- 8 -
eventually followed on September 3, 2004, with the filing by
respondent of a motion under Rule 91(f) for an order to show
cause why proposed facts in evidence should not be accepted as
established. Therein respondent also updated the Court that as
of the date of the motion, no criminal investigation of
petitioner was being pursued. The Court granted respondent’s
motion and on September 7, 2004, issued to petitioner an order to
show cause in writing on or before September 27, 2004, why the
matters set forth in respondent’s proposed stipulation of facts
and accompanying exhibits should not be accepted as established.
On October 4, 2004, the Court received from petitioner a
response, postmarked timely, to the order to show cause. The
response reflected that petitioner objected to each stipulation,
other than the perfunctory statements identifying the notices of
deficiency and petitioner’s address, on grounds of the Fifth
Amendment. Petitioner also made the further objection that
copies of checks from GCE payable to petitioner were hearsay and
secondary evidence. In advocating the propriety of his Fifth
Amendment stance, petitioner placed particular reliance on United
States v. Nipper, 210 F. Supp. 2d 1259 (N.D. Okla. 2002). After
reviewing petitioner’s submissions, the Court on October 6, 2004,
issued an order making absolute the order to show cause and
deeming established for purposes of these cases the matters set
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011