I noted articles in your paper on July 30 about the reversal of last summer’s Supreme Court decisions regarding the Michael Falcone and James Jannetti case, in which two non-residents of Maine were indicted on state income tax evasion charges because they are “Civmars”: Civilian Mariners in the Military Sealift Command.

The Maine Revenue Service under the Baldacci administration is harassing out-of-staters for additional undeserved revenue by refusing to define “domicile in Maine.” I read recently Maine admitted it doesn’t want to define domicile because they “will lose money.” To me, this is an admission of outright fraud.

Justice Roland Cole made an excellent ruling dismissing these charges because Maine’s “definition of residency in Maine tax law was unconstitutionally vague.” However, Justice Donald Alexander reinstated these tax evasion charges, saying “…the term ‘domiciled’ is not unconstitutionally vague.” Dissenting Justice Warren Silver said “The inadequate definition forces people to guess at its meaning and face imprisonment if they guess wrong” and “violates the defendant’s right of due process…Maine offered no guidance…” Hoorah for Justices Warren, Cole and Silver!

In my opinion, Maine purposely reversed Justice Cole’s ruling because the MRS would otherwise find itself open to justifiable lawsuits by previously convicted mariners who have already restituted $1.38 million collectively or been jailed by a law Maine has too loosely defined. Why should citizens be held accountable when the state of Maine isn’t? Isn’t that the essence of tyranny which our Constitution rules against?

Robert Bruce Acheson,

Dixfield