Protect your hard earned assets
Save big money on gold!

Call Harvey at USA Gold Vault

* * *

Following the Redemption/Strawman Nonsense?
(Then Get Yourself a Good Criminal Defense Attorney)

Devvy Kidd
June 5, 2003

For years, many of us have attempted to get factual information distributed that will help Americans understand the legal system with a particular emphasis on the income tax.

Unfortunately, the "tax movement" is full of con artists and charlatans. Those who are in it strictly for the buck. The sad outcome is more clients for the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Prisons.

How many angry e-mails I have received over the years screaming that I don't know what I'm talking about regarding various bogus "legal" arguments that people have bought into without doing the real homework.

They don't want to find out they've been taken for a ride and have placed themselves in dire legal jeopardy. The fear factor kicks in and instead, I get the most colorful electronic letters.

Well, no doubt I'll get more, but that's fine. People are in denial all over this country. Those who do the homework and verify Larry Becraft's legal research will see that it is accurate.

If you are someone who has bought into this "redemption" or "strawman" baloney, I highly recommend you get yourself a good criminal defense attorney as soon as possible. It's just a matter of time before the feds get caught up on their workload. Don't call Larry, he will no longer represent these foolish people getting indicted under this phony "redemption/strawman" nonsense.

From the desk of Larry Becraft, Attorney at Law with more than 25 years experience in criminal law:

June 2, 2003

I have read the article published in the American's Bulletin written by Jack Smith of Wrong Way Law. Let me state that I find it incredible that such arguments are still being promoted.

The first version of the "redemption process" was "developed" by Roger Elvick. He contended that the Social Security account of SS taxpayers was divided between "public" and "private" sides and people could write drafts off of that SS account. I estimated that approx. 40 or more
people followed this bad advice and got into trouble: they were indicted, convicted and sent to jail. I analyze that Elvick "redemption process" here:

The Smith version of the "redemption process" simply follows the Elvick theory closely, the change being that, rather than placing emphasis upon the SS account, Smith now uses a closed checking account. People have already been indicted for this argument. I provide below the links to a search warrant affidavit and indictment of people now charged with
following this argument:

Please notice the "style" of the name of one of the defendants in this indictment.

I was asked to represent one defendant here, but I declined. I am tired of representing people who have followed bad advice; I no longer have any interest in playing "clean-up" for the messes these gurus create.

I also must note the Smith contention regarding the "Rule of 93," which  appears to be a completely invented assertion. I know there is an accounting "Rule of 78", which is defined as:

"The Rule of 78s is a mathematical formula that was devised in the days  before modern calculators. The formula was a quick way for lenders in the 1920s and 1930s to estimate payoff amounts when a customer paid ahead on an installment loan. It's still around today."

But I suspect that this "Rule of 93" has absolutely no basis in fact. I also cannot believe that anyone is still asserting that completely false contention that the King of England loaned US money during the Revolutionary War. It was the King of France, not England.

* * *

I also highly recommend that you go to the URL below and click on the blue items so you can read additional and important documents in some of these cases: