US v Snipes (cont'd)

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
       
snipes.jpg
Well, this is a twist.  Apparently, after he was indicted for criminal tax and other offenses, Mr. Snipes thought it a good idea to send a 600 page letter to the IRS with a copy to the United States Attorneys' Office. Good stuff.

The subject of this massive document was “Filing of Amended Return, and Tax Statements” and Snipes made numerous claims throughout:

1.He doesn’t have a Social Security Number or Tax ID number

 2. his name is Wesley Trent Snipes, not WESLEY TRENT SNIPES

3. his advisors had filed that amended Form 1040 for 1997 in his name and he now issued a “sincere apology about the 1997 filing”; he claimed that when he filed the amended return in 2001, he “didn’t have the legal skills” that he does now and admitted that the “refund attempt may have been illegal.”

4. he complained that he was being both ignored and persecuted

5. he made it clear that he has not waived his sovereign immunity

6. he asserted that he is a “nontaxpayer” not a taxpayer and is therefore free from taxes

7. after claiming that he is a nonresident alien and instead of finally filing a normal Form 1040, he submitted a blank amended Form 1040NR-EZ and stamped “NOT LIABLE” on it in huge block letters

8. he called the prosecutor and IRS people “public dis-servants” among other insults

9. he threatened “significant personal liability” for anyone who tried to collect from him

10. “Warning: pursuit of such a high profile target will open the door for your increased collateral risk.” 

 
Oviously, this is not the recommended course of action for one who has been indicted. The 600 page letter reads like a tax protestor handbook and probably, but we shall see, acts as a waiver to Mr. Snipes' 5th Amendment right not to be compelled to testify in his case.
 
At the outset of this case, and as a tax attorney, I thought why would Mr. Snipes possibly go to trial with this case. What could the government have in its arsenal and why wasn't there a "no time" plea bargain? Obviously, I thought he was the victim of some bad advice and what good would it do to have Wesley Snipes in jail. Well, the 600 page diatribe reveals that Mr. Snipes was not such a victim; he really believes that he had no obligation to file or pay taxes. What else would prompt him to say:"You and the organization you work for are in need of a SERIOUS education.”
 
That objective belief, albeit unreasonable and ridiculous, may just save Mr. Snipes from a jail cell. As has previously been reported, the United States has the bruden of proving that Mr. Snipes acted willfully. An objective belief, even unreasonable, is a potential defense to willfullness. The defense is getting there.
John Hanamirian
 
 
.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: US v Snipes (cont'd).

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://sskrplaw.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/52

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Administrator published on January 25, 2008 1:32 PM.

Twinkie Narcissist: Mr. Snipes Financial Advisor Lays the Groundwork for Combined Defenses. was the previous entry in this blog.

"Do No Harm" Means Just That is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.01