Errors in the Case, will they ever end?
December 24th, 2011 § 1 Comment
This just in..
Mr. Ioane’s verdict form says he was guilty of a violation of Title 18 Section 541 and 2 (for counts 5 through 8) Then there is verbiage related to the charge, but it refers to (Bills of Exchange); but, bills of exchanges are not a violation of Title 18 Section 514 (a) (2), which is what the indictment alleges. Additionally, Michael Scott Ioane was actually charged with Aiding and Abetting the violation of Title 18 Section 514(a)(2) not actually Title 18 Section 514 (a) (2); however, we understand that aiding and abetting has the same basic consequences as the charge, so if you are charged with aiding and abetting someone in a particular crime you suffer the same consequences as they even though you may not have been directly involved in the act.
The problem here is that the Jury found Michael Ioane guilty of something entirely different then aiding and Abetting Title 18 section 514 (a) (2), they found him guilty of Title 18 Section 541 and aiding and abetting. Maybe this is why prosecutor denied Mr. Ioane a speedy trial; they had no case against Mr. Ioane under any theory, so now they come up with Title 18 Section 541?
This cannot just be a typo, they forgot the (a) (2) and they added verbiage to the section of Title 18 Section 514 by adding the words (bill of exchange) to the statute. If you Read Title 18 Section 514 no ware does it indicate that a bill of exchange is a violation of the law! Sounds to me like someone tampered with the Jury; also how can someone be found guilty of two charges within one count. The Jury found Michael Scott Ioane guilty of Title 18 Section 541 and 2, in counts 5-8, so are they saying he did the act and he aided and abetted the act? When you start with a lie you end with a lie, it just never matches up. The indictment was a sham, the trial was a sham and the jury verdict form is a sham. Now I know why the US has the highest incarceration rate than any other nation, including communist China. .
Title 18 Section 541 Defined:
Whoever knowingly effects any entry of goods, wares, or merchandise, at less than the true weight or measure thereof, or upon a false classification as to quality or value, or by the payment of less than the amount of duty legally due, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. Read the complete JURY VERDICT FORM Read the Complete INDICTMENTTitle 18 Section514 Defined:
(a) Whoever, with the intent to defraud - (1) draws, prints, processes, produces, publishes, or otherwise makes, or attempts or causes the same, within the United States;
It is plane to see that the indictment verbiage regarding counts 5 through 8 is quite different from that verbiage on the jury verdict form that found Ioane guilty 18 Section 541 rather than section 514.
Additionally, count one on the jury verdict form only finds Ioane guilty of Title 18 section 371 and there is no mention of IRC 7201, which is referenced throughout the indictment and trial brief as what Ioane was charged with. Also the verdict form counts 5 through 8, say “Bill of Exchange” but no such words are used in Title 18 Section 514, notwithstanding the wrong section sited and signed of 541.
Now according to what we can between the indictment and the jury’s verdict, the Foremen of the Jury signed that Mr. Ioane was guilty of charges unrelated to his indictment. Is just harmless error? I mean these guys are so smart they wouldn’t make a mistake like this would they?
Think again, none of what Ioane was accused of was provable so perhaps the government (IRS and DA included) had to give false jury verdict forms and amend the complaint during the trial. How else can someone conclude why errors like these could happen over and over again in a case with no evidence.
Plain and simple Ioane was not convicted of what he was charged with because they could not prove it!
Ioane’s attorney Anthony Capozzi filed a reply regarding these erros. Read the complete REPLY TO GOVERNMENT OPPOSITION. In this filing you will see the numerous errors that happened during trial including the violation of Ioane’s Speedy Trial Rights. Of which cost him the loss of his attorney who signed off on all of the work completed for Dr. Booth.
Ioane will be back in Court January 3 with Judge Lawrence O’Neill awaiting the decision of the court in regards to this filing.
Prosecutorial Misconduct
December 10th, 2011 § Leave a Comment
Prosecutors Coach witnesses to lie, manufacture evidence and put witnesses on that they know are committing perjury.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2010-09-22-federal-prosecutors-reform_N.htm
Looking back over the testimonies of the IRS witnesses and Steven Booth and the fact that they effectively amended the federal indictment during trial. One can not help but suspect, could this have happened during the Ioane case?
Sounds like prosecutorial misconduct by federal prosecutors in Fresno, CA
Wrong Jury Instructions- Ioane requesting retrial.
November 28th, 2011 § Leave a Comment
According to Ioane’s indictment (which was never edited or changed) he was charged with Conspiracy under Rule 371 Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States by “willfully attempting to evade or defeat income tax”
which states, http://www.irs.gov/compliance/enforcement/article/0,,id=106790,00.html
If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each:
Under the Jury instructions #26 it states that Ioane was charged with conspiracy under Rule 371. Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States by “obstructing the lawful functions of of the IRS”
Looks to us that this charge was manipulated into something else as “willfully attempting to evade or defeat income tax” and “obstructing the lawful functions of of the IRS” are two completely different things.
Anthony Capozzi, Attorney for Michael Ioane brought this up to the Judge before the Jury went into deliberation, requesting a retrial for mistrial actions however Judge Lawrence O’Neill claimed ” I don’t care let the Jury decide”.
Read for yourself!
A motion for retrial has been filed on Ioane’s behalf. He and his family, awaits the decision of the judge December 5th.
Lets see if the Honorable Judge Lawrence O’Neill continues to defraud Ioane of his rights and illegally convicts him of something he was not indicted for. Motion for Acquital or New Trial
Ioane’s Motion for Acquital or New Trial
November 9th, 2011 § 1 Comment
On November 7, 2011 Mr. Ioane attorney Anthony Capozzi filed a motion for Judgement of Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 29 or as an alternative a Motion for Retrial Pursuant of Rule 33.
Attached is the motion along with a memorandum of points and authorities in support.
How much was actually evaded? Booths Plea Agreement
November 2nd, 2011 § Leave a Comment
Here you will see the Plea Agreements, indictment and the newspaper publications
It is plan to see that the IRS could not figure out how much was evaded. First we see in the unsigned Plea that it was 3.8 million then it changed in the signed agreement to 207,000. Yet in the indictment it says 1.3 million and the IRS reported to the newspapers that the loss was 1.8 million, so which one is it? Maybe the F.B.I should investigate and ask Assistant US Attorney Mark Cullers, which one is it. We might find that Mark Cullers and others within the Department of Justice participated in a subordination of perjury; sounds like the real story is that Michael Scott Ioane found out the IRS fraud, exposed it and now is suffering for being a “Whistle Blower” of public corruption. There is a lot more to this story and we will be exposing the corruption involved as we uncover more and more facts behind this story.
Perhaps nothing was owed and no evasion was committed? The Jury surely did not get an instruction for tax evasion nor did the government even attempt to prove tax evasion during the Trial. Vincent Steven Booth and his Wife Louise simply didn’t have the faith to go to trial or maybe they committed a crime, that Michael Scott Ioane had nothing to do with. What we do know is that they took the easy way out lied at Trial and implicated Michael Scott Ioane. Never mind that they sought Michael Scott Ioane’s help, four years after they had created their own problems or that Michael Scott Ioane referred them to an Attorney for all major changes in their financial affairs! This was the IRS’s opportunity to get vengeance on Michael Scott Ioane. For the last 13 years Michael Scott Ioane has been exposing IRS corruption and let’s not forget he has two pending multimillion dollar lawsuits against the IRS; the exact same IRS agents who manufactured these false charges, and assisted Booths in implicating Michael Scott Ioane .
Michael Scott Ioane received no benefit from helping Vincent Steven Booth or Louise other than his normal consultation fees. It was the Booths who were the benefactors of this alleged, evasion, We say alleged evasion because the facts and Jury instructions prove unequivocally that Michael Scott Ioane was not convicted of conspiracy to commit tax evasion, as stated in the indictment; but, rather some sort of obstruction and impeding, which he was never charged with! What we find scary is that this happened with the assistance of the Attorney General’s Office, and in the presence of a federal judge. Citizens assume and want to believe that our Court’s and Government are free of corruption and play by the rules; but, what we are finding is they are not. This is scary and could happen to anyone of us. Michael Scott Ioane has been exposing the IRS for the last 13 years by filing reports with the Inspector General for Tax Administration, Congress and other oversight committee; however, these agencies have no interest in investigating public corruption. They are simply agencies created for the purpose of expanding the size of government and protecting their own; especially their $100,000K a year salaries; unimaginable retirement and medical benefits the normal Citizen will never imagine having; but, we will pay for it. Wonder why we have national economic problems?
Bogus Financial Instruments… look again!
October 26th, 2011 § Leave a Comment
Where and how does Booths Letter look like a Fictitious Financial Instrument. A financial instrument my be “issued by the Government or drawn on a government bank” according to United States VS. Albert Salman, West law No 05-10093, argued and submitted June 9, 2008, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The letter submitted to the IRS by Steven Booth was drawn on his own alleged “Personal UCC Trust Account”. Where in the letter are indications that BOOTH LETTER is a check similar to the bogus checks used in the Salman case.
The US v. Salman check, clearly states that the US government is the Bank, it says so right on the ACTUAL BOGUS CHECK AS STATED BY NINTH CIRCUIT.
Where does BOOTH LETTER say “pay to the order of”? It does not because it is a letter of offer, it asks the IRS to discharge their claims against him, just as if he had filed bankruptcy and based on some congressional act called HJR 192. This letter is no different then if someone sent a letter to PG&E asking to credit 50 dollars for whatever reason. If PG&E choose to credit the account great, and if they disagreed they would not credit the account and the bill would still be in effect.
How could anyone, given they were not uneducated ape, say that this was somehow an attempt to defraud or pass a bogus check authorized by the US?
Is it now a crime to send a letter to the government disputing a debt or asking to have a debt discharged or abated?
This is non-sense and how a Judge ever let this get this far is preposterous. It is even more scary that a Jury actually thought that a letter was as an attempt to pass a bogus check?
Although the Jury might have been misguided by the false and incorrect jury instructions; they had to be completely out of their minds to consider BOOTH LETTER to the IRS a bogus check.
Perhaps they were government plants cherry picked by the IRS. We all know this type of situation is not unheard of!
Booths Letter Sent to IRS disputing Charges
Salman’s Bogus Check sent to US
