Break the Law, Run for Mayor
Just back from the field trip to Clayton. The petitioner put on a pretty good case. Here is what was presented in court (some of these facts we already knew):
1) Schneider did not register his vehicles in the State of Missouri until April 2006. If he became a resident on/before April 2005, he is in violation of the law that states one must register a vehicle in 30 days.
2) On the Coll of Revenue database, it shows that a verbal statement was provided that Schneider moved here in February 2006. However, there is nothing that shows who gave that statement.
3) After research done by the St. Louis County Collector of Revenue's office, Schneider was provided a tax bill that included interest and penalties dating back to January 1, 2007.
The Defense:
1) Schneider didn't know and wasn't aware of the tax and licensing laws.
2) Schneider actually did not receive the bill for arrears until this week. So, he wasn't officially in arrears on May 22 (the filing deadline for this election).
3) Schneider submitted payment for this arrearage and marked it "paid in protest."
Questions for Class Discussion
1) Is ignorance of the law a valid defense?
2) Do we want a mayor who isn't aware of the most basic tax and licensing laws?
3) Is the fact that you were not "caught" by the filing deadline a valid defense to stay on the ballot?
4) Why didn't Schneider plate his cars until 2006 if he lived here in 2005?
5) Do we want a mayor who claims to want to increase tax revenues but does everything to evade paying his own (and then when he pays it is "paid in protest") ?
Stay tuned kids. The judge will rule on Monday (6/25) at 9 AM.
1) Schneider did not register his vehicles in the State of Missouri until April 2006. If he became a resident on/before April 2005, he is in violation of the law that states one must register a vehicle in 30 days.
2) On the Coll of Revenue database, it shows that a verbal statement was provided that Schneider moved here in February 2006. However, there is nothing that shows who gave that statement.
3) After research done by the St. Louis County Collector of Revenue's office, Schneider was provided a tax bill that included interest and penalties dating back to January 1, 2007.
The Defense:
1) Schneider didn't know and wasn't aware of the tax and licensing laws.
2) Schneider actually did not receive the bill for arrears until this week. So, he wasn't officially in arrears on May 22 (the filing deadline for this election).
3) Schneider submitted payment for this arrearage and marked it "paid in protest."
Questions for Class Discussion
1) Is ignorance of the law a valid defense?
2) Do we want a mayor who isn't aware of the most basic tax and licensing laws?
3) Is the fact that you were not "caught" by the filing deadline a valid defense to stay on the ballot?
4) Why didn't Schneider plate his cars until 2006 if he lived here in 2005?
5) Do we want a mayor who claims to want to increase tax revenues but does everything to evade paying his own (and then when he pays it is "paid in protest") ?
Stay tuned kids. The judge will rule on Monday (6/25) at 9 AM.
posted by suzyjax at 1:21 PM
29 Comments:
Just got back from first part of trial. Ouch. Schneider's attorney had the hair of Mike Brady, the complexion of W.C. Fields and the trial skills of Lionel Hutz. In an attempt to discredit the County Official, this dude actually submitted additional documentation that supported Conlon's argument. I don't think his attorney prepared for the case. At one point he turned and asked Schnieder in a whisper if he had paid the taxes for 2006.
Don't know how the judge looks at these things but one thing is absolutely true.
Mike Schneider is a disingenuous liar.
His defenses are that the County made a mistake in not catching his false declaration, and that is what the County calls it, a false declaration. Or, the oral declaration is hearsay because it was taken by a clerk and that we don't know actually know who made the declaration. Maybe it was the tooth fairy. The County Official absolutely stood by the veracity of the oral declaration as other supporting documents are necessary.
Consistent with common law, whether his wife made declaration or the vehicles were owned by his company is not material to the case.
They were to proceed after a recess.
You didn't miss much in part 2. The judge just asked about "if it was the Coll of Revenue who made a mistake..."
Umm...not really relevant since they did NOT, it was the Schneiders!
Schneider really hired quite a schmuck to defend him. More than once he glared around the gallery. Best quote (to Deputy Collector of Revenue after much grilling on how he applied the law): "Are you a lawyer?"
I wish he would have answered "Are you a tax collector?
A tax lawyer?"
That County Official buried Schneid's attorney. He was as credible as any witness. How did you like the "why didn't you call Schneids before sending him his notice of making false declaration."
"Normal course of business is that we do not call people in violation, we notify by mail."
"That was not my question, did you call Mike Schneider before sending letter?"
"Normal course of business is that we do not call people in violation, we notify by mail."
"That was not my question, did you call Mike Schneider before sending letter?"
"No"
The lawyer was acting like he really had a "you can't handle the truth" question and the official looked at him like he had two heads."
It was hard not to laugh at Schneid's attorney.
Oh yeah! I knew there was something else to post about.
Many of the Schneider supporters have told me that they " wished MBC would have just gone to Schneider with this tax stuff and worked things out".
What?!
That might be considered extortion.
Not to mention that is so "good ol' boy" smoky backroom politics.
Thus, when Schneider's attorney asked that I wondered why he would think that the Coll of Revenue would call him.
He stared at me twice, I looked into his eyes and I saw a bottle of Jim Beam. Window to the sole.
It all was summed up in the "not but for the fact that Mr. Schneider gave false declaration we would not be here." point made by Conlon's attorney.
In his lawyer's defense, you can't turn a pig's ear into a purse anymore than undue the lies of a guilty client. Not much to work with.
Exactly!
He wasn't officially yet in arrears because he misled the taxing authority!
Schneider's lawyer kept stating "he wasn't in arrears on May 22".
I kept thinking "because he lied!"
Unfortunately, it looked like the judge was buying it (at least by the questions he was posing in part 2).
Conlon took the stand first at the request of her attorney and was not cross examined by Schneid's suit. She made herself available to Schneid's attorney to ask about anything underhanded in the law suit "No questions for this witness your honor."
Guess who didn't take the stand?
I wish Overland had a local paper or a on-line journalist to give an unvarnished take on what seems to be the most important issue facing the electorate.
Thank you for the post and your reporting Suzy. And thank you for your input Gravy.
Suzy, you said the following:
2) Schneider actually did not receive the bill for arrears until this week. So, he wasn't officially in arrears on May 22 (the filing deadline for this election).
Well, Schneider was officially in the rears as of May 22nd, just because he didn't receive his "past due" notice until May, he was officially in the rears as of January 1st. The tax bill would have been due on December 31, 2006.
When did he get the tax bill stating that he was delinquent and when did he pay it?
Correction, Schneider received the past due notice in June, not may.
However, just because he received the past due notice in June, for his 2006 taxes, they were still in the rears as of May 22nd. Those taxes were due on December 31, 2006. Correct?
That's patriotic isn't it. Claim you don't live here, violate the law, deceive the collector of revenue, evade your taxes, run for Mayor. Typical Overland public servant.
Schneider For Mayor
Different Enough To Not Pay His Taxes!!!!!!
From what was reported here yes it was for tax year 2006 and it was delinquent. He paid it in protest.
Question did the DOR send him a bill for delinquent taxes because of Conlon's petition to the court?
Did the DoR find out he was making a false declaration based on Conlon's case?
If that is the case and he stays on the ballot every single person in Overland should get on the Conlon Bandwagon and help this girl win. It's about following the rules and standing up for principals
You have 30 days from the date upon moving to Missouri to register your vehicles and get your Missouri Driver's License. Even if they are "company cars"!!!!!
Ignorance of the law, does not excuse you from being punished. As the courts say, pleading "ignorance" is not an acceptable excuse for breaking the law, the law is the law.
If this Judge rules in favor of Schneider, the Judge should really be admonished for not upholding the laws of this state.
I don’t care if Schneider got his past due tax bill yesterday. As of January 1, 2007 he was in the rears for his 2006 taxes, period end of story.
Mary Beth, if you read this blog, you are doing the right, logical and honorable thing by filing this petition to the courts. I hope Keller is grateful for your efforts. Because if Schneider were to get away with tax evasion, that would not be fair to you or Keller who are abiding by our tax laws. Hold your head high Mary Beth, you are a great accomplished honorable woman.
You do it, best defense, deny it or plead ignorance.
The ORT have that one done pat.
After hearing some of Schneider's supports thought MaryB should have gone to him first, tells me at least, they are a tad worried about their boy. They've made it quite clear they do not want her for how long, now they thought she should have played nice.
Let's see how nice they are to her if he indeed & should be kicked off the ballot. Are they going to back her, are they going to go to her first to discuss a write-in before they do it.
Even if you are a supporter of Schneider the fact he paid under protest, should tell you something about the man & make you think twice before casting a vote.
I love how they twist things, it's MaryB fault, it's the Coll. fault what happened to we're all responsible for the choices we make good or bad. He happened to make a bad one, he should bare full responsiblity for it and no one else.
Forgot,
Thanks Suzy & Gravy for the reporting of the trial.
New Girl,
Found the article you were talking about, loved how Brown couldn't come to the phone & had no comment for a man, what he's known & done business with for years. What guy.
Sorry, for all the typo's it's late.
I got it, the Schneider's could get personal license plates that read "PAID IN PROTEST"
Onelayer,
Good idea, but too long. Perhaps Schwindler could get "Paid in" and Geri could get "Protest"--after all there are in this together!
What else do you expect from Schneider's supporters? They appear to be blind. It is there fault there is a three way going on here. Everyone knows Conlon is the most qualified person and would have won handidly for Mayor. They didn't care they were willing and ready to split this vote up even after all this city has been through. It's not that they think Schneider is qualified its that they will remain in power. He is the golden boy. Let's support Mike because he was such a stand up guy on the council. Which councilmen defended the city last year? Jeff and Jerry May and even Glen Corcoran.
And the Golden Boy what did Schneider do stayed silent? It is amazing how during his forums he embraces the good guys on the council saying it was us "four" who held the city together.
No it was not. It was Jerry May and Jeff O'Connell and even Glen Corcoran who spoke up Schneider let those guys take the heat.
So when he rode in here on his white horse and the got out his flute and the old boys followed the pied pieper without knowing anything about this guy is what has happened. He shakes hands, he hugs people he says nothing for God's sakes people this guy is a not what he appears to be and for a person to knowingly made a false declaration to the DOR and say you moved here in 2006 to avoid paying taxes to Overland is pathetic. Wake up Overland. Wake Up.
If you do this type of thing to personally save yourself a couple bucks what kind of Mayor will you be and what type of "businessman" were you
Say it aint so said "not that they think Schneider is qualified its that they will remain in power. "
That's so true. Schneider is the most malleable person I have seen in politics in a while. When he first wanted to jump into the poltiical scene he was in the Brown/Purzner camp hoping to hitch his horse to that wagon. Then, from what I understand, jumped away from them and to the others once the backlash started.
Wait, I say "jump to" as if he as active. He voted the right way, but never really stood up against the power plays that Purzner was making. I think these folks saw then how easy it would be to mold Schnieder into want they want him to be. Go to Sailor's blog. Watch the video of his forum. This guy contradicts himself more than once, all in trying to "play the audience."
What the good ole boys best watch out for is that if he jumped once, odds are he'll jump again if the offer or situation is right.
Between the good ole boys & Brown/Purnzer camp Snidley will be saying "how high"
Just remembered this one, was told by one of his supporters that they were told that Brown said he was more afraid of Schneider then MaryB, so that's why we should be backing Snidley. I'm like & you believe that one.
No matter what the decision is on Monday morning, I want to see how he acts at the council meeting. He can't lie his way out of not paying or wanting to pay his taxes. He's going to have to sit up there in front of everyone in that room knowing they all pretty much know what he did.
Don't Tell The Truth suffer the Consequences.
Hardworking stiffs have to follow the rules should'nt elected officials be held to same standard as we are?
It's amazing Overland Chatters and OVCC Bloggers are in lockstep on this one. I hope this brings the people on these two sides together to rid the city of what has held it hostage. Oh and the Old Boys Rhetoric "The DOR Made a Mistake" isn't going to fly. Suzy all the evidence and information about the court case is public record right?
Yes, everything I "reported" was either from attending a public hearing or from documents anyone could obtain via either a visit to the appropriate govt entity or a phone call.
Forget who's with whom & the names and look at just the candidates themselves.
1. Stay at home grandma who watches kids, admits to only going to 2 meetings. Elected 2 months ago, never been involved with politics before, now running for mayor.
2. Man gone 20 yrs from Overland, salesman, rec'd waiver on taxes, didn't pay, then protested when paying, on council 1 yr., maybe shouldn't have been at all, did nothing to help or promote the city during the past yr.
3. Life long resident, current & ex-council person, entire education geared toward economic developement & growth, has all the right contacts. Affilated with no interest groups.
If you did not know their names or who they were affilated with who would you vote for honestly.
The burden is wholly on the individual. It would not matter if the County ever sent him a notice. The individual bears the entire burden for tax incidence regardless of misfeasance or malfeasance.
Post a Comment
<< Home