Audio TNT Tony Returns To TNT Against Court Orders Plus Court Documents - Violates

Audio TNT Tony Returns To TNT Against Court Orders Plus Court Documents - Violates








I have the recording of Tony from the beginning of the call, the part that was NOT recorded.  I also have some of the chat.  How did I find this you might ask?  Well, let's save it for the video!

See also:

http://www.dinardaily.net/t59533-anthony-renfrow-tnt-tony-probation-information-and-reporting-violations BY NASH RAMBLER

As soon as the video is posted, I will be putting the word out there.  Just so everyone knows, I put up the original court sentencing transcripts here:

http://dinarrvnews.net/guru/tnt-tony/sentencing-court-transcript/

and part two is here:

http://dinarrvnews.net/guru/tnt-tony/sentencing-court-transcript/part-2/

Yes, they are long, but I also have them in Slide-share format here:




TNT Tony - Iraqi Dinar Guru Scam - Court Sentencing Transcript from Iraqi Dinar News


Just so you don't forget:

Obtained from http://dinarrvnews.net/ by http://www.nickgiammarino.com/
Information on Tom Bartee, TNT Tony’s public defender:
Federal Public Defender 
525 S. Griffin St. Suite 629
Dallas , Texas 75202 
(214) 767-2746
United States
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF KANSAS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Docket No. 12-20041-CM
Plaintiff, Kansas City, Kansas
Date: 11/30/15
v.
ANTHONY RENFROW, Defendant.
……………….
TRANSCRIPT OF SENTENCING HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE CARLOS MURGUIA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiff: Scott Rask
Asst. US Attorney
360 US Courthouse
500 State Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
For the Defendant: Tom Bartee
Asst. Federal Public Defender
201 US Courthouse
500 State Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
Court Reporter: Nancy Moroney Wiss, CSR, RMR, FCRR
Official Court Reporter
558 US Courthouse
500 State Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
Proceedings recorded by machine shorthand, transcript produced by computer-aided transcription.
THE COURT: Let the record show we’re here regarding Case Number 12-20041. It’s a case entitled United States of America versus Anthony Renfrow. The parties please enter their appearance.
MR. RASK: May it please the court, United States appears by Scott Rask.
MR. BARTEE: May it please the court, Mr. Renfrow appears in person and by and through counsel Tom Bartee.
THE COURT: Mr. Bartee, if you and Mr. Renfrow will please approach the podium. Mr. Renfrow, we’re here for your sentencing hearing. Since you may be asked to make some statements to the court, I am going to swear you in to tell the truth, so if you’ll please raise your right hand.
(Defendant sworn.)
THE DEFENDANT: I do.
(NICK CUT'S HERE AND GOES TO THE STIPULATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE)
MR. RASK: Yes, Your Honor. As the court mentioned, it has received letters regarding Mr. Renfrow and the potential sentence in this case. The United States Attorney’s office has received numerous communications via e-mail, letter, telephone calls, and so forth with respect to Mr. Renfrow’s current involvement with an Iraqi dinar –what I will call scam. And as a condition of him being allowed to voluntary –voluntarily surrender, we would ask that a condition of his release include that he have no involvement, no advocation, no participation whatsoever with the Iraqi Dinar or any other sort of currency exchange activity, whether that be through internet communications, that could be as simply on a web site, whether it’s internet facilitated conference calls, whether it’s any sort of activity on Twitter or some other form of social media. As long as essentially, the defendant withdraws himself completely from anything to do with the Iraqi Dinar and currency exchange, the United States would not oppose voluntary surrender.
THE COURT: Mr. Bartee?
MR. BARTEE: Your Honor, that’s what we anticipated would be the request, and it’s –that’s agreeable with defense.
THE COURT: Mr. Renfrow, the court has asked whether or not any party’s going to make a request for you to voluntarily surrender. Mr. Bartee’s done that on your behalf. He mentioned a number of things that went into that decision. The government does not have an objection to that as long as you abide by this condition, which I believe would be a modification of his bond at this time, very specifically set out a number of prohibitions involving your involvement with this other sounds like program or whatever you want to call it.
THE DEFENDANT: Thank you. I appreciate that.
THE COURT: I know other people would say it’s a scheme to defraud people as well.
THE DEFENDANT: But that’s okay. The truth comes out, but go ahead. I appreciate that. Go ahead.
THE COURT: So –so, the question to you is, did you understand what the government has now mentioned as the condition as to whether they will agree to this voluntary surrender?
THE DEFENDANT: Yeah, nothing to do with the Iraqi dinar scheme or internet or Twitter or anything mentioned or the exchange. Okay.
THE COURT: I would let you know, however that’s set out as a condition of your bond, it will be set out as the government has proposed. If you, in fact, fail to abide by that prohibition or are involved in any way, in any manner, that what would happen is if that’s relayed to the court, the court is going to remove the voluntary surrender, and order that you be placed into custody and start serving your imprisonment sentence.
THE DEFENDANT: I understand.
THE COURT: You understand that?
THE DEFENDANT: Yep.
THE COURT: Any objections to the court’s proposed findings of fact and tentative sentence from the government?

MR. RASK: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: From defendant?
THE DEFENDANT: I had a question, though.
THE COURT: Why don’t you talk to Mr. Bartee first.
(Defendant conferring with attorney off the record.)
THE COURT: Anything else, Mr. Bartee?
MR. BARTEE: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Any objections to the court’s proposed findings of fact and tentative sentence from defendant?
MR. BARTEE: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Bartee, do you know of any lawful reason at this time why the court should not impose a sentence?
MR. BARTEE: I do not, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Renfrow, the court determines that the presentence investigation report and the previously stated findings are accurate, and orders those findings to be incorporated in the following sentence. Pursuant to Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it’s the judgment of the court the defendant, Anthony Renfrow, is hereby sentenced to the custody of bureau of prisons for a term of 12 months and one day on Count 1.  This term of imprisonment shall be followed by three years of supervised release. Within 72 hours of release from the custody of bureau of prisons, defendant shall report to the US Probation Office in the district in which he is released. While on supervised release, defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime, shall comply with the standard conditions that have been adopted by this court, and the special and mandatory conditions of supervision as set forth in Part D of the presentence report.

It is ordered defendant shall pay United States a special assessment of $100 to the crime victim’s fund pursuant to 18 United States Code Section 3013. Payment of the assessment is due immediately, and may be satisfied while in the bureau of prisons’ custody. No fine is imposed.  Pursuant to 18 United States Code Section 3663 A, defendant is ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $1,692,803.26 to the victims identified in the presentence report. Restitution is ordered joint and several with William Fox; that’s Southern District of California Docket Number 3:15 CR 01449-L-1, and payments shall be made to the US District Court, US Courthouse, 500 State Avenue, Room 259, Kansas City, Kansas, 66101.
Restitution is due immediately, and shall satisfied in payments of not less than ten percent of the funds deposited each month into defendant’s inmate trust fund account, and monthly installments of not less than five percent of his monthly gross household income over the three years of supervised release to commence 30 days after his release from imprisonment. Interest on restitution is waived. A final order of forfeiture and imposition of forfeiture money judgment has previously been filed by the court. Both the government and defendant are advised as to their respective right to appeal this sentence and conviction.
An appeal taken from this sentence is subject to 18 United States Code Section 3742, and subject to any waiver in the plea agreement in this case. Defendant is advised of your right to appeal the conviction and sentence, but only to the extent you’ve not waived that right in the plea agreement. You also can lose your right to appeal if you do not timely file a notice of appeal in the district court. Rule 4 B of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure gives you 14 days after the entry of judgment to file a notice of appeal. If you so request, the clerk of the court shall immediately prepare and file a notice of appeal on your behalf. If you’re unable to pay the costs of an appeal, you have the right to apply for leave to appeal in forma pauperis, whichmeans without having to pay a filing fee.

[
At this time, voluntary surrender is granted with the condition that was mentioned here in the courtroom added to the other bond conditions you’re presently under. Mr. Renfrow, is there any reason for the court to believe you won’t follow all those conditions?
THE DEFENDANT: No, sir.
THE COURT: Is there any reason for the court to believe that you won’t appear on the date, time, and place that you’re notified to appear to begin serving your term of imprisonment?
THE DEFENDANT: No.
All emphasis by Nick Giammarino.


Thanks everyone, more to come!

***************************
Nick Giammarino

Contact me on Twitter via globalresetguy or dinarrvnews or private message (PM) me here on Dinar Daily.

Thanks to Nick and: http://www.dinardaily.net

View Slide Share here: http://www.dinardaily.net/t59545-audio-tnt-tony-returns-to-tnt-against-court-orders-plus-court-documents-violates

TNT Dinar Raymond Renfrow (RayRen98) Now Listed on Justice Department Scammers Page   Today at 3:09 pm

Enlarge this image Click to see fullsize https://www.justice.gov/tax/program-shut-down-schemes-and-scams

https://youtu.be/zFPY0nM4fb8

YouTube Description:
Published on Dec 6, 2015
http://daystarnet.com/ Raymond Renfrow (RayRen98) of TNT Dinar Department of Justice 2009 Press Release Memo -

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/tax/legacy/2009/03/11/RRenfrow_Memo_and_Recommend.pdf

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-court-shuts-down-north-carolina-tax-preparer

TNT Dinar presentation for CMI (Concept Marketing International) made back in 2010. It was discovered on the internet archive website (archive.org). I have added additional screenshots, cleaned up the audio, and converted it from the old PowerPoint Presentation format to a video format.

Tarp Bailout from Raymond Renfrow



There is no copyright for this video and sound recording, it is being presented for the historical record. August 3, 2010 was the file date, and the author was Deborah Johnson.

wral.com/elm-city-man-barred-from-preparing-tax-returns/4714444/

Please see the following for more information on RayRay:

Facebook - facebook.com/raymondrenfrow

Twitter - twitter.com/rayren98

#raymondrenfrow
#rayren98

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
NO. 5 : 07-CV-117-FL
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
RAYMOND A. RENFROW,
individually and d/b/a IDEAL TAX
SERVICES and FIRST CLASS
LIMOUSINE,
Defendant.

ORDER

This matter comes now before the court on motion of defendant entitled "Motion to
Reconsider Contempt Order For Cancellation" (DE # 47), which motion requests the court now set
aside its order holding this defendant in contempt, entered upon the government's motion (DE # 40)
and after hearing. The government has not responded.

On March 9, 2009, the court ordered: "within thirty (30) days ofentry ofthis order, defendant
must, at his own expense, provide a copy of the complaint and this injunction to each of his
customers, employees, and associates, both current and former; ... within forty-five (45) days of
entry of this order, defendant must provide evidence ofhis compliance with the foregoing paragraph
by filing a declaration with this court setting out a complete list of names and addresses of
individuals or entities to whom he has mailed a copy ofthe complaint and injunction in this action."
Plaintiff, in its motion filed September 15, 2009, brought to the court's attention that no declaration
in compliance timely was filed.

The declaration lodged by defendant on the docket October 23,2009, showed some effort
on the part of defendant to comply. However, it failed to adhere fully to the court's prior order.
Defendant's declaration did not provide "a complete list of names and addresses of individuals or
entities to whom he has mailed a copy of the complaint and injunction," as required by this court's
March 9,2009 order.

After hearing November 16,2009, order was entered setting forth the court's findings offact
and its determination that defendant be held in civil contempt. The court imposed a daily fine of
$500.00 against defendant until a declaration was filed with the court as ordered and, moreover, that should defendant fail to fully comply with the court's earlier order, in the one entered November 18, 2009, served on defendant Wednesday, November 19, 2009, after fourteen (14) days, defendant
would be taken into custody and incarcerated to coerce defendant's compliance.

In his motion now before the court, postmarked the day after he was served with the court's
order on contempt November 20,2009, defendant indicates he misplaced notice ofthe hearing date
and time. He offers what are termed as corrections to the earlier declaration in the form of"Exhibit
A", which appears as a printed list extending fourteen (14) pages, ofindividuals' names, telephone
numbers, email addresses, social security numbers, and places ofresidence. Defendant refers to this as additional information bringing himselfnow into compliance with the court's prior order.

Upon court initiative, where his submission included social security numbers, the motion was sealed on the record.

Hearing nothing further from the government as to this matter, where it appears from the general tenor of the parties' underlying discourse that there was some agreement as between counsel
during negotiations earlier this year that defendant could, in lieu of street address information,
present his customers' email addresses in satisfaction of the court's order, under all of the
circumstances ofthis case, in the court's discretion, defendant is relieved now of the court sanctions
and shall pay nothing. In these parts, the motion is ALLOWED.

SO ORDERED, this the 29th day of December, 2009.

Chief United States District Court Judge

Video on Raymond Renfrow RayRen98 and Concept Marketing Internation - https://youtu.be/zFPY0nM4fb8
Category
People & Blogs
License
Standard YouTube License

***************************
Nick Giammarino

Contact me on Twitter via globalresetguy or dinarrvnews or private message (PM) me here on Dinar Daily.

http://www.dinardaily.net/t59568-tnt-dinar-raymond-renfrow-rayren98-now-listed-on-justice-department-scammers-page#298877

Thanks to Nick and: http://www.dinardaily.net