- 12 -
disarray. Id. The Department of Justice lost many other
records. Id. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
held that the gallery's inability to produce the books and
records which the Government seized and did not return was not a
sufficient reason to reject the gallery's claim of loss. Id. at
1342. Andrew Crispo is distinguishable from the present case
because the Government did not lose petitioners' records;
petitioners lost the records.
Petitioners introduced a bridge toll receipt, a supermarket
receipt, a notary receipt, six handwritten notes, and 10
questionnaires to show that they used their car for the living
trust activity from May to December 1991. All the receipts
petitioners introduced had "LT" marked on them. The six
handwritten notes listed names, numbers, addresses, and some
directions. One of the notes and the supermarket receipt were
dated June 15, 1991. Of the 10 questionnaires, 4 sought members
for a financial support group sponsored by petitioners. Those
four questionnaires indicated that petitioners called the person
on May 6, 1991. The other six asked the individual responding
if he or she understood a presentation about the living trusts.
Those six were dated June 15, 1991.
Petitioners listed, on one of their exhibits, what they
claim are income and expenses of the trust activity. Petitioners
listed six expenses. There were entries dated March 11, April 1,
and June 27, 1991, and three dated June 15, 1991. The six
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011