- 24 -
they relied on Mr. Clack's advice and that they did not know that
written identification was required and did not realize the
significance of the false, backdated letters. We believe,
however, that petitioner husband initiated the idea of backdating
documents and falsifying identification and, more importantly,
that petitioners knew their misrepresentations were fraudulent.
Mr. Clack maintains that it was petitioner husband's idea to
falsify documents. In late October 1989, petitioner husband
suggested backdating and falsifying a purchase offer and contract
for another property not ultimately purchased by petitioners in
order to fraudulently obtain section 1031 tax deferral. Mr.
Clack denies that he advised petitioners to falsify documents to
establish timely identification but admits that he assisted
petitioners in perpetuating this fraud. Mr. Clack provided a
backdated sample letter that petitioners used in soliciting the
Pleasant Hill and Skyland letters. Mr. Clack contends that he
believed that petitioners in fact had expressed an interest in
the Pleasant Hill and Skyland properties during September to Ms.
Love and Mr. Fivey and that he did not know that the letters were
false (other than being improperly backdated). Petitioners
received the sample letter from Mr. Clack before they expressed
interest in acquiring Pleasant Hill or Skyland. Most likely,
petitioners obtained the letter because they intended to create a
false impression that they had timely identified whatever
property they acquired.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011