Additional Titles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other
Devvy
Articles:

Vote Fraud: What They Aren't Telling You

Forced Mental Health Screening for Your Children


More
Devvy
Articles:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SHERRY JACKSON CONVICTED UNDER WHAT LAW?

 

 

 

By: Devvy
November 5, 2007

2007 - NewsWithViews.com

"It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood." James Madison, Father of the U.S. Constitution

My friend, Sherry Jackson, is the latest victim in the Federal Department of Justice's crusade to silence any American who dares tell the truth about the misapplication of the federal income tax. Sherry isn't some "tax protester" who wanted to get out of "paying her fair share." This intelligent, articulate woman is a former IRS Revenue Agent and Certified Public Accountant. She is a woman of rare qualities. A wife, a mother. A woman of deep religious faith. She also doesn't put up with liars, the railroading of the American people and has worked very hard over the years to get the factual truth to her fellow countrymen and women about how we the people have been had. Of course, this doesn't sit well with the criminal syndicate out there in Washington, DC.

Sherry determined many years ago that she was not one of those required to file and pay federal income taxes. Sherry didn't come to this conclusion overnight nor did she undertake her exhaustive research to "get out of paying her fair share." Sherry also came to understand the symbiotic relationship between the privately owned Federal Reserve and it's feeding artery, the IRS. Like so many others, DOJ went after her for willful failure to file and on October 30, 2007, she was convicted by a jury who obviously has zero knowledge of the law nor did they care. They did their civic duty!

When I heard the news, I was sick to my soul. Another friend found guilty of violating a law that doesn't exist. Another honest, decent, law abiding American will be stripped from her family and friends, taken to a federal pen, finger printed, strip searched, degraded and humiliated because twelve jurors not only have no idea of the subject matter, they didn't believe Sherry's testimony known as a good faith reliance defense. The feds brought in some highly suspect rebuttal witnesses (more on this later) and the curtain closed. Less than 45 minutes later, America's friend was made a felon. Have you ever been in a federal court room? I have and I state categorically that most people put on the stand, fighting for their life, their very freedom, would fill their drawers before the swearing in even begins. Sherry held her own on the stand.

The focus of this column is what isn't being discussed and that is ambiguity in the law and individuals all charged with the same "crime," with some juries convicting, while others acquit. The IRS uses the Sixteenth Amendment as justification for the income tax fleecing. For those who have never read any of my columns before, I have written a hundred over the past 18 years on the income tax; most are archived here, the rest are on my CD. Regular readers know of Bill Benson's incontrovertible proof, with court certified documents to back up his discovery, that the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was never properly ratified. Therefore, it is a law that does not exist, yet your government has kept this lie intact to continue stealing the fruits of your labor.

In January 2000, a lawsuit was filed in Oklahoma challenging the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment. This suit was brought by the Wallace Institute on behalf of Bill Benson. The results were typical and due to lack of funding, no appeal was filed. One of the most important aspects regarding the making of our laws is what's called the journal entry rule; see here. When I interviewed Jeff Dickstein recently on a radio show I hosted, he told me this will be one issue included if they go to the U.S. Supreme Court on Bill Benson's case.

For the sake of argument, let's say the Sixteenth Amendment was actually ratified. What have the courts said on its meaning? Jeff Dickstein, a constitutional attorney with decades of experience in the federal court rooms and expert on this issue, can tell you:

"In 1894 Congress passed an income tax act very similar to the current income tax law. That law was challenged on the basis that a tax on income is a direct tax, the United States Constitution requires direct taxes to be apportioned, and the act passed by Congress was not apportioned. The United States Supreme Court agreed and held the income tax act was unconstitutional in Pollock v. Farmer's Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429, aff. reh., 158 U.S. 601 (1895)." Ah, but what about Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916) and Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), both U.S. Supreme Court cases? Jeff gives you a complete overview here and unless one is willing to take the time to research this issue, they will continue to believe a lie. This comprehensive and easy to understand explanation of what the courts have said is crucial. The bottom line as Jeff says is this:

"Whether you agree with Brushaber that the tax is an excise tax that doesn't have to be apportioned, or agree with Eisner that the tax is a direct tax that doesn't have to be apportioned, without the 16th Amendment, the law reverts back to Pollock. The serious student will find my book, Judicial Tyranny and Your Income Tax, an in depth study of the history of the income tax, with two chapters devoted to the issue of direct and indirect taxes, and an extensive analysis of the Pollock and Brushaber cases."

As the courts have been divided on this law and can't make up their mind, how can any American be charged and convicted for violating this so called law? It's called 'uncertainty of the law' and this is what constitutional attorney, Larry Becraft, with about 30 years experience in federal court rooms has to say:

"Under the U.S. Constitution, the Congress is authorized to impose two different types of taxes, direct and indirect. Via Art. 1, 8, cl. 1, of the Constitution, indirect taxes (excises, duties and imposts) must be uniformly imposed throughout the country. Direct taxes are required via Art. 1, 2, cl. 3, and Art. 1, 9, cl. 4, to be imposed pursuant to the regulation of apportionment. These tax categories are mutually exclusive and any given tax must squarely fit within one category or the other. To which constitutional category does the federal income tax belong? Is it a direct tax, or is it an indirect tax? Do American courts speak with unanimity about this simple question of what is the nature of this tax?" Larry provides an understandable overview on this issue that you must read to fully understand what's happening to our fellow Americans like Sherry. Take the time this week or this weekend to read Jeff's analysis cited above and Larry's analysis here. They aren't that long and will validate what I'm saying in this column.

Juries

I have written before about ignorant juries who want nothing more than to "feel good about themselves" by convicting "tax protesters" when they don't have a clue about the laws or the history of tax laws. They don't even know their rights as jurors or jury nullification. They only know what these buzzards from the U.S. Attorney's office tell them: This defendant wanted to cheat you! He/she didn't want to pay their fair share! But, what about these juries who are all over the place on convictions?

2000: Whitey Harrell was charged in state court (Illinois) on willful failure to file income taxes. Just like Sherry Jackson. He was acquitted by a "jury of his peers." In Whitey's case, his jury fore person was a remarkable and lovely woman named Marcella Brooks; I had the pleasure and honor to share the podium with her at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on my birthday, June 29, 2000. You can watch Marcella's speech here and I recommend you take the 14 minutes to listen to what she has to say about the case and her role as a juror.

2006, Dr. Tom Clayton, a learned and generous man, was convicted on six counts of willful failure to file and making a false return using the 861 argument. State of Texas. Like Sherry, Dr. Clayton believed what he read and didn't read in black and white: that the income tax laws are being misapplied to most Americans and that he was not required to file. The most putrid statement was made following the conviction by a smarmy government employee: "The majority of people are willing to pay their taxes, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton said after Clayton's conviction, "but those who aren't must be held accountable. This conviction is a reminder that the obligation to pay taxes is not negotiable." Johnny boy Sutton is the same U.S. Attorney responsible for the railroading of U.S. Border Patrol Agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean into long federal prison sentences.

1993, Lloyd Long was charged with willful failure to file and he was acquitted by a jury of his peers. Larry Becraft was his attorney. State of Tennessee.

2007: Tommy Cryer, attorney at law; State of Louisiana. Charged with two counts of willful failure to file. Larry Becraft was his attorney. A jury unanimously found him not guilty.

2003: Vernie Kuglin, a former FED-EX pilot was acquitted on six counts of tax evasion. Her attorneys were Larry Becraft and Bob Bernhoft. State of Tennessee.

2005: Joseph Banister, former IRS Criminal Investigation Division Special Agent was charged as follows: Alleged violation of 18 U.S.C. 371- Conspiracy; 18 U.S.C. 287 - False Claims Against United States (Two counts); 26 U.S.C. 7206(1) - Filing False Tax Returns; 26 U.S.C. 7206(2) - Aiding and Assisting the Filing of False Tax Returns (Three Counts); 26 U.S.C. 7202 - Willful Failure to Withhold and Pay Taxes (10 Counts). The indictment contains several bald faced lies that I personally know to be false. The feds wanted Joe bad, but a jury of 12 acquitted him on all charges. His legal team was Jeff Dickstein and Bob Bernhoft. State of California.

2007: Sherry Jackson charged with four counts of willful failure to file. Legal counsel, Larry Becraft and Jeff Dickstein. Found guilty by a jury of 12. State of Georgia.

1991, U.S. v Sanders. Attorneys Larry Becraft and Jeff Dickstein represented Mr. Franklin Sanders, Jr. and 16 other people. Charges ranged from conspiracy to failing to file tax returns. All defendants were found not guilty on all counts by a jury of 12 in the federal case. The state then went after Franklin and he was convicted. State of Tennessee. "But acquittal in federal court did not end Sanders' ordeal. The IRS had sent an agent to work for the Tennessee Revenue Department (Sanders contends) to cook up some state charge against him." See link below, The Franklin Sanders Case.

I know Dr. Clayton, Joe Banister, Tommy Cryer, Vernie and of course, Sherry. I am fully versed on all these cases and this is just a handful, believe me. So, we have Vernie, Whitey, Franklin, Tommy and Joseph all acquitted on willful failure to file charges. Yet, Dr. Clayton and Sherry are convicted on the same charges by different juries in different states. If the law is so clear cut, how is it some Americans are getting acquitted and some convicted on the same charges? Where is there justice in this insanity?

Congressman Ron Paul has promised that if elected president he will get rid of the IRS immediately. Every candidate from the Republican and Democrat parties promises more of the same fleecing or in multi-millionaire, John Edwards words, he wants to raise taxes.

Ron Paul introduced a bill on December 12, 2000 to end the withholding taxing scheme. I believe he will see this happen if elected president. No other presidential candidate from either party will even entertain discussing this rape of the American people.

Ron Paul has a current bill to abolish the privately owned Federal Reserve and I believe he will fight to get this done if elected. No other presidential candidate from either party will even broach this subject because they are either too ignorant of the subject matter. Many of them know that to continue funding these endless wars and wasteful spending, they need the central bank to keep borrowing, further enslaving we the people, our children and grand children into unpayable debt and indentured servitude.

There is one other educational piece you must read if you haven't already. This piece is titled, Why An Income Tax is Not Necessary to Fund the Federal Government.' As you will see, the first part deals with educating Americans on where your income taxes actually go, the debt and deficit. The next part deals with 'A Pioneer on the Withholding Issue', Vivien Kellems. This part is particularly important because it goes right to the heart of the court decisions discussed at the top of this column regarding apportionment of taxes. What a magnificent statement by this woman on the intent of those who birthed this republic. Vivien stopped withholding from her employees in 1948 and won the narrow battle she fought. Vivien's trial transcripts, her FBI file I obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request and all the Wallace Institute newsletters covering our Sixteenth Amendment lawsuit are on my CD.

Towards the bottom is actual testimony (Senate) on how and why this withholding taxing scheme was cooked up and it's sickening. If you don't have time to read Why an income tax isn't necessary, I've put it up in the audio section on my web site. Download it to your IPod or a CD and listen in commute traffic or any driving you do. I get more requests for reprints from newspapers, Internet sites and college professors for this piece than any other. You have my permission to copy, distribute; paper or CD, just please don't make any changes and attribute the proper copyright to me.

How many more Americans will be sent to federal prison for violating a law that doesn't exist? And, even if it did exist, does NOT apply to the majority of Americans? These U.S. Attorneys aren't stupid and neither are the federal judges who are allowing this persecution against we the people to continue. Instead of quitting their jobs like Joe Banister did, forfeiting an $80,000 a year secure job with a wife and two sons, these buzzards stay on the job and draw paychecks while they send the best of the best like Sherry Jackson, to prison. They are moral cowards. Gutless parasites that feed off the host, which is Congress, who have been conning the American people since 1913. The first step towards stopping this is getting Ron Paul nominated as our next president at that GOP convention next summer.

If you are a person of faith, please pray for Sherry, her family and all the other victims of this corrupt system.

Important Links:

1 - Sherry Jackson's web site
2 - Must watch: 4-minute video: Smearing Ron Paul by useful idiots
3 - Our biggest challenge in '08
4 - USDOJ: Who will stop this criminal enterprise
5 - Wrong law used by Johnny Sutton to convict border agents
6 - Vernie Kuglin's trial transcripts
7 - Four-month trial ends with no convictions
8 - The Franklin Sanders case
9 - Lloyd Long trial transcript
10 - The Right Argument on Taxes

2007 - NewsWithViews.com - All Rights Reserved

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Devvy belongs to no organization.

She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site (www.devvy.com) contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

Devvy's website: www.devvy.com

Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site. It is filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources.

E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net


 

Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Congressman Ron Paul has promised that if elected president he will get rid of the IRS immediately. Every candidate from the Republican and Democrat parties promises more of the same fleecing or in multi-millionaire, John Edwards words, he wants to raise taxes.