Not knowing anything about sentencing, I had figured Hovind would get time already served plus probation or something. I guess not. Probably with good behavior this will become 5 years or less of actual prison time. The moral of the story: living in your own personal alternate reality works for only so long. That, and don't tick off the IRS.Pensacola evangelist Kent Hovind was sentenced Friday afternoon to 10 years in prison on charges of tax fraud. After a lengthy sentencing hearing that last 5 1/2 hours, U.S. District Judge Casey Rodgers ordered Hovind also: -- Pay $640,000 in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service. -- Pay the prosecution's court costs of $7,078. -- Serve three years parole once he is released from prison.
Dr. Dino gets 10 years
Convicted felon Kent Hovind's sentencing was today, and again the Pensacola News-Journal has the story:
98 Comments
RBH · 19 January 2007
A lawyer on Infidels noted that Federal sentences tend not to be reduced much (if any) for good behavior, and suggested that Hovind would serve at least 85% of the sentence.
RBH
stevaroni · 19 January 2007
After this and Kitzmiller It seems that when the chips are on the line, the, um, unnamed designer, doesn't exactly have his footsoliders backs.
David B. Benson · 19 January 2007
Lying for Jesus doesn't pay...
carlos · 19 January 2007
doesn't this make him a martyr?
Nick (Matzke) · 19 January 2007
David B. Benson · 19 January 2007
Nick --- Maybe his followers will now call him a 'martyr', but surely the IRS will not. They will simply quote scripture along the lines of
Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's...
Doc Bill · 19 January 2007
Hovind was quoted in the article as saying that "thousands" of his supporters would pay his fine.
Wouldn't these contributions be considered income on which he would have to pay tax? Furthermore, how would he set up a contribution drop box from prison?
i like latin · 19 January 2007
Funny or should I more accurately say appauling the lack of personal responsibility for ones actions. Great role model for all those kids out there.
J-Dog · 19 January 2007
OMG! Who is going to take care of all his poor dino's for the next ten long, long years? Hovind will probably have to sell them to Ken Ham, and the dino's will have to walk all the way from FL to KY... it will be another "Trail Of Tears", only this time they will be tears of laughter.
Perhaps Hovind's dinos are haunted by SATAN and just like an intelligently designed virus, they will infect Ham's Dinos too. Couldn't happen to a better bunch of knuckleheads.
Jeez! If Ham does go down the same way, maybe there is a god after all!
Nah... but it would be funny!
kjvdoc · 19 January 2007
Please evaluate the law that was changed by the judge at the time of the closing arguments to read in essence that the "crime" of structuring is applied to an amount less than $10,000 instead of "more than." Please evaluate that the judge would not allow Supreme Court rulings into this case (Cheek) that completely nulifies the prosecution. Please hold onto your own civil rights as we all wave good bye to them.
david gehrig · 19 January 2007
Cedric Katesby · 19 January 2007
"Please evaluate the law, blah, blah, blah..."
Evaluate? Wha..?
"Supreme Court rulings into this case (Cheek) that completely nulifies the prosecution."
Next time you visit Hovind in prison, be sure he gets your "sound legal opinion".
Mark Studdock, FCD · 19 January 2007
I am not a proponent of YEC, but for the record and against speculations or talk categorizing Hovind with other YECers or all YECers, the following should be acknowledged.
From Wikipedia's page on Hovind:
"Criticism
From creationists
Hovind has come into conflict with other young earth creationists, who believe that many of his arguments are invalid and, consequently, undermine their cause. One in particular, Answers in Genesis, has publicly criticized him [62] after he had criticized AiG's article, "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use".[63] In the letter Carl Wieland, Ken Ham, and Jonathan Sarfati noted that some claims made by Hovind are "fraudulent" and "mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good."[62] He is also criticized by Creation Ministries International (formerly AiG Australia). Their article "Maintaining Creationist Integrity"[64] responds to Hovind's criticism of the original Answers in Genesis article.
Hovind who has stated carbon dating is unreliable, was criticized by Greg Neyman of Answers In Creation noting that in his statements "Hovind goes on to show that he knows absolutely nothing about the science of Carbon Dating."[65] In fact, as Neyman explained, Hovind's claim that "scientists assume the amount of carbon-14 is constant" is wrong and Neyman writes "there are many periods of decreasing C-14, which disproves his theory that the earth is young based on C-14 equilibrium."[65]"
Mike · 19 January 2007
[Fx: shadenfreude]
deadman_932 · 19 January 2007
Jake · 19 January 2007
Gary Hurd · 20 January 2007
Zarquon · 20 January 2007
Popper's ghost · 20 January 2007
Popper's ghost · 20 January 2007
Popper's ghost · 20 January 2007
Popper's ghost · 20 January 2007
Oy ... make that "your". Not that my own typo invalidates my point.
Jason Spaceman · 20 January 2007
Daniel Morgan · 20 January 2007
Right now, the PNJ has a BROKEN LINK to the audio of these calls Hovind made running his stupid mouth. But, I suspect they'll have the link fixed soon, and I can't wait to listen to him blather on about how he's going to "fight" like a buffalo against lions. Hilarious.
ben · 20 January 2007
k.e. · 20 January 2007
buuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrp!!!
Next....
Gerard Harbison · 20 January 2007
I dunno if it's entirely wise for YECcers to be outing themselves on this thread. With this clear evidence that the IRS is controlled by the eeevil Darwinist Conspiracy (TM), if I were they, I'd be keeping my head down and making sure my receipts are filed in chronological order.
Peter Henderson · 20 January 2007
No more Jack Chick comics from Hovind for a while then:
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp
Torbjörn Larsson · 20 January 2007
[schadenfreude]
First it was Be-He-He-He in Dover, now as a belated yule present Ho-Ho-Ho-vind in prison.
What's next - Do'h-Do'h-Do'h-mbski in drag?
[/schadenfreude]
It is almost a shame it's for real, because it is very tempting to continue and make Hovind the butt of prison jokes.
haceaton · 20 January 2007
"Please evaluate ...."
From the statute:
§ 103.63 Structured transactions.
No person shall for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of § 103.22 with respect to such transaction:
(a) Cause or attempt to cause a domestic financial institution to fail to file a report required under § 103.22;
(b) Cause or attempt to cause a domestic financial institution to file a report required under § 103.22 that contains a material omission or misstatement of fact; or
(c) Structure (as that term is defined in § 103.11(n) of this part) or assist in structuring, or attempt to structure or assist in structuring, any transaction with one or more domestic financial institution.
Pretty straightforward; no mention of more than or less than $10,000. The "structuring" of the transaction was to to make it less than $10,000 for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements by "cause[ing] a domestic financial institution to fail to file a report required under § 103.22. It's plain as day a violation of the law as enacted. No miscarriage of justice here, just a slam-dunk case.
But thanks for playing.
Peter · 20 January 2007
Schadenfreude is one of my favorite words even it it's a nasty one.
brightmoon · 20 January 2007
ouch ..i guess lying & cheating doesnt always pay for creationists
Joe McFaul · 20 January 2007
Please evaluate that the judge would not allow Supreme Court rulings into this case (Cheek) that completely nulifies the prosecution.
Oh yes, Cheek v. United States, cited by tax protesters nationwide. In Cheek, the Supreme Court held that a taxpayer's failure to pay taxes is a defense in a criminal action for willful failure to pay taxes if that failure is based on a good faith misunderstanding of the tax law. The misunderstanding must be in good faith, a matter to be determined by the trial judge or jury.
Cheek is not a defense to payment of taxes. It provides a very limited defense to a criminal conviction for willful failure to pay. You still have to pay your taxes.
In this case, the trial judge found that Hovind's belief was not in good faith. So it is a bald-faced lie to assert that Cheek completely nullifies the prosecution. Look no further than Cheek himself. After Cheek's conviction was reversed by the Supreme Court, he was re-tried and convicted again. That conviction was sustained on appeal.
Good discussion of Cheek for non-lawyers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheek_v._United_States
Tax protesters are just like evolution deniers. They selectively take the evidence out of context and ignore the actual applicable law. When they predictably lose, they accuse the judge of not "understandign" the law.
bob · 20 January 2007
If you check out drdino.com, you can see Dr. Hovind's tour schedule.
April 01, 2007 Dr. Kent Hovind Farmville VA
May 04, 2007 Dr. Kent Hovind Denison TX
September 02, 2007 Dr. Kent Hovind Anchorage AK
September 16, 2007 Dr. Kent Hovind Cheektawaga NY
I wonder if he has given any refunds yet?
Laser · 20 January 2007
Nick (Matzke) · 20 January 2007
Jason Spaceman · 20 January 2007
The Hovind jail cell phone calls are now available online. Listen to them here.
Nick (Matzke) · 20 January 2007
Oh man, the Hovind recording is now up on PNJ website.
Around minute seven there is some really sad stuff where Hovind's wife is trying to tell him that she would like him to change, and of course he doesn't get it.
kjvdoc · 20 January 2007
Dear "slamdunk,"
Please take a look at the rest of the statute that you didn't post:
Sec. 103.22 Reports of transactions in currency.
(2) Multiple transactions--general. In the case of financial institutions other than casinos, for purposes of this section, multiple currency transactions shall be treated as a single transaction if the financial institution has knowledge that they are by or on behalf of any person and result in either cash in or cash out totaling more than $10,000 during any one business day (or in the case of the Postal Service, any one day). Deposits made at night or over a weekend or holiday shall be treated as if received on the next business day
following the deposit.
The entire structuring case is bogus. They never showed one time where the Hovinds in one business day took out more than $10,000 in multiple withdrawals in effect to prevent the reporting to the IRS. But again, thanks for letting me play and I wish you good luck when the storm troopers come to your door. Who will you call on that day?
NJ · 20 January 2007
MartinM · 20 January 2007
H. Humbert · 20 January 2007
kjvdoc · 20 January 2007
Dear Bob, No refund will be needed for future cancelled seminars since Dr. Hovind never charges for seminars. Thank you for your comment nevertheless.
Steviepinhead · 20 January 2007
Well, at least he's charging what they're worth.
Exactly nothing.
Actually, when you adjust for all the flat-out lies, deceitfulness, and distortions, he should probably be reimbursing all the attendees he's defrauded over the years.
steve s · 20 January 2007
mike · 20 January 2007
It is one of the signs of legal crackpotism that folk like kjvdoc think prosecutions succeed despite holes in their cases that amateurs can point out. Just like the way creationist crackpots (the latter redundant, I know) think that evolution can be brought down by saying it is contrary to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics or because survival of the fittest is a tautology.
The Hovind clan used scams like having multiple family members cash checks for $9,000 on the same day. kjvdoc is just out there lying for creationism and crackpotism.
Steviepinhead · 20 January 2007
Hovind may well be clueless and stupid, but in this case he's also culpable for an intentional and long-term effort to defraud the government.
Nobody's cheering for the IRS here or standing in line to pay taxes.
But when cheats like Hovind pay MUCH less than they should, the (relatively) honest rest of us pay more.
Good riddance.
Jon Williams · 20 January 2007
Blog Survey.
True or False?
Hovind is a sinner.
David B. Benson · 20 January 2007
steve s --- I would say ignorant rather than stupid or 'dumb'. Some of those red-neck crackers have quite a good head on their shoulders...
haceaton · 20 January 2007
stevaroni · 20 January 2007
bob · 20 January 2007
NJ
The really sad thing is that there is a prison in Farmville VA, where Hovind is suppose to make an appearance on 4/1/2007.
Bob
Nick (Matzke) · 20 January 2007
steve s · 20 January 2007
Peter · 21 January 2007
DMC · 21 January 2007
Over at Red State Rabble, under the post HARD TIME, a lawyer named O'Connor is calling for HOVIND and his wife to be murdered in prison, like Dahmer.
Pat Hayes frequently deletes and bans, but has left this up.
Ed Brayton on his blog agrees that this looks like what O'Connor is advocating, and some are calling for his Ethics Committee to be notified.
Frankly, this kind of talk doesn't help. Hovind was wrong and was prosecuted.
Persecution becomes something else.
Dan · 21 January 2007
Steve S wrote: "Those few relatives I'm talking about are't merely ignorant. The decisions they make, the beliefs they hold, seem detached from all reason. They lack the mental skills to distinguish the likely from the unlikely, the reasonable from the impossible. It's a complete and enduring inability to tell good ideas from bad ones."
I think that you are touching on the essence of the problem here Steve.
How is it that we (Humans) are able to deconstruct and reason and conceive of such complex ideas (like - oh Evolution, for instance), and yet seem to be so utterly incapable of grasping the difference between dearly held beliefs and mere facts.
This is an idea that has been fascinating me for quite some time, and it really is spotlighted by continued religious doctrine being accepted over observed reality in 21st century America. YECs exhibit an excessive capacity for this sort of self-delusion, but I do notice a little of this tendency in all humans.
What would be the survival benefits of delusional, illogical tendencies? I think that it may be an extension of our pattern-projecting abilities and the ability to imagine possible futures that enable us to make plans.
Dan
Salim Fadhley · 21 January 2007
Looky, conservative sites are already calling him a "martyr". Wow:
http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/2007/01/21/kent-hovind-another-martyr-in-americas-culture-war-against-rampant-secularism.aspx
Erasmus · 21 January 2007
anyone else notice that some genius posting at the CSEblogs post that nick put up has begun calling for GW Bush to give Dr Dino a full pardon?
i'd rather they were cellmates instead.
David B. Benson · 21 January 2007
steve s, Nick et al. --- Good points. Some people are dogmatically rigid. That is not just simple ignorance, although it might be correlated with stupidity. Dunno.
Good discussion about this. Thank you, each and every one...
stevaroni · 21 January 2007
John Marley · 21 January 2007
Erasmus:
Please, don't spread that around! The eleventh-hour pardon is a time honored tradition. If Hovind gets out after only 2 years, I'm blaming you.
David B. Benson · 21 January 2007
stevaroni --- Jesus was willing to talk with tax collectors, the most despised of men...
Nothing about tax cheats, AFAIK.
Gary Hurd · 21 January 2007
Too bad fundies ignore the Bible:
Romans 13:
3. [...] Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;
4. for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.
5. Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake.
6. For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.
I don't find the last part of verse 6, "... for rulers are servants of God ..." at all credible, but then I am not a literalist.
stevaroni · 21 January 2007
Carol Clouser · 22 January 2007
Stevaroni wrote:
"Let's start with the obvious...
"Thou shalt not steal and Thou shalt not bear false witness.
"Two oldies but goodies".
I don't give a whit for Hovind, but not paying taxes is not the same as stealing. After all, it is the IRS that is trying to take Hovind's money, and Hovind is trying to hold on to his own. You can actually argue that the IRS is trying to rob Hovind of HIS hard-earned money. Not paying your taxes is illegal but it is not stealing.
Now, about bearing false witness...that's another matter.
Anton Mates · 22 January 2007
Popper's ghost · 22 January 2007
MartinM · 22 January 2007
stevaroni · 22 January 2007
Carol Clouser · 22 January 2007
Stevaroni and Anton,
What I said was that tax-evasion is not stealing, not that it is ethical or moral to do so. And the government services you mention, Anton, are not paid for by the federal government nor is their value all that obvious, nor is it clear that Hovind entered willingly and voluntarily into any kind of relationship with the taxing authority seeking to take his money.
Whether it is ethical to evade paying taxes obviously depends on what the government does with the money, whether the government has a moral right to impose and enforce its rules, which in turn depends on how it came to power, and so on and on. I am sure Hovind will give you a good argument along these lines.
But stealing it is not.
LazyDay · 22 January 2007
Raging Bee · 22 January 2007
Carol blithered:
And the government services you mention, Anton, are not paid for by the federal government nor is their value all that obvious, nor is it clear that Hovind entered willingly and voluntarily into any kind of relationship with the taxing authority seeking to take his money.
By choosing to remain a citizen and resident of the USA, and to make use of the taxpayer-funded benefits thereof, when he could have found another country to which to emigrate, Hovind (like myself) did indeed "willingly and voluntarily" agree to be bound by all the laws and obligations of US citizenship, including the obligation to contribute his share (as determined by US law) of the costs of maintaining the well-ordered liberty from which Hovind benefited. (That fair trial he got before being sent to the slammer cost money too; so do those elections that he and his kind are using to try to enshrine their know-nothing agenda into law.)
Peter · 22 January 2007
Just to join in the chorus of the obvious. That Shelley the Republican link is crazy. She says that Jesus is the founder of the United States. Oh Christian Dominionists. When will you please stop trying to rewrite history?
Mike · 22 January 2007
"Looky, conservative sites are already calling him a "martyr". Wow: http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/2007/01/21/k..."
Uh, guys, Shelley the Republican is a satire site, not a conservative site at all. Of course, the lunacy many 'conservatives' spout makes it hard to tell at times.
Flint · 22 January 2007
cronk · 22 January 2007
Carol, state and local government agencies do receive federal funding, directly and indirectly.
Peter · 22 January 2007
"Looky, conservative sites are already calling him a "martyr". Wow: http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/2007/01/21/k......"
I'll consider myself clowned.
stevaroni · 22 January 2007
carol clouser · 22 January 2007
Stevaroni,
Regarding those "tricky" questions God will ask you and each of us on the day of reckoning and the legal advice you may need to answer them.
According to the Talmud (you know that 60-volume commentary on the ORIGINAL Hebrew bible by the ultimate experts on what it meant and the oral tradition that came with it) you will be asked only four basic questions.
They are (I am translating loosely from the Aramaic here):
(1) Have you conducted your affairs in good faith?
(2) Were you engaged in the raising of a family?
(3) Did you set aside time for study?
(4) Did you help prepare the world for the messianic era (by fostering peace and reconciliation, I assume)?
Are you ready, Stravoni? Need a lawyer?
carol clouser · 22 January 2007
Stevaroni,
I apologize for mispelling your name at the end there. No insult intended.
GuyeFaux · 22 January 2007
Anton Mates · 23 January 2007
stevaroni · 23 January 2007
Raging Bee · 23 January 2007
Carol asked, and I'll answer, FWIW:
According to the Talmud (you know that 60-volume commentary on the ORIGINAL Hebrew bible by the ultimate experts on what it meant and the oral tradition that came with it) you will be asked only four basic questions.
They are (I am translating loosely from the Aramaic here):
(1) Have you conducted your affairs in good faith? Mostly yes.
(2) Were you engaged in the raising of a family? Mostly no, but at least I took reasonable measures to avoid having kids I couldn't afford to raise in keeping with my responsibilities. Also, I did some babysiting as a teenager. Does that count?
(3) Did you set aside time for study? Enough to see through the most bogus claims of apocalyptic religions that have nothing better to look forward to than the destruction of their God's creation.
(4) Did you help prepare the world for the messianic era (by fostering peace and reconciliation, I assume)?
You "ASSUME?!" Didn't the "ultimate experts on what it meant" explain this matter in any detail? That seems a rather important thing to understand, doesn't it? So, when will the "ultimate experts on what it meant" come back to clarify this? Hopefully messianic era can wait until we get this clarification...
stevaroni · 23 January 2007
Keith Douglas · 23 January 2007
Steviepinhead: On the contrary, he is charging far more than they are worth, considering that they contain negative knowledge.
Carol Clouser · 23 January 2007
Stevaroni wrote:
"Apparently, all I have to do is "Do unto others as I would have them do unto me", which is, frankly, a whole lot easier than preparing an entire world for the messianic era."
My understanding is that you will be asked the same questions that I will be asked. And the principle of "do unto others..." doesn't quite cut it. You might prefer that others leave you alone in time of need. You may even wish to kill yourself. Do you do unto others in the same manner?
Preparing "an entire world" sounds like a tall order, which is why the Talmudists continued: Rabbi Tarfon said, "The day is short, the task is abundant, the laborers are lazy, the wage is great, and the master of the house is insistent. You are not required to complete the task, yet you are not free to withdraw from it."
Carol Clouser · 23 January 2007
Stevaroni,
Or you might find this more to your liking:
Rabbi Akiva said, "Everything is given on collateral and a net is spread over all the living. The shop is open, the merchant extends credit, the ledger is open, the hand writes, and whoever wishes to borrow, let him come and borrow. The collectors make their rounds constantly, every day, and collect payment from the borrower whether he realizes it or not, for they have proof to rely upon and the judgement is truthful. And everything is prepared for the banquet."
Is there a need for elaboration or commentary?
GuyeFaux · 23 January 2007
chance · 23 January 2007
One wonders at what legal advice Hovind was receiving, surly his lawyers would have told him it was folly to challenge the IRS in such a way.
Naive as he was to the expectations of the IRS, I can't help feeling sorry for him, 10 years is an awfully long time. Too long IMO.
Anton Mates · 23 January 2007
fnxtr · 23 January 2007
Wheee! Another religious war!
The passage in Matthew 7:12 (NIV)says: "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets".
My italics, obviously.
Let the bickering begin.
I'll start. It's a good idea. But's it no more heaven-sent than any other early philosophy.
Anton Mates · 23 January 2007
yea · 25 January 2007
To all of you who think this is funny, you are sick individuals, 10 years in prison ? while murderers like O.J. are walking around free. This is not a violent criminal, he didn't even steal, the money was given to him, He really should be tax exempt under our laws, not even needing a 501c3, and this money never was the private bankers collection agency's in the first place.
The only thing he should have done is pay payroll taxes.
Just my 2 cents.
Raging Bee · 25 January 2007
To quote from the movie "Grosse Point Blank:"
"Ten Years. Ten years! tenyears. TEN! YEARS!! TEN years! Ten YEARS!!..."
GuyeFaux · 25 January 2007
MpM · 27 January 2007
Yea said
" The only thing he should have done is pay payroll taxes.
Just my 2 cents."
Look... if you listen to the phone recordings, he is comparing the IRS to the Nazis, accusing everyone else of breaking the law...
I would agree with you if he had been found guilty of tucking a few bucks away for a rainy day. I'd even entertain the thought of a shorter sentence that matched his penitence.
He is still conning others from his jail cell. While on one hand, he claims everyone else is corrupt, on the other he tells his son to start moving finances around to hide money.
Did he steal? Yea he did. He stole from me. I pay my taxes. I pay for the roads he drives on, the public transportation his workers took to get to work, etc. He stole from me, and now he has to pay the price.