Summary

Portrait of Charles Evans Whittaker Charles Evans Whittaker Parr v. United States (363 U.S. 370…

The petitioners themselves controlled the entire conduct of the District's fiscal affairs, and their own decision, limited only by a statutory ceiling, determined the amount of the tax that would be collected. Petitioners' exercise of their power to fix the amount of the tax, an exercise which ultimately assured to themselves an excess of funds over their intended expenditures or reserves for school purposes, was necessarily central to their scheme. Such control obliterates the line they seek to draw between themselves and the entity it was their duty to serve.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Charles Evans Whittaker Charles Evans Whittaker Parr v. United States (363 U.S. 370…

In fact the heart of petitioners' effort to escape their conviction is the claim that the skulduggeries of which the jury found them guilty do not fall within the scope of the Mail Fraud statute because in sending out the tax bills they were the neutral vehicles of legal compulsion, although at the time that they sent them out, and having full governmental control of the process of controlling revenue and expending it, they had predetermined that the proceeds were not to be fully applied to school purposes but were in part to be diverted into their private pockets.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature