Dear Mr. Beard:

This is in response to incorrect statements and allegations made in your Motion to Show Cause, on July 15th, which I did not address during the hearing because I did not have time to read it. However, so that there is no presumption of my acquiescing to the truth of these misstatements and false allegations, by a failure to respond to them, I am hereby memorializing a response to them, for the record.

First, you stated that the grand jury was conducting an investigation into whether I had "willfully failed to pay income taxes" for the years 1997 through 2001. Since you are an attorney, I would assume you are aware that willfulness, as defined by the Supreme Court in quite a number of cases, means the "voluntary, intentional failure to comply with a known legal duty." While I have not paid income taxes for the years in question, I have always stated I would, provided the government would prove that I have a legal duty to do so. I have repeatedly asked government agents – in correspondence and verbally – to inform me as to what law makes me liable for an income tax, what law requires me to pay an income tax, and, from the time I was informed of the criminal investigation, what law(s) I have allegedly violated? Not one government agent, including yourself, has given me a truthful answer.

Second, you stated that you provided me with the "applicable law" that required me to provide hand-writing exemplars. I had asked your office to provide me with the statute that required me to provide such exemplars. Although you provided me with a plethora of court opinions (most of which were irrelevant to the case at hand), you did not cite one law (statute) which required me to provide the exemplars.

You stated that I had attempted to obtain the names and addresses of the members of the grand jury from the clerk of the court. This is an absolute falsehood. I asked the clerk for the correct official address to use to address a letter to the Foreperson of the grand jury. I had assumed the Clerk of the Court was the correct address to forward a letter to the Foreperson, but wanted to double check. The Clerk was very ambiguous about the address, and first said to send it to you, and then admitted that the grand jury was independent of the U.S. Attorney. I did not at any time attempt to learn the names or personal addresses of grand jury members as you stated – only the correct official address of the Foreperson.

You stated in your motion that I have an internet website. Does the government have a problem with truthful websites? Does the existence of my website have anything to do with whether I am required to provide handwriting exemplars? I think not. The reason I created the website was to provide an objective forum for news of this story. I believe my website accurately and objectively portrays events that have occurred, with correspondence from both sides accurately presented. This is to counter the one-sided and carefully controlled press releases that I expect will be forthcoming from your office, in accordance with government policy to carefully manage the news of tax cases. The website was created after I learned of the grand jury proceedings, to offer another, more accurate, view.

You correctly stated that I requested certain documents from you and SA Burgess prior to providing the exemplar. I did this to ascertain whether she and you are lawfully authorized, by statute and lawful delegation orders, to do what you were doing. I have a right and duty to do this, pursuant to the admonitions of the U.S. Supreme Court to not take a risk that you might be acting beyond the scope of your authority (Federal Crop Insurance Corp (FCIC) v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380 [1947])

You stated that "a person who refuses to comply with a lawful order holds the keys to the prison in his or her own hands." (Italic emphasis added). That is undoubtedly true, in the case of lawful orders. I was trying to ascertain, pursuant to the Merrill case, whether the "order" (in this case) was more than a "prima facie" lawful order, and that it was, in fact, "lawful." Although Judge Vinson claims that it was, I have seen no evidence yet to validate this claim. Nevertheless, since the keys to prison were obviously in someone else's hands, I complied with the order under threat, duress and coercion.

On 8 July, 2003, I went to the Clerk of Court's office to ask whether there were any local rules regarding the grand jury in the Northern District of Florida. I knew The Northern District has local rules which modify the federal rules of civil procedure; and I knew that many local districts in the several states in the United States have local rules regarding grand jury procedures, as well. I wanted to know if there were any similar local rules regarding grand juries in the Northern District of Florida. The clerk told me that they did not know of any, and referred me to your office. You provided me with a copy of Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (which I already had). However, I did not "demand information regarding the grand jury process," as you stated.

You allege I had an "intention not to comply with the law" and stated that my "true purpose is simply not to co-operate under any conditions." Those are absolute lies! I have made every effort to comply with the law. The problem was, and still is, your failure to confirm that what you wanted me to comply with actually was the law. You have failed to provide me with the statute that requires the provision of handwriting exemplars; and you have, as you disingenuously stated, "respectfully refused" to provide me with the documents that I have requested so I can ascertain that you have the authority you claim. As these documents are supposed to be public records, available to all citizens, I do not understand how providing them would "saddle a grand jury with mini-trials and preliminary showings that would assuredly impede its investigation and frustrate the public's interest in the fair and expeditious administration of the criminal laws." Your continuing refusal to provide documents required by statutes, regulations and rules, makes your statement that you have made "every effort to accommodate [me]" utter fabrication or falsehood.

As stated, the purpose of this letter is to correct, for the record, the misperceptions and inflammatory allegations and insinuations made in your Motion to Show Cause. Let me state unequivocally that I have never indicated in any way that I would not comply with a lawful subpoena, nor with lawful, or even colorably lawful, orders of any court. However, I believe the government and its agents, like citizens, must comply with the law. That is the type of government for which I risked my life during all my years while serving in Vietnam with the Rangers, and later with the Delta Force. So, I expect you, and all other agents and agencies of the government, to comply with the law. Regrettably, you don’t seem to share that opinion and ethic.

Sincerely,

Ward Dean, M.D.