Dr. Dino (aka Kent Hovind) - April's Fool???

[RLBaty]

Following are some of my comments posted elsewhere today after determining that Dr. Dino (aka Kent Hovind - Dinosaur Adventure Land proprietor and young-earth creation-science promoter) filed 5 separate motions to dismiss his criminal convictions in U.S. District Court last month (March 2010), making lengthy arguments and claiming reliance on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(b).

The Federal District Court quickly told Dr. Dino,

> Motion #1: "NO"!
> Motion #2: "NO"!
> Motion #3: "NO"!
> Motion #4: "NO"!
> Motion #5: "NO"!

-----------------------------------------

I suspect there is a back-story to Dr. Dino filing all of those motions to dismiss in his own name even though they were prepared by his "attorney".

I suspect part of that story involves the prospect that had any legitimate attorney filed such motions trying to use civil procedures to file a motion to dismiss in a crminal case, such attorney would be subject to disciplinary action.

So, for now, the person who actually prepared Dr. Dino's motions remains secret. I wouldn't be surprised if that person is the same person who recently filed his U.S. Tax Court petition.

This may be a sign as to how his Tax Court case is going to go; though the Tax Court case will probably move rather slowly.

The United States District Court wasted no time in disposing of all of Dr. Dino's motions to dismiss his criminal convictions.

Here's relevant information from the five separate ORDERS of the Court which were entered today:

> Filed: March 31, 2010
> Entered: April 1, 2010

> The relief requested is DENIED.

> Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules
> of Civil Procedure does not
> provide relief from judgment
> in a criminal case.

>> Signed: M. Casey Rodgers
>> United States District Judge

-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

[RLBaty]

1. Regarding Dr. Dino's pending U.S. Tax Court case!

Here's some information off the Internet on the person Dr. Dino has chosen to represent him in his pending U.S. Tax Court filing; Jerold W. Barringer:

------------------------------------

Tax Protester Dossiers; Gurus and Other Big Fish

Jerold W. Barringer

Background

A lawyer admitted to the bar in Illinois in 1983.

Theories Advocated/Promoted

Barringer has been involved with several cases in which it was claimed that Form 1040 does not comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act so no one can be penalized for failing to file a tax return.

Books, Web Sites, Videos, and Organizations

None known.

Court Actions

Barringer was censured by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2001 for filing a motion with accusations against a judge that Barringer either knew or should have known were false. In re Jerold Wayne Barringer, No. 00SH0080 (Ill. 9/21/2001).

In affirming the conviction of one of Barringer's clients, Judge Easterbrook of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals also critiqued Barringer's performance in the appeal:

> "Patridge's brief in the criminal appeal
> presents 19 issues, all frivolous. Many
> are in the style of tax-protest arguments
> that we might expect from a layman
> representing himself but do not expect
> to see in a brief filed by a member of
> the bar. <….> Jerold W. Barringer
> represented Patridge at trial, in the
> Tax Court, and during the three appeals
> to this court. He has performed below
> the standard of a pro se litigant; we
> have serious doubt about his fitness to
> practice law. The problem is not simply
> his inability to distinguish between
> plausible and preposterous arguments.
> It is his disdain for the norms of legal
> practice (19 issues indeed!) and the
> rules of procedure."

After citing several ways in which Barringer's brief did not comply with rules of practice, the court gave Barringer 14 days to show cause why he should not be sanctioned $10,000 for “frivolous arguments and noncompliance with the Rules” and why he should not be suspended from practice “until he demonstrates an ability to litigate an appeal competently and responsibly.” United States v. Denny R. Patridge, 507 F.3d 1092, 1094-95, 2007 TNT 221-11, Nos. 06-3635 and 06-3785 (7th Cir. 11/14/2007), cert. den., No. 07-1045 (U.S. 3/24/2008) (conviction for tax evasion affirmed).

Sanctions were in fact imposed, and the Supreme Court denied a petition for mandamus by Barringer seeking review. In re: Jerold W. Barringer, No. 07-1140 (S.C. 4/14/2008).

Barringer has also been sanctioned by the Tax Court and required to pay $4,725 for time spent by government lawyers responding to what the Tax Court described as "frivolous discovery requests" that amounted to "unreasonable and vexatious conduct" and conduct that was "reckless and in bad faith." Robert Powell v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-174, 2009 TNT 138-7, No. 18134-06L (7/21/2009) (sanctions of $25,000 were also imposed against Barringer's client for maintaining frivolous arguments).

Barringer represented Lindsey Springer in an unsuccessful appeal to the 10th Circuit in which the opinion of the court described Barringer's briefs as "ambiguous" and "far from a model of clarity."

Barringer also tried to raise new issues in a reply brief that the court refused to consider because the arguments were not raised in the initial brief. Lindsey K. Springer v. Commissioner, 2009 TNT 167-4, No. 08-9004 (10th Cir. 8/31/2009), aff'ng Tax Court No. 17707-06L (levy allowed to proceed for collection of taxes, penalties, and interest notwithstanding Paperwork Reduction Act claims; government's motion for sanctions denied).

Students/Disciples/Associates

Barringer has represented Gaylon Harrell, Jo Hovind (wife of Kent Hovind), and Lindsey Springer.

---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------

[RLBaty]

2. The Tax Court Dispute!

Courtesy of our friends at Quatloos in response to my inquiry thereat:

--------------------------

by Nikki
on Fri Apr 02, 2010

With respect to Dr DIgNOramus' latest Tax Court petition, the amount at issue, NOT including interest, is $3,334,315.35 covering tax years 1998 through 2006.

Nikki
Minstrel of the Mystical Moolooh

Posts: 3118
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:41 pm

---------------------------
---------------------------

The amount, if correct, is probably overstated quite a bit, of necessity, because Dr. Dino did not participate in good faith in trying to come up with a more appropriate amount.

[Christa]

3. Good job, Robert. nt

[RLBaty]

4. Re: The Tax Court Dispute!

Thanks Christa!

That $3,334,315.35 works out, on average, to the following:

Tax per year 1998-2006: $205,409.00

Fraud penaty (75%) per year 1998-2006: $154,057.00

Estimated tax penalty (5%) per year 1998-2006: $11,013.00

Total tax & penalty per year 1998-2006: $370,479.00

Total - $370,479.00 x 9 (rounded): $3,334,315.35

My guess is that with a little cooperation the amounts could be substantially reduced. But then again, Dr. Dino has yet to indicate a willingness to actually work in determining his income, expenses and resulting tax liability related thereto.

Time will tell how close my calculations are to what is actually being proposed.

Time will also tell whether or not Dr. Dino is prepared to cooperate in resolving the determination of his tax liabilities or if he'll "soldier on"!

[RLBaty]

5. Re: The Tax Court Dispute!

OK, Nikki has now provided specific details. Let's see if it will come through in proper form:

Code: Select all

Year Deficiency Section 6651(f) Section 6651(a)(2)* Section 6654

1998 $113,026.00 $ 81,943.85 $28,256.50 $ 5,130.06
1999 $195,708.00 $141,888.30 $48,927.00 $ 9,399.26
2000 $197,061.00 $142,426.98 $49,112.75 $10,562.41
2001 $155,216.00 $112,531.60 $38,804.00 $ 6,203.03
2002 $155,238.00 $111,920.43 $38,593.25 $ 5,155.49
2003 $136,545.00 $ 98,995.13 $34,136.25 $ 3,523.02
2004 $267,428.00 $193,885.30 $66,857.00 $ 7,663.70
2005 $298,640.00 $216,514.00 $65,700.80 $11,978.91
2006 $147,669.00 $107,060.03 $23,627.04 $ 6,988 26

Of course, statutory interest will effectively double the total liability, or more, so let's say Dr. Dino is looking at $7,000,000.00 or so!

Definitely a show to keep an eye on!

[RLBaty]

11. Re: Dr. Dino's wife also in Tax Court!

I noticed today that Dr. Dino's wife, Jo Hovind, also has a recently filed Tax Court case pending.

I was advised that she apparently got a notice similar to her husband's; for $3,000,000.00 +.

However, she has what a appears to be a legitimate lawyer to represent her interests in the case and is asking for Tampa as the for her trial.

Not unusual for the government to propose the same liabiility to both parties in such a situation in order to insure that, in the final analysis, one or the other gets charged with the tax.

We'll have to watch and see how it plays out.

[struggle4progress]

6. Well, golly gee! Better luck next time, Dr. Dino! I mean, nobody could have foreseen that the US

government would be so nit-picky about tax fraud!

[charlie]

7. Looks like he's getting his Mo back

He was a weepy puddle the first couple of years in prison, which was a big turnaround from the swaggering badass who dared the Law to mess with him.

Fundie grifters are so wincingly shameless... and their supporters -- Hovind still has plenty of them -- are so spectacularly DUMB. He'll be back.

[RLBaty]

8. He'll be back?

Dr. Dino's Tax Court petition should be available in a few days, and it should make for some interesting reading regarding Dr. Dino's state of mind regarding the government and personal tax matters.

He'll be back, but not in a form some may be hoping for.

[RLBaty]

9. Maybe Hovind didn't get the news????

One of the posters to my discussion list provides the following update:

> Kent Hovind had a blog entry at his
> CSE blog earlier today in which he
> was discussing how he was going about
> showing the government had failed to
> follow procedures in his case and he
> had filed 5 new appeals on that basis.
> His analogy was a runner who hit a home
> run and failed to touch first base.
>
> I posted an entry on the blog pointing
> out that all of his new appeals were
> dismissed because he was trying to apply
> the rules of civil court in his criminal
> case.
>
> His blog entry disappeared.
>
> Wonder why???

Neato!

Sometimes it pays to get out in front of a story like I helped the poster to do by noting the Court's speedy dismissal of the Hovind motions.

[RLBaty]

10. What Hovind didn't want you to see!

Another poster elsewhere has now provided us with that now-deleted boasting from Dr. Dino:

-----------------------------------------

Case Update—The Home Run!
0 Comments

Date Sent: 3-20-10
Date Posted: 4-5-2010

Case Update—The Home Run!

Thank you for all those who have prayed, fasted, and supported us during this 3½ year ordeal! Without your support, it would have been impossible to make it.

As most of you know, the Supreme Court declined to look at our case January 8. They only take 65± out of 11,000 each year. So-o-o-o, we are taking a different approach. A story will help: If you hit the baseball and run all the way around the bases, but miss touching first base, it is a home run unless the other team calls you on it. Before the next pitch is thrown, they can go touch first base and you are out—the run does not count. In a similar way, if the US Attorney or the government does not “touch all the bases” during each part of the indictment, arraignment, trial, and sentencing, they can later be challenged and the entire case dismissed as if it never happened.

It turns out, in our case, they missed every base so we are calling them on each one!

Issues in the case, like right or wrong, don’t matter for this stage of the game they play with people’s lives, only procedure. We have found and filed motions on five procedures so far that they did wrong with many more coming soon. Any one can overturn the case as if it never happened. I would go home, case dismissed, and they would return the money taken so far. (Unlike other motions, there is no time limit on these nor limit on the number of jurisdictional challenges. Maybe Luke 18:5 will kick in?!)

If the district judge does not rule in our favor, we will appeal to the 11th circuit and then to the Supreme Court for EACH issue. I will post the motions after this update. I would encourage you to look up the cases cited where they were overturned on issues exactly like mine. Many are “sure wins”—in Kansas—but this is OZ!

Once I am out the door and back home, I will tell the world about the people helping us research these issues. MANY people in prison can be helped in this same manner. Please pray that the district judge simply rules to release me. This could be done in 30 seconds; the camp would get the call to send me HOME! IMMEDIATE RELEASE! If she denies or stalls, the 11th Circuit or Supreme Court can force the issue.

This trial and prison time has been an eye opening experience! God has been so-o-o-o-o good to me in here and the ministry out there. Thanks again for your prayers and support.

Kent

-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

[Christa]

12. God has not been so good to him

It is the lifeblood of all those people giving him money so he can live a life of luxury.

[RLBaty]

13. Dr. Dino keeps plugging away!

In an action filed on April 15 and entered on April 16, Dr. Dino asks the Court to reconsider the dismissal of all his recently filed motions for a "get out of jail free" card.

Among other things, Dr. Dino claims:

> There are applicable exceptions to
> the rule that Federal Rule of Civil
> Procedure #60(b) cannot be used to
> dismiss the criminal case against
> him.

> Claims he is acting "pro se", as
> his own attorney, and should be
> afforded some consideration since
> he cannot be expected to navigate
> the legal system as a trained
> lawyer might.

(Courts do give special considerations to pro se litigants, but as a practical matter it is laughable that Dr. Dino wants us to think he is really acting pro se.)

> Claimed he has learned that his
> prior legal counsel was
> "incompetent, ineffective,
> ignorant, disloyal, and
> deceptive".

(Yeah, right, Dr. Dino didn't have any idea he was hiring a charlatan, NOT!)

We'll see if the Court is able to dispose of Dr. Dino's latest missive to the Court as easily and quickly as it did those five motions filed last month.

[RLBaty]

14. Another dead end for Dr. Dino (aka Kent Hovind)!

Not unexpectedly, the Federal District Court has again moved speedily to dispose of Dr. Dino's (aka Kent Hovind) latest motion for reconsideration, as follows:

---------------------------------------------

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing (motion
for reconsideration), it is Ordered this 16th
day of April, 2010, that:

The relief requested is DENIED.

M. Casey Rodgers
United States District Judge

Filed: 16th
Entered: 19th

---------------------------------------------