From hkhenson@cogeco.ca Fri Feb 08 04:03:32 2002 Path: sn-us!sn-xit-01!supernews.com!iad-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!news.lightlink.com!news2.lightlink.com From: hkhenson@cogeco.ca (Keith Henson) Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: Henson informs the judge Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 09:03:32 GMT Organization: Temple of At'L'An Lines: 91 Message-ID: <3c6391e6.264913638@news2.lightlink.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.34.12 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.141.40.229 X-Original-Trace: 8 Feb 2002 04:01:40 -0500, 24.141.40.229 Xref: sn-us alt.religion.scientology:1033041 H. Keith Henson 2237 Munns Ave. Oakville, ON L6H 3M9 Canada 905-844-6216 hkhenson@cogeco.com In Pro Per RIVERSIDE SUPERIOUR COURT APPEALS DIVISION PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff/Respondent, vs KEITH HENSON, Defendant/Appellant Appellate No. 003226Case No. HEM014371 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 1) MOTION OF APRIL 18, 2001 2) RULING IN SKLAR VS COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE Defendant/Appellant wishes to inform the court that the Motion of April 18, 2001 and the Declaration of Frank Oliver are not missing from the Clerk's transcript (see Bates numbers 291-295). They were out of sequence and follow the minute order of May 16, 2001. The far more important (for the appeal) exhibits of Frank Oliver are missing, as is the Amicus brief of Arnoldo Lerma. As the court may realize, the criminal case against me was highly influenced by Scientology. A good part of the reason Scientology has an intense animus against me is my legal effort starting at the end of 1998 to draw the court's attention to the "closing agreement" Scientology worked out in secret with the Internal Revenue Service in the early 1990s. I sued the IRS under Flast vs Cohen in an attempt to get the courts to review the matter. The suit was dismissed on grounds of not having standing to sue. I appealed and the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal in a non-published opinion. At the same time, a case was lost in the tax courts MICHAEL SKLAR; MARLA SKLAR v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL No. 00-70753. The Sklars were trying to take advantage of the extraordinary "deal" given to the Scientologists to deduct payments for religious instruction for *their* religion. They too appealed. On January 29, 2002 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the IRS in a remarkable published opinion. I quote from the dicta of Judge Silverman concurring: "An IRS closing agreement cannot overrule Congress and the Supreme Court. "If the IRS does, in fact, give preferential treatment to members of the Church of Scientology -- allowing them a special right to claim deductions that are contrary to law and rightly disallowed to everybody else -- then the proper course of action is a lawsuit to put a stop to that policy. The full opinion may be found at: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/27B565D1754D4E5E88256B50005F20CE/$file/0070753.pdf?openelement Six levels of indents down in the "closing agreement" the IRS bound itself contractually to discriminate in favor of Scientology: IV. Obligations and Undertakings During the Transition Period. A. Establishment of Church Tax Compliance Committee 3. Responsibilities of CTCC. d. Guaranty. "ix. . . . . the following actions will be considered to be a material breach by the Service: b. the issuance of a Regulation, Revenue Ruling or other pronouncement of general applicability providing that fixed donations to a religious organization *other than a church of Scientology* are fully deductible . . . ." This is yet another example of the legal anomalies which occur frequently in Scientology's massive litigation history. Respectfully submitted, H. Keith Henson, pro se Dated February, 2002