AMERICAN PATRIOT NETWORK TAX FREEDOM NETWORK
Q Did you take civics in high school, Mr. Long?
A I don't recall sir. That's been a long time ago.
Q Okay. When you taught school, were there
civics teachers? I think it's called social studies now.
A Might be.
Q Were there social studies?
A Might be.
Q Did you-all have lounges?
A Lounges?
Q Yes.
A Yes, sir.
Q At the school? Teachers lounges?
A Uh-huh.
Q Would you sit around and talk with other
teachers?
A Not a lot because most of them smoke and I
don't smoke.
Q Would you sit around and talk a little bit?
A Little bit maybe.
Q Did you have bus duty?
A Occasionally.
Q Other teachers have bus duty too?
A Right.
Q And sometimes you-all would talk out there at
bus duty?
A Yeah.
Q Okay. Now, one of the things you learned, Mr.
Long, whether it was from your civics course or talking to
these teachers, was that the supreme law of the land is that
announced by the Supreme Court of the United States, isn't
it?
A I believe the supreme law of the land is the
Constitution, sir.
Q And who interpretes the Constitution?
A I guess the Supreme Court of the United States.
Q And in terms of federal requirements, federal
laws and federal requirements, the Supreme Court is the
ultimate authority on that next to the Constitution, isn't
it?
A Sounds reasonable.
Q That's 9th and 10th grade civics, isn't it?
A I guess. I don't know.
Q You don't need a master's degree to know that,
do you?
A Probably not.
Q And the fact that the State of Tennessee, the
Tennessee Supreme Court might say something doesn't mean
that that's binding on the United States Supreme Court or on
the United States Congress or the President or anybody else
in federal government, does it?
A No. It dosesn't mean it isn't either, sir.
Q Now, at any rate, you received another letter
in May of 1990, from the Internal Revenue Service again.
This is what, the fourth letter they have written to you?
A That sounds about right. Let me figure out
which one that is.
Q May, 15, 1990.
A I found it.
Q You received this letter?
A Yes, sir.
Q You read it?
A Looks like it.
Q And they told you that the responsibility of
the Internal Revenue Service is to administer the tax laws
passed by Congress?
A Yes, sir.
Q That didn't surprise you, did it?
A That's what it says. No, sir.
Q You knew that Congress passed laws?
A Right.
Q The IRS doesn't pass laws?
A Right.
Q I mean, Congress does that. The only thing
that the IRS can do is to enforce those laws that Congress
decides to pass.
A Okay.
Q And the President signs laws into effect,
doesn't he?
A Yes, sir, as far as I know.
Q Well, you picked that up in high school, didn't
you?
A I think that's right, yes, sir.
Q And the current federal tax law is the Internal
Revenue Code?
A That's correct.
Q And then they tell you that this code does not
define the general term "income." What they talk about is
gross income, not income, in the code?
A That's what it says, yes, sir.
Q That's what the letter says. And they say that
the term "gross income" is defined in a certain section?
A Yes, sir.
Q And this apparently is in response to some
questions that you had asked?
A Yes, sir. Some specific questions, yes, sir.
Q And then they say that wages, salaries and
other forms of compensation for services are included within
gross income and, therefore, are subject to the income tax
by law. That's what they said?
A That's what it says right there, yes, sir.
Q And that's what the letter said when you
received it?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you read that when you got it?
A Uh-huh.
Q And then the next thing says is that no federal
court has ever held otherwise?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you challenge that? Did you disbelieve
that?
A No, sir, I don't disbelieve that, for people
who are liable. But again, sir, I've asked to see the
section that makes me liable for this tax.
Q So when they said no federal court had ever
held otherwise, you believed them when they said it? You
did not disagree with that?
A No, sir, I don't disagree with that. For
people who are liable, obviously that would be true.
Q "In fact, the courts have repeatedly rejected
the argument that wages and other forms of compensation for
services are not subject to federal income tax, and have
found all those arguments confused, frivolous, and
meritless." Did you understand that when you received it?
A Yes, sir, for those cases that you're talking
about. If those people are liable for that tax, that would
be --
Q What we're talking about is you.
A No, sir. No, sir. No, sir, they're not
talking about me.
Q They sent the letter to Lloyd R. Long.
A Yes, sir. And I had specifically --
Q Not --
A -- asked them --
THE COURT: Wait a minute. One at a time.
Go ahead.
Q Who lives at this address, Mr. Long?
A That is my name, sir.
Q That is your name. Who lives at that address?
A I do.
Q You do. And you asked them some questions
about wages, didn't you?
A No, sir. I asked them about -- I explained to
them my situation, that I was working, contracting, which
I believe the Constitution plainly says we have an unlimited
right to contract.
Q And you were exchanging your services?
A I was exchanging my God-given time, talent and
knowledge with individuals for equal...
Q For equal compensation?
A Equal compensation, yes, sir.
Q And you didn't make a profit on it?
A No, sir.
Q And that's what you told them?
A Yes, sir.
Q And what they told you was that wages,
salaries, and other forms of compensation have to be
included on your income tax return?
A If I'm liable. They didn't say I was liable,
sir. They said that certain people who are liable, wages
and things, would be compensation. I believe that. That's
true. But they didn't tell me I was liable.
Q Okay. Are you finished?
A Excuse me.
Q Are you finished?
A I guess.
a Okay. What did you just say? If you're
liable? That's what they told you?
A No. I said if I'm liable.
Q They didn't say that?
A I asked them to tell me if I was liable, is
what I said.
Q They did not tell you, when they wrote back
they did not exclude certain people in their response? They
don't say, for those people who are liable, wages, salaries,
and other forms of compensation have to be included on the
tax return. The letter doesn't say that, does it?
A No, sir.
Q The letter is written to you?
A Yes, sir.
Q There are no exceptions? It doesn't say,
"Well, you might be in some special category. You might be
above the law or beyond on the law, so you don't meet this."
It doesn't say that, does it?
A It doesn't not say that, no, sir. Because my
question was am I liable.
Q It also doesn't say that you're a Martian, does
it? Does it?
A I guess not.
Q You didn't ask them if you were a Martian, did
you?
A Mr. Collier, that has nothing to do with this.
Q But answer the question.
A No, sir, I didn't ask them if I was a Martian,
no, sir.
Q It does not include any exceptions, does it?
If you see an exception there, tell us.
A The exception is, sir, that I've asked these
people --
Q Mr. Long, do you see an exception in this
letter? Let's do it easy. Is there an exception in
paragraph one?
A Well, let's read through it.
Q Is there an exception in paragraph one?
A "This is in reply to your letter concerning
federal tax laws."
Q Is there an exception in paragraph one? Yes or
no.
A I guess not.
Q Is there an exception in paragraph two?
A The only exception --
0 Is there an exception in paragraph two, sir?
Yes or no.
A No, sir.
Q Is there an exception in paragraph three?
A What are you meaning by exception?
Q Is there an exception in paragraph three, Mr.
Long?
A Can you explain to me what you mean by
exception, sir?
Q We got into this because you said this did not
apply to you.
A I don't think it does, sir. I don't believe it
does. And if it was written to someone that it doesn't
apply to, obviously there'd be no exceptions in it, sir.
Q After this you received one last letter, didn't
you?
A I suppose.
Q You suppose? You don't know?
A Well, I'm trying to see what you're showing me
here.
Q These are your exhibits.
A I know, but mine aren't quite as big.
Q This is dated February of 1991. So, we have
almost two years of letters. The first one was sometime in
'89 and the last one was in '91.
A Okay. I believe I'm with you. Yes, sir.
Q You received this letter?
A Yes, sir.
Q And they tell you that, and they refer back to
some previous correspondence that they've had with you,
"Compensation for services is subject to federal taxes. It
does not matter what state a person lives in. The federal
tax laws apply to individuals in all of the United States."
That's what they told you?
A That's what it says, yes, sir.
Q Did you think that applied to you, that
response?
A Sir, I've explained that all --
Q Yes or no?
THE COURT: You can answer yes or no and then
explain your answer.
Q Did you think that --
A No, sir, I didn't think that applied to me.
Q And then the letter says, "The fact that an
individual does not consider himself or herself a taxpayer
does not exempt that person from federal tax laws. Whether
an individual is liable for income taxes is determined under
the law."
A Under what law?
Q Well, they describe it here.
A What do they describe?
Q Internal Revenue Code, chapter 1, subchapter S,
Determination of Tax Liability, Part 1, Section l.
A Okay. But the Privacy Act says 6001, 6011 and
6012.
Q But the letter doesn't say that. We're talking
about the letter.
A Oh, excuse me.
Q That's what we're talking about.
A Yeah, that's what it says there, yes, sir.
Q And it says this particular law that they
discuss here imposes tax on all the taxable income of every
individual. You didn't believe that, did you?
A No, sir.
Q You thought they were wrong?
A I sure did. And I asked them to define
individual, tell me that I was an individual defined in that
code.
Q And you disagreed with them, didn't you?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, before you wrote this letter you already
knew about some of these statutes in some of these sections,
didn't you?
A I believe I stated that I had studied some of
those, yes, sir.
Q And you'd already made up your mind on what you
thought they meant, hadn't you?
A I had formed my beliefs, yes, sir.
Q And the fact that they wrote you this letter
saying something different didn't make any difference at all
to you, did it?
A It would've made a lot of difference if they
would've said yes or no.
Q well, if they'd agreed with you it would've
made a difference.
A Well, no, sir. If they'd just said that I was
liable, I would've believed I was liable.
Q Now, this next paragraph here, this is pretty
much what we've seen before. They talk about this same code
section, 6012?
A Yes, sir.
Q We talked about that before. And then this is
the first time since the very first letter where they talk
about voluntary compliance again. "The government expects
voluntary compliance with the federal tax law. This means
that we expect taxpayers to comply with the law without
being compelled to do so by action of a government agent.
It does not mean the taxpayer is free to disregard the law.
If an individual is required by law to file a return or pay
tax, it is mandatory that he or she do so. Failure to do so
could cause the individual to be subject to civil and
criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment."
A If an individual is liable for the tax or
required to file, sir. Right there, there's a big "if"
there, sir, a big "if."
Q Okay.
A "If an individual is required."
Q Well, someone who makes a hundred dollars, for
example, and who does not have to file an income return
obviously would not be covered by this. Someone who makes,
what is it, forty? How much did you make, forty-seven
thousand dollars?
A I believe so.
Q Forty-seven or forty-eight thousand dollars.
A I don't believe the liability is based on that,
sir. It's an excise tax, plain and simple. The Supreme
Court says it is. The state supreme court says it is.
Q Where do --
A And an excise is on privileges.
Q Where do you see the word "excise tax"?
A I don't see it on there. That's why I don't
believe that applies to me, sir
Q So, you disagree with everything that's in this
letter?
A Certainly. I asked for yes and nos and I
didn't get any.
Q Now, this exhibit that you offered into
evidence, Exhibit 1, what is that? Let's take Exhibit 1 and
Exhibit 2. Where did you get those things from?
A These were sent to our group.
Q Sent to "our" group? They weren't sent to you?
A No, sir.
Q How you get them then?
A Our group copied them. We shared them.
Q Wait, wait, wait. You got them from a person,
right?
A The person sent them to the group.
Q Who gave them to you?
A I believe I got them from a Ms. Libby
Dickerson.
Q And she's in your group?
A Yes, sir.
Q Where did she get them from?
A She got from, I think, a Mrs. Billy Murdock.
Q Is she in your group or is she in another
group?
A No, she's in another group.
Q What city is her group in?
A I'm not real sure, sir.
Q Is it in Tennessee?
A No, sir, it's not in Tennessee.
Q You're pretty sure it's outside of Tennessee?
A Yes, sir.
Q But you don't know in which one of the other 49
states --
A I sure don't.
Q How do you know she didn't make up those
documents?
A I don't know, sir.
Q For all you know, they could be fraudulent
then?
A Well, they appear to be from the Congressional
Research Service, sir. I mean, I didn't go up there and
find out, no. I didn't have time or the finances or the
economics either. That's why I'm asking simple questions.
And if the sections they're quoting here say that I'm liable
and I'm required, then why can't somebody say yes?
Q So, Exhibits 1 and 2, Defense Exhibits 1 and 2,
you really have no idea where they came from? They came
from some third person out of some third state?
A Yes, sir.
Q You don't even know what state it is?
A Right. And I really didn't have an opportunity
to go up there and check it, no, sir.
Q But someone in your group gave it to you and
told you what it was and you relied on it?
Well, basically I relied on it because it
established the facts that I'd already learned that the
United States Supreme Court had said, that the income tax is
an excise tax. That's what made it believable to me, sir.
And here's the government saying it is.
Q Because what's contained in those documents
agreed with your position, you decided to --
A It reinforced my position, yes, sir. Here's
the government saying it's an excise tax.
Q Now, Number 4, where did you get Number 4 from,
Exhibit No. 4?
A This was just a document that came to our group
and was passed around.
Q Who? Who did you get it from?
A I think it came from Ms. Dickerson.
Q And where did she get it from?
A I really don't know.
Q Now, look on the first page of that. Just open
up the cover.
A Uh-huh.
Q They talk about some people there at the
bottom. Do you see that? Who's the last name there?
A Irwin Schiff.
Q Irwin Schiff. Is that the same man who wrote
this (indicating)?
A I believe it is, sir.
Q Same man. So, once you saw that Mr. Schiff was
affiliated with this book, you didn't believe anything in
the book, did you?
A Are you saying that everything Irwin Schiff
said was garbage? Is that what you said a while ago?
Q I'm asking you. Do you think everything that
Mr. Schiff said is garbage?
A I don't think everything he said was garbage,
no, sir. He had a lot of things in there about the code
that was right on target.
Q The fact Mr. Schiff was also involved with
this, though, did not decrease your relying --
A I mean, when you say things, do you never make
errors or make mistakes?
Q How many times has Mr. Schiff been put in
prison?
A I don't know, sir. I don't know.
Q There's a big difference between making an
error and going to prison, isn't there?
A Well, how many times was the apostle Paul put
in prison, sir?
Q Well, you don't compare Irwin Schiff with the
apostle Paul, do you?
A No, sir. But I'm just saying Mr. Schiff may
have some good points too. The apostle Paul was a known
murderer, and he was converted and became one of the
greatest apostles that we read about.
Q The apostle Paul doesn't accuse the Supreme
Court of the United States of America of fraud and
corruption, does he?
A I'm not saying that, sir. I'm not saying that.
Q You really can't compare --
A You've been laying some groundwork here saying
that anybody that happens to go to jail is totally unworthy
of accepting anything they say, and I don't believe that.
Q well, it sure doesn't help their credibility,
does it?
A Well, it may not, but it doesn't mean
everything that they say is completely wrong, sir.
Q But it sure brings up some doubts about the
person, doesn't it?
A About the act that they did. I believe a
person is innocent until proven guilty. And once they're
proven guilty it's just for that crime, isn't it?
Q Mr. Schiff has been proven guilty at least
twice, hasn't he?
A I don't really know that. I just know he has
been, yes, sir. And that was because he was a corporation
and he was required to file.
Q Now, Exhibits 5, 6 and 7, where did you get
those?
A This annual report came in about basically the
same way. It was sent to us by probably Mrs. Billy Murdock.
Q And where did she get it from?
A I don't know. She does a lot of research. She
has time; a lot of us didn't. So, we'd swap this
information.
Q So, you don't know whether this is true or not'.
A I don't, sir. Do you know if it is or not?
THE COURT: Your role here is to answer
questions.
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
BY MR. COLLIER:
Q How about Number 6? Same thing?
A Internal Revenue Service. I just assumed it
was, sir, because it appears to be an official document.
Q But you don't know that? You did not go to any
official source and retrieve that yourself?
A I did go and check it, yes, sir. That's what
it said. "The mission of the Service is to encourage and
achieve the highest possible degree of voluntary
compliance."
Q Did you go to the Internal Revenue Service in
Washington, D. C?
A No, sir, I didn't do that, no, sir.
Q So, you did not verify it yourself?
A Not in Washington, D. C., no, sir. Is that the
only place I could verify it?
Q The Judge just told you --
A I'm sorry.
Q -- only one of us can ask questions.
A I'm sorry. Excuse me. It's a little unusual.
I'm the school teacher. It's hard for me. I'm sorry.
Q Now, Exhibit 16, do you have that?
A Yes, sir, I have it.
Q Now, this is an affidavit that you signed?
A That's correct.
Q And who did you send this to?
A I sent it to the Secretary of the Treasury,
as I recall.
Q Turn to the second page, paragraph seven.
A Yes, sir.
Q Read to the jury what's contained in paragraph
seven.
A Out of context, sir?
Q Read paragraph seven, please.
A In addition to the aforesaid warnings, I have
also been influenced by misleading and deceptive wording of
IRS publications, IRS-generated news articles, and pressure
of widespread rumors and misinformation, public opinion, and
the advice which misled me by incorrectly believing that the
16th Amendment to the United States Constitution" --
Q Wait, wait. You skipped a line. Go back up to
"and the advice."
A I'm sorry?
Q You skipped a whole line. Go back up to "and
the advice."
A "... and the advice and assurance of lawyers,
CPAs and income tax preparers which misled me by incorrectly
believing that the 16th Amendment to the United States
Constitution authorized Congress to impose a direct tax on
me by my property, my exchange of property, and other
property received as a result of exercising my
constitutionally secure right to contract; that I was
further misled into believing that I had a legal duty and
obligation to file a Form 1040 income tax return and other
IRS forms or documents."
Q Who are the lawyers who misinformed you?
A I didn't mean that in any particular sense.
This goes back over my whole life, sir.
Q Well, can you name three of the lawyers --
A It's explaining that all this time I had
thought I was required to have a social security number and
I'd told by well-meaning people and individuals and maybe
even lawyers that we'd come in contact with from time to
time said, "Oh, you've got to have one." And at this
particular juncture in time I had discovered --
Is that all right, Your Honor? Can I go ahead?
THE COURT: Well, maybe you could keep your
response to the question that was asked.
Q Can you name three of the lawyers who
misinformed you about the 16th Amendment to the United
States Constitution which authorized Congress to impose a
direct tax on you and they also misled you into believing
you had a legal duty and obligation to file a Form 1040
income tax return and other IRS forms or documents? Name
three lawyers at this point.
A I was not talking about lawyers who talked to
me, but lawyers who had talked to everybody in general who
had formed the opinion that I was supposed to file just like
everybody else was, sir. That's what that's talking about.
Q How about name three CPAs who had misinformed
you?
A I've explained about as good as I can, sir.
Q You can't name any?
A No, sir. I wasn't talking about specific
lawyers. I'm talking about in general, news media,
everything.
Q Can you name three income tax preparers who
misled you?
A No. No, sir, I can't.
Q How about paragraph 24, would you read that?
A "That both the United States Congress and IRS,
by deceptive and misleading words, statements in the
Internal Revenue Code, as well as IRS publications and
IRS-generated news articles, committed constructive fraud by
misleading and deceiving me as well as the general public
into believing that I was required to file a Form 1040
income tax return and other IRS forms, documents and
schedules, and also to keep records, supply information and
to pay income tax."
Now, that came from The Law That Never Was,
sir.
Q The Law That Never Was?
A Yes, sir.
Q That was written by a man named Vincent, wasn't
it?
A Yes, sir.
Q Mr. Vincent was also convicted of a crime,
wasn't he?
A Yes, sir, and he was later acquitted.
Q And was he retried?
A I don't think so.
Q You didn't hear he was retried?
A No, sir.
Q You gave us a copy and I can't find it.
A I'm sorry.
Q Now, do you really believe that the United
States Congress engaged in deception and fraud against you?
Do you really believe that?
A I believe that the way it happened at the time
it happened in history, and I believe if you read his book
that I brought you, he has irrefutable proof that it was not
ratified correctly.
Q Okay. So, you think that the 16th Amendment to
the United States Constitution was not properly ratified?
You think that?
A That's what his book said. He went to every
state capitol and pulled up all the records and had
certified documents, sir.
Q And this man was charged and convicted of a
crime and his conviction was overturned later on?
A That's what I understand, yes, sir.
Q And you know that the Supreme Court has
addressed this issue on several occasions. and on each
occasion has said that the 16th Amendment was properly
ratified?
A I don't know that, sir. I know that in
Brushaber they addressed it and said that it didn't matter
because it didn't change anything in the Constitution.
Q You didn't look into that?
A I didn't have time, sir. I just, I've told you
what I studied and everything.
Q So, you think that the Congress did engage in a
fraud against you?
A Well, I think it may have wound up being that
way, sir. I don't think maybe they did it intentionally. I
think it was just the circumstances and the time. I think
that was 1913, wasn't it?
Q Well, you say, "by deceptive and and misleading
words." You think the U.S. Congress accidentally engaged in
deceptive words and misleading words?
A I think it's possible.
Q It's possible that they didn't know what they
were doing?
A There was a lot going on at that time, sir.
And you've got to read the book. Mr. Vincent explained some
things in there that, you know, it was real unusual how that
thing came about.
Q And then it says the IRS also, "by deceptive
and misleading words and statements, committed constructive
fraud." Do you really believe that the IRS engaged in a
constructive fraud?
A Well, I know there are a lot of words in here
like "must" and "shall" that could mean "may," you know, in
a lot of instances, sir.
Q Did the IRS write the Internal Revenue code?
A I don't know. It's their book.
Q You told us a few minutes ago that Congress
did.
A No. Congress wrote the federal code and the
IRS interpretes it into this, I believe, doesn't it? Ain't
that how it works? So, this is an IRS version of the code.
Q Now, this document is called an Affidavit of
Revocation and Rescission.
A Yes, sir.
Q And you see this same thing in one of the books
that you gave us, Detaxing America. It's called a Notice of
Revocation in there. Is this where you got the idea from?
A No, sir. I got it from a friend of mine who
had had an insurance policy, and he discovered that there
was some fraud in the policy, so he rescinded his signature
on the contract.
Q Did he give you a sample of this, or did you
make up all this by yourself?
A Well, I had a little help with this, sir.
Q Did you have a sample to go by?
A No, not really.
Q What did you have to go by?
A Well, I just kind of went through my argument
that I've explained to you here, basically about voluntary,
about the excise tax, the whole works, step by step.
Q The fact that an affidavit like this is set out
in Detaxing America and some of these other authors like Mr.
Schiff discussed doing something like this is just
coincidence?
A To some degree. I won't say that I didn't use
some of those. But, you know, I'm a school teacher. I've
used lots of documents, you know, as examples to do things.
I didn't go by a set set of rules, no, sir.
Q Now, this morning before lunch we talked about
some of the language in some of these publications, Mr.
Schiff's book, Mr. Stang's book, and perhaps Mr. Gordon's
books, where they talked about how the Congress of the
United States is corrupt and does things. And we see some
of the same language in your affadavit. Is that also a
coincidence?
A No, sir.
Q That's not a coincidence?
A I wouldn't think so.
Q That's intentional?
A Well, here again, this document takes place
over my whole life, sir, ever since I've had a social
security number, from well-meaning individuals and things
that have been said. That's what that means, as best I
could put it down and get it to cover everything.
Q Now, you also introduced some letters from a
man named Dickerson?
A Yes, sir.
Q And those letters start off by saying "Based
upon our information." Do you see that?
A Yes, sir.
Q What information does the Internal Revenue
Service have in their possession that they were talking
about, saying "Based upon our information"2
A I have no idea, sir.
Q You have no idea at all?
A How would I, sir? This is another man's
letter.
Q So far all you know, the information that the
Internal Revenue Service had that they based that letter
upon was that Mr. Dickerson had already filed a return, for
all you know? All the letter says is that no return is
filed. It might mean they have already a return on hand.
A Well, would that be true, sir why would they
be telling him that for four different years?
Q He may've asked. You don't know, do you?
A Well, I guess not.
Q You also don't know whether that might refer to
a child?
A No, sir, it doesn't refer to a child.
Q How do you know?
A Because they don't have any children.
Q How do you know there's not a child with that
name? Do you know that?
A Mrs. Dickerson herself gave me these, sir, and
explained to me that they were her husband's letters.
G And you're relying upon what she told you?
A Certainly.
Q You didn't verify that, did you?
A How would I verify it? If I asked the IRS,
they wouldn't tell me.
Q Did you make an effort to find out?
A Well, if I had, would they have told me?
Q Did you make an effort to find out?
A No, sir.
Q Now, at some point, I believe it was in 1989 or
'90, you received an inquiry from someone at the Internal
Revenue Service, a man named Winburn?
A Yes, sir.
Q And Mr. Winborn wanted to discuss with you
whether you owed taxes; is that right?
A I don't have that right here, sir. I believe
that was, if not mistaken, the one where he had sent some
kind of information request.
Q Well, wasn't the general thrust of the letter,
though, trying to determine whether you owed taxes for a
certain year? That's the way you interpreted it, wasn't it?
A It may've been, sir. My point was, you know, I
just wanted to know who the man was, where his authority
came from.
Q Well, try to answer the question, Mr. Long.
A I'm sorry.
Q The inquiry from Mr. Windbush -- let me see if
we can find it.
A Winburn?
Q Winburn? Is that his name?
A Yes, sir.
Q What exhibit is that?
A I don't know, sir.
THE COURT: 1991 correspondence.
Q Now, the letter, up in the top right-hand
corner, mentions the tax year 1989? Do you see that?
A Yeah.
Q Upper right-hand corner?
A Uh-huh.
Q And the first paragraph of the letter says,
"The federal tax return for the above year has been assigned
to me for examination."
Well, you had not filed an income tax return
for that year, had you?
A That's correct.
Q So, you knew when you received this letter that
he wanted to ask you some questions about whether you
should've filed a return and about how much money you owe,
if anything, didn't you?
A Here again, sir, I didn't feel that I was
liable. I had asked the IRS to tell me I was liable, to
show me the section that makes me liable.
Q And Mr. Winburn tells you that he wants to come
out and talk with you, and he set up a time and date to meet
with you. That's in the first paragraph?
A I believe that's right, yes, sir.
Q Now, this would've been a perfect opportunity
for you to sit down with a real person and say, "Here'a how
much I made. Here are my expenses. These are my
deductions. Tell me whether I owe any money or not, and
also tell me whether I have to pay." This would've been a
perfect opportunity, wouldn't it?
A Well, sir, I believe at that time, you know, if
I had gone and done that, I would've been saying, "Hey, I
believe that I'm liable for this." And I didn't believe I
was liable, sir. So, I asked him the next best thing, to
show me the authority he had, to a citizen of Tennessee, to
ask for these records, and he wouldn't show them to me.
Q One of the questions I asked you this morning
that again came out of one of these books was about how you
deal with the IRS. When they ask you questions, make
demands, ask about personal information. That came out of
one of the books. Remember that?
A I believe I remember you saying that, yes, sir.
Q This is your reply. It's four pages. "Before
I can meet with any IRS official, the following questions
must be answered and facts determined." Who was going to
determine those facts? You were, weren't you?
A If I got any, yes, sir.
Q So, you were going to be the fact determiner
here?
A Yes, sir. Would that not apply?
Q "What is the home address, telephone number,
proper name, job title, and employee number of Mr. Mel
Winburn, revenue agent, the district director, group
manager, and other Internal Revenue Service employee
connected with this incident actio?"
So, not only did you want Mr. Winburn's home
address, telephone number, proper name, job title, employee
number, you wanted the district director's, the group
manager, and any other Internal Revenue Service employees,
that same information, for anybody else that might be --
A Well, how else would I check him out, sir?
Q So, you were going to check them all out?
A No. But if I don't know his superior, how am I
going to find out if that's who he works for?
Q The next question, "What is the ultimate
purpose of the information document request? If it is for
the purpose of completing Internal Revenue Service forms,
please explain what kind of forms, what is the authority,
and list all the forms that you can execute under this
authority." You asked for that, didn't you?
A Yes, sir. I believe that's right in line with
what I've been asking for before.
Q "Please furnish me with a copy of the assistant
commissioner's and/or district director's notice served upon
me to keep such records."
A Yes, sir.
Q Number five. "Please explain why the
information document request that I received is not an
attested copy."
A Yes, sir.
Q Number six. "Please provide the following:
The date Delegation Order Number 4 was published, date
Delegation Order Number 15037 was published, the date
Delegation Order Number 15010 was published, the date
Delegation Order Number 1537 was superseded."
A Yes, sir.
Q You're making all these demands on somebody who
just wants to come out to see whether you owe any taxes and
whether you filed a return? That's the only thing he wants
to do.
A I'm trying to determine if he has authority to
do that, sir.
Q Number seven. "Since the information document
request is asking for information and there is no ongoing
court action involving a presumed valid assessment, it does
not meet the summons exclusion under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1980 and, therefore, must have an OMB control number.
Please explain why the information document request that I
received does not have an OMB control number."
Why do you care? If you're trying to find out
whether you owe taxes or not, why do you care about this?
A There's a lot of questions that I'd like to
have answered, sir.
Q And what the book says that if you do this, you
buy time, you scare the Internal Revenue Service off and you
get more time.
A I don't believe they're scared, sir.
Q You did buy more time, though, didn't you?
A I don't know. I don't know what the time frame
is, sir.
Q Number eight. "Since Form 4564 does not have
an OMB control number, am I required to respond?" Number
nine. "Why wasn't an OMB control number posted on your
request?" Number ten. "Was there an application made to
the Office of Management and Budget for OMB review?" Where
did you get that?
A Why is that so funny, sir?
Q Where did you get the question from, Mr. Long?
Where did that question come from?
A Well, I know for a fact that any form that
comes to me is supposed to have an OMB number.
Q Where did you get that question from, though?
You didn't make that up. Who told you to ask that question?
A Why do you think I didn't come up with that
question? I've read a lot. I've got a whole file on OMB
numbers.
Q Did you make that question up yourself, sir?
A Yes, sir.
Q No one gave you any help with it?
A No, sir, not that one.
Q Which ones did they give you help with?
A Not any of them so far, sir.
Q How about the --
A But you act like you want to think somebody
did.
Q I'm not going to go through all of them. There
are four pages of them. You said, "not so far." How about
the rest? Who helped you with the other questions?
A I don't know that I had any help, sir. But
like I say, you know, I'm a school teacher, and if there was
anything available that would help me come up with these
questions, I would've used it. And is it -- I'm sorry.
Q Sorry?
A I'm sorry. I was going to ask a question.
Q As a result of this four page request, Mr.
Winburn wrote you a letter back and said that in view of all
these demands, he really thought that you did not want to
cooperate and that he would have to complete his examination
through other means?
A Yes, sir, that's what he said.
Q And you read that. You didn't read the last
sentence in this letter, though.
A I'm sorry, I left that out a while ago.
Q Read that to the jury.
A "If at any time you wish to cooperate, please
let us know." That's why I wrote my letter, the other
letter, which is right behind it.
Q Did you ever write to Mr. Winburn telling him
that you were sorry for the demands that you had made, that
you really wanted to sit down and get some answers and he
could come on by your house and sit down and talk with you?
Did you ever do that?
A I wasn't sorry, sir.
Q Did you ever do that?
A No, sir.
Q Did you ever call him on the telephone and tell
him to come on by?
A I don't believe I did, no, sir.
Q Now, during July of last year, 1992, you met
with Mr. Geasley; is that right?
A That's correct.
Q You called Mr. Geasley up and asked him to meet
with you?
A That's correct.
Q And during your discussion with Mr. Geasley,
you told him that everybody told you to file your income tax
returns? Did you tell him that?
A When? That's all I told him? I told him that
I, you know --
Q Was that one of the things you told him?
A I don't really recall, sir. I didn't record --
Q Would you like to see a copy of the report?
A That's okay. If he said I said it, I may've
said something to that effect.
Q You don't dispute that?
A No, sir.
Q Was that true, what you would've told him, that
you'd been told by a lot of people --
A Tell me one more time.
Q This is you. "He stated," he being Long, "I
know everyone have told me to file."
A Okay. Yeah. People around me didn't
understand and hadn't learned what I had learned and they
were worried about me. So, they told me I should've done
it.
Q And you disregarded their advice?
A I had studied it, sir, and had written letters
asking to see the statute that makes me liable.
Q And you regarded their advice?
A Yes, sir.
Q Okay. Now, on the fourth page of the report,
this is again you. You indicated that you'd done some
research at the library, that you got some of your
information from newsletters, and that "When he first got
involved," that is, you, he read a book by Irwin Schiff."
A No, sir. He may've took it that way, but I
didn't say when I first got involved I read that. I said I
had read it.
Q He misunderstood what you said?
A Yes, sir.
Q "Long indicated that" -- he also asked you
about Tupper Saussy?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you told Mr. Geasley that Mr. Saussy had
talked to you about his opinions on income tax?
A I may've mentioned that. I was under a lot of
stress at that time, sir.
Q And he said, that is you, "Long said that this
was just prior to Tupper Saussy's troubles with the
government."
A I really don't recall whether it was prior or
after or whatever. See, this was what, in 1992? You know,
eight or ten years later, sir.
Q And the other agent with Mr. Geasley, Special
Agent Rankin, commented that when Saussy was corvicted,
didn't that tell you that your arguments would not hold up.
Your reply was that every case is viewed differently. Did
you tell them that?
A I may've said something to that effect, because
I really didn't know what Mr. Saussy had done, sir.
Q But you knew it involved taxes?
A I knew it involved taxes.
MR. COLLIER: May I have the Court's indulgence
for a moment?
THE COURT: Yes.
(Brief pause.)
BY MR. COLLIER:
Q Mr. Long, you told us about getting a videotape
or seeing a videotape. I think someone in your group had a
videotape from a man named, you thought the name might've
been Carter?
A Could've been.
Q The name was actually Marvin L. Cooley, wasn't
it?
A No, sir.
Q Do you know Marvin L. Cooley?
A No, sir.
MR. COLLIER: We have nothing further, Your
Honor.
MR. BECRAFT: Real briefly, Your Honor. I
don't want it to be a tennis match here.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. BECRAFT:
Q Mr. Collier asked you some questions about
these books that you have written -- read. He held up, oh,
some of Irwin Schiff's books, a few of those others, George --
Gordon, things of that nature. And he pointed out to you in
there passages that had opinions, right?
A Right.
Q Now, are you telling this jury that the books
that they wrote that you had in your possession were one
hundred percent opinions? I mean, if the jury had that
book, would they sit there and read just page after page or
opinion after opinion after opinion? Is that what the books
are about?
A I didn't understand that.
Q I'm sorry. I broke a rule of examination.
Those opinions that he read to you were only a part of the
books; is that right?
A That's correct.
Q Now, those opinions that were a part of the
books were maybe a chapter or a few pages; is that correct?
A I believe so.
Q Those books would contain other things; is that
right?
A Correct.
Q Now, Alan Stang, have you ever met him before?
A No, sir.
Q Do you know anything about him?
A No, sir, I don't.
Q Where did you get the book?
A I believe it came to the group. It was one we
just shared, you know, passed around.
Q Now, Irwin Schiff's book, the pages that Mr.
Collier pointed to, that's only a small part of the book; is
that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q And that's an opinion?
A Absolutely.
Q Have you met Mr. Schiff?
A No, sir.
Q Do you know anything about him other than...
A Just that I had heard that he was a corporation
and that was one of the reasons he was required to file.
Q Now, this other book, you mentioned this Mr.
Benson that wrote a book about the 16th Amendment?
A Yes, sir.
Q You got that book, right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, you're not telling this jury that that
forms the basis of your belief, are you?
A Oh, no.
Q Now, you acquired that book sometime in the
past?
A That's true.
Q Read it?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you're not telling this jury that this man
has been convicted of any crime right now, are you?
A No, sir.
Q Is it your understanding that his conviction
was reversed?
A That's what I understood, yes, sir.
Q Okay. Now, have you read books that were
published by people who have not been convicted of anything?
A I believe I have, yes, sir.
Q This George Gordon fellow that Mr. Collier was
talking about, he held up this book, didn't he?
A Yes, sir, he did.
Q And he didn't ask you to tell the jury what Mr.
Gordon was doing, did he?
A No, sir.
Q What does the book say Mr. Gordon was doing?
A This one just says resisting arrest.
Q So, those might be the maximum amount of
convictions for Mr. Gordon?
A Yes, sir.
Q Well, it's your understanding that this book is
written by Scott Reynolds, right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Has he been convicted of anything?
A Not that I know of.
Q Pat Deech, Lynn Johnson?
A Not that I know of, sir.
Q So, you've read books of people that haven't
been convicted of anything, right?
A That is correct, yes, sir.
Q Well, what about this Tupper Saussy fellow?
The Court's -- you understand that Judge Edgar knows a whole
lot about Tupper Saussy, right?
A I assume he probably does.
Q In fact, his case was tried here, right?
A Yeah.
Q Is it your understanding that he was only
convicted of one out of three counts?
A I just heard he was convicted. I don't know
how many, honestly.
Q Have you ever heard that it was for filing 5th
Amendment tax returns?
A I remember hearing something about 5th
Amendment, but I really didn't know what the actual
circumstances were.
Q Was that what you heard that he was charged
with?
MR. COLLIER: I'm going to object because it's
leading, first of all.
MR. BECRAFT: I'll quit leading.
MR. COLLIER: He's already said he doesn't
know. And Mr. Becraft is testifying.
THE COURT: Well, the questions are leading.
MR. BECRAFT: I'll quit it.
BY MR. BECRAFT:
Q We , what was your understanding about the
type of charge that was brought against Tupper Saussy?
A I really had no understanding other than it
involved taxes.
Q How about this Dr. Leonard?
A Same thing. At that point in time I was just
beginning to try to learn, and I was trying to raise my
family and working, and I just, had just started.
Q Okay. Well, so you got started in '83, '84,
right?
A Somewhere in there, '82.
Q But it would be your judgment and recollection
that it would be about '85, '86 when these cases came up,
Dr. Leonard and Tupper?
A I really don't remember.
Q Was that about the approximate time?
Q From January 1, 1990, until October 13, 1993,
have you told anyone associated with the Internal Revenue
Service what your expenses were for the year 1990?
A No, sir.
Q And just based upon what you did in 1988, you
know that nobody could tell whether you're liable for taxes
if they don't know what your expenses were?
A No, sir, I don't know that.
Q If your expenses exceed what you made --
A No, sir.
Q -- you wouldn't be liable for anything?
A I don't know that at all.
Q You don't know that from basic math?
A No, sir. It has to be, the liability has to be
whether you're liable or not, period, sir. It's not based
on -- the state Supreme Court has said I have a right to
receive income, sir, and that right can't be taxed as a
privilege.
THE COURT: Is that it?
MR. COLLIER: That's it, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. You can step down.
(Witness excused.)