Bogus Jury Instructions From Irwin Schiff's Supplementary Appeal
4. Jury Instructions 20, 24 and 25 Were All Given Contrary to Law
Apart from the erroneous Jury Instruction #19, already discussed, the Court gave a number of other erroneous jury instructions, three of which Defendant discusses below.
1. In Jury Instruction 25 the Court instructed the jury that "the Internal Revenue Service... is an agency of the United States." That instruction was incorrect, as Schiff pointed out to the Court at a jury instruction conference in chambers. Congress never passed a law establishing the IRS as an agency of the federal government; so the IRS cannot be "an agency of the United States" as the Court charged in this instruction. Congress merely created the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue as an office within the Treasury Department when it passed the Revenue Act of 1862 - and that is as far as it got.
Schiff objected to this instruction, and giving it did not amount to "harmless error" because it invalidates Jury Instruction 24. Defendants could not have been guilty of "impeding, impairing obstructing and defeating the Internal revenue Service on ascertaining, computing assessing and collecting taxes in violation of 18 USC 371" as stated in Jury Instruction 24, because (a) the IRS does not exist as a federal agency and (b) Congress never gave the IRS or the Commissioner any authority to "ascertain, compute, assess or collect" income taxes as charged in Jury Instruction 24. All such authority (in the 1954 Code) was given only to the Secretary of the Treasury, who was also authorized to delegate such authority, pursuant to 26 USC 7701(12) to "any officer, employee or agency of the Treasury" but he never did so. Click here for more.
PS. Special thanks to Fred Marshall for the "heads up!"
Apart from the erroneous Jury Instruction #19, already discussed, the Court gave a number of other erroneous jury instructions, three of which Defendant discusses below.
1. In Jury Instruction 25 the Court instructed the jury that "the Internal Revenue Service... is an agency of the United States." That instruction was incorrect, as Schiff pointed out to the Court at a jury instruction conference in chambers. Congress never passed a law establishing the IRS as an agency of the federal government; so the IRS cannot be "an agency of the United States" as the Court charged in this instruction. Congress merely created the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue as an office within the Treasury Department when it passed the Revenue Act of 1862 - and that is as far as it got.
Schiff objected to this instruction, and giving it did not amount to "harmless error" because it invalidates Jury Instruction 24. Defendants could not have been guilty of "impeding, impairing obstructing and defeating the Internal revenue Service on ascertaining, computing assessing and collecting taxes in violation of 18 USC 371" as stated in Jury Instruction 24, because (a) the IRS does not exist as a federal agency and (b) Congress never gave the IRS or the Commissioner any authority to "ascertain, compute, assess or collect" income taxes as charged in Jury Instruction 24. All such authority (in the 1954 Code) was given only to the Secretary of the Treasury, who was also authorized to delegate such authority, pursuant to 26 USC 7701(12) to "any officer, employee or agency of the Treasury" but he never did so. Click here for more.
PS. Special thanks to Fred Marshall for the "heads up!"
posted by The Freedom Fellowship at
1:35 PM
2 Comments:
Coersion of the Jury is Happening day in and day out.
Jurors have the Power and the Authority to Decide the Verdict Based on the Law, and the Facts.
Jurors MUST ALWAYS carefully Read the Instructions of the Court. And the Jury DOES have the Right to Disregard Such Instructions, ESPECIALLY if they Themselves can plainly see applied coersion from the Court.
The Problem I see, and the Problem that's happening more and more often... Is that Jurors do not even realize that they have the Authority to disregard the Judge's Instructions, and to Demand to SEE THE EVIDENCE, THE STATUTES, THE REGULATIONS, THE IRC ITSELF, and to HEAR LEGITIMATE TESTIMONY from both the Prosecution and the Defense.
The problem, getting back to My point... is that Judges do not let Jurors know their full Legal Rights, and are Prevented from doing so by law.
Most People selected for Jury Duty have no idea what their Legal Rights are as JURORS... Therefore they think that they MUST FOLLOW the Judges Instructions.
This alone would easally allow any weak Jury to be Manipulated by the Judge.
If you Combine this Fact, with the fact that Judges Today often DO NOT EVEN ALLOW the LAW, or ANY EVIDENCE to be SHOWN TO, or SEEN BY the Jurors.
How can you then Convict a Person, call it Justified, and tell Others that is's because they BROKE A STATUTE OF LAW?
If a Judge gives Instructions to a Jury TELLING THEM, ASKING THEM, or even Reccomending that they Render a Guilty verdict... And... Fails to allow the Jury to review ANY EVIDENCE IN ANY FORM, (as in the Brown Case) Then Rendering a Guilty verdict would make the Jurors Un-witting LIERS.
Any verdict of guilty obtained by such means, IS NULL AND VOID... Becaust the case was NOT LEGALLY TRIED BY A JURY, and in fact, the entire Proceedings were Unlawfully Held, Rulings Unlawfully Applied.
What recourse does the Duped Juror have after the fact? Can they change their verdict after ruining a Man or Woman's Life? I doubt it. Consider the importance of this before rendering a final verdict.
Bottom Line is this. The Judge has a Duty to ensure that the Jury SEES Evidence of any kind, and hears Testimony.
Instead, they are TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE, by not allowing it. They are OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, by not allowing it. And they are Coercing Jurors into Rendering the Verdict of their Choice. Wether it's to keep their Pockets well lined, or to Please the FED, They no longer uphold our Constitutional Rights, unless it's to their benifit in some way.
There are Good Judges out ther... And Good Senators, and good Congressmen. They are Few in Numbers, But they CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE by Exposing anything they KNOW is wrong within our System... By Applying the LAW correctly within THE PEOPLE'S, Court... By Ensuring that Federal Prosecutors Remain within their Constitutional Boundary, and Jurisdiction... And by Firmly Ensuring that Jurors ALWAYS RETAIN the ability to review the Law, and the Evidence.
I encourage them, to Help ensure a Good, and Just Future for Our Children.
Thank you.
Thank you Truelogic. That may be posted!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home