Patricia G. McCulley - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         
          petitioner were in the midst of a fractious divorce.  Apparently            
          in an effort to hurt petitioner (or at least to gain the upper              
          hand) Griffith reported petitioner to the authorities.  Griffith            
          physically, mentally, and emotionally abused petitioner during              
          the entire course of their relationship.  Moreover, Griffith had            
          other credibility issues.  In 1989, Griffith, a securities                  
          broker, was fined and barred from the National Association of               
          Securities Dealers (NASD) for converting the funds of three                 
          different clients to his own use.                                           
               We also note that respondent afforded Griffith innocent                
          spouse protection for 1985, despite the fact that he co-signed              
          the joint return with full knowledge of the embezzled funds.  If            
          the agent had spoken to petitioner, he would have known that                
          Griffith knew petitioner was stealing before he married her, that           
          the stealing continued throughout their marriage, and that                  
          Griffith never asked petitioner to stop.                                    
               We also find misleading respondent's characterization of               
          petitioner's "refusal to sign" an amended return prepared by her            
          ex-husband's accountant as further evidence of her intent to                
          willfully evade her Federal income tax for the years in issue.              
          It was Griffith, not Agent Johnson, who asked petitioner to sign            
          the amended return.  At that time the couple was in the middle of           
          a difficult divorce, and her refusal to trust Griffith was not              
          unreasonable.  Moreover, Griffith's accountant testified that he            
          had prepared the amended return exclusively on information                  

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011