We were much better off in 1775. Just say’n.
Asset Forfeiture.
The legacy of the War on Drugs that just keeps giving.
My broadest take: It appears that the attorney was not acting as an attorney but as an accountant...”helping” his client to “deceive”.
Bookmark
It doesn't matter what you're accused of-- theft. treason. triple homicide, pedophilia. With very limited exceptions, an attorney cannot be compelled to testify against a client, nor can their communications be subpoenaed for evidence, UNLESS IT'S ABOUT TAXES !!!
Dawn breaks evenly today
On the truth and the lie
All rise, courts in session
Were hanging someone high
Justice means nothing today...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY8psvAB7wY
THE SYSTEM HAS FAILED
We really should take the next step:
The new model for American Jurisprudence:
1) Sentence the perp.
2) Hold a trial that shows the sentence is justified.
This ruling only applies to people who elect to be treated as corporations, and thereby trade their rights for privileges.
The fact that such a swap even exists should fascinate every American, since it is the process by which rights are lost. Yet it might as well be astrology for how it’s generally treated.
I find that amazing.
Link to the decision:
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/ADInvestmentDiv.Halpern.TC.WPD.pdf
Attorney Client privilege has never been absolute. There are a variety of reason why it may not be valid. As I read it, the client has implicitly waived Attorney Client privilege because they have argued their attorney gave them X advice, and thus the other side gets to see if the attorney actually did give that advice.
The “Free Country” ended on November 4, 2008. By popular demand.
—
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”
Patrick Henry
1736-1799
This is a blog...and he’s an agitator...
Obamacare got rid of doctor patient and HIPPA. What’s so special about attorney client.
Is this your blog? Why the excerpt? Are you blog pimping here?
” The concept of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ may officially exist in courts”
PRESUMED innocent.....You are either innocent or guilty regardless of what the courts say
It’s a fine line. If a client tells his/her lawyer of intent to commit a crime in the future it is not protected. So for example, if a person comes into my office, establishes an attorney/client relationship and then tells me he is going to go rob a liquor store or rape my secretary, I am obligated to report his statement. So I don’t know the facts here but I assume that if I were a tax lawyer and a client told me that he was going to hide assets to avoid paying taxes, I guess that communication would not be privileged.
The mere fact that every taxpayer has to submit a tax form SIGNED UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY negates our 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.
A century ago, the bastard early progressive activists may have passed the outrageous 16th Amendment allowing the feds to tax our income one hundred years ago.
But that abomination did NOT repeal the 5th Amendment.
The IRS has been violating our Constitutional rights pretty much since its inception.
You might expect this in the Tax Court system which has torn up the Constitution on individual rights for years.