Paul Hansen called Rudy twice yesterday to go over what he intends to file as a subpoena duces tecum of IRS agent Scott Schneider since he is now representing himself. I went through the first video and transcribed it Hansen reading the first 18 points. He’s since gone back and added several more, and if I find time to listen to that, I will update this post. However, to be honest, it’s “more of the same.” And, not to put too fine of a point on it, this subpoena will be quashed if it even gets served. It is worth a read, however, if only to get an insight into the head of a hard core sovereign citizen.
As you read this, keep in mind that Paul Hansen is huge on jurisdiction. He thinks he can show that he and Kent are not under the jurisdiction of the United States of America and thus not subject to federal charges. Or income tax. Or forfeiture. Or much of anything.
Paul: I have in front of me a document subpoena duces tecum that I’m delivering to Chris Klotz, my 6th Amendment counsel in the case U.S. V. Paul Hansen and Kent Hovind. The subpoena I’m putting together here is to Scott Schneider, IRS criminal agent that prosecuted Kent in 2006 and prosecuted him again in 2015. 0038 Duces tecum simply means bringing the documents to court. I’m going to read them off and it’s self-explanatory. Basically it’s a notice for Scott to bring documents with him when he appears in court and it also gives him time to get the documents together and prepare to answer questions which might be associated with the documents.Number One: Documentation that evidences that Hovind or Hansen did the charged claimed acts on land owned by the USA, as the USA is titled in the Articles of Confederation. 0121Number Two: Documentation that evidences that Hovind or Hansen did any mailings, emails, calls or filings where the land is owned by the USA[Number Three:] Documentation that evidences that Hovind or Hansen’s mailings, emails, calls or filings passed over land owned by the USANumber Four: Documentation that evidences that Hovind or Hansen mailings, phone calls, e-mails were effected upon land owned by the USA[Number Five:] Documentation that evidences that the courthouse building the cases?/places? where Hovind was tried in 2006 and 2015 and the case to be tried in May 2015 is owned by the USA.Number Six: Documentation that evidences the attorney, Eggers, representing the USA, has a state of Florida attorney license that operates on land owned by the USA[Number Seven:] Documentation that evidences Creation Science Evangelism workers operated on land owned by the USA in (repeats from the start) 1995 to 2006.Number Eight: Documentation that evidences the bank that Hovind was indicted in 2006 as with structuring was operating on land owned by the USANumber Nine: Documentation that evidences Kent Hovind was authorized to withhold taxes for the United States as prosecuted in 2006 0342.Number Ten: Documentation that evidences Kent Hovind or Hansen was a resident or resided on land owned by the USA at any time from 1995 to 2015.Number Eleven: Documentation that evidences when and how the plaintiff was created. The plaintiff in this case is the USA, all capital letters.Number Twelve: Documentation that evidences what plaintiff relied upon to create to prove the court’s personal jurisdiction over the man called Paul John Hansen and the man called Kent Hovind. 0426Number Thirteen: Documentation that evidences the man Paul John Hansen and the man called Kent Hovind is a person named in the charged written laws of this case.Number Fourteen: Documentation that evidences the definition of the term “person” used in the charged written law of this case.Number Fifteen: Documentation that evidences the charged written law of this case has force and effect of law on land that is not owned by the USA.Number Sixteen: Documentation that evidences the IRS agent/agents have written authority to operate outside of the fifty United States.Number Seventeen: Documentation that evidences that you, Scott Schneider, knew any of the following at any time from 1995 to 2015: (1) Kent did not have workers, Creation Science Evangelism workers, working on land of the USA [(2)] Kent had no duty to withhold any tax from any worker associated with Creation Science Evangelism the ministry. (3) Kent had no banking activity 0600, structuring actions associated with any illegal or criminal activity. (4) That all or some of the United States written laws as charged from 2006 to 2015 do not apply to Kent Hovind or where Kent Hovind operated. (5) What written law does the USA rely upon that gave authority to Judge Rodgers to administratively take property belonging to Creation Science Evangelism Trust and land and property not on land owned by the USA.Number Eighteen (the last one): Documentation of the written law the United States relied upon that was the process Hansen or Hovind would have needed to follow to become a United States citizen.That should do it.
The updated subpoena video can be seen here: