good morning my name is morgan king plays the corey represent the defendants in this case i want to start by saying that the case is not about the right of the united states government to collect taxes proven to establish that there's a valid assessment of the tax premised on the first documented step which is called the summary record of assessment over twenty three   but the government did not produce those documents even though they were requested the evidence is there at the taxpayer made charbroil freedom of information request schiff weekly referencing the twenty three c the litigation he did it a request for production being a layman and not an irishman ploy he he wasn't sure there was such a thing he had heard about it if it existed he wanted it so  have had the opportunity to do that i haven't because without knowing the results of this case i don't want to waste the taxpayers or finance trust funds on a futile exercise or just to see if you know well if we could've put on occasion we would trial they bring in an expert who says oh yes there's a twenty three she we all know about it it's been around for a long time it's easy to obtain and it's not easy to interpret and i'm saying that i think that u s courts are a lot more time to get your so i you know i only quote it becomes obvious to determine which kind of futile to if you annoy the trial judge he should really shut up about it which is going to what i did because it was obvious to me she was going to have this trial and she was going to do it obvious discrepancy in the power of these two parties we have all of them might and majesty of the united states government versus an individual that's part that's part of the system you never look at the code to see what the statute of limitations is for suing the government if represent them so i thought about that when it was my time for a bottle i stood up and said well there's been an empty chair next to mine also you know who's sitting there thomas jefferson and the writers of e what he perceived to be non production noncompliance with the production request at a time when the taxpayers were represented by counsel in march up to two thousand they entered a stipulation providing for the complete resolution of their discovery disputes with the government without having received these documents they did not at any time request a an extension of the discovery period to seek additional discovery they didn't ask for a continuance of the trial they didn't ask for any that i have found in the transcript of the pretrial conference or or anywhere else that there was a request for a continuance the first motion that they made that discovery closed in april two thousand there was a stipulation the previous months to the resolution of all discovery dispute the next time we heard about the fact that the first time we heard about these documents in the case there were there were four requests outside because the first time we heard about these documents in the case was in november of two thousand and one two months before trial that was the first time we had get these things are not there somebody records of assessment survey are they reflect all the assessments that are made by a particular i r s service center with respect all taxpayers assessed on that it's like a long it's like a log but in fact it doesn't break down the taxpayers individual it's just  it's just it's just relaxing because it has to be there partly it is something that's required to be there it's something that's required to be executed yes but it's not something that's readily available it's not something that is ordinarily part of an individual taxpayers administrative file because it pertains to multiple taxpayers and that's why i mean at the inception of that you know shortly after the taxpayers first production request we produced all non privileged you know the entire non privileged portion of the administrative file but the administrator in this case as in most produced all those documents are generally not generated until the documents containing the same information were produced with the first the government's first production which was i mean within six months of the time the case was filed years before the the forty three forty that were actually introduced were not produced until november of two thousand and one and the reason for that is that they are off and those forms are often generated right before the trial so that they were the payments the forty three forty is called a certificate assessment and payments and so it will show both all the tax assessments that were made and it will show all the payments that were made that were credited to porter's assessments and in order to be to try to make sure that the form captures all of the payments that were made more or less counsel for the government stated that we enter into some kind of a stipulation that i'll discover you shouldn't settle and that was sometime in the year two thousand to the extent that there is accurate it was based on the fact that has fully complied with the defendant's request for production of documents and he says the government delivered two defendants copies of all non privileged documents well there's nothing in the in the law that says that this is a my position was that the taxpayer has a right to determine that there was of the settlement and that's what that means you are right to look into whether all the steps were done properly and i should invest in depositions with conversations with mr vanier at least two or three or four transcripts that there's any question mr downey or responded to my questions saying there is no such meeting he did this repeatedly and then suddenly four days before trial he says here are the twenty three c d s and then i find out not only do they he brings in an expert he says well these are well known these with well known for years and they're easy to get and so there i am as a trial attorney thinking well you know can the government get away with this i mean i can't hear a promise if you didn't ask for a continu