Winston Shrout Charged

[David Merrill]

I have some PACER information. You can bring in more information if you sign up for PACER. I find it sad that Winston could have avoided this headache by applying remedy, by demanding lawful money.

Since I find enjoyable things much more enjoyable, I may not be spending a lot of time on this.

[David Merrill]

Negotiable and Non-Negotiable Instruments". A corporation cannot arrest it's members, but it can "Make Offers" to the "public". The opposite of an "Offer is an "Acceptance". When you don't "Accept", you are in "Dishonour". You cannot pay a debt with a debt and all of the money, credits, Bank notes, checks, money orders etc. are ALL debt instruments, since they are all borrowed into circulation. If you don't understand this part, then ask yourself this question : "Did you create that money?" ? If the answer is no, then IT IS DEBT, TO YOU. The only way we can pay is (WE CAN'T)...but we can make an engagement to pay by "Acceptance for Value". Then they have to adjust our account, because there is our remedy, since they took away our ability to pay with real substance.lawful money The Emergency Banking Act (1934) and HJR 192 and other actions set up a fixed
"dollar for dollar" exchange rate allowing the perpetrators operating the "Federal
Reserve System" to exchange their Promissory Notes known as "Federal Reserve
Notes" for our United States Dollars defined as one ounce of fine silver.
They traded their paper promises for our actual silver and gold, and when it was time
for them to make good on their Notes, they declared bankruptcy and named us as
their sureties--- that is, they pretended to "represent" us and said we were
responsible for their debts after they siphoned off the entire value of our National
Credit, which by definition is equal in value to their National Debt. When the state or federal government is making us offers, i.e. warrants, indictments, fines, tickets etc., they are making us "Offers" and we are "Dishonoring" them. BECAUSE we are not "Accepting" them. When we "Accept" them, and we ask them to "adjust our account", they now have the obligation of "settlement". If they refuse, then they are in a position of "dishonor" now, and they are stepping out of their bounds as our Trustees in Bankruptcy. Now they are the ones with a Tax obligation on their hands because they have everything "ACCOUNTED FOR" in their system. "Accepting" how is "Dishonoring"a fictional offer or debt When you don't "Accept", you are in "Dishonour" only if your a person Can a Man be a DEBT . Might ask who can dishonour a TRUST accountability for lawful money is a demand on the Non-Negotiable Instruments a Man is non Negotiable until re venued. Been here before acceptability is Non-Negotiable.

Thank you X;

You just explained that with all things SHROUT to choose from, this indictment is simply failure to file income tax returns on what can be proven to a grand jury is taxable income.

[Kelly-Anne]

case number 3:15-cr-00438-JO

Shouts case number is 3:15-cr-00438-JO

on Pacer I believe it will show up as 15-cr-00438

[xparte]

Identified as such a legal name is just wholesale standing on further development do we need to SHROUT it out for ya. MEADS VS MEADS all the private persona standing any licensed legal marriage or legal tax paying Name can stand.I may not be spending a lot of time on this.nothing too see here Winstomb more -hereditary brilliance [RIP]no thanks.

[allodial]

I have to agree. The thing that always fails, in my opinion is that assertion debt has value. Everybody else thinks it does, and so that is supposed to maintain the delirium.

Maybe one of the first illusions pierced is like Michael Joseph called on as bullshit from the cartoon about money. The illusion debt has value is why it is so easy to misstate it that money is conjured out of thin air. It is backed by a naked contract (endorsement) and the security is slave-like substance.

An unsecured loan. Unsecured doesn't mean 'not secured', it simply points to all assets of the debtor underwriting the loan rather than a specific asset (floating debentures vs fixed debentures). I suppose a promise to pay can be 'created out of thin air'. Whether any given promise to pay is worth anything or not might be subject to inspection. Why do banks want collateral? Hmmmm. In any case, it is well established that an unconditional promise to pay a sum certain in money is itself money.

...the Bretton Woods proposal of yours Allodial...

How is it mine? I take the stance that the likes of exemption, immunity, forgiveness (cancellation of debt) have value. Afterall, if it is the extant sovereign that declares what is or what is not money, then at the fount of money would be sovereign prerogative, no? Relevantly, a sovereign's duty to promote equity goes without saying IMHO. [Is a ruler that is a terror to good works a ruler at all?]

***

I've been endeavoring to obtain specimens of the IBOEs that he specifically utilized. I suspect they are the same as the type shown above. However, templates for them are apparently part of this 'course material'. Anyone have copies? Here's more...


Note that the foregoing is a promise to pay not an order to pay. It is not a bill of exchange.


... and...


Much the same as the letter-sized ones shown a few posts back. It is of such poor form even according to the most Kindergarten-level of comprehension of BOEs.

***

For edification and comparison, here is specimen of a simple, textbook, non-defective bill of exchange:


There are at least three key role with respect to a bill of exchange:

1. the drawers (or issuer)
2. the payees (original payee as opposed to subsequent payees or endorsers)
3. the drawee (or payee--why do they specify the drawee twice?)

If a bill of exchange is payable through a bank rather than payable at a bank then the payable-through bank would be an additional (i.e. fourth) role player. Point being: it is rather easy to spot a defective instrument.

[walter]

However, templates for them are apparently part of this 'course material'. Anyone have copies?

Yes I have them. Seen him a few times.
Later when I get back home I will look for them tonight.

[walter]

http://nesaranews.blogspot.ca/2016/04/may-day-may-day-alert.html

[walter]

Man charged with issuing $100 trillion in fake finance documents

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/03/federal_indictment_charges_hil.html

A federal grand jury has returned a new indictment against Hillsboro resident Winston Shrout, accusing him of defrauding U.S. financial institutions by issuing bogus documents and failing to file six years of income tax returns.

The grand jury returned an indictment charging Shrout with 13 counts of making, presenting and transmitting fictitious financial instruments and six counts of willfully failing to file income tax returns.

He's accused of making and issuing more than 300 fake "International Bills of Exchange'' on his own behalf and for credit to third parties. The government contends Shrout falsely claimed the bills had value and purported them to be worth more than $100 trillion.

The indictment also alleges Shrout promoted and marketed the fake financial documents to pay off debts.

He's also accused of failing to file income tax returns from 2009 through 2014 after receiving income for presentations at seminars and licensing fees for the sale of DVD recordings and private client consultations through his business Winston Shrout Solutions in Commerce.

By 2014, Shrout received gross income of more than $21,500, according to the indictment.

"Winston Shrout is one of the biggest sovereign citizen gurus of the last decade. This is a big deal, '' said Mark Pitcavage, senior research fellow with Anti-Defamation League center on extremism, in Ohio.

Anti-government sovereign citizens claim that paper money is unconstitutional, with gold and silver the only lawful forms of currency, so they find it easy to rationalize creating their own forms of paper money, according to the Anti-Defamation League.

"This is a very longstanding tactic in the sovereign citizen movement,'' Pitcavage said. "They love to use bogus financial instruments. Some use bogus checks. Some look like money orders. They use these to pay off the IRS or other debtors.''

Shrout was previously indicted in December on charges of failure to file tax returns. On that indictment, he told the court in February that he didn't want to be represented by a court-appointed attorney, and a judge allowed him to represent himself but named an assistant federal public defender to advise him. The court entered a not guilty plea on his behalf, according to court records.

Shrout is scheduled to return to court on this new indictment March 31.

If convicted, Shrout faces a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison on each count of making, presenting and transmitting fake financial documents and one year for each count of failure to file income tax returns.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Carolline D. Ciraolo of the U.S. Justice Department's Tax Division announced the new indictment in a prepared release Wednesday.

-- Maxine Bernstein

[walter]

[walter]

[walter]

By Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com

The Oregonian/OregonLive

A federal jury Friday returned across-the board guilty verdicts against Winston Shrout, a prominent sovereign citizen charged with 13 counts of issuing fake financial documents to banks and the U.S. Treasury and six counts of willful failure to file tax returns from 2009 to 2014.

The jury foreman stood and read each guilty verdict for each of the 19 counts as Shrout watched from his seat at the defense table. Shrout displayed no expression.

He will be sentenced at 11 a.m. on Aug. 1.

U.S. District Judge Robert E. Jones polled each of the jurors to ensure the 12-member panel was unanimous in its findings. As the jury foreman began reading each of the verdicts, one juror teared up. A fellow juror reached out to hold her hand as the rest of the verdicts were announced.

The judge ordered Shrout to turn over his passport and restricted him from any travel outside of Oregon without prior court permission.

The jury deliberated for about five hours over two days following a three-day trial.

Government lawyers argued Shrout aimed to cheat the Treasury and banks, and preached his illegal schemes to hundreds of others in paid seminars across the country and abroad.

He purposely sent a package of 1,000 homemade International Bills of Exchange, each purporting to be a legal tender for a trillion dollars, to a small community bank in Chicago "hoping to slip one by an unsuspecting banker,'' U.S. Tax Division trial lawyer Scott Wexler told jurors.

Investigators found a copy of the U.S. Tax Code and the U.S. Department of Justice's criminal tax manual on Shrout's laptop computer, seized one night in the parking lot of The Grotto in Portland after he concluded a seminar there. The computer also contained an alert from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, cautioning banks and federal savings institutions to be on the lookout for the circulation of such fictitious financial documents, Wexler said.

Shrout was driven by "simple greed,'' Wexler told jurors during his closing argument. He earned a total of $562,224 from a carpentry pension, plus royalties and payments for his seminars, between 2009 and 2014, the years he failed to file tax returns, the prosecutor said.

"He intended to get and keep as much money as he could,'' Wexler said. "The defendant knew he didn't have legal authority to print legal tender of the United States from his home computer... The defendant didn't file his tax returns because he didn't want to.''

The 69-year-old took the stand in his own defense, claiming he was given authority to make the financial documents from the Office of International Treasury Control in order to help relieve debts from mortgage foreclosures. The office Shrout cited, though, is considered by the U.S. government a fraudulent organization that claims ties to the United Nations and the Federal Reserve.

His standby lawyer Ruben Iniguez stressed that "not a single penny was paid out or transacted by anyone'' as a result of the 13 fictitious documents Shrout sent. He argued that the government was simply out to "muzzle'' his client.

Shrout also testified that he hadn't paid taxes for about 20 years, joining what he estimated are about 65 million other people in what he called "tax avoidance.'' Iniguez, in his closing argument, argued that Shrout held a firm and sincere belief that he didn't have to pay taxes.

Shrout declined comment after the verdicts were announced.

Making, creating and issuing fictitious financial instruments is a felony. Each count could bring up to 25 years in prison, according to prosecutors. The failure to file tax returns is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison.

-- Maxine Bernstein

[walter]

www.wssic.com

[marcel]

Thanks and glad to hear you're doing well, walter. Are we mining bitcoin with cheap hydro in British Columbia?

Been awhile since we heard from the doug555 persona.

[lorne]

That banker fellow give 'em to me