From:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
To: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Praise God indeed, Wesley ! ! ! ! !
Wow - Congratulations to you and the other lawyer for all your tireless work to help bring about this victory! Jack McLamb CAN'T WAIT to get Roland on for a radio interview, if he will be available for such! We hope you all can sue the pants off every person and agency of government responsible for the crimes against David and his family.
Thank You for letting us know.
Carol
Well, P.S.: Just after writing the above, I phoned another friend, Stan Celmer, to see if he had heard the good news and he had, from Joe Volk earlier today, who, in turn, had gotten the news from David's Dad, Roland. But here's why I'm writing this add-on: Stan had understood that it was the 33 year (Swisher-connected) conviction that got reversed, but that David would still have to remain to serve out the balance (5 years or so more?) of the separate 10-yr. sentence having to do with a banking/check-writing charge. If not too much trouble, Wesley, could you confirm or clarify this for us? Thank You very much. My warm regards to Sandra!
Dear Carol:
Glad you asked. I was in such a hurry yesterday with all the other demands but I knew you would want to know that David's conviction for Solicitation of murder and 33 years of his prison sentence was reversed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, so I gave you the short version. The full version is that David was also convicted of Currency Structuring which carries a 10 yr sentence. There was not crime committed because all of the evidence showed and all of the witnesses testified that he used the money for payroll; I mean all the evidence, even the testimony of the Gov't witnesses; they did not have a case! The problem was that there was a move to get a conviction at any cost so the trial judge failed to instruct the jury on the so called “Payroll Defense.”
It is supposed to be a complete defense to criminal charges of Currency Structuring that a businessman used cash-money (currency) withdrawn from his bank account to pay his employees. This is what is known as the “Payroll Defense” but it is buried in IRS regulations, rather than being on the face of the law. Early in the case against David, the first trial judge, who was replaced by Richard C. Tallman, ruled that if there was any evidence that the cash taken out of David’s account was being used to pay David’s payroll, David would be entitled to a jury instruction telling the jury they could not convict David of Currency Structuring unless it was proven he also used currency from his bank account for some illegal purpose.
Originally, the Currency Structuring law was interpreted by the courts that way, but was changed because the lobbyists for the Gov’t insisted the law be amended in the mid 1990s and Congress unwittingly agreed. The provision that required the money to be used for an illegal purpose before the crime of Currency Structuring could be charged was taken out. Several of the congressional members on the committee that considered this new law asked representatives of the US Attorney's Office if this proposed law wasn't ‘a bit too broad, sweeping into its ambit legal, legitimate business conduct as well as the illegal use of currency.’ The reply from the US Attorney's Office was (and now I am paraphrasing): 'Oh, you can trust us...we’re from the Gov’t, we would never try to use this law against an innocent person.' What was Congress thinking?
So, as to David’s case, unless we appeal the 10 year sentence, or appeal the misconduct of the Gov't in charging David with crimes that involve innocent conduct in what is known as a “2255 Proceeding,” or prove that his attorneys were incompetent based on what is known as ‘ineffective assistance of counsel’, or we are able to show that the Currency Structuring conviction was unconstitutional, David will have to serve out the full remaining ten year sentence. He has already served almost five years now on these false and fraudulent charges.
But, take heart and we glory in the grace of a favorable decision in the Solicitation case. There still is some justice in America. We are so relieved to see that part of the total 43 year sentence has been striped away. That is, the conviction for Solicitation and its 33 year sentence was reversed and it is a clean reversal, no new trial is required, unless the Gov't should overturn the reversal on appeal. There are two levels at which the Gov't now can attack the reversal of the solicitation case, first, to an en banc hearing before one of the two, 24 member panels of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and second, to the US Supreme Court.
Our work is not done yet, but we pray that the Lord will guide our minds, thoughts and hands as we attempt to protect the innocent, such as David, from the tyranny of the forces of wickedness within our Gov't.
May God continue to bless America and may he bless David Hinkson in his cause to liberate himself from the false and fraudulent prosecution, conviction and sentence imposed upon him by a wicked and adulterous generation of US Gov't workers who have conspired to take away his freedom.
Tell your readers to open their eyes, before it is too late and demand that their Congressman and Senators repeal such laws as Currency Structuring, otherwise, who knows who will be next. It is like getting a ticket and being punished for running a green light.
There is no defense to this kind of tyranny if Congress has made illegal that which is clearly legal. We no longer have freedom, if a person can be imprisoned for taking their own money out of their own bank account and using that money to pay their lawful debts, none of us are safe. That is what they did to David Hinkson and we need to call them on it before it is too late. Every candidate must be asked, where do you stand on the Currency Structuring law and all laws that allow the Gov't to prosecute as criminal, conduct which is innocent.
Wes Hoyt
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
To those who do not know, Carol is a retired Catholic Nun who, a few years ago, served on a jury in Idaho County, Idaho and dared to vote 'not guilty' along with two other jurors on a case for a man charged with a crime when there was no evidence connecting him to the crime. How dare she do that? The Attorney General of Idaho prosecuted her for perjury because she did not disclose to the judge during jury selection that she might use her moral agency to vote to acquit someone who was innocent. This was a deeply held belief that she had and according to the prosecution, it was a crime for her not to reveal this “secret” so that she could have been removed during jury selection by the prosecution. When I defended her on this heinous offense, the punishment for which could have been 14 years in prison, the case was dismissed because the prosecution's chief witness (another juror on the same case) actually stated on the witness stand, "I always believe law enforcement and I do what ever they tell me to do." She was then asked, did you tell the judge that you were biased in favor of the Gov't during jury selection? Well, she said 'of course not, that's just my little secret.' So I asked the Attorney General if he was going to prosecute this other juror for perjury because she did not confess her moral convictions during jury selection. What an irony and what an embarrassment. Carol’s case and David’s case show that the Gov’t is attacking the innocent in order to control them.
What are they thinking?
Law Offices of Wesley W. Hoyt
333 W. Hampden Ave., Suite 710
Englewood, CO 80110-2335
Ph: (303) 806-8886
Fx: (303) 806-8882
Cell: (303) 819-7400
Toll Free: (800) 220-4698
E-Mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
To: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Praise God indeed, Wesley ! ! ! ! !
Wow - Congratulations to you and the other lawyer for all your tireless work to help bring about this victory! Jack McLamb CAN'T WAIT to get Roland on for a radio interview, if he will be available for such! We hope you all can sue the pants off every person and agency of government responsible for the crimes against David and his family.
Thank You for letting us know.
Carol
Well, P.S.: Just after writing the above, I phoned another friend, Stan Celmer, to see if he had heard the good news and he had, from Joe Volk earlier today, who, in turn, had gotten the news from David's Dad, Roland. But here's why I'm writing this add-on: Stan had understood that it was the 33 year (Swisher-connected) conviction that got reversed, but that David would still have to remain to serve out the balance (5 years or so more?) of the separate 10-yr. sentence having to do with a banking/check-writing charge. If not too much trouble, Wesley, could you confirm or clarify this for us? Thank You very much. My warm regards to Sandra!
Response from Wes Hoyt (Dave's Legal Council) to Carol
Dear Carol:
Glad you asked. I was in such a hurry yesterday with all the other demands but I knew you would want to know that David's conviction for Solicitation of murder and 33 years of his prison sentence was reversed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, so I gave you the short version. The full version is that David was also convicted of Currency Structuring which carries a 10 yr sentence. There was not crime committed because all of the evidence showed and all of the witnesses testified that he used the money for payroll; I mean all the evidence, even the testimony of the Gov't witnesses; they did not have a case! The problem was that there was a move to get a conviction at any cost so the trial judge failed to instruct the jury on the so called “Payroll Defense.”
It is supposed to be a complete defense to criminal charges of Currency Structuring that a businessman used cash-money (currency) withdrawn from his bank account to pay his employees. This is what is known as the “Payroll Defense” but it is buried in IRS regulations, rather than being on the face of the law. Early in the case against David, the first trial judge, who was replaced by Richard C. Tallman, ruled that if there was any evidence that the cash taken out of David’s account was being used to pay David’s payroll, David would be entitled to a jury instruction telling the jury they could not convict David of Currency Structuring unless it was proven he also used currency from his bank account for some illegal purpose.
Originally, the Currency Structuring law was interpreted by the courts that way, but was changed because the lobbyists for the Gov’t insisted the law be amended in the mid 1990s and Congress unwittingly agreed. The provision that required the money to be used for an illegal purpose before the crime of Currency Structuring could be charged was taken out. Several of the congressional members on the committee that considered this new law asked representatives of the US Attorney's Office if this proposed law wasn't ‘a bit too broad, sweeping into its ambit legal, legitimate business conduct as well as the illegal use of currency.’ The reply from the US Attorney's Office was (and now I am paraphrasing): 'Oh, you can trust us...we’re from the Gov’t, we would never try to use this law against an innocent person.' What was Congress thinking?
So, as to David’s case, unless we appeal the 10 year sentence, or appeal the misconduct of the Gov't in charging David with crimes that involve innocent conduct in what is known as a “2255 Proceeding,” or prove that his attorneys were incompetent based on what is known as ‘ineffective assistance of counsel’, or we are able to show that the Currency Structuring conviction was unconstitutional, David will have to serve out the full remaining ten year sentence. He has already served almost five years now on these false and fraudulent charges.
But, take heart and we glory in the grace of a favorable decision in the Solicitation case. There still is some justice in America. We are so relieved to see that part of the total 43 year sentence has been striped away. That is, the conviction for Solicitation and its 33 year sentence was reversed and it is a clean reversal, no new trial is required, unless the Gov't should overturn the reversal on appeal. There are two levels at which the Gov't now can attack the reversal of the solicitation case, first, to an en banc hearing before one of the two, 24 member panels of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and second, to the US Supreme Court.
Our work is not done yet, but we pray that the Lord will guide our minds, thoughts and hands as we attempt to protect the innocent, such as David, from the tyranny of the forces of wickedness within our Gov't.
May God continue to bless America and may he bless David Hinkson in his cause to liberate himself from the false and fraudulent prosecution, conviction and sentence imposed upon him by a wicked and adulterous generation of US Gov't workers who have conspired to take away his freedom.
Tell your readers to open their eyes, before it is too late and demand that their Congressman and Senators repeal such laws as Currency Structuring, otherwise, who knows who will be next. It is like getting a ticket and being punished for running a green light.
There is no defense to this kind of tyranny if Congress has made illegal that which is clearly legal. We no longer have freedom, if a person can be imprisoned for taking their own money out of their own bank account and using that money to pay their lawful debts, none of us are safe. That is what they did to David Hinkson and we need to call them on it before it is too late. Every candidate must be asked, where do you stand on the Currency Structuring law and all laws that allow the Gov't to prosecute as criminal, conduct which is innocent.
Wes Hoyt
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Background on Carol
by Wes Hoyt
To those who do not know, Carol is a retired Catholic Nun who, a few years ago, served on a jury in Idaho County, Idaho and dared to vote 'not guilty' along with two other jurors on a case for a man charged with a crime when there was no evidence connecting him to the crime. How dare she do that? The Attorney General of Idaho prosecuted her for perjury because she did not disclose to the judge during jury selection that she might use her moral agency to vote to acquit someone who was innocent. This was a deeply held belief that she had and according to the prosecution, it was a crime for her not to reveal this “secret” so that she could have been removed during jury selection by the prosecution. When I defended her on this heinous offense, the punishment for which could have been 14 years in prison, the case was dismissed because the prosecution's chief witness (another juror on the same case) actually stated on the witness stand, "I always believe law enforcement and I do what ever they tell me to do." She was then asked, did you tell the judge that you were biased in favor of the Gov't during jury selection? Well, she said 'of course not, that's just my little secret.' So I asked the Attorney General if he was going to prosecute this other juror for perjury because she did not confess her moral convictions during jury selection. What an irony and what an embarrassment. Carol’s case and David’s case show that the Gov’t is attacking the innocent in order to control them.
What are they thinking?
Law Offices of Wesley W. Hoyt
333 W. Hampden Ave., Suite 710
Englewood, CO 80110-2335
Ph: (303) 806-8886
Fx: (303) 806-8882
Cell: (303) 819-7400
Toll Free: (800) 220-4698
E-Mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it