- 7 -
unlawful,4 and the IRS is abusive. Furthermore, her conduct at
trial was highly improper. She refused to answer factual
questions during trial about how much money she earned, whether
she had ever filed a tax return, or whether she obtained tax
advice from anyone. Instead, petitioner persisted in repeating
her statements about the illegality of the Internal Revenue Code
and the oppression of the IRS toward her and all fellow citizens.
When the Court reprimanded her for wasting time on frivolous
arguments, petitioner simply restated her beliefs and accused the
Court of trying to silence her. Finally, when the Court denied
her objections as to the relevancy of respondent’s routine
questions and ordered her to answer, petitioner answered each
question with “I have amnesia; I don’t know.”
Petitioner was warned repeatedly that her arguments were
frivolous and that, if she continued in that vein, she would be
subject to an additional penalty. Furthermore, when respondent
moved to impose the penalty, the Court gave petitioner an
opportunity to file a reply brief. Petitioner’s reply brief,
however, simply reiterated the protester arguments she advanced
at trial. On this record, the Court grants respondent’s motion
4For example, petitioner attached a computer CD entitled A
Disturbing Expose’ of the United States Income Tax System to many
of her letters and affidavits.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011