Kent Hovind gets 10 years

[Chris Haynes]

Big Rule8ing deal... this has exactly nothing to do with Hovind's conviction for tax fraud, threatening a federal tax agent and filing spurious lawsuits against a federal tax agent... on and on for 58 full counts.

Here they are at http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_of_America_v_Kent_Hovind_and_Jo_Hovind ,

Count #58 is particularly interesting:

a. Filing a petition for bankruptcy, and falsely listing the IRS as his only creditor, for the sole purpose of discharging this debt and forcing the IRS to release seized property;
b. Filing a false and frivolous lawsuit against the IRS in which he demanded damages for criminal trespass and other false allegations during the IRS execution of a lawful court-issued search warrant;
c. Filing a complaint for a preliminary injunction against an investigation IRS special agent and the Commissioner of the IRS;
d. Making threats of harm to those investigating him and to those who may consider cooperating with their investigation;
e. Filing a false complaint against investigating IRS agents with the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration;
f. Filing a criminal complaint against investigating IRS special agents falsely alleging, among other things, false arrest, false imprisonment, excessive use of force, and theft or property;
g. Destroying records; and,
h. Paying his employees in cash and labeling them “missionaries” rather than employees to avoid payroll tax and Federal Insurance Contributions Act requirements.
All in violation of Title, United States Code, Section 7212(a).

So what if he has a bogus college degree... so does John Gray of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus fame, and he is not exactly being thrown into jail for tax fraud and threatening federal employees.

 

[AgingYoung]

Questioninggeller,

If you suspect that Hovind is guilty of concealing a material fact by excluding ‘Christian’ from the description of his degree in education you might answer these questions…

• Did he have any duty to include it?
• Did he conceal ‘christian’ with the intent to defraud?
• Did his audience have any reason not to know Hovind’s degree was in ‘christian’ education?
• Did anyone suffer damage because of this concealment?

That second point is a very difficult one to substantiate. You make a point of fraud by nondisclosure but you haven’t substantiated it.

Gene

 

[AgingYoung]

As to your other statements others replied very well, which is probably why you have, again, ignored their points to bring up something irrelevant.

The charge that I'm ignoring other comments is specious. In the same manner that I can only address one point at a time I can only address one person at a time.

Gene

 

[Slimething]

I'll comment on his cancer claim now. It's irrelevant to the point of substantiating intent to defraud by Hovind by his acquiring a perfectly legal degree from an institution of higher learning that is sanctioned by the legal authority of the State of Colorado.

No one other than you has made such an accusation of Hovind. His fraud was not in obtaining a fake degree. His fraud was not abiding by the tax laws of the USA.

You notice that it was the legal authority of a court that established Harvard.

Great, you've produced the charter by which Harvard was authorized. Again, I implore you, please produce one shred of evidence that the government of the State of Colorado had anything to do with PBU's foundation or their awarding of degrees. Just a shred, that's all I requested.

The similarities between Harvard and Patriot Bible University are

• They both had meager beginnings
• Those beginnings were by acts of duly authorized authorities

You don't get a pass on this one until you prove it, bub. Cite.

• Their purpose and motivations are education in morality and piety and as they see necessary

See? Here you go again. First you tell us how difficult it is to prove a case of intent yet now you know the intent of two corporations. What is with you and your perptual need to contradict yourself?

Zep,

Hey zep, what's shaking? Let me give you a slight clue. You would not have a prayer with me in open court. That is a fact. Although it's not likely to happen it would amaze you how readily I would crush your simple behind. Let’s move to pertinent matters.

I've decided that I need to initiate my 'catch and release' policy with you. Hopefully I'll catch you some time in the future when you've managed to grow a little distance between your head and your tail. Be free, my little fish!

Gene

Gene, my job requires me to work with a great many lawyers. Said lawyers comprise a wide variety of pursuits. All of the attorneys I hire are highly educated and accomplished. All can write in complete sentences without contradicting themselves or generally demonstrating ignorance in an issue they're addressing. If any of them ever spoke or wrote as you have done in this forum, I would fire them on the spot.

I've left opposing attorneys speechless in the past and I suspect you're not even as good as those were. Don't flatter yourself that you can lay anyone to waste in open court if you can't even string a logical argument together in this venue. You keep trying to change the point and retreating from earlier positions. I have no idea what type of business you do in real life but I'm so thoroughly underwhelmed by you it's difficult to put into words.

Perhaps Hovind would still be hawking his idiocies today if you had been the prosecutor.

 

[Slimething]

The charge that I'm ignoring other comments is specious. In the same manner that I can only address one point at a time I can only address one person at a time.

So, cite a law that states you can only address one point or one issue at a time. You've been dodging me for days. All I've asked you to do is post evidence for the falsifiable portions of your claims.

In reality, you're just another slinking, evasive, self-righteous prig who opens his mouth without thinking then can't defend what he says. Do you really think we're all fooled? That would take someone a whole lot smarter than you, m'boy.

 

[Questioninggeller]

I'll comment on his cancer claim now. It's irrelevant to the point of substantiating intent to defraud by Hovind by his acquiring a perfectly legal degree from an institution of higher learning that is sanctioned by the legal authority of the State of Colorado.

So someone with an unaccredited degree in "Christian Education" telling people that eating poison cures cancer is acceptable in your worldview?

An individual who practices or holds himself out as practicing a health profession subject to regulation without a license or registration or under a suspended, revoked, lapsed, void, or fraudulently obtained license or registration, or outside the provisions of a limited license or registration, or who uses as his own the license or registration of another person, is guilty of a felony. For the purpose of the offense of practicing medicine without a license, the "practice of medicine" means the diagnosis, treatment, prevention, cure, or relieving of a human disease, ailment, defect, complaint, or other physical or mental condition, by attendance, advice, device, diagnostic test, or other means, or offering, undertaking, attempting to do, or holding oneself out as able to do, any of these acts.

http://wiki.bmezine.com/index.php/Practicing_Medicine

Now to the point you made about the distinction of education and 'christian' education...
...
The similarities between Harvard and Patriot Bible University are

...
Now by what authority do you suppose you have to question the purpose and motivation of the duly appointed executioner of power and authority of Harvard or Patriot Bible University to issue degrees? How is it, do you suppose, you have the right to accuse someone having a degree from Patriot Bible University to have a fake degree. You can only do that if you cross the lines of reason, meaning and the established legal authorities of the day. As far as I know there hasn't been a decree that anarchy is legal..

You are honestly comparing two of the best schools in the world to a doublewide in Colorado?

Start here, Enter: Harvard, Yale, and Patriot at
http://www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Search.asp

Tell me what you find out then we will continue.

(On a side note, Hovind got his degree from Patriot University, it changed names in 2004 to Patriot Bible University.)

Further you haven't established intent to defraud with your claim there is a difference between 'education' and 'christian education' much less that it is fraud by nondisclosure. The very mention of having a degree from Patriot Bible University discloses it in the same manner that it used to when you said you had a Harvard degree. In time that may change as it has with Harvard.

Gene

You saying so doesn't make it true. You're going to need a bigger blindfold to keep on this, as pointed out at the top of the page or view http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2301492&postcount=255

Some of the first professors at Harvard were deacons from surrounding jurisdictions...

• It is therefore ordered by this Court, and the authority thereof, that the Governor and Deputy Governor for the time being, and all the Magistrates of this jurisdiction, together with the teaching Elders of the six next adjoining towns

Christian, no doubt.

Gene

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! What? You just compared something that happened in 1600s to Hovind's 1989 "degree" from a doublewide in Colorado. Accreditation didn't exist in 1600 and neither did the state of Colorado.

A nearly 400 year difference in higher educational institutional eras.

Yeah, if Hovind attended Havard in 1640 he would have attended the only university in North America, and he wouldn't be in jail for US tax fraud because the US didn't exist! What is your point?

Many religious schools offer very good education. Accreditation is what these, Harvard, Yale, Southern Methodist, and so on have. Even Liberty University and Bob Jones University is accredited.

You have not proved Patriot University (not accredited) provides a good education. Do you read the links I supply?

if not, again:

If Patriot University did, in fact, accept this dissertation and award a Ph.D. in Christian education, then it does fall into the category of a diploma mill, for the reasons listed below.

--- There is no original research presented.

--- Large portions of the dissertation are repeated. Formatting errors are rampant.

---References are absent.

--- Spelling errors that are typical of high school (but not college) writing are present in this document.

--- The writing style, "popular" or not, is typical of high school-level writing, not college, and certainly not postgraduate. The writing style, as well as Hovind's lectures, are reminiscent of drive-by shootings, where many disjointed topics are presented in rapid-fire order (so as to not allow the reader or listener to really think about any particular topic).

...
It is certainly possible for a person to acquire expertise in a scientific field by studying that topic independently. However, such a person does not claim to have an advanced degree in the field. There is NO EVIDENCE that Kent Hovind has more than a college sophomore level of course work in ANY science. There is NO EVIDENCE from his thesis that he is widely-read in the areas of evolution, astronomy, geology, paleontology or even the history of science beyond what is written in a few young-Earth creationist books. There is ABUNDANT EVIDENCE that the requirements for a Ph.D. degree from Patriot University fall far below those of typical secular or religious institutions.

http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/bartelt_dissertation_on_hovind_thesis.htm

 

[Zep]

Zep,

Hey zep, what's shaking? Let me give you a slight clue. You would not have a prayer with me in open court. That is a fact. Although it's not likely to happen it would amaze you how readily I would crush your simple behind. Let’s move to pertinent matters.

I've decided that I need to initiate my 'catch and release' policy with you. Hopefully I'll catch you some time in the future when you've managed to grow a little distance between your head and your tail. Be free, my little fish!

Gene

Gene, my job requires me to work with a great many lawyers. Said lawyers comprise a wide variety of pursuits. All of the attorneys I hire are highly educated and accomplished. All can write in complete sentences without contradicting themselves or generally demonstrating ignorance in an issue they're addressing. If any of them ever spoke or wrote as you have done in this forum, I would fire them on the spot.

I've left opposing attorneys speechless in the past and I suspect you're not even as good as those were. Don't flatter yourself that you can lay anyone to waste in open court if you can't even string a logical argument together in this venue. You keep trying to change the point and retreating from earlier positions. I have no idea what type of business you do in real life but I'm so thoroughly underwhelmed by you it's difficult to put into words.

Perhaps Hovind would still be hawking his idiocies today if you had been the prosecutor.

Thanks, Slimething. I chose to basically ignore his puerile attempts at insults. Although those plus a few obvious gaffes from his previous posts indicate Gene has had little or no legal training or ability! Or that perhaps he got his law degree from Patriot University!

 

[AgingYoung]

I’ve never claimed that Patriot Bible University was an accredited university. You are stating weak points for me then asking me to defend them. That’s specious.

The point is that Patriot Bible University is duly authorized by the laws of Colorado to operate within the state. In accordance with that authority it has the right to issue valid degrees.

Pursuant to Colorado code 23-2-101 et seq C.R.S. (Private Institutions Authorized to Operate in Colorado) Patriot Bible University does indeed have that authority; that fact is recognized by the Colorado Commission on Higher Education.

A claim that Hovind’s degree is fraudulent is absurd (the veracity of his (faked) doctorate) as has been claimed. When you include that charge of ‘fake degree’ in a ‘LONG list of obviously fraudulent behavior’ you are not being intellectually honest. When you further conclude based on that ‘LONG list’ that Hovind’s case is similar to Capone’s situation you are abandoning all reason. Then when you attempt to say that you use reason when necessary yet are entitled to be human and express your glee at the demise of another person I submit to you critical thinking is only something you claim to use. You haven’t demonstrated that you are restrained by reason or that it has any authority you answer to. When you expect someone to submit to reason you should at least submit to it yourself. I don’t see that in the jubilation of the demise of another person. When you expect someone to submit to your reasoning I have to ask, ‘you’re joking, right?’

Now you specifically have alleged that Hovind is guilty of fraud by nondisclosure by reason of not explaining that when he mentions his degree in education he doesn’t mention that it’s in ‘Christian’ education. You did concede the point, ‘Hovind does have a doctorate.’ Yet you insist on attacking its quality and the quality of the institution that granted it. Both points are irrelevant. Now to the point; even if you could prove your point (fraud by nondisclosure) it would in no way allow that his degree was fraudulent, thereby allowing it to be included in that ‘LONG list’ of previous fraudulent behavior. The analogy between Hovind and Capone’s situation breaks down when you examine all the previously mentioned frauds. The point being, ‘tax evasion is what they managed to nail Hovind with’. Hovind fought the law and the law consistently won. Capone consistently absconded.

I don’t see any use in looking at any of the other items in that ‘LONG list’. I have touched on some points of that list. They’re equally absurd.

I rest.

Gene

 

[Zep]

Whom are you addressing with this ongoing diatribe, Gene?

 

[Hastur]

Gene, it's clear you're splitting hairs here. You keep harping on this "vailidity" tangent with Hovind's degree. The question is, what is a valid degree? That is what accreditation seeks to answer. If the university is accredited, that means the relevant authorities have examined the curricula of the school and have vetted that the curricula meet their standards.
Without this vetting, the degree may be worth nothing more than the paper it's written on. A degree from an accredited university is a general warranty deed, a degree from an unaccredited university is a quitclaim deed.
Now, is Hovind being fraudulent in not giving the specifics of his degree? Possibly. If he knows or has every reason to know but doesn't care what he has is practically worthless outside Patriot University's say-so, and he goes out and creates the illusion that he is some sort of authority, then it can be argued where there is reliance on that illusion by other people.

 

[AgingYoung]

Hastur,

Your analogy is not precise.

A degree from an accredited university is a general warranty deed, a degree from an unaccredited university is a quitclaim deed.

If I sign a paper stating I'm relinquishing any claim I have on your domicile the result is I continue to have precisely what I had before that act. The quality of my ownership hasn't changed.

Hopefully if I engage in a course of study I'll arrive at a place where I know more than when I first began. Quality should change.

Your analogy doesn't speak to your actual objection to the validity of Hovind's degree. The difference between a Bentley and a VW is a more apt comparison. Yet in spite of quality both are still cars.

Gene

 

[brodski]

Hopefully if I engage in a course of study I'll arrive at a place where I know more than when I first began. Quality should change.

Yes, it should. However as unaccredited universities are held to no standards whatsoever, "hoping" that the quality, depth or breadth of knowledge will improve avert a course of study at one is probably a waste of time in many instances. Given the "quality" of Hovinds thesis, I would say that the hopes where futile in his case.

 

[wahrheit]

Patriot Bible University, I thought this was some kind of running gag in the forum until I googled it. Ironically, god placed "his" patriot university in 1135 French Street.

 

[AgingYoung]

Hastur,
There is another point to be made...

....The question is, what is a valid degree? That is what accreditation seeks to answer. If the university is accredited, that means the relevant authorities have examined the curricula of the school and have vetted that the curricula meet their standards. ......

The question is a little deeper than 'what is a valid degree?' The question really is 'what makes a degree valid?' These 'relevant authorities' doing accreditation are really private enterprises operating under the authority of law; private enterprise is regulated by law. If the point is conceded that accrediting agencies have a right to operate and are valid, the point has to be given that a private university also has that right. Both are private enterprises operating under the authority of law.

It is entirely hypocritical to allow one enterprise yet deny the other. If you recognize the rule of law you have to allow that a university is a valid entity and hence it's authority to issue degrees is equally valid. The rule of law makes it valid.

If you don't agree with the rule of law you are entirely hypocritical to consider it a right thing for Hovind to be convicted by it. If you do agree with the rule of law yet pick and choose which ones you agree with you're arrogantly setting yourself in authority over the law.

Now you might appeal to the higher authority of meaning and reason. The meaning of a 'degree' is

• Title conferred by a college or university to indicate completion of a course of study or extent of academic achievement.

If you allow that one university has the right to award a degree yet another doesn't you are setting yourself in authority over meaning and reason. That has to be the height of arrogance.

Regrardless of what authority you care to appeal to, the degree is valid.

Gene

 

[ponderingturtle]

Your analogy doesn't speak to your actual objection to the validity of Hovind's degree. The difference between a Bentley and a VW is a more apt comparison. Yet in spite of quality both are still cars.

Gene

No it is compaireing a real car with a soap box racer. Both are still cars right?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Regrardless of what authority you care to appeal to, the degree is valid.

Gene

The degree might be legal but it is not valid, as it does not require the ammount of work associated with having a doctorate.

 

[Questioninggeller]

These 'relevant authorities' doing accreditation are really private enterprises operating under the authority of law; private enterprise is regulated by law. If the point is conceded that accrediting agencies have a right to operate and are valid, the point has to be given that a private university also has that right. Both are private enterprises operating under the authority of law.

It is entirely hypocritical to allow one enterprise yet deny the other. ...

Regrardless of what authority you care to appeal to, the degree is valid.

Gene

1) It is not "valid" in the academic sense. Accreditation is set up by academics (the board that approves schools are from various schools) and control the criteria.

The whole point of accreditation (accreditation is not ran by the government) is to keep the state out of running schools whether they be private or public.

2) Private schools get accreditation too. Some states, like California, let "schools" issue religious degrees without ANY state oversight. (See my post about the $30-100 degrees from the Universal Life Church)

3) On validity: Hovind's degree would not be accepted by any college to teach much less transfer credit.

As for Hovind applying to a Burger King job in Oregon and putting his "PhD" on his resume:

So now Kennedy-Western grads can proudly proclaim their degrees … sort of. Under the new law, those graduates will have to follow mention of their degree by saying that their alma mater “does not have accreditation recognized by the United States Department of Education and has not been approved by the [Oregon] Office of Degree Authorization,” the official language dictated by the legislation.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/07/07/oregon

Other states have laws limiting non-accredited claims.

This is getting tiresome. You are repeating the same thing. You are not making any point related to academics.

 

[Questioninggeller]

Patriot Bible University, I thought this was some kind of running gag in the forum until I googled it. Ironically, god placed "his" patriot university in 1135 French Street.

It should be pointed out the guy who runs it heads a church that operates it. So its tax free and comes with the joys of various exemptions.

A picture of this place in November 2006:

 

[wahrheit]

Um, looks like just about anybody can make up a church and then a "university". If they call this building a university, my neighbours chicken farm could pass for the British House of Lords.

 

[Hastur]

These 'relevant authorities' doing accreditation are really private enterprises operating under the authority of law; private enterprise is regulated by law. If the point is conceded that accrediting agencies have a right to operate and are valid, the point has to be given that a private university also has that right. Both are private enterprises operating under the authority of law.

Your comparison is oversimplistic. Accreditation agencies are under government oversight in that the government will stop using them to accredit institutions. Private universities run at the pleasure of their funders.

Snipped Gene's pouring cyanide down the well

If you allow that one university has the right to award a degree yet another doesn't you are setting yourself in authority over meaning and reason. That has to be the height of arrogance.

Regrardless of what authority you care to appeal to, the degree is valid.

Gene

It's not a question of who has the right to award a degree, it's a question of which degrees have evidence of being of value. I have degrees from accredited universities, Hovind does not but tries to carry himself as if he did. Whose degrees can we say are of greater value and seen by the academic, not the legal, world as valid?