- 19 -
without revealing that Respondent had fraudulently
obtained “jurisdiction” over them.
3. The same counsel for Respondent, who obtained
the fraudulent settlement from Petitioners, Kenneth
McWade also, with others, committed a further series of
frauds on the Court in the related consolidated
Kersting test cases of Petitioners Thompsons and
Cravens, and the settlement of the cases of non-test
case petitioner Denis Alexander.
4. The fraud on the Court regarding the specifics
pertaining to Petitioners Richards was undiscovered
until the facts were partially admitted in a letter
from IRS Special Trial Attorney to Petitioner's counsel
on September 3, 1996.
1 Petitioners do not agree with Judge Goffe's
decision regarding Kersting investors' standing under
the Fourth Amendment to contest the illegal search and
seizure (Dixon v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 237 (1988));
however, these Motions do not per se include any claim
of Petitioners' Fourth Amendment rights being violated.
Mr. Jones' affidavit in support of petitioners' Motion for
Reconsideration includes a statement that Mr. Jones is attempting
to obtain an affidavit submitted by an IRS employee to the Court
“in a related proceeding” purportedly stating that the materials
seized from Mr. Kersting were not used in the preparation of
notices of deficiency issued to Kersting investors--a statement
that would be inconsistent with statements made in Ms. Wynne's
letter dated September 3, 1996.
We have considered petitioners' various contentions, and we
are not persuaded that they have satisfied their heavy burden of
particularized pleading and proof that the stipulated decision
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011