Kent Hovind has been imprisoned for 10 years, now for the "crime" of "structuring". Which the IRS has just apologized to America for prosecuting people for. There is no such thing as the crime of structuring but the IRS has used it to extort 2.5 billion dollars from American citizens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC54v-P7Mic
[SIZE=large]In late summer of 2014 the IRS apologized for seizing bank accounts from otherwise law-abiding business owners, simply because they structured bank transactions to avoid federal reporting requirements. That allowed them to avoid reporting requirements designed to catch drug dealers and money launderers. Kent Hovind was NOT convicted of tax evasion, but STRUCTURING.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Structuring is when anyone would routinely make bank deposits or withdrawals of less than $10,000. Banks are not required to report transactions of less than $10,000. If you have a bank account, and have put in less than 10,000, or withdrawn less than 10,000, you too could be found as guilty as Kent Hovind of structuring. It is all just a matter of SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT. Having been found to be abusing the structuring laws,
and illegally confiscating 2,500 million dollars, the IRS has apologized. The IRS is changing its policies to prevent the seizures, as long as the money came from legal means.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]However, Kent Hovind has had everything confiscated and is STILL now serving his 100th month for the alleged crime of STRUCTURING. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]The average time served for those convicted guilty of tax evasion on amounts 1000 times larger than Kent Hovind, serve an average of 14 months. Finding no way to keep Kent Hovind more than a couple of more months on the original charges, the same corrupt justice department and court system has put together new false charges against Kent Hovind, in which he is to appear for trial now scheduled for March 2, 2015. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Kent Hovind has been assigned a public defender. I want you to be able to see these motions, which Kent Hovind has probably NOT YET SEEN, but Rudy Davis did read them to Kent. Otherwise Kent would know nothing of these new motions of the prosecution. Yet, the court assigned public defender for Kent’s case has already told the court that Kent does NOT object to these motions. When Kent heard the motions, NO, he does NOT agree with them, and YES, Kent does object. You may hear what Kent had to say about these motions. It is rather obvious that the court, and the public defender assigned to Kent’s case, as well as the prosecution and/or persecution team do NOT want Kent to have any defense against them putting Kent in prison for up to another 100 years.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]You may hear Kent Hovind discuss these most recent motions of the prosecution in the CASE NO. 3:14cr91/MCR scheduled to be tried in Pensacola County Florida March 2, 2015,
at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC54v-P7Mic[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]This is the first Kent Hovind had heard of the new motions of the persecution, and you can hear Kent's response from his jail cell. Understand that Kent’s court assigned public defender had told Kent he is and will be out of town, and had told Kent NOTHING of these charges, and had already told the court that Kent did NOT object to these motions.
Here are the new motions –[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Filed February 17, 2015[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]PENSACOLA DIVISION[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]UNITED STATES OF AMERICA[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]v. CASE NO. 3:14cr91/MCR[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]KENT E. HOVIND[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]and[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]PAUL JOHN HANSEN[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]GOVERNMENT’S MOTIONS IN LIMINE (excerpts)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]ONE THROUGH FOUR[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]COMES NOW the United States of America and files its Motions in Limine One through Four. At this time the government moves in limine and asks that defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses be prohibited from making the following types of arguments, suggestions, and claims during the course of the trial (including jury selection, opening statements, testimony, and closing argument).[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number One[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Jury Nullification – The government moves, in limine, to limit the introduction of evidence or argument suggesting jury nullification, that is, the jury members’ power to disregard their oaths and decide the case without regard to the Court’s instructions thereon. Such jury nullification arguments and efforts to introduce evidence in support of such arguments are improper.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]In Trujillo, 714 F.2d at 105-06, we concluded that a criminal defendant is unentitled to a jury instruction which alerts the jury of its de facto power and, further, that defense counsel may not argue jury nullification during closing argument. Because the jury enjoys no right to nullify criminal laws, and the defendant enjoys a right to neither a nullification instruction nor a nullification argument to the jury, the potential for nullification is no basis for admitting otherwise irrelevant evidence.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]The government specifically seeks to prohibit counsel, the defendants, and defense witnesses from making any reference to the possible punishments that could be imposed and/or making statements to the following effect: the jury has the “power to determine the course of the fate of a human being,” or “don’t give the defendant a felony conviction, ” or “You have the power to say yes to the Government, you have the power to say no to the Government, and you have the power to take a man’s freedom away.”[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number Two[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Improper Argument Concerning Government’s Former Counsel – The government moves, in limine, to prohibit defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses from making any mention of prior allegations and/or claims against any prior Assistant U.S. Attorney who handled any portion of the cases against defendant Hovind.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number Three[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Improper Argument Concerning the Internal Revenue Service – The government moves, in limine, to prohibit defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses from making any mention of allegations against and/or alleged conduct of the Internal Revenue Service in Washington D.C. Allegations against and/or alleged conduct of the Internal Revenue Service in Washington D.C. and/or any of its employees is not relevant
to the defendants’ trial.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]None of the above is relevant to any fact that is of consequence in this case, and, even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the evidence is relevant, any relevance it has is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and confusion of the issues that admission of the evidence would create. Therefore, mention of such should be prohibited pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence, Rules 401 and 403.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number Four[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Improper Argument Concerning Policy and/or Changes in Policy – The government moves, in limine, to prohibit defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses from making any mention of policies and/or changes in policy of the United States or any agency thereof, i.e. the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Justice, etc.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Policies of the United States, any agency thereof, and/or changes in (IRS) policy are not relevant to the defendants’ trial. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Policies of the United States Department of Justice are contained in the United States Attorneys’ Manual. The United States Attorneys’ Manual only provides internal department of Justice guidance, that is, it does not create any rights, and does not place any limitations on otherwise lawful litigative prerogatives of the Department of Justice.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Mention of Department of Justice policies and/or changes in Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service policies should be prohibited pursuant to the aforementioned authority and the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rules 401 and 403.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]WHEREFORE, the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney files these Motions in Limine with the Court.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Respectfully submitted,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]PAMELA C. MARSH (contact info: 850.444.4000 [email protected])[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]United States Attorney[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]/s/ Tiffany H. Eggers[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]TIFFANY H. EGGERS (contact info: 850.444.4000 [email protected])[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Assistant United States Attorney[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]END ------------[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Brethren, we have been standing up for Kent Hovind against this outrageous persecution, trying to put it in the light, since 2005. Thanks be to God, TRUTH about Kent’s case is finally beginning to get some traction. If your trusted news source has covered the persecution of Kent Hovind, then you can trust them. If they have remained silent about Kent Hovind – get a more trustworthy news source. We must NOW earnestly pray for our Brother in Bonds, Kent Hovind, at this time. His persecutors seek to put him away for another 100 YEARS with this new trial now set for March 2, 2015. THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE HIDDEN IN DARKNESS. Find out the truth regarding why Kent Hovind has spent 100 months behind bars. This new trial is to cover up the injustice of the selective enforcement persecution of Kent Hovind. Please pray and do what you can to put feet on your prayers.[/SIZE]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC54v-P7Mic
[SIZE=large]In late summer of 2014 the IRS apologized for seizing bank accounts from otherwise law-abiding business owners, simply because they structured bank transactions to avoid federal reporting requirements. That allowed them to avoid reporting requirements designed to catch drug dealers and money launderers. Kent Hovind was NOT convicted of tax evasion, but STRUCTURING.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Structuring is when anyone would routinely make bank deposits or withdrawals of less than $10,000. Banks are not required to report transactions of less than $10,000. If you have a bank account, and have put in less than 10,000, or withdrawn less than 10,000, you too could be found as guilty as Kent Hovind of structuring. It is all just a matter of SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT. Having been found to be abusing the structuring laws,
and illegally confiscating 2,500 million dollars, the IRS has apologized. The IRS is changing its policies to prevent the seizures, as long as the money came from legal means.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]However, Kent Hovind has had everything confiscated and is STILL now serving his 100th month for the alleged crime of STRUCTURING. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]The average time served for those convicted guilty of tax evasion on amounts 1000 times larger than Kent Hovind, serve an average of 14 months. Finding no way to keep Kent Hovind more than a couple of more months on the original charges, the same corrupt justice department and court system has put together new false charges against Kent Hovind, in which he is to appear for trial now scheduled for March 2, 2015. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Kent Hovind has been assigned a public defender. I want you to be able to see these motions, which Kent Hovind has probably NOT YET SEEN, but Rudy Davis did read them to Kent. Otherwise Kent would know nothing of these new motions of the prosecution. Yet, the court assigned public defender for Kent’s case has already told the court that Kent does NOT object to these motions. When Kent heard the motions, NO, he does NOT agree with them, and YES, Kent does object. You may hear what Kent had to say about these motions. It is rather obvious that the court, and the public defender assigned to Kent’s case, as well as the prosecution and/or persecution team do NOT want Kent to have any defense against them putting Kent in prison for up to another 100 years.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]You may hear Kent Hovind discuss these most recent motions of the prosecution in the CASE NO. 3:14cr91/MCR scheduled to be tried in Pensacola County Florida March 2, 2015,
at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC54v-P7Mic[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]This is the first Kent Hovind had heard of the new motions of the persecution, and you can hear Kent's response from his jail cell. Understand that Kent’s court assigned public defender had told Kent he is and will be out of town, and had told Kent NOTHING of these charges, and had already told the court that Kent did NOT object to these motions.
Here are the new motions –[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Filed February 17, 2015[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]PENSACOLA DIVISION[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]UNITED STATES OF AMERICA[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]v. CASE NO. 3:14cr91/MCR[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]KENT E. HOVIND[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]and[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]PAUL JOHN HANSEN[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]GOVERNMENT’S MOTIONS IN LIMINE (excerpts)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]ONE THROUGH FOUR[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]COMES NOW the United States of America and files its Motions in Limine One through Four. At this time the government moves in limine and asks that defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses be prohibited from making the following types of arguments, suggestions, and claims during the course of the trial (including jury selection, opening statements, testimony, and closing argument).[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number One[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Jury Nullification – The government moves, in limine, to limit the introduction of evidence or argument suggesting jury nullification, that is, the jury members’ power to disregard their oaths and decide the case without regard to the Court’s instructions thereon. Such jury nullification arguments and efforts to introduce evidence in support of such arguments are improper.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]In Trujillo, 714 F.2d at 105-06, we concluded that a criminal defendant is unentitled to a jury instruction which alerts the jury of its de facto power and, further, that defense counsel may not argue jury nullification during closing argument. Because the jury enjoys no right to nullify criminal laws, and the defendant enjoys a right to neither a nullification instruction nor a nullification argument to the jury, the potential for nullification is no basis for admitting otherwise irrelevant evidence.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]The government specifically seeks to prohibit counsel, the defendants, and defense witnesses from making any reference to the possible punishments that could be imposed and/or making statements to the following effect: the jury has the “power to determine the course of the fate of a human being,” or “don’t give the defendant a felony conviction, ” or “You have the power to say yes to the Government, you have the power to say no to the Government, and you have the power to take a man’s freedom away.”[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number Two[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Improper Argument Concerning Government’s Former Counsel – The government moves, in limine, to prohibit defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses from making any mention of prior allegations and/or claims against any prior Assistant U.S. Attorney who handled any portion of the cases against defendant Hovind.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number Three[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Improper Argument Concerning the Internal Revenue Service – The government moves, in limine, to prohibit defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses from making any mention of allegations against and/or alleged conduct of the Internal Revenue Service in Washington D.C. Allegations against and/or alleged conduct of the Internal Revenue Service in Washington D.C. and/or any of its employees is not relevant
to the defendants’ trial.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]None of the above is relevant to any fact that is of consequence in this case, and, even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the evidence is relevant, any relevance it has is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and confusion of the issues that admission of the evidence would create. Therefore, mention of such should be prohibited pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence, Rules 401 and 403.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Motion in Limine Number Four[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Improper Argument Concerning Policy and/or Changes in Policy – The government moves, in limine, to prohibit defense counsel, the defendants, and any defense witnesses from making any mention of policies and/or changes in policy of the United States or any agency thereof, i.e. the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Justice, etc.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Policies of the United States, any agency thereof, and/or changes in (IRS) policy are not relevant to the defendants’ trial. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Policies of the United States Department of Justice are contained in the United States Attorneys’ Manual. The United States Attorneys’ Manual only provides internal department of Justice guidance, that is, it does not create any rights, and does not place any limitations on otherwise lawful litigative prerogatives of the Department of Justice.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Mention of Department of Justice policies and/or changes in Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service policies should be prohibited pursuant to the aforementioned authority and the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rules 401 and 403.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]WHEREFORE, the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney files these Motions in Limine with the Court.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Respectfully submitted,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]PAMELA C. MARSH (contact info: 850.444.4000 [email protected])[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]United States Attorney[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]/s/ Tiffany H. Eggers[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]TIFFANY H. EGGERS (contact info: 850.444.4000 [email protected])[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Assistant United States Attorney[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]END ------------[/SIZE]
[SIZE=large]Brethren, we have been standing up for Kent Hovind against this outrageous persecution, trying to put it in the light, since 2005. Thanks be to God, TRUTH about Kent’s case is finally beginning to get some traction. If your trusted news source has covered the persecution of Kent Hovind, then you can trust them. If they have remained silent about Kent Hovind – get a more trustworthy news source. We must NOW earnestly pray for our Brother in Bonds, Kent Hovind, at this time. His persecutors seek to put him away for another 100 YEARS with this new trial now set for March 2, 2015. THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE HIDDEN IN DARKNESS. Find out the truth regarding why Kent Hovind has spent 100 months behind bars. This new trial is to cover up the injustice of the selective enforcement persecution of Kent Hovind. Please pray and do what you can to put feet on your prayers.[/SIZE]