My biggest realistic hope for Kent Hovind after his release from prison was that he would become conventionally tax compliant - focus his energy on saving souls and exposing the "lies of evolution". The first of those is benign and the latter is probably relatively harmless.
My wildest dream was that he would realize/admit that his legal troubles were of his own making and that he would advise his flock to say away from the tax mishegas of the likes of Paul John Hansen and Glenn Stoll. That was altogether unrealistic.
However his continued efforts in the area of tax mishegas seem to be limited to promoting what Bob Baty characterizes as his "false legal narrative"
This is quite different from the days of CSE 6 when he was promoting widespread income tax non-compliance.
and encouraging churches to avoid 501(c)(3) status.
Ernie Land assured me that that the new structure for Kent's ministry would be conventionally tax compliant. And we have the first public sign of that in the filing of Form 990 which was prepared by Britton Finch CPA (A real CPA holding Alabama Certificate 9331). I'm thinking about giving him a call, but am waiting until tax season is over. No promises.
I had a couple of nits to pick about the Form 990, but I have seen a lot worse. So I think they are really trying.
I decided to try to interview someone on the CSE board and I struck gold with Bill Sardi. When I asked about on the record, Bill insisted that everything he said was on the record. I had trouble keeping up with him and am not a great note taker, but I believe that I captured the essence of what he had to say about his experience as CSE board member.
Bill Sardi is one of the six board members listed on the Form 990. Bill Sardi is involved with health supplements and I note that there is some controversy around that, but I didn't and will not be getting into that. I'll leave it for the comments section. There are only so many rabbit holes I can go down. He as on Alex Jones which I don't see as a great endorsement
At any rate, Bill started off giving me a version of the Hovindication rant about Kent Hovind being persecuted. He was going on about the Obama administration enough that I had to remind him that Kent was prosecuted the first time during the Bush administration, Bill doesn't think all that highly of Bush either.
A detail that I have never heard is the claim that there was at least one document signed by Lois Lerner in and among filings about Kent. I found this a little odd, because there did not seem to be anything related to Kent's case that would have called for attention from Lois Lerner unless you think her position at the IRS was roving Satanic minion (She was Director of Rulings and Agreements in the Exempt Organizations function and then was promoted to Director of Exempt Organizations). The essence of the interminable scandal was about delays in processing applications for exempt status, something that pre-prison Kent Hovind would not have concerned himself with. I was so intrigued by that claim that I reached out to Ernie Land about it. Here is his response:
That was told by several family members. It was questioned at the time and lead to the many beliefs, Kent was a target because of his Ministry and creation debates. Kind of supports the beliefs Kent was targeted for those debates, as well as his speaking out about taxation. What I find even more interesting is the cost of their defenses and the lack of any real defense. I call it malfeasance. I have a anonymous source, who claims to be a retired CPA, who has made a FOIA request to be sure the CSE Trust did not ever apply or have a EIN#, which I am sure the facts will show it did not, and I originally helped open the bank accounts, so I am very certain none exist, but that person must be sure it is factual. And they tell me if I am factually correct that there are US codes making it illegal for an entity without a EIN# to even ask for a W-4 or issue 1099’s, which would have been a rock solid defense. So we shall see, and I have requested the study to verify the codes, so if you know which code they speak of, I would appreciate you sharing with me some wisdom.
I poked at the followup question a bit and concluded that the rule is that if you are required to file something that requires an EIN then you are required to apply for an EIN.
Regardless, there was something just a bit different about Bill's recounting of the Hovindication narrative. He indicated that he believed that Kent was misled by his advisers. Kent actually believed that the things he was filing were going to work. Bill believes that the IRS is kind of like the mafia and probably illegitimate, but does not see any point in fighting them. This is the kind of reasonably sensible attitude that I got from Irwin Schiff's sons.
And this is what has me feeling optimistic about Kent's future. Apparently he is holding himself accountable to a board that includes people who have a realistic view of how the world works regardless of unconventional view on some matters. Bill assured me and I don't doubt him that the board has placed limits on what Kent is doing.
Bill indicated that Kent will probably get his roadside dinosaur. On the other hand you will note that the 990 was prepared by a CPA not Brady Byrum.
I'm kicking myself for not taking better notes when I spoke with Bill, although some of the tidbits were more gossipy than newsworthy. I'll try to do better in the future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter J Reilly CPA writes on taxes for forbes.com.
This post is written with the assumption that the reader has some familiarity with the trials and tribulations of Independent Baptist Minister, young earth creationist, convicted felon Kent Hovind (Doctor Dino). If he is new to you, you might want to read this piece first.
____________________________________________________________________________
When Kent Hovind, nearing the end of a long prison sentence, was facing the prospect of another long sentence for actions taken in response to property seized as a result of his first conviction, one of the primary outlets of the Hovindication movement was freekenthovind.com,
Thanks to my role as a critic of Kent Hovind's innocence narrative, I was mentioned
EDITORS NOTE: Peter Reilly of Forbes.com and IRS agents running a Kent Hovind defamation page are working side by side with the Atheist organization, Freedom From Religion Foundation, to target Christian Churches. We are doing an investigation into these individuals and have very strong evidence that the IRS and specific individuals are committing treason in America – stay tuned.
Knock on wood, the treason hunters have not come for me yet. And then there was:
EDITORS NOTE: This country was founded by Christians. Don’t like it? Go to communist China – I’ll pay for your move. Peter Reilly, IRS agents and atheists from the Freedom From Religion Foundation are working together like Hiter’s Gestapo. A treasonous offense against our Christian Nation. These domestic terrorists want to be a bunch of puny g-ds running America… they want Government to be a puny g-d they can run. These people gnash their teeth at the fact America was founded as a Christian Nation by Puritans. For heaven’s sake, Congress printed KJV bibles for schools in the late and early 1800’s! The Bible was the school’s foundation for education and moral development!
At any rate, I have to work on forgiving myself for experiencing a bit of schadenfreude based on what has happened with the site. Freekenthovind.com now points to "lies of the deVil". Theodore Valentine, who remained anonymous when he was calling me a traitor who should be exiled to China, has turned the site, at least for the moment, into a Hovind attack site.
Oddly enough, at least so far, the attack against Hovind seems to be as silly as most of the freekenthovind.com attacks on Hovind critics were. Waiting For The Other Shoe To Drop
Theo has been putting out teasers trailers on a lengthy Hovind exposure documentary that is soon to be released. Hovindologists are on the edges of their seats listening to the popcorn pop. Here is the most recent and purportedly final teaser.
So far Theo's revelations have been pretty disappointing. His teasers are trying to build a greed case, but that is very weak. I have tailed off on watching Hovind videos, but I have to say as Christian evangelical preaching types go, his fund raising is pretty low key. And the snippets Theo shows of Kent sitting on a tractor or evidence that a long term board member has her own room while volunteers sleep barracks style is entirely without scandal.
Theo's most dramatic release so far is an audio recording of what appears to be a counseling session that Theo had to go through (That is my inference of the context, anyway).
What is amazing about this is that Hovind in the secret recording is exactly like the public face of Kent Hovind. He makes it quite clear in public pronouncements that he runs things at the site in Lenox, Alabama and that he expects people to come there to work and that if they don't like the way he runs things, they can just leave.
The only thing I noted that might be "scandalous" (though not really) was that he made it clear that he expects the ministry to make money from his innocence videos and that he is not interested in helping Brady Byrum help others. I ran that by Rudy Davis who did not think much of it:
It does not surprise me that people get disturbed that Kent feels financially responsible for his projects and wants to look for ways to make a profit. I believe wholeheartedly that Kent was targeted by a bias judge with an anti-Christian agenda and spent 9 years in prison as an innocent man. If Kent wanted to engage in a mutually profitable business relationship with Brady to produce videos proving Kent was innocent, then that is between Brady and Kent. I wouldn't care to speculate on the details and whatever agreement that they had should have remained private between them and not published from a secretly recorded conversation by an infiltrator turned traitor. There is nothing wrong with Kent looking for ways to make money to further his ministry based upon efforts to prove his innocence. I suspect that Brady wanted to take his time and be very thorough and Kent was pushing for completion of the project.
My inquiry prompted Rudy to contact Brady who put out a ringing endorsement of Kent.
This prompted a written response from Kent to Rudy that includes a threat of legal action against Theo. Erin Davis read Kent's response on another video.
Theo Was Still A Mensch When He Was In Kent's Corner
I suggested to both Rudy and Ernie Land that maybe they should consider taking a look at what Theo put up on freekenthovind.com back in the day and distance themselves from some of that. Kind of like something to the effect of "Gee, even though we don't agree with Pete Reilly's analysis of Kent's legal situation, we don't think it was kindly to suggest he was a traitor who should be exiled to China". I didn't have much luck. Rudy responded:
Hi Peter,
Kent can speak for himself but I would guess that from Kent's perspective, freekenthovind.com was helpful in the effort to make noise and shine light so Kent could be a free man once again.
The analogy I would give is the following:
A man is stuck in a burning building. The building has been on fire for 9 years and there is a threat that the fire could go on for another 20 years. A supporter decides to help the man in the burning building and drives a tank through the neighborhood and into the building and helps to rescue the man. Now in the process of driving the tank through the neighborhood, the man runs over some people's fences. Your fence got ran over but ultimately the man was released from the building which was going to burn for the next 20 years. So it is natural that Kent would be thankful to the man driving the tank and not be held responsible for the broken fences. The man who drove the tank should be responsible for the broken fences.
Just my $0.02. You always give me interesting things to consider. I pray all is well with you and yours.
What was really amusing about Rudy's response is that the freekenthovind.com link in his email was live and we know where that points.
Ernie was even more discouraging:
You got to know all of us American patriots believe the entire IRS, 14th amendment, Federal zone and Judicial are treason of the US Constitution perpetuated upon the real America and it’s people. We feel you and 90% or more of America have been lead like sheep. I often make fun of their legalize with facts like Attorneys as a requirement in Court, when that fact can not be argued with any promise because the Constitution and in fact a free man by Constitution can choose their council of choice, the Bar did not even exist when the Constitution was written, so in fact a licensed Attorney could not be a fact. Things like speedy trial, trial by jury for any value over $20, these are all Constitution that have been abridged. Marriage being redefined was unlawful and treason by a Supreme Court. So those who adhere to and do not stand against such acts in reality are committing treason, most unknowingly, just as unknowingly as is argued that each of us commit 3 felonies each day by legal standards.
I guess your affiliation with the likes of Baty and friends is why Theo places you in that category. And given a Court room type setting in which we could debate it, I sincerely believe 12 jurors would be a confused hung jury or come back with a like verdict. Just saying! I also feel the system and our colleges have brainwashed most American’s into a sheep like trance. My 2 cents!
Wow, I just need somebody else to send me a penny and I'll have a nickel.
Other Critics
Somehow closely related to the falling out with Theo is Deborah Henderson. I have not invested enough lifespan into Deborah's videos to sort out what her issues are. Fellow Hovindologist Dee Holmes took a shot:
1) Hovind remarried after his divorce. Hovind claims that he had a bunch of pastors say it was OK because he didn't instigate it, but Deborah apparently believes that you shouldn't marry after divorce. That's why Deborah calls Mary Tocco a "Jezebel," because she's leading Kent astray. I cannot put enough stress on how Independent Fundamental Baptists don't think you should remarry after a divorce. (For the record, some of the earliest Christians thought that you shouldn't remarry after a spouse dies, either, but that was by no means universal, not at all.)
2) I think Deborah really likes Theo and she's defending him in the Theo-Kent battle. I think it's also because I've gotten the very strong impression that Theo's views on Kent's remarriage are similar to that of Deborah.
Keep in mind, though, these IFBers will separate over any little thing. Deborah and Theo may be allies on this but they could separate over something else that we outsiders would find terribly insignificant.
I'm open to hearing more from or about Deborah, but I do prefer writing to video.
Then there is "Whatever With Billy"
Billy's beef with Kent has to do with a difference of opinion about the nature of the crime committed by someone that Kent wanted Billy to "have fellowship with". I don't think I want to get into it, but you can check it out if you are curious. I kind of like Billy's style of presentation. It's About The Theology
You'll have to forgive me here as I explain something that you and I both know, but you need to consider other readers.
Most Christian doctrine is based on the notion of original sin which creates a need for salvation. God is infinitely just and infinitely merciful, which created kind of a dilemma. All human beings deserve to be tortured for all eternity and are incapable of changing that. So God being merciful sent his only son (Who is also God. That's the trinity thing. Don't try to figure it out. It's a mystery.) to pay the price for our sins by suffering and dying on the cross.
When this was explained to us when I was a kid, we were told that when we commit a sin, it's like we are driving one of the nails a little deeper into Jesus on the cross.
At any rate much of modern history in the West has been people arguing about the fine points of how you can take advantage of the mercy that God granted by having Jesus get tortured for us and, somewhat incidentally, whether somebody else has done what they need to do to, as they say, be saved.
People who were raised in a very secular way are unable to appreciate how and why such disputes are of overriding importance. The big divide is about faith versus works. I'm reminded of W.H. Auden's poem September 1, 1939:
Accurate scholarship can
Unearth the whole offence
From Luther until now
That has driven a culture mad
Go ahead and yell at me that the poem has nothing to do with this discussion. Sorry, those lines haunt me.
At any rate, Joshua Joscelyn was one of Kent's strongest supporters during the trial, one of the few people from the Pensacola area who were out on the street during the trial. Here he is talking to Hovindologist Dee Holmes
And here he is being interviewed by filmmaker Jonathan Schwartz
Joshua, who seems to be in some way aligned with Theo is now advising Christians to stay away from and not support Kent Hovind, because he is a "damnable heretic". It has to do with the relationship between faith and repentance.
Kent's marriage to Mary Tocco has also cost him Christian support. George Lujack, who was there for parts of the trial came out against him on that ground back in September. What Does Theo Have On Kent?
As a tax geek, the thing that I worry about the most for Kent Hovind (I have this odd affection for him that would like to keep him out of trouble) is that his new ministry will be viewed as an alter-ego, which is the source of most of his problems with the IRS the first time around - that and him being stubborn and enthralled with crackpot tax theories.
Kent remains enthralled with crackpot tax theories, but he may be getting that out of his system with Brady Byrum's innocence narrative project. Don't get me started. Ernie Land has assured me that the ministry is being run to be conventionally tax compliant. The alter ego problem is very serious, because Kent must still be living under a huge civil liability for income taxes.
He never really discusses that. Perhaps that is because many people can sympathize with him on the structuring conviction (Taking his own money out of the bank), but probably even most of his followers appreciate that if you go decades without filing individual returns, brag about it on video and encourage other people to not file, it is not unreasonable for the IRS to take an interest in you.
(Long video but the money shot is early around 00:02:17 ("I have not filed any income tax in 28 years")).
Independent of Kent's criminal conviction, he has a huge ($3 million plus) civil liability. While he was in prison he likely would have been classified currently not collectible. And there is a good chance that collections might not be interested in him at this point. They probably have until 2023 though. At that point at which collections picks up his file, it will be intriguing as to whether it is handled conventionally, in which case we might never hear about it or as Kent handled things in the past.
If I were really cynical I would believe that Kent knew he was being taped by Theo and that Theo would release the tape. The reason I say that is that Theo's tape helps make the case that Kent is running things about as straight and narrow as is possible. A number of financial matter are discussed and rather than making the type of bottom line I'm the boss type of rulings that he is fond of, Kent concludes that there needs to be a board meeting to sort those matters out.
The verbal picture presented in Theo's tape is one of Kent as a strong manager, who wants the staff to follow orders and mind their own business, but one who is ultimately accountable to a board when it comes to major issues, particularly financial ones.
More From Rudy
As I was working on this I got another message from Rudy. He is particularly upset that Theo's last teaser video indicates that Kent was funding Rudy. Rudy puts it as only Rudy can:
Theo put out a public video implying that Kent Hovind is funneling me money. Just so you know, that is a lie. We have never made a dime off Kent and actually the opposite is true, it has cost me dearly but it was worth it. I just wanted to share that. Theo can't imagine that someone wants to help without any financial benefit. Theo is a barking poodle on the train tracks and the train is coming.
I've been at this while and I have a fairly well developed BS detector and I have to say I think Rudy Davis is a very honest guy. He believes many things that I find preposterous, but he believes them sincerely.
Kent Hovind, on the other hand, reminds me a lot of our President. I'll leave it at that.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter J Reilly is anxiously awaiting Theo's mangum opus, but is prepared to be disappointed.
Kent Hovind's latest innocence narrative was long delayed (Originally it was going to be a January surprise. January 2016) and had a false start, but it is up and running now. It is the work of Brady Byrum. And whatever else you might think of it, there seems to be an original idea here.
Kent Hovind was convicted on a 58 count indictment in 2006. He appealed his conviction to the Eleventh Circuit which upheld it. He finished his long sentence last summer and is now on supervised release.
Brady Byrum
Brady Byrum believes that Kent's conviction was wrongful and that, the Eleventh Circuit to the contrary notwithstanding, that the conviction can be overturned which will entitle Kent to substantial compensation.
Assuming Brady has arguments that support this conclusion, a conventional approach would be to go back to the Eleventh Circuit and argue that Kent had had ineffective assistance of counsel. Well, that's the only thing I can think of anyway. Brady Byrum is taking a different approach.
He is asking people to watch a series of videos that he believes will convince them that Kent Hovind is innocent and that the people complicit in his conviction, most notably Judge Margaret Casey Rodgers were altogether wicked.
Here are the videos . I don't know of anybody who has watched them all. None on the hearty band of Hovindologists have signed on for it. Rudy Davis reports that he has started and is convinced that Brady is a legal genius
In the video you get a view of Rudy's garage which he is cleaning out. It would make a good setting for a Storage Wars episode.
Anyway Rudy is geared up for the full drill so we will probably be hearing more from him.
After you watch the videos and you are convinced that Kent is innocent you are ready to take the next step, which involves a number of filings.
Forms To Fill Out
The First Set of Forms is addressed to the 11th Circuit. There is a cover letter which seems to anticipate that the Court might be concerned about getting a boatload of these things.
Then there is a sworn affidavit of criminal complaint, which is, I guess, why you have to really listen, understand and agree with the videos so you can, you know, swear. Among the things that you swear to is:
. I AFFIRM that I BELIEVE that because Margaret Catherine Rodgers DID NOT refuse to accept, DID NOT abandon, DID NOT cast out and DID NOT reject the Fraud of the Federal Prosecutors contained in the Indictment thereof, during the above time span between the Indictment Filing Date of July 11, 2006 and the Trial Date of October 18, 2006, in Case Number 3:06CR83/MCR, that she therefore accepted, ratified, approved of and joined in with said Fraud, knowingly, willingly and voluntarily in a conspiracy with the other actors named herein.
OK. So you just watched a video by a paralegal and you now believe that a judge whose opinion was upheld on appeal was in a conspiracy for accepting an indictment. Just saying. Here are a few more of the affirmations.
I AFFIRM I have read the three unoverturned United
States Supreme Court case law quotes from the California Bankers Association
v. Shultz, 416 U.S. 21 (1974); U. S. v. Murphy, 809 F. 2d 1427 (9th
Circ. 1987); U.S. v. Mersky, 361 U.S. 431 (1960) cases, that clearly
explain the tenet or maxim of law that when a Statute does not have its own
Implementing Enforcement language, that Regulations must be written by the
Executive Branch Official in charge of enforcement, for the Statute to be lawfully
enforceable, applicable and prosecutable.
I AFFIRM that I therefore BELIEVE that because the Statute 26 USC 7202 used in Counts One through Twelve of the Indictment in the Case Number of 3:06CR83/MCR had no Enforcement Regulations, it could not have been lawfully enforced against Kent Hovind, and thus SHOULD NOT have been prosecuted against Kent Hovind.
I AFFIRM I have read quotes from at least four separate Federal Case laws U.S. v. Reinis, 794 F.2d 506; U.S. v. Espriella, 781 F.2d 1432; U.S. v. Anzalone, 766 F.2d 676 and U.S. v. Varbel, 780 F.2d. 758 that clearly show the COMPLETE ABSENCE OF CRIMINALITY regarding 18 USC 2 and 31 USC 5313, when the total of transactions conducted by each individual at any single bank, on any single day, did not add up to or go over $10,000.
. I AFFIRM that this invalidity of the Form 4789 does not JUST strip the one United States District Court in the Northern District of Florida from lawfully prosecuting the 45 Hovind Structuring charges in Case Number 3:06CR83/MCR, this also strips the lawfulness from EVERY OTHER Structuring Charge and conviction across the entire United States of America, filed against every other Defendant, making the alleged offense of Structuring an utter IMPOSSIBILITY when the Form 4789 has NOT EVER been truly mandatory to begin with.
Then there is a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct or Disability and letter to send to your Congressman and Senators looking to impeach Judge Rodgers.
The second set of forms concern one of the prosecutors Michelle Heldmyer. The third set of forms are, I think to appeal if the first set does not work.
What About Later Case Law?
What is odd about the whole package is the notion that Brady Byrum thinks he has proved that all structuring convictions are invalid and he maintains that Judge Rodgers is criminal for not reaching the same conclusion. If Kent and Jo Hovind had been the only people to be convicted of structuring, he might have a point, but they are hardly alone as you can see here.
I have to confess that I have not listened to all 12 hours. I'm more of a reader, but I think I have extracted a key piece from the first video at 26:13. It is the list of cases that Mr. Byrum will use to build his argument.
There is quite a bit of post-1986 case law that is actually about the statute that the Hovinds were convicted under. In some instances there were acquittals based on lack of willfulness, but the statute has been upheld. US v MacPherson, for example, was decided in 2005.
Byrum's apparent lack of discussion of case law after the statute in question was passed, at least in my mind, greatly weakens his argument. Frankly arguing that a judge is criminal for not overturning a statute that has been upheld is kind of preposterous.
About The False Start
The false start that I mentioned at the outset is alluded to. In Part 8 at the outset, you will see in small print at the bottom.
The views expressed in these materials are not necessarily the views of CSE Inc or its principals.
I asked Ernie Land of CSE about that and he gave me the following statement
Brady Byrum interviewed Dr. Kent Hovind intensively for weeks as an investigative reporter. After getting all the facts relating to Dr. Hovind’s case Brady Byrum has prepared a very well researched DVD series proving with case law Dr. Hovind’s innocence. The timing could not be more perfect as it seems this election has proven American’s have awaken to the excessive abuse in Politics, Government and in our Judicial system as well. Many of us felt the Judge was very biased and even overreached in an effort to discriminate against Christians. The DVD series Kent Hovind Innocent revels all those abuses with case law and the real reason codes were made in Congress to prove Dr. Hovind’s innocence. The Ministry and Creation Science Evangelism appreciates Brady exposing these truth’s. With that said we however do not wish to put Dr. Hovind in jeopardy and have made a decision to have Brady market any production third party to us.
Originally the innocence series was being promoted through Kent's website and the videos were not available on youtube. You had to spend $50 before you could watch them They still ask for $50 in the series to get the DVDs but it appears that you can go through the whole exercise without spending any money now and the plan is being promoted on a stand alone basis. From My Brain Trust
I reached out to my legal brain trust and, not surprisingly, did not find a lawyer who would put in 12 hours watching youtube. Mainly I was interested in learning whether somebody could get in trouble for doing anything suggested in the videos. Peter Goldberger did respond with some observations that might be useful even though he did not dive into the material.
Each of the 13 Circuits of the U.S. Court of Appeals has a process, managed by the Chief Judge of the Circuit, for receiving and acting upon complaints suggesting that a federal judge sitting within that Circuit has engaged in ethical misconduct warranting discipline. The 11th Cir rules and procedures are here. As you will see, the general information for the public about this process correctly and accurately states, "Almost all complaints in recent years have been dismissed because they do not follow the law about such complaints. The law says that complaints about judges’ decisions and complaints with no evidence to support them must be dismissed. If you are a litigant in a case and believe the judge made a wrong decision—even a very wrong decision—you may not use this procedure to complain about the decision." Contrary to what the Hovind website says, this is *not* a process that can lead to "impeachment.' I have not read the attached model affidavit of complaint, so I cannot say whether it contains any information that would support a valid ethical complaint against Judge Rodgers. Let me just say that I am very skeptical.
The people of the United States have a right under the First Amendment to petition their government for a redress of grievances. The further suggestion that people should send affidavits to their Representatives and Senators seeking impeachment proceedings against Judge Rodgers are protected by that provision. It would not call this "paper terrorism" in any sense. It is not like filing liens against judges' and prosecutors' property, for example, nor does it strike me as similar to filing bogus lawsuits against them. If you want to see how many federal judges have actually been impeached in the last 225 years, and for what, you can look here.
The same goes for the part of the campaign that suggests filing ethics complaints against the prosecutor with the DOJ's "Office of Professional Responsibility." I have not read the proposed complaint, but I doubt very much it has any legitimate basis. But even if it did, the OPR is a notorious "black hole," where even serious and legitimate complaints of misconduct against federal prosecutors are generally sent to be covered up, whitewashed, and brushed aside.
I have never seen a campaign organized this way, so it will be interesting to see how it plays out in detail. If Rudy Davis moves forward with it, I think we can count on getting regular updates on how the various agencies respond. I'm looking forward to it.
________________________________________________________________________ Peter J Reilly CPA has been following the Kent Hovind story for over four years.
