The last post discussed the legal side of the charges.  This post addresses the government’s factual basis for the charges.

Once again there is a great deal of overlap between the charges, along with highly implausible theories.  There are nuances that are likely to be addressed in later posts.

The government claims that Oscar Stilley and Lindsey Springer conspired to defraud the United States in 2000, and committed the first overt act in 2003.

The government attempts to soften the impact of this absurdity by claiming that the statute of limitations prevented them from alleging older overt acts in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy.  However, limitations didn’t preclude them from alleging other matters back to 2000, including but not limited to the alleged unlawful agreement.  Furthermore, any delays were occasioned solely by the government.

The conspiracy count was made on the theory that the defendants prevented the government from getting information it needed to assess taxes against Springer.  However, the government didn’t even claim that they could not get the information.  In fact, most of the information at issue was spoon fed to them by way of currency transaction reports.   It was undeniable that the government received much more than the usual amount of information concerning money received by Lindsey Springer.

The essence of the government claims against Oscar Stilley is as follows:

Count 3 – 2003 – Transferred $90,000 donation from Eddie Patterson to Lindsey Springer.
Count 4 – 2005 — Transferred $250,000 loan from Pat Turner to Lindsey Springer according to the directives of Lindsey Springer.
Count 1 –             Told the grand jury that Lindsey Springer did not charge for his services, i.e., that the money transferred to Springer was a donation as opposed to “compensation for services.”  Conveyed the moneys alleged in counts 3 and 5.

Let’s address these facts in turn.  First, Patterson was a client who settled an insurance claim and sent the money to my IOLTA (lawyer’s trust account).  Trial was just days away when the money was received.  Patterson told me that he had gifted $90,000 to Springer.  Springer was therefore entitled to the money, and I transferred it according to his instructions.

Second, Pat Turner was under IRS criminal investigation and therefore a potential client at the time he sent his funds.  When he informed me that Springer was entitled to the funds, I respected that decision.  When Lindsey told me that some other person had become entitled to those funds, for whatever reason, I respected that decision, and conveyed the money as directed.

Lastly, the grand jury did not allege any perjury on the part of Stilley.   No one had ever told Oscar Stilley that he was to pay Springer for any services.  On the contrary they unequivocally stated that the funds were donations.    Stilley was commanded pursuant to grand jury subpoena to supply records showing compensation paid to Springer for services.  Stilley simply stated to the grand jury the same credible representations he had received from persons whose funds were conveyed to or for the benefit of Springer.  Anything less would have been misleading testimony.

An attorney is required under the law and ethical rules of the state of Arkansas to promptly distribute funds to the person “entitled” to the funds, where no genuine dispute exists as to the identity of the person entitled.  As to counts 3 and 4, the failure to promptly turn over the funds, upon request, would have constituted 1)  the tort of conversion, 2) a violation of legal ethics, and 3) quite possibly a crime as well.

If Oscar Stilley is forced to choose between a “pretended offense,” and a real offense, it will be the pretended offense every time.  There was no real choice for Oscar Stilley, at the time of the events.

The alleged facts of this case clearly demonstrate that the government is not honestly attempting to enforce the criminal laws of the United States.  Rather, the government seeks to chill 1st Amendment rights of speech, association, and peaceful petition for redress of grievances.  The message the government wishes to send is that any person who associates with persons known to resist illegal and abusive IRS activity is liable to criminal indictment and imprisonment.

Some people have asked what they can do to help.   At the present time I can think of three ways. First, you have the opportunity to support this fight financially, if you feel so led.   PayPal to, or send funds to Oscar Stilley, 7103 Race Track Loop, Fort Smith, AR, 72916.

Second, sign up for an RSS feed to this blog.   Go to  if you are new to RSS.  Learn it, use it, and tell your friends about it.  Publicity is the cure for government evils.  An RSS feed is a great way to get prompt notice when a new post is placed on the blog.

Third, if you can think of a way to improve this blog, send me an email.   I’m going through a learning curve.    Tell me about my mistakes, and tell me how to make things better.