Monday, November 21, 2011

Controversial Pastor, Self Proclaimed Prophet, Indicted re Income from Church Offerings and Offshore Accounts (11/21/11)

Ronald Weinland, a self-proclaimed prophet about the end of times, has been indicted on 5 counts of tax evasion. The Indictment is here. The USAO ED KY press release, here, says in part here relevant:
The Indictment alleges that Ronald Weinland, 62, attempted to evade taxes in the amount of $357,065 over a period of five years starting in 2005.
Robert Weinland’s alleged acts of evasion included filing tax returns, understating his gross income, using church funds for personal expenses and failing to claim those funds as income on his income tax returns, and failing to report the existence of a bank account in Switzerland. He also allegedly failed to report any interest made on that account as income.
Although  I have not seen the indictment yet, the key facts (some to be filled in are):

Taxpayer: Ronald Weinland
Bank : ?
Entities: ?
Counts: Tax Evasion (7201) - 5 Counts
Maximum Incarceration Period - 25 (although a superseding indictment might be brought for the FBAR violations)
Tax Evaded: $357,065
FBAR Penalty: ? (usually resolved in the criminal case only by plea)
Court: ED KY
Judge: Danny C. Reeves

And here are the fun facts: The defendant is a minister and self-proclaimed prophet whose specialty is the end of days.

For those interested in more on his prophecies, his church's web site, including revelations and biblical truth, is here.  And, just days before his indictment, he writes here that "God first revealed to His two end-time witnesses, His final two prophets that His Son would return to this earth in a second-coming as King of kings on May 27, 2012."  He'll probably be preparing for that coming rather than his defense to these charges. But, perhaps he can pay his attorneys a lot of money (can't take it with you anyway) to get him to May 27, 2012.  If you believe this stuff, you might give up whatever obsesses / possesses you to read this blog.


  1. Thanks for the morning funnies. About time one of these were caught. This indictment is just part of the end times tribulations, I am sure. Send more money, please! :)

  2. The indictment (which you now link in your post) on Weinland treats each year as a separate count. The false prophet's Swiss bank account is mentioned in each count along with the tax evasion. Since this case has been under investigation for over 3 years now as evidenced by Weinland filing a motion to quash summonses back in 2008 and the Swiss bank account having been known about for over a year, I would think that FBAR violations would have been designated as separate counts from the get-go.

    With the first count being for tax year 2004 with the filing date in April of 2005, the statute of limitations would ordinarily have run out for that count. But Weinland travels a lot internationally. However, I don't think his travel been much more than the 7 months we're past April. Unless there's another legal maneuver that would allow them to refile even if now past the statute of limitations with an expiration date extended by his travel.

    Also, I don't believe that Weinland would be part of the early UBS case. Weinland travelled personally to Switzerland early in 2003 to set up the account. IIRC, UBS sent people to the US to allow opening a Swiss account without having to travel there yourself.

  3. Hi Jack: this court case, in the context of our current corrupt government in Washington, is reminiscent of the following proverb by Aesop:

    We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. — Aesop

    They should leave the prophet alone and arrest themselves and put themselves in federal prisons. When we've appointed a new government, then perhaps they can look into the case of the prophet. But this government cannot be trusted and has no moral authority to condemn such people when men like Jon Corzine, and women like Nancy Pelosi are walking about free.

  4. Thanks for that contribution. The general point of Aesop's aphorism is a good one, but don't know enough about the specific facts of Corzine and Pelosi to know whether their situations prove the truth of Aesop's aphorism.

    Jack Townsend

  5. Thanks for your blog! Well, the wrong-doing on the part of Corzine or Pelosi is based on circumstantial evidence, but to my knowledge, there aren't even DOJ investigations going on. So that leaves the impression that if you have high level government connections, the justice system gives you a pass. Such a system is corrupt and the best thing is just simply to opt out if you get a chance.

    Another example is that of the sub-prime mortgage crisis where there have apparently been no bankers who have gone to jail for mortgage fraud. I myself became a victim of mortgage broker who sold a business plan to the SBA so that my brother (my partner) could get a loan, arguing that he could make 3x his historical the cash flow--which even the new location did not help it to become so, his cash flow went down to almost nothing because of the move--it was a patented lie, but did that guy go to jail? Did any of the politicians or big banksters go to jail? No, the person that went to jail was a certain Charlie Engle, a cross-country runner.

    Thanks for giving me chance to air my gievances. I'm a little guy, like many of your readers, whose innocent bank accounts have been made into a crime by FBAR. I had to give up my US citizenship as a result, and I like many people in my boat, are not very happy with the US system of justice right now.

    As bad as this prophet may be, he becomes the enemy of my enemy, and in that sense, I feel sympathy for him. Certainly it is the way of organized crime to eliminate all the petty thieves so as to gain a monopoly. I see little difference between the way the Federal government operates today and the Sopranos.


Please make sure that your comment is relevant to the blog entry. For those regular commenters on the blog who otherwise do not want to identify by name, readers would find it helpful if you would choose a unique anonymous indentifier other than just Anonymous. This will help readers identify other comments from a trusted source, so to speak.