This isn’t exactly the case though from what I have been able to follow.
In October of 2006 the initial event starting this entire case unfolded. The IRS issued an indictment against Wesley Snipes, who was no where to be found. My thoughts at the time were,
“As a celebrity it would not be unusual for him to be on vacation, or on a trip, outside the country or in seclusion. It would not be strange for Mr. Snipes to be working on a film somewhere in the world, and not immediately aware of what is going on here in the United States. To hear the talking heads speak, it sounds as if Mr. Snipes is actively avoiding contact, which may well be inaccurate.”
There was not one major news media outlet that stated the same thing I did. Every single one took the position that Mr. Snipes was evading the law. The virtually stated that his lack of response and absence was a sign of guilt.
They also glossed over the odd facts of the case. In quick summarry they were,
“First is the fact that the government accepted an amended claim of 0 income and made a refund of $7,000,000 without a red flag popping up is not Mr. Snipes fault….
…the fact that the business preparing the taxes is considered a “tax protest organization” should have drawn some interest….
It was claimed, as reports say so far, that the funds are not available for taxation as the funds were from overseas. I do not think that funds paid out in a foreign nation, for services in a foreign land, should be taxed by the government….”
These facts of the case have been roundly ignored in all the major news media.
Then came the news that Mr. Snipes was in Nambia.
“I’ve seen anchors defend and minimize actions of dozens of entertainers. I’ve heard them brush off gun charges and violence by rappers, barely mention potential criminal actions of actors, and breeze past arrests of musicians and singers on drug charges. Yet, there has been a direct implication of Mr. Snipes being guilty and hiding. Why the difference?”
I would ammend that statement made 2 days after the first. I would include the sympathy and outpouring of emotion to the utter devestation that is Britney Spears. This woman has endangered the lives of her children, indulged in drunken and intoxicated binges, blatantly violated the law, and acted in a manner that few would call rational. Yet with all that, there are constant cries for her to get another chance, that compassion should be shown, and the need of the children to be with their mother declared. Yet a crackhead mother, or a working single parent for that matter, can have their kids removed in a heartbeat. And Mr. Snipes is demonized.
A month later, on news of comments by Mr. Snipes I was able to find I stated,
“Well I’m not sure if Mr. Snipes is exactly innocent, but I do agree that he is being railroaded. The media has worked hard to portray him negatively…”
In December of 2006 Mr. Snipes returned from Africa and peacefully surrendered to authorities as he had previously arranged via his lawyers. The media and law enforcement swoped down on this event as if it were David Koresh exiting his compound in Texas. The media played it out as if this was the government standing up against a vile wrong-doer who was evading them and presenting danger to the public.
“Mr. Snipes has not evaded arrest, has not resisted, nor hindered the authorities. Mr. Snipes was doing his job when authorities indicted him, and his work happened to place him overseas at the time. I have no doubt that the Government knew this fact, or could have known it if they chose to. To create a media event by claiming to be unaware of Mr. Snipe whereabouts, to structure this matter as if there was negative intent, is almost conspiratory.”
Concluded in part 2...
No comments:
Post a Comment