitions and whether they had to review evidence on who does have to pay taxes.

McColl said his client's company, Arrow Custom Plastics, is in deep financial trouble because of his fights with the government. Simkanin has been in jail since June.

Simkanin was convicted on 10 felony counts of failing to withhold about $139,000 in taxes from employees' wages and 15 felony counts of filing false tax refund claims for about $235,000.

He also was found guilty of four misdemeanor counts of not filing individual income tax returns from 1998 to 2001. Simkanin had an estimated gross income of about $410,000 during those years, according to the indictment.

Dottie Harrison, a Simkanin supporter from Houston, said his allies will continue to fight.

"I'm in shock, but the determined energy everyone feels to overturn this injustice will be a catalyst that will expose the entire IRS fraud," she said.

The facts of the political situation are clear.. Neither our 'representitives', nor our courts, -- will address the issue of constitutional violations.

A red herring & irrelavent to the issue at hand as the power of Congress to tax is unquestionable and clearly enumerated in the Constitution.

Constitution for the United States of America:

Article VI: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,
to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;
but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "

Article I Section 8: "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

Aa I remarked at #133:

One of the important functions of a jury is to corral in government people who are running astray. Its a very important function.

You have not demonstrated that the government is running astray insofar as the income and payroll taxes are concerned. The power to levy and collect taxes on the individual by the national government is clear and incontestable, and has been from the very first tax case before the Supreme Court:

Hylton v. United States(1796), 3 U.S. 171

"A general power is given to Congress, to lay and collect taxes, of every kind or nature, without any restraint, except only on exports; but two rules are prescribed for their government, namely, uniformity and apportionment: Three kinds of taxes, to wit, duties, imposts, and excises by the first rule, and capitation, or other direct taxes, by the second rule. "

"the present Constitution was particularly intended to affect individuals, and not states, except in particular cases specified: And this is the leading distinction between the articles of Confederation and the present Constitution."

"Uniformity is an instant operation on individuals, without the intervention of assessments, or any regard to states,"

As well as clearly exemplified in the arguments of the founders in the Federalist Papers and the constitutional debates:

James Madison, Federalist #39:

"The difference between a federal and national government, as it relates to the OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT, is supposed to consist in this, that in the former the powers operate on the political bodies composing the Confederacy, in their political capacities; in the latter, on the individual citizens composing the nation, in their individual capacities. On trying the Constitution by this criterion, it falls under the NATIONAL, not the FEDERAL character;"

James Madison, Federalist #45:

"The change relating to taxation may be regarded as the most important; and yet the present [Continental] sic Congress have as complete authority to REQUIRE of the States indefinite supplies of money for the common defense and general welfare, as the future [Constitutional] Congress will have to require them of individual citizens;

James Madison, Elliots Debates Vol 3 p128:

"If a government depends on other governments for its revenues -- if it must depend on the voluntary contributions of its members -- its [*129] existence must be precarious."

"If the general government is to depend on the voluntary contribution of the states for its support, dismemberment of the United States may be the consequence."

Our only recourse is jury nullification..

False, as this is a Republic afterall and recource is to be had in the particular instance through the legislative process necessary to functioning under the Constitution.

MCCRAY v. U S, 195 U.S. 27 (1904)

"'But if what Congress does is within the limits of its power, and is simply unwise or injurious, the remedy is that suggested by Chief Justice Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden [9 Wheat. 1, 6 L. ed. 23], when [195 U.S. 27, 56] he said: 'The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often rely solely, in all representative governments."

However if you can establish a level of abuse beyound the principles stated by the early Supreme Court, then the tax law can be overturned.

MCCRAY v. U S, 195 U.S. 27 (1904)

"Let us concede that if a case was presented where the abuse of the taxing power was so extreme as to be beyond the principles which we have previously stated, and where it was plain to the judicial mind that the power had been called into play, not for revenue, but solely for the purpose of destroying rights which could not be rightfully destroyed consistently with the principles of freedom and justice upon which the Constitution rests, that it would be the duty of the courts to say that such an arbitrary act was not merely an abuse of a delegated power, but was the exercise of an authority not conferred. "

-- And surprise! -- The selfsame people at FR who argue for prohibitions & insane tax codes , argue against nullification.

Since I do not see anyone arguing for prohibitions nor insane tax codes, your statement is a is more hot air, and calling for jury nullification of constitutional statutes merely because one is dissatisfied with the operation of that law with regard to themselves is merely self interest looking for another avenue of expression.

Yet they call thenselves conservatives. Go figure.

The operation and preservation of law as opposed arbitrary action of the individual is a conservative position. Arbitrary application of law and the whims of men is a value of the anarchist, not that of the conservative.

The facts of the political situation are clear.. Neither our 'representitives', nor our courts, -- will address the issue of constitutional violations.

A red herring & irrelavent to the issue at hand as the power of Congress to tax is unquestionable and clearly enumerated in the Constitution. Constitution for the United States of America

Taxation is not the issue. Abuse of the taxing power is our subject.

The abuse of power is self evident to all rational men.
Our only recourse is jury nullification..

False, as this is a Republic afterall and recource is to be had in the particular instance through the legislative process necessary to functioning under the Constitution.

Our legislative process is broken. Partisan politics rule. We lack viable recourse.
- And surprise! -- The selfsame people at FR who argue for prohibitions & insane tax codes , argue against nullification.

Since I do not see anyone arguing for prohibitions nor insane tax codes,

Look in the mirror, geezer.

your statement is a is more hot air, and calling for jury nullification of constitutional statutes merely because one is dissatisfied with the operation of that law with regard to themselves is merely self interest looking for another avenue of expression.

Whatever.. Your own brand of hot air grows irksome.
Yet they call thenselves conservatives. Go figure.

Your silly effort to brand me as an anarchist is refuted by my every post urging you to honor our constitution..

Give it up geezer.. Your ploy to baffle em with volumes of BS cites isn't working.. Put a cork in it.

Taxation is not the issue. Abuse of the taxing power is our subject.

You have not demonstrated abuse of authority to tax. You have only complained of the exercize of a power to collect taxes under the authority of Congess as enumerated in the Constitution.

As such no abuse exists within the statute you complain of.

The abuse of power is self evident to all rational men.

Exercise of a power enumerated in the Constitution is not an abuse of power. It is an exercise of authority granted to the government nothing more.

Our only recourse is jury nullification..

Article V amendent of the Constitution exists, by which the statutes may be prohibited;

Article I Legislative power exists to repeal or replace the statute in accord with the republican principals (representative government), you know, all that partisan politicing you complain of.

You so called only recouse is not justified for lack of moral right on which to stand, there is no right to not be taxed as the power to lay and collect a tax and to enact laws necessary and proper to that end is clearly with the authority granted the national government.

If there were no authority of government to lay and collect the tax, and government wrongfully were exercising such a power, then jury nullification could be justified in the absense of action by the legislature or the Courts. However, under the Constitution as it now exists there is no moral authority to act through nullification in this instance as the Congress clearly has the power to lay and collect the tax, and the executive branch the charge to execute that law.

Our legislative process is broken. Partisan politics rule.

The legislative process is the process of political rule. Nothing more nothing less. The 1st amend assures the right of association and petition of grievence fundamental to the process, partisan support is nothing more than the process by which the debate is carried forward and legislation and amendments are implimented.

We lack viable recourse.

You lack viable recourse, to impose your personal view upon the body of the electorate is what you really are crying about.

Your silly effort to brand me as an anarchist is refuted by my every post urging you to honor our constitution.

Constitution for the United States of America:

Article VI: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,
to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;
but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "

Article I Section 8: "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

Furthermore legislative and amendment processes, as well as legal process exists for addressing real legislative and exectutive abuse.

It happens that in the particlular instance of taxation it works against your personal interest, so now you cry for arbitrary intervention and lawless action to make you happy. Sorry but this is a nation of law, not the arbitrary desires of men.

You have the standard by which you may seek redress in the courts,

MCCRAY v. U S, 195 U.S. 27 (1904)

"'But if what Congress does is within the limits of its power, and is simply unwise or injurious, the remedy is that suggested by Chief Justice Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden [9 Wheat. 1, 6 L. ed. 23], when [195 U.S. 27, 56] he said: 'The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often rely solely, in all representative governments."

"Let us concede that if a case was presented where the abuse of the taxing power was so extreme as to be beyond the principles which we have previously stated, and where it was plain to the judicial mind that the power had been called into play, not for revenue, but solely for the purpose of destroying rights which could not be rightfully destroyed consistently with the principles of freedom and justice upon which the Constitution rests, that it would be the duty of the courts to say that such an arbitrary act was not merely an abuse of a delegated power, but was the exercise of an authority not conferred. "

Failing to meet that test you are only justified a change the law through argument and legislation or constitional amendment. You do not have the moral justification for any other action.

Your ploy to baffle em with volumes of BS cites isn't working..

LOL, you come here with nothing but person opininon and lack of any foundation for your views, calling anything contrary to your fantasy "volumes of BS cites"; Sorry personal opinion against the words of the constitution, the founders, and the institutions of government that constitution erects just does not fly.

Put a cork in it.

Silence opposition and that which is contrary to your personal views. So democratic of you.

Your words are nothing more than the pandering of the demogogue to emotion and self interest, they certainly are not supportable within the context of the constitution nor the words of the authors of that constitution.

Taxation is not the issue. Abuse of the taxing power is our subject.

You have not demonstrated abuse of authority to tax.

No need, its a given to rational men.

You have only complained of the exercize of a power to collect taxes under the authority of Congess as enumerated in the Constitution. As such no abuse exists within the statute you complain of.

You are in denial. The whole income tax system is insane.
The abuse of power is self evident to all rational men.

Exercise of a power enumerated in the Constitution is not an abuse of power. It is an exercise of authority granted to the government nothing more.

Our rights are being violated by income tax enforcement. Our only recourse is jury nullification..

Article V amendent of the Constitution exists, by which the statutes may be prohibited; Article I Legislative power exists to repeal or replace the statute in accord with the republican principals (representative government), you know, all that partisan politicing you complain of. You so called only recouse is not justified for lack of moral right on which to stand, there is no right to not be taxed as the power to lay and collect a tax and to enact laws necessary and proper to that end is clearly with the authority granted the national government. If there were no authority of government to lay and collect the tax, and government wrongfully were exercising such a power, then jury nullification could be justified in the absense of action by the legislature or the Courts. However, under the Constitution as it now exists there is no moral authority to act through nullification in this instance as the Congress clearly has the power to lay and collect the tax, and the executive branch the charge to execute that law.

ALL branches are violating basic human rights in tax 'law' enforcement. Our legislative process is broken. Partisan politics rule.

Both political parties cooperate in the constitutional violations of taxing powers. We lack viable recourse.

You lack viable recourse, to impose your personal view upon the body of the electorate is what you really are crying about.

Another infantile remark. Your silly effort to brand me as an anarchist is refuted by my every post urging you to honor our constitution.

The primary person here not honoring the provisions of the Constitution is you. For the Constitution clearly has granted the authority to lay and collect taxes to the Congress. Contrary to anarchic your desire that it be otherwise. Furthermore legislative and amendment processes, as well as legal process exists for addressing real legislative and exectutive abuse. It happens that in the particlular instance of taxation it works against your personal interest, so now you cry for arbitrary intervention and lawless action to make you happy. Sorry but this is a nation of law, not the arbitrary desires of men. You have the standard by which you may seek redress in the courts, Failing to meet that test you are only justified a change the law through argument and legislation or constitional amendment. You do not have the moral justification for any other action.

Anpther uncalled for rant.. Your ploy to baffle us with volumes of BS cites isn't working..

LOL, you come here with nothing but person opininon and lack of any foundation for your views, calling anything contrary to your fantasy "volumes of BS cites"; Sorry personal opinion against the words of the constitution, the founders, and the institutions of government that constitution erects just does not fly.

Cite the opinions I've made "against the words of the constitution, the founders, and the institutions of government that constitution erects".. Your can't, cause your full of BS.. Put a cork in it.

Silence opposition and that which is contrary to your personal views. So democratic of you. Your words are nothing more than the pandering of the demogogue to emotion and self interest, they certainly are not supportable within the context of the constitution nor the words of the authors of that constitution.

Yada yada..
You have ceased to be amusing. Before being dismissed, feel free to give us one more huge spam post.
- I suggest you post the constitution in its entirety, {suitably highlighted} as that will certainly prove once again your obsession with belaboring the obvious..

I'm not going to get involved in the flame war with the tax-loving nuts, but I will post this thing as a rebuttal to the dismissal of the concerns about the taxation level in this country:

Below is a partial list of taxes American's pay. Reference: http://www.angelfire.com/az/nativebob/politicTAXES.html

* Income taxes, general taxes both federal & state: wages

* interest

* dividends

* capital gains

" Payroll withholding:

* Social Security Medicare

* State disability

* Unemployment Taxes collected at the register:

* State

* City

* County

* Liquor

* Tobacco

* Special taxing district

"Real Estate Taxes

"Gasoline taxes:

* (In Arizona these taxes are not revealed at the pump or on the printed receipt. This from the same government which insists food manufacturer's list every gram of fiber, carbohydrate, fat, calorie and insect fragment in everything they produce.) Federal excise

* State excise

* State sales tax

" Taxes, termed 'registration fees':

* Auto

* Boats

* Trailers

* Motor homes

* motorcycles

City/County taxes disguised as:

* fees

* permits

* licenses

State fees:

* Driver's license

* Various professional licenses

" Inheritance taxes:

* Federal

* State

Gift taxes:

* Federal

* State

Double taxation on dividends:

* Corporations pay taxes on all income prior to dividends being paid out and then taxes are paid on the dividends by the owner of the stock.

Hidden taxes:

* Within bank charges and insurance premiums

Miscellaneous taxes on:

* Airline tickets

* Hotel rooms

* Rental cars

A.P.S. Electric Utility taxes, surcharges & assessments: (Taken off of my Arizona Public Service statement dated 11/03/2003)

1. ACC mandated environmental surcharge

2. Regulatory assessment

3. Sales tax

Telephone taxes and surcharges:(Taken off of my Cox Communications bill of 10/17/2003)

1. Federal excise tax

2. State sales tax

3. County sales tax

4. E911 tax

5. Telecommunication Fund for the Deaf

6. State universal service fund

7. Local communications sales tax

8. Universal service fund fee

Miscellaneous Taxes Not Collected in Every State:

* Taxes on corporations

* Think about this, the more money a corporation spends on Social Security, unemployment taxes, income taxes, permits, fees, complying with government mandates, the more it must charge for its products or services and the less it can budget for payroll, benefits and dividends. Transfer tax stamps and recording fees on real estate transactions

* Import duties / Tariffs on foreign-made goods

* A recent Fortune Magazine article stated that import taxes on foreign made clothes alone add up to 66% of the retail price of a garment purchased in the United States! U.S. Customs taxes on items you bring into the country

* Township taxes

* State tax on your assets or capital (stock, bonds, savings)

* Taxes on water bill

* EPA fees, levies and duties on garbage collection and worn tire disposal

Calculate from the list above what you paid in taxes last year. Divide the total taxes you paid by your gross income (your income before taxes). Then multiply this number by 100 the result will be the percentage of your income you paid in taxes. You will have the shock of your life. Most American's labor 1,040 hours (which is equal to 26 weeks) every year just to pay the myriad of taxes that our governments burden us with.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.