-Caveat Lector-

..............................................................

>From the New Paradigms Project [Not Necessarily Endorsed]
Note:  We store 100's of related "conspiracy posts" at:
http://www.msen.com/~lloyd/oldprojects/recentmail.html

From: "Lloyd Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Legal Scholars Say Government Regs. Led to Boston Shootings
Date: Friday, December 29, 2000 5:33 AM

http://www.sierratimes.com/arvc122900.htm

Legal Scholars Say Government Regs. Led to Boston Shootings
By Sierra Times - Posted: 12.29.00
Government’s Warrantless Search & Attempted Warrantless Seizure Leads to Shooting 
Rampage; Boston Again the Scene of Tax Revolt; Legal Scholar Says Government Evasion 
of Constitutional Requirements for Tax Searches and Seizures Led to Killings

Reports indicate an employee of a Boston Internet consulting firm shot and killed 
seven co-workers who apparently participated in plans to honor warrantless government 
searches for and seizures of the employee’s earnings, accrued and future.

The law, constitutional and statutory, requires a Fourth Amendment warrant, executive 
or judicial, for tax searches and seizures, but the IRS has routinely operated without 
them, provoking an outcry, producing litigation, and fomenting office stress that has 
now resulted in violence. "Without a valid warrant, no legally valid proof of a tax 
debt exists," said Virginia L. Cropsey, J.D., a graduate of Wayne State University 
School of Law and the University of Michigan, and author of an Internet newsletter and 
new website that expose the legal insufficiency of IRS notices of levy.

"The Fourth Amendment accords protection to a person’s "effects," Cropsey says, "and 
that includes a person’s accounts receivable." The Fourth Amendment was inspired by 
the 1761 speech in Boston against the writs of assistance by James Otis, an attorney 
engaged by the merchants of Boston. British issuance of the writs of assistance, which 
are similar to the current IRS "process" led to the Revolutionary War. A young John 
Adams, later second President of the United States, heard the Otis speech and was 
inspired to draft a provision, Article XIV, for the 1780 Massachusetts Declaration of 
Rights, which later became the basic language for the Fourth Amendment, Cropsey says. 
At the time of the construction of the Bill of Rights, Richard Henry Lee, Senator from 
Virginia, and an ancestor of Robert E. Lee, saw to it the word "effects" rather than 
"possessions" was used in the Fourth Amendment, so that accounts receivable, which 
would include the apparent shooter, Michael McDermott’s!
  earnings, have Fourth Amendment protection.

This means, and the 4th and 5th Amendment pre-judgment seizure case law shows, that a 
warrant is required, according to Cropsey. Additionally, wages are special property 
for purposes of pre-judgment seizure under the Supreme Court decision in Sniadach v. 
Family Finance Corp. You can’t seize property for taxes in this country pre-judgment 
without a sworn statement, says Cropsey. "Certainly the government should have to 
swear the debt is owed and demonstrate probable cause for these searches and seizures. 
The IRS has no business writing your employer about you and interfering with your 
employment relations without proper authorization."


Recently Cropsey showed that the Fourth Amendment’s "no warrants" clause was intended 
by the Framers to require at a minimum, an executive branch warrant for tax seizures. 
“I call it ‘all about adjectives,’” said Cropsey. “I read the case law more carefully 
than most attorneys, and noted that the Supreme Court said in its 1977 opinion in GM 
Leasing that a judicial warrant was necessary for entry into private premises for tax 
seizures. I knew from the plain language of the Fourth Amendment, and from research I 
did on the 1762 case of Entick v. Carrington & Three Other King’s Messengers, a 
British sedition case, and from other research, that at least an executive branch 
warrant was necessary for other tax seizures. I’m a bit like the kid in “6th Sense” – 
I don’t see dead people, but I see something the others didn’t due to my careful 
reading of the Fourth Amendment’s 'no warrants' clause – I see executive branch 
warrants."

These executive branch warrants were held to be required for federal tax seizures. 
Pre-1954 case law exposed in a 1998 opinion in Williams v. Boulder Dam Credit Union by 
Clark County Nevada Magistrate Victor Miller held the executive branch warrant is 
required, Cropsey says. Cases concerning the issue of the warrant requirement are just 
beginning to make their way through the courts, she says. In order to avoid a Fourth 
Amendment test, the government does not cross the line and technically seize the 
property; it has not been using the language obfuscated case law says is required for 
seizure – "is seized and levied upon," according to Cropsey, who says she spent over 
1000 hours researching the issue and who has 60 pages briefed on the subject in the 
Michigan Court of Appeals, as well as on the question of whether private sector 
employers are required to withhold wages without a signed wage withholding order in 
effect.

"They used quite a few standard legal tricks. It was a textbook case of stealthy 
encroachment." The levy situation leaves banks and employers subject to suit on 
contracts, and without a defense that they honored a levy under 26 U.S.C. 6331 & 6332 
since no levy occurs, according to Cropsey. Cropsey’s briefs show the pre-1954 case 
law was continued in effect by Congress under the 1954 Code. Since then, a consumer 
snatch-back line of cases in the Supreme Court makes clear that the Due Process clause 
of the Fifth Amendment requires sworn statements for pre-judgment seizure. These 
standards also apply to federal tax seizures according to the Supreme Court, Cropsey 
says.

Cropsey says her research also shows future earnings aren’t property under state law, 
and therefore under 26 U.S.C. Sec. 6331, the federal tax levy statute, so the IRS 
cannot reach future earnings with current levy process as they currently do.

"The situation is despicable; every member of Congress, every President in modern 
times, bears responsibility for allowing this situation to occur," she says, and 
encourages citizens to write Congress and the President and demand the IRS obtain the 
warrants the Constitution requires for tax searches and seizures. The warrant is 
critical to show all the necessary procedures and laws have been complied with to 
allow the government to seize the property, she says. "One judge stated he’d never 
seen anything like what my research exposes in 23 years on the bench."

"The IRS can’t get a warrant for these tax seizures because no competent authority can 
swear the tax debt is due and owing. The Constitution prohibits direct taxes without 
apportionment. The government is avoiding a test of the Constitutionality of the 
income tax by not technically seizing the property. It’s a double-end run of the 
Constitution, one the framers Fourth Amendment language was written to prevent, and 
one which must end immediately," Cropsey said. "The IRS has engaged in a calculated 
campaign to intimidate attorneys, legislators and others who should have reported this 
situation into silence – the situation is grim."

The article submitted by Red Hen Resources - Troy, Michigan

 http://www.sierratimes.com/arvc122900.htm





Forwarded for info and discussion from the New Paradigms Discussion List,
not necessarily endorsed by:
***********************************

Lloyd Miller, Research Director for A-albionic Research a ruling
class/conspiracy research resource for the entire political-ideological
spectrum. **FREE RARE BOOK SEARCH: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> **
   Explore Our Archive:  <http://a-albionic.com/a-albionic.html>

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to