- 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