Saturday, March 15, 2008


I always felt that the so-called ‘leaders’ in the tax revolution were missing the point. Then came Whitey Harrell and Venice Kuglin with notable acquittals. Why were they acquitted?

Because they did not try to tell the court, what the law was. They were acquitted because they put on a “Good Faith Belief defense”, that they had not violated a ‘Known Legal Duty’. And it was this known legal duty, which the prosecutors (in both cases) did not identify to the Court in their complaint or in open court, the judges (in both cases) would not identify to the jury, when they were requested it! SHOW ME THE LAW!

This type of defense first accomplishes two things:
(1) It maintains your presumption of innocence; and
(2) It keeps the burden of proof on the prosecutor. That’s pretty simple.

Do I believe the prosecutor will ever tell the Court what provision of the internal revenue code imposes the “legal duty” on you to pay a personal federal income tax? NO! Because if he does, he will have stated a claim on which the court cannot grant relief and the judge will have to dismiss the case on that basis or, for lack of jurisdiction.

Do I believe the judge will ever identify to the jury, the known legal duty? NO! Because, that known legal duty has never been presented with the “full” law of the case, by the prosecution, he can not give it to the jury, even if they request it. And since you are not the complaining party, you are not authorized to do it either.

Bottom line is. In a criminal indictment, based on violations of the Internal Revenue Code. Relative to personal federal individual income tax, the indictment – HAS NOT ACTUALLY CHARGED YOU WITH “ANY” CRIME!

Both the prosecutor and the judge know this. That is why they will never identify the law that “made you liable”, but the prosecution will move only on “implied presumption of a known legal duty! Please remember that I, Robert B. Graham Sr., am not an attorney, and you should seek one and run this information buy him/her to check out!

People like Larken Rose and his wife along with Dick Simkanen and Lynn Merideth made assertive claims and affirmative defenses based on what they perceived the law to be, or they made judgements regarding the law and its application to them. This is not your job but the court’s job!