Many people have asked for information about the criminal case against Oscar Stilley.  After way too much delay, I am ready to begin with a basic explanation of the charges against me.   The case is complicated, and it is hardly possible to include all the nuances while at the same time maintaining some semblance of brevity.  This being said, let’s start with a chart showing generally who is charged with what:

Charge ………………………………………………  Party named

1 – Conspiracy to impair the                                 Oscar & Lindsey
determination, assessment,
and collection of taxes
2 – Tax evasion for years 00-09                          Lindsey
3 – Tax evasion for year 03                                    Oscar & Lindsey
4 – Tax evasion for year 05                                    Oscar & Lindsey
5-  Willful failure 04                                                  Lindsey
6- Willful failure 04                                                   Lindsey

Lets cross reference this with the tax loss claimed by the government, since tax loss is the major determinant of sentencing.

Year ………Loss claimed
00                  $33,777
01                   $      500
02                                 0
03                  $89,350
04                                 0
05                  $33,463
06                                 0 this year and following

This information was obtained directly from Charles O’Reilly, a US Department of Justice lawyer prosecuting the case, during a telephone conversation.

Several things jump out from this modest bit of information.  First, Lindsey Springer is charged on two counts of willful failure to make tax returns on two separate years, for each of which the government frankly admits that the tax loss is zero.  Granted, tax loss is not an element of willful failure to make tax returns.  But it seems strange that the government hinged its entire willful failure case on two years for which they admit the complete lack of tax liability, and stranger still that the jury bought the story.

Second, Lindsey was charged in Count 2 of tax evasion that he was also charged with in Count 3 and 4.  How this is legally permissible was not explained.   The years 2000 and 2001 were clearly outside the 6 year statute of limitations.  Every penny of tax evasion alleged in Count 2 was either clearly stale, or unmistakably charged in Count 3 or 4.

Based on the original tax loss figures, the federal sentencing guidelines provide for a sentence of 21-27 months.  After the verdict, I asked Mr. O’Reilly to explain reports in the press that he would ask for 5-10 years incarceration.  Here is the exchange, italicized because I can’t readily figure out how to indent a block of text:

Mr. Stilley:

We will discuss the potential sentence at the appropriate time” your sentencing hearing. I can confirm that a member of the media asked what the anticipated       Guideline Sentence was and that we, with the strong caveat that no actual computation had yet been calculated, stated that we anticipated the sentences would be between five and ten years.  Now that we have had an opportunity to review the relevant provisions and facts, we anticipate the Guideline Sentence may be significantly greater.


Charles A. O’Reilly
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
Northern District of Oklahoma

From: Oscar Stilley []
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 1:28 AM
To: O’Reilly, Charles A. (TAX); Snoke, Ken (USAOKN)
Subject: Theory for 5-10 year sentence

Dear Mr. O’Reilly and Mr. Snoke:

Would either of you care to explain your theory for suggesting to news media that I face 5-10 years in prison? If you never said that then I’ll decide if I want to take that up with the responsible parties publishing such.   However, if you did say words to that effect, I’d like to know your theory for it.

Oscar Stilley

This has been the standard modus operandi for the government in this case.  The indictment means little if anything.  The word of the government investigators and lawyers means even less.  The facts, the law, and the rules, are all whatever the government wants them to be on a given day, neither more nor less.

Stephen Friot, who presided over the trial, issued an Order [docket 247] which included the following proviso:

2. Subject to the exception set forth below in this paragraph (B)(2), you will maintain no website that refers to any matter relating to federal taxation.  You will immediately take down any website that you control that makes reference to any matter relating to federal taxation. You will post no material of any kind on any website that refers to any matter relating to federal taxation. Exception: You may solicit funds in support of your defense, and, in so doing, accurately make reference to the nature, history, result and status of this case, as long as, in so doing, you provide no advice, suggestions, or recommendations to any person or entity, public or private, other than immediate family members, with respect to any matter relating to federal taxation.

Since it was put to me this way, I’ll be happy to ask.  Can I please have some money?  How about some Federal Reserve Promises to Pay Nothing?  Their value drops on a daily basis anyway.  Rubles, francs, pounds, euros, what have you?   As a beggar I can’t very well be a chooser.

You can send it via Paypal at, or you can send it to Oscar Stilley, 7103 Race Track Loop, Fort Smith, AR, 72916.   Call the phone number at if you need to talk.

For those who have already contributed, I’d like to thank you mightily.  This is not aggressive panhandling, please don’t take it that way.  Nevertheless, if you’d like to see the corrupt practices of the IRS and the DOJ exposed, this would be a fine opportunity.  Fighting the IRS can be a blood sport, figuratively speaking, and there are advantages to watching from afar.

Admission is free and everyone is heartily invited.   Sign up on RSS, any way you can think of it, and tell your friends to do the same.  Send your friends to if they’re new to RSS.  Publicity is the cure for government evils.

This is the first but by no means the last missive you’ll see on these pages from undersigned counsel, directly informing you about the case and the issues involved in it.  I’ll just pass the hat from time to time, and at least as often as is necessary to satisfy any orders of the court.  I hope you’ll understand.

Oscar Stilley