Welcome to Ward Dean MD, Anti Aging, Longevity Authority, GHB, Aging, Anti-aging, medicine, medical, doctor, IAS, VRP, Vitamin Research Products, smart drugs, health nutrients, IRS Grand Jury, Property Rights.

FOURTH DECLARATION OF
SPECIAL AGENT TANYA D. BURGESS

See Tanya's Mentioned Exhibits: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12

"I, Tanya D. Burgess, under 28 U.S.C. § 1746, declare as follows:

1. I am employed as a Special Agent with the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS" or "Service"), Criminal Investigation. I have been employed with IRS Criminal Investigation since 1980 and am currently assigned to the Pensacola, Florida office.

2. As a special agent, I am authorized to investigate possible criminal violations of the Internal Revenue Code and related offenses. (Int. Rev. Man. §9.1.2.2(6), attached as Ex. 1.) I am also authorized under Title 26, United States Code, Sections 7602, 7609(f), (g) and (i)(2), and Delegation Order #4 to issue, serve and enforce summonses, to take testimony and to receive and examine records.

3. I am assigned to an investigation of Ward Dean concerning his Federal income tax matters for the years 1997 through 2001. My investigation is based on a referral from a civil examination into Dean's potential tax liability.

4. The IRS Criminal Investigation's investigation of Dean for the years 1997 through 2001 began in October 2002. The purpose of the investigation is to determine whether Dean has committed an offense under the Internal Revenue Code by attempting to evade Federal income taxes, filing fraudulent Federal income tax returns or any other tax related offenses. The investigation was the result of Dean’s filing income tax returns that indicated that he earned zero income and, thus, claimed zero income tax liability for the years in question, except for 2000 when Dean failed to file any return.

5. I am aware of the IRS's policies and procedures concerning the disclosure of return information. These policies and procedures are based upon -- among other things -- the regulations, the Internal Revenue Manual and internal memorandum, and allow a special agent to make disclosures to third parties of return information during the course of an investigation when it is necessary to obtain, verify or corroborate information.

6. On October 3, 2002, in accordance with IRS procedure, I went in person with Revenue Agent Wayne Jackson to Dean's residence to inform him that he was under investigation and to give Dean the opportunity to provide information and answer some questions that I had. After introducing myself as a special agent with IRS Criminal Investigation, I displayed my pocket credentials and badge and advised Dean of his constitutional rights. Dean declined the opportunity to be interviewed or provide any information, and ordered Revenue Agent Jackson and me to leave his property.

7. In response to a letter that Dean sent to me after the visit to Dean's residence on October 3, 2002, I informed Dean that he could provide the Service with any information that he would like to be considered as part of the investigation. (Ex.2.) To date, Dean has not provided any infonnation in connection with my investigation.

8. Dean attempted to hinder the investigative process by contacting third parties who were issued summonses during the civil investigation of Dean and threatening to instigate litigation if they complied with summonses. Dean sent letters to financial institutions and his employers that were summonsed notifying them that "they were under no obligation to comply with this fraudulent summons." He further stated: "That it is not a court order. It is a phony document sent by a 'Revenue Agent' who has no authority to send a lawful summons to anyone." Dean concluded that he would hold anyone who releases records personally liable if they complied with the “phony document.” (Ex. 3.) Dean sent Revenue Agent Jackson a copy of the letters he sent his employers and requested that the letters be forwarded to any other third parties that were summonsed.

9. I issued a summons to Dillon Vickery, which Dean attempted to quash. As set forth in his motion, Dean sought to quash the summons on the grounds that it was wrongful because Dean is "not one who is 'liable for any tax."' Dean alleged the Internal Revenue Code provisions related to summonses do not apply to him because he is not subject to income taxes. (Ex.4.) This is another example of Dean challenging the IRS's and my authority, as a special agent, to conduct an investigation.

10. As presented in a hearing transcript on Dean's website, a subpoena was issued to Dean for a handwriting exemplar in order to verify Dean's signature on his tax returns for the years under investigation. On or about June 4, 2003, I personally served the subpoena on Dean. Revenue Agent Jackson was present when I did so. Dean was forced to give the handwriting exemplar by court order, which Dean objected to under "threat, duress and coercion." (Ex. 5, p.12.) Dean again expressed his belief that I did not have the authority to conduct an income tax investigation of him. (Id., pp.16, 20-21.)

11. The culmination of these events described above -- ( 1) Dean ' s attempt to hinder the civil investigation by threatening to hold third parties personally liable if they complied with the summonses; (2) Dean declining the opportunity to be interviewed or provide any other information on October 3, 2002, and then ordering Revenue Agent Wayne Jackson and me to exit his property; (3) Dean attempting to quash the summons issued to Dil1on Vickery; (4) Dean's refusal to comply with the subpoena for a handwriting exemplar; and (5) Dean not providing any information to the Service in response to my October 14th letter -- lead me to reasonably believe that Dean would not voluntarily provide information in connection with the investigation.

12. Although it is not the case here, even if a subject of an investigation does voluntarily provide documents and testimony in connection with one of my investigations, it is still my practice to issue summonses to witnesses and financial institutions and conduct personal interviews. These third party contacts are a necessary part of an investigation to corroborate, verify and obtain information. The reasons which make these contacts necessary are explained below in paragraphs 13 through 15.

13. The Internal Revenue Manual that pertains to criminal investigations, in particular, instructs me that "it is the special agent's duty to interview the taxpayer and witnesses connected with the investigations." (Int. Rev. Man. §9.4.5.3(2).) Interviews are a necessary part of an investigation because they are used to gather information that may bring about leads in the investigation, assist in developing information and establish evidence so that is it more likely to be admissible if the case was recommended for prosecution. (Int. Rev. Man. §9.4.5.3(1), attached as Ex. 6.) I am required to interview third parties in connection with the investigation.

14. The necessity to seek information from third parties is aptly demonstrated by example. For instance, assuming the subject of the investigation does provide information during the investigation, corroborating and verifying the information with a third party better ensures that the information received from a taxpayer would be admissible at trial, for example, if the taxpayer subsequently claimed his Fifth Amendment privilege. Because the United States has the burden of showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the subject of the investigation criminally violated the Internal Revenue Code, I must also obtain, corroborate and verify evidence with third party witnesses and other available sources in order to ensure that the evidence is sufficient to support a criminal prosecution. (Int. Rev. Man. §9.3.1.3.1(2), attached as Ex. 7.)

15. As a general rule, the Internal Revenue Manual allows for the disclosure of return information to third parties when conducting either a civil or criminal investigation to the extent necessary to obtain information not other wise reasonably available. For example, these circumstances arise when it is necessary to corroborate statements or information provided by the subject of the investigation, or the information is within the control of a third party. (Int
Rev. Man. §11.3.21.3(5), attached as Ex. 8.) This lends further support to my practice of seeking information from third parties.

16. Specific to this investigation, I sought information in two principle methods: Issuing summonses to third-parties and personally contacting witnesses.

17. During my investigation of Dean, all of my verbal conversations with third parties were by telephone, except one in-person meeting when I served a summons by hand on Dillon Vickery. The telephone calls were made for three reasons. First, I would call individuals to obtain needed information related to the Dean investigation. Second, before I issued and served some of the summonses by mail, I would call the third party to confirm the address. Third, after the summonses were mailed, I would then sometimes follow up with a telephone call to check on the status or when I could expect a response to the summonses.

18. My telephone calls were discrete and specific contacts based upon my review and evaluation of bank records that were obtained during the civil examination. Upon reviewing these records, I identified payments made to Dean and attempted to determine if they were sources of income. After identifying these particular payments, I then contacted the party that made payments to gather more information about the nature of the payment. I also attempted to verify how Dean disposed of any income. Again, to do this I identified from the bank records third parties to whom Dean made payments and contacted them.

19. Any time that I contact a witness by telephone, I have a procedure that I follow. The procedure is as follows: I always identify myself by providing my first and last name, I tell the third party contact that I am with IRS Criminal Investigation, and I tell them that I have been assigned to an investigation involving a person (whose name I provide to the third party contact). My practice is to always follow this procedure, and I followed this procedure with the third party contacts I made by telephone in the investigation of the Dean. Thus, I would have stated: My name is Tanya Burgess. I am with IRS Criminal Investigation. I have been assigned to an investigation involving Ward Dean. I would like to ask you some questions.

20. The only instance when I contacted a witness in person was when I served a summons on Dillon Vickery on October 16, 2002. The reason for serving the summons in person was that Mr. Vickery had earlier declined to provide me with information over the telephone. All of the oral disclosures made to Mr. Vickery during our telephone conversation were made in accordance with the procedure described above in paragraph 19. When I served the summons on Vickery , I identified myself as Tanya Burgess, a special agent with IRS
Criminal Investigation, displayed my badge and credentials, and I served Mr. Vickery with the summons and explained to him what he was required to do in response to the summons.

21. I made these disclosures in accordance with my understanding of IRS regulations, policy and procedure that authorizes special agents, when making third party contacts, to display their badges and credentials, to make an affirmative statement that they are special agents with IRS Criminal Investigation, and to identify the person under investigation. My practice is, in fact, in accordance with the IRS's policy and procedure, which is set forth in part in a memorandum dated February 2, 2001, from Mark Matthews, Chief, Criminal Investigation, IRS to CI Special Agents in Charge. (Ex. 9.) The policy reflected in the attached memorandum was the IRS policy in effect -- and a policy that I was aware of -- at the time that I contacted third parties in conjunction with the IRS' investigation.

22. For the written contacts that I made with third parties in connection with my investigation, I issued administrative summonses to obtain information relating to financial transactions they had with Dean. Three examples of the summonses are attached as Exhibits A- C of the complaint. (Comp. 7.) The summonses indicate that they were issued from the "Crimina1 Investigation" Division of the Internal Revenue Service. (Comp. 9.)

23. I served summonses on third party recordkeepers, including Dean's return preparer and financial institutions with which Dean had engaged in transactions, and sent Dean notice as required by Title 26, United States Code, Section 7609. I.also sent summonses to individuals and entities that had made payments to Dean or to individuals and entities to which Dean made payments. The purpose of the inquiries was to determine the source and disposition of Dean's income.

24. I identified the individuals and the entities that I wanted to contact from Dean's bank records that I received from civil examination (as explained above in paragraph 18). Because the bank records showed who had engaged in financial transactions with Dean, I was able to make specific and discrete contacts with third parties to gather needed testimony and documents.

25. Third parties that receive administrative summonses must also be apprised as to whether the summonses were issued by IRS Criminal Investigation. In order to conduct investigations in a forthright and consistent manner, IRS policy dictates that field offices enter "Criminal Investigation" as the issuing compliance function on line two of the administrative Summons, Form 2039. This is also my personal understanding of the IRS's policy and procedure, which is indicated by a March 5, 2001 memorandum from Howard Levine, Special Litigation Assistant, Office of Chief Counsel to Area III Counsel. (Ex. 10.) A December 3, 2002 memorandum to special agents in charge from Johnny Rose, Director, Operations Policy and Support reconfirms this policy. (Ex. 11.) This policy with respect to identifying Criminal Investigation as the issuing office on administrative summonses was the IRS policy in effect -- and a policy that I was aware of -- at the time that I issued summonses to third parties in conjunction with the IRS ' investigation of Dean.

26. "Criminal Investigation" or "CI" may have appeared on the return addresses of the envelopes in which I sent the summonses. But, the disclosure of criminal investigation on the envelopes is an authorized disclosure just like the disclosures made on line two of the summons, Form 2039. These are the envelopes provided by the Service for the mailing of the correspondence. Thus, I believed that it was necessary to use the Service's official envelopes , when mailing the summonses that I issued to third parties as part of my investigation of Dean.

27. It is the IRS's policy and procedure to authorize special agents to disclosure return information to the extent necessary to obtain information which may be relevant to the investigation. (Int. Rev. Man. §9.3.1.3(1), attached as Ex. 12.)

28. During my investigation of Dean, I did not say to any third party that Dean was under "criminal investigation." "
///
///

"I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct." -- Executed on October 15, 2003.

TANYA D. BURGESS
Special Agent
Criminal Investigation
Internal Revenue Service
880 N. Reus Street, Suite 101
Pensacola,F1orida 32501