This is a supplement to Jonathan Schwartz Finishes His Account Of Kent Hovind's Trial.
Chronology of orders to the defendants
Below is a timeline of the events mentioned in the closing and throughout the March 2015 trial. It specifies dates and details explaining the mountain of documented evidence.
January 19, 2007: Kent Hovind was sentenced to ten years in prison. As part of his sentence, Hovind had to pay $430,400 in accordance with the law to the forfeiture judgment. (Exhibits 7 & 8). Hovind was also ordered to pay $605,000 in restitution, $5,800 in special monetary assessments, and a $2,000 fine. (Exhibit 6a). Before heading to prison, defendant Hovind paid Glen Stoll $20,000 to defend Creation Science Evangelism, Hovind’s ministry (Exhibits 31n-3 & 31n-4).
June 28, 2007: Hovind received an order from the Court to forfeit the following properties: 5720 North Palafox Highway, 400 Block Cummings Road, 5800 Block North Old Palafox Street, 29 Cummings Road, 21 Cummings Road, 100 Cummings Road, 23 Cummings Road, 120 Oleander Road; 12 Oleander Road, 116 Cummings Road, and a Wachovia Bank account. (Exhibit 9b
August 2007: Following Jo Hovind’s sentencing for structuring charges, Jo moved to stay the forfeiture pending her request to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. (Exhibit S-3, line 22). Jo Hovind’s motion to stay was denied by the Court. (Exhibit S-3, line 23).
March 2009: The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed Kent and Jo Hovind’s conviction and sentence. The appellate Court also affirmed the Court’s June 28, 2007 Order Forfeiting Substitute Property (Exhibit 72).
A footnote in the prosecution’s rule 29 motion states that Jo Hovind appealed the Court’s Order forfeiting the property (Exhibit 72). Jo is Kent’s wife, who had made many of the irregular bank transactions that landed Hovind and herself in prison. As part of the Eleventh Circuit’s Opinion, the Court addressed the sufficiency of the evidence for Count Fifty-Eight, impairing and impeding the lawful function of the IRS (Exhibit 72, pgs. 17 & 18). In addressing the sufficiency, the Eleventh Circuit Court noted that, “Kent [Hovind] filed complaints and sued agents of the Internal Revenue Service and instituted legal proceedings to circumvent the lawful seizure of his assets.” (Exhibit 72, pgs. 17 & 18).
Later, Eric Hovind filed an objection to the forfeiture of 23 Cummings Rd, and Glen Stoll filed an objection to the forfeiture of the remaining nine pieces of real property, as purported trustee for various “trusts” (Exhibits 9c & 9d).
July 29, 2009: The Court entered an order which sought to forfeit Eric Hovind and Glen Stoll’s interest in the properties and bank account. (Exhibit 10b). As part of the Court’s Order, they determined that by the time defendant Hovind and his wife Jo Hovind began “transferring the five individual trust properties and the CSE Foundation properties to Stoll’s trusts, the Hovinds had already engaged in serious criminal conduct” (Exhibit 10b, pg. 5). The Court further determined that Glen Stoll was a “nominee title holder of the substitute forfeiture properties held in trusts for which he acts as trustee” (Exhibit 10b, pg. 14). The Court confirmed the forfeiture of property held by nominee trustee Glen Stoll but left ownership of one parcel with Eric Hovind. (Exhibit 10b, pg. 14).
September 14, 2009: Kent Hovind filed his first motion to stay forfeiture. It was denied by the Court. (Exhibit S-3, lines 28 & 29).
A review of the motion shows that defendant Hovind asked the Court to stay the July 29, 2009 Order on the Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment which sought to forfeit third party claimants Eric Hovind and Glen Stoll’s interest in the properties (3:06cr83/MCR, Doc. 330).
May 27, 2010: Kent Hovind filed his second motion to stay forfeiture, and was denied. (Exhibit S-3, lines 46 & 47).
December 15, 2010: Kent Hovind filed his third motion to stay forfeiture, and was declined by the Court yet again.
February 3, 2011: Kent Hovind filed a motion for reconsideration as to stay of criminal forfeiture proceedings. The motion was denied by the Court. (Exhibit S-3, lines 67 & 68).
April and June 2011: Defendant Kent Hovind directed his son Eric Hovind, on three separate occasions, to send money to defendant Hansen on or about the below-identified dates:
April 6, 2011 - $300
June 6, 2011 - $300
June 10, 2011 - $400 (Exhibit 47i).
Count One charges Kent E. Hovind and Paul John Hansen with Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud for conduct occurring between June 1, 2011, and July 1, 2013.
June - September 2011: Defendant Hansen mailed nine purported liens to the Escambia County Clerk of Court to be filed in three separate mailings. These “liens” would be filed on the nine pieces of property the Court had previously ordered to be forfeited in the June 28, 2007 Order, and had forfeited to the United States in July 2009. (Exhibit 15 Series, 16 Series, and 17 Series).
August 31, 2011: Paul John Hansen sends a letter to “Bob,” who’s true identity is Anthony Jaworski. He had bought land that was formerly a part of Dinosaur Adventure Land in 2011. In the letter, Hansen demanded Jaworski to pay $100/day in either cash or gold to pay for rent.
September 14, 2011: Kent tells Eric Hovind to send Hansen $800. (Exhibit 47i).
September 19, 2011: Approximately five days later, defendant Hansen mailed and filed a “Quiet Title – Equitable Action” with the Escambia County Clerk of Court as purported director and trustee of the very same trusts Glen Stoll supposedly represented (Exhibit 18 Series).
This case was later removed to Federal Court as case number 3:11cv475/MCR. (Exhibit 19 Series). Defendant Hansen attempted to file pleadings in Federal Court, but they were rejected. (Exhibit 19 Series).
December 2011: Hansen sends a letter to Anthony Jaworski demanding that he pay “5720 trust” $14,600 in back rent, which is equivalent to payment of $100 a day (Exhibit 54b).
March 26, 2012: The Government filed a Complaint in United States District Court seeking to have defendant Hansen’s liens declared null and void (Exhibit 20a). The United States further sought a permanent injunction against Creation Science Evangelism, the various purported trusts, and any agent or representative acting on their behalf from being allowed to take further action to file or attempt to file any liens, notices, financing statements, and claims of whatever nature with the Clerk of Court in and for Escambia County (Exhibit 20a). Answers were due by May 3, 2012 (Exhibit 20).
June 1, 2011: Kent Hovind directs Eric Hovind to send Hansen $4,000 to pay a bill Hansen had sent. He said, “Time is of the essence!” Further in the e-mail chain, Kent told Eric that Jaworski had been noticed of fraud and “will lose it” (the property). The entire email reads,
Has the $ been sent to Paul yet? I am running out of time to file the legal paperwork (15th) and he needs the $ asap. I do not want you to turn the entire account over to him. Just the 4k we discussed. Please send him the $ right away. He sent a bill I believe and time is of the essence! Please let me know when this is done.” (Exhibit 45c). Thereafter, in said email chain, defendant Hovind said that “the ‘buyer’ in 5720 has been noticed of the fraud and will lose it.” (Exhibit 45c).
Soon after, Hansen attempted to file pleadings on the Government’s March 26, 2012 filing. These were rejected (Exhibits 20c & 20d).
June 4, 2012: The Court issues order to defendants, CSE, CSE Foundation, and the trusts to show cause within 14 days of why order should not be entered for the Government. Apparently, nothing was filed (Exhibit 20d).
June 11, 2012: The United States filed a Motion for Default Summary Judgment in case number 3:12cv136/MCR (Exhibit 20e).
June 15, 2012: Eric Hovind sent $4,000 to defendant Hansen (Exhibit 47i). At or about the same time frame, Hansen had been emailing with an attorney asking them to assist in the CSE civil case 3:12cv136/MCR (Exhibits 46c & 46d). No activity took place, and no pleadings were filed in defendant Hovind’s criminal case during this time period (Exhibit 67).
June 27, 2012: The Judge enters summary judgment for the Government against CSE, CSE Ministry and the “trusts.” All of their agents and representatives are enjoined from filing any more liens or other notices. The Court held that Hansen’s liens were null and void and entered the injunction sought by the United States (Exhibit 20f).
April 1-June 3, 2013: Count five criminal contempt against Paul Hansen for violating the June 27, 2012 order, presumably, by attempting to file “Claim of Lien Affidavit of Obligation” with Escambia County on April 15, 2013, and then by sending the same document to closing attorney on May 22, 2013
April 15-30, 2013: Count four charges Kent E. Hovind and Paul John Hansen with Mail Fraud for mailing or causing to be mailed a Claim of Lien Affidavit of Obligation with attachments between April 1, 2013, and April 15, 2013.
On or about April 15, 2013, defendant Hansen and Glen Stoll caused a Claim of Lien Affidavit of Obligation, with attachments, to be mailed and delivered to the Clerk of Court of Escambia County. Due to insufficient filing fees, the document was mailed back to defendant Hansen. (Exhibit 27 Series).
May 22-29, 2013: Count two mail fraud against Hovind/Hansen and Count 3 criminal contempt against Hovind.
Count two charges Kent E. Hovind and Paul John Hansen with a substantive Count of Mail Fraud for mailing or causing to be mailed four Memoranda of Lis Pendens between May 22, 2013, and May 29, 2013.
May 22, 2013: Hovind signs and mails four lis pendens to Paul Dublin. The lis pendens are for the properties Hovind family members hope to close on soon: 21 Cummings Road, 29 Cummings Road, 100 Cummings Road and 400 Cummings Road. Kent asked Paul Dublin to file the lis pendens on the four properties with the Escambia County Clerk of Court (Exhibit 28 Series) [N.B. Superseding indictment says this was 5/19/2013]. On the same day, defendant Hansen mailed the Claim of Lien Affidavit of Obligation, with attachments (previously returned to him by the Escambia County Clerk of Court) to the title attorney handling the closings on the same four pieces of property (Exhibit 25 Series).
May 29, 2013: Hovind files lis pendens with Escambia County Clerk of Court per Superseding indictment.
July 1, 2013 End of Count 1, Hovind and Hansen conspiracy to commit mail fraud
July 13, 2013: Defendant Hovind sent the following email to his son, Eric Hovind.
“During this entire legal battle the properties are off the county tax roles :), you have a rental agreement :), they are holding your down payment so you are locked in as a first buyer if they come avail. :) and CSE has lines :) and a criminal complaint :) and I have a lis pendens filed :). The prop isn’t going anywhere. Use it” (Exhibit 47b).
July 15, 2013: Hovind mailed Anthony Jaworski, the purchaser of former Dino Land property, a letter. It read,
“both the Trustees Paul Hansen in Omaha and Glen Stoll in Edmonds, WA are working to overturn this travesty of justice from their side while I also fight in my personal capacity.” (Exhibit 55a)
August 22, 2013: The United States filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause and Discharge of Liens seeking to have defendant Hovind’s lis pendens removed and declared null and void. (Exhibit S-3, line 140).
October 11, 2013: Defendant Hovind told his son-in-law Paul Dublin,
“Okay. I have some um. I’m going to win this case and I’m going to get the property back in the name of CSE. I have two very serious buyers for the whole thing in toto. Buy it all.” (Exhibit 31l-2).
December 18, 2013: Kent sent a statement to his son Eric Hovind about what he wants to happen to Dr. Dino, CSE, etc. when he returns.
“Okay. Well maybe everything is fine. Uh. But just. And I think you know it and there is no sense debating it anymore. You know that I still think Dr. Dino, CSE, uh the assets that I left you with are mine and are mine when I get home.. . .Right. Their CSE is controlled by me and I get to decide what to do with it. Now here’s one option.”
December 31, 2013: Kent talked to his daughter, Marlissa about how a lis pendens is like “dog crap” and difficult to remove (Exhibits 31s-1 & 31s-2).
July 9, 2014: Kent Hovind made the following statement to an individual named Mark Harrison,
“If I don’t win my case right away, my plans are to keep fighting until I die. Uh. I’m gonna. I’m gonna sue them and then sue them again and then sue them again just because it’s fun. I like being on the offensive. The best defense is a good offense” (Exhibits 31w-1 & 31w-2).
July 31, 2014: Hansen was personally served with a subpoena to appear before the Grand Jury.
Dura lex sed lex, the law is hard, but it is the law
August 19, 2014: Count Six Contempt of Court: Hansen fails to appear before the Grand Jury to provide handwriting samples and fingerprints. He did this knowing that failing to comply would result in his arrest. Instead of agreeing to the subpoena, Hansen sent a letter to the United States District Court, which was passed on to the Government. When a government witness travel agent was attempting to make plans for Hansen to appear for his subpoena, he responded by forwarding the same letter that had previously been sent to the U.S. District Court. Hansen was then notified that if he had any questions on the authority of the subpoena, that he should seek legal counsel.
At the defendant’s detention hearing held before the United States Magistrate Judge Charles J. Kahn, Jr., it appeared as though the defense was suggesting that the Government or the Court were under some obligation to identify the legal authority for the Grand Jury Subpoena.
No such requirement exists.
In the present case, Hansen failed to appear and comply with the lawfully issued Grand Jury subpoena. As shown above, the burden was upon the defendant (as the Grand Jury subpoena’s recipient) to show unreasonableness. Based upon that, the prosecution asked the Court to prohibit the defendant, defense counsel, and any defense witness from arguing or suggesting that the Government, the Court’s Clerk, or the Grand Jury were under a legal obligation to identify the legal authority upon which the Grand Jury Subpoena was issued (from Government’s motion in limine, document 86).
November 2, 2014: Kent Hovind tells an unknown person that his cell mate gave him legal advice concerning filing liens. His “cellie” was an African American man in the New Hampshire Federal Penitentiary for real-estate fraud. He told Hovind he wasn’t bound by the Court order that told the trustees not to file liens because Kent wasn’t a trustee.
“So when I was up in New Hampshire, my, my cellie who’s the law genius up there, said well Kent the Court banned the trust from filing any more liens but that doesn’t apply to you. You’re not the trustee. That’s not your property but she said it was so you can file a lien. I said okay. So I filed a lis pendens which I don’t think is the same as the lien. I don’t know.”