|
Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 02:22 PM EDT |
They are finished making money. The IRS will
see to that, and the criminal investigation
will likely address your issue. It's over.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 02:49 PM EDT |
... so far...
... isn't what I would call "winning".
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 04:44 PM EDT |
The IRS is noted for its peculiar approach to the burden of proof--as the
article phrases it, "Referring to the U.S. Attorney's Office and the IRS's
CID is like siccing both the Klingons and the Romulans on Prenda, except that
the Romulans have a somewhat better grasp of due process than IRS CID."
(The Romulans used "guilty until proven innocent", and the IRS seems
to do so as well.)
Also, I suspect that disbarment (is that the right word/spelling?) would result
in the letters being found illegal.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Wol on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 10:11 AM EDT |
As I think he did, I think you start worrying.
The Judge also ORDERED that ALL other courts where Prenda was a plaintiff should
be notified of this order.
I also got the distinct impression that - where there was evidence of intent to
conceal - the IRS has this nasty little habit of confiscating the hidden money -
and then asking you to pay the taxes and penalties on top!
So I think Prenda are going to disappear like a neutron star - shedding energy
and slowing down, all of a sudden the centripetal energy can no longer hold back
the Chandresekhar limit and the unstoppable gravitational collapse begins.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 10:48 AM EDT |
I think an important fact the original poster has forgotten is that, if they are
disbarred, they won't have the power of the court to get a name associated with
an IP address. Therefore they won't have anyone to send their threats to. I
doubt they'll have much luck sending Comcast a letter saying "This IP was
downloading something of mine at this time, could you tell me their name?"
They'll need a lawyer to file a suit, and the experience of Gibbs is a warning
to anyone considering representing them.
But it got me thinking, what's to stop me from randomly mailing letters stating
that the recipient was found to be downloading porn at 9 pm some evening, but if
they'll pay a small license fee ($1k maybe) then the issue will be dropped. If
challenged, I just say "Whoops, wrong person, sorry...." A few kids
will get grounded, marriages broken up, but what's a little collateral damage
when there's money to be made? What law would I be breaking? And if done in
small batches, to out of state addresses, under different names and PO boxes,
would I be caught? (No, I'm not going to!)
SB[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Not a problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 03:03 PM EDT
- Not Forgotten - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 10:34 PM EDT
|
|
|
|