72

Mr. Kamiyama in relation to Mr. Kamiyama's inability to speak English and the general incompetence of the Government appointed translator. The Government, however, consistently utilized the various problems posed by Mr. Kamiyama's inability to speak English in order to develop a broad conspiracy charge, and used the substantive counts against Mr. Kamiyama as a conduit for the introduction of highly prejudicial and irrelevant evidence supporting its theory that Reverend Moon was a businessman, not a religious leader, and that the Unification Church was not in fact a genuine religious institution. The case against

Mr. Kamiyama, accordingly, supports the conclusion that the proceedings in this action went substantially beyond a simple, narrowly focused tax prosecution.

4.

The Government Convicted Reverend Moon on the Novel Theory That "If It Is Moon's Money and He Used All of It For the Church That Doesn't Make It Not His Money."

At the conclusion of the trial, in response to

Reverend Moon's post-trial motions, the Trial Judge made the following comments:

I received 50, perhaps a 100, letters from
prominent church leaders, Protestant and Catholic
Church leaders decrying the fact that a religious
leader could be prosecuted for merely holding
church funds in his own name.

What

troubles me is that they all start on the
assumption that the only evidence here was that
the monies were in Moon's name and that he was a
church leader, whereas in fact, as I told the jury
and I will quote to you, the key issue is whether

73

or not the bank accounts at the Chase Manhattan
Bank and the Tong Il stock issued in Reverend
Moon's name belonged to Reverend Moon. (S9-10.)

More recently, during the hearing on Reverend Moon's motion for a reduction in sentence, the Judge reiterated that:

These funds and this stock, however, were clearly
the personal possessions of Reverend Moon...
The jury determined that they belonged to Reverend
Moon, and had I been given the facts, I would have
made the same determination. (P. 25 to Hearing on
Motion to Reduce Sentence, July 18, 1984.)

Unfortunately, these statements ignore the fact that
throughout the trial, the Government presented the case to
the jury on the theory that, regardless of whether or not
the disputed funds were spent on genuine church-related
projects, the mere fact that the funds were in the name and
under the control of Reverend Moon (a matter not disputed by
the defendants in this case), warranted the conclusion that
the funds would still, as stated by the trial judge, "belong
to Reverend Moon."

The presentation of the Government's case on this issue, is best described by the following remarks of the Government attorney in his summation to the jury:

Mr. Stillman said, look at how the money is
used. And if you will recall in my opening thats
exactly what I told you. Because the use of the
funds is important. It really is important.
is one of many factors.

It

However, as is probably obvious to all of
you, the fact that if it is Moon's money and he
used all of it for the church that doesn't make it
not his money. So use is just one factor.

The ownership can be determined from other
factors as well. Use is not solely determinative.

74

And you can see that in your own daily lives.
If
you use funds for a charity or for a project that
you are interested in, that doesn't make the money
not yours before you give it to them.
The

fact that Moon uses the money for HSA (Holy Spirit
Association) does not make the money not

...

his.
The money is his, he has to pay the
taxes on the money, so the fact that he reported
just the personal expenses that he claims were
personal doesn't mean that the money is not his.
(TR. 6461-6463.)

(Emphasis added.)

The most vivid example of the expansive nature of the Government's theory of taxability concerned a $250,000 contribution to the Korean Cultural and Freedom Foundation for the benefit of the "Little Angels of Korea Cultural Center," which was made from funds in the Chase Manhattan Bank accounts which the Government contended "belonged" to Reverend Moon. The following excerpt from the Government's own exhibit describes this organization:

1. The Little Angels of Korea

Little Angels of Korea is a children's folk ballet company created as a cultural program of the Foundation in 1965. During the fiscal year 1974, the Little Angels Company performed in 78 cities in the United States and 23 countries in Europe and Asia.

2. Children's Relief Fund

extended
the

The Children's Relief Fund was initiated to
meet unmet needs of children in Asia.
During the 1974 fiscal year aid was
to ... the Center of War Orphans,
Children's Polio Service, and the Pediatrict
Service of Hospital Mohasat, Vientiane. It came
to the attention of the Foundation that a great
need for medical attention and for medical

75

information exists in villages of Southeast Asia. The villages of special need contain large numbers refugees, living in primitive conditions, and subject to diseases of hemorrhagic fever, milaria, typhoid, plague, cholera and acute dysentary, which cause a high death rate among children.

During the month of May 1974, a total of 4,220 people (2,443 children and 1,777 parents) were examined and treated in 23 villages.

3. Radio of Free Asia

Since its inception in 1966, Radio of Free Asia has been committed to serve people of Asia as a bridge between themselves and the United States and the Western World. In 1970 Radio of Free Asia began a series of programs to inform the people of North Vietnam of American and world opinion in respect of the treatment of release of American prisoners of war in Southeast Asia.

During the fiscal year 1974, the Foundation has contributed to provide educational

scholarships and grants to a number of worthy students here in America and in Korea for their pursuit of their studies in the field of the arts. (GX. 2702-2706.)

In its attempt to convince the Court that the contribution to the Little Angels from the Chase funds represented a personal expenditure on the part of Reverend Moon, the Government attorney stated:

Now I agree with Mr. Stillman that the Little Angels may be a delightful cultural event and may bring a lot of pleasure to a lot of people and if Reverend Moon wants to spend his money helping the Little Angels that's fine if that's what he wants to do with it. If I want to give my money to the synagogue that's my personal business. But that

76

doesn't mean that the money that I'm giving isn't

my money. (TR. 5517-5518.)

In his summation to the jury Mr. Flumenbaum again stated his premise that Reverend Moon's involvement with the Little

Angels was the result of his personal/business interest in the Foundation:

We

We don't quarrel with the purpose of the loan.
told you in our opening that it was for the
construction of this school for the Little Angels.
And we told you and brought out through the
business card that Moon was the founder of the
Little Angels.
(TR. 6455.)

. .

Reverend Moon in his love of this program wants to stand as full-fledged guarantor. (TR. 6456.)

This characterization was directly contrary to the testimony of Mr. Pak, a close associate of Reverend Moon who testified

on direct examination:

Q: Will you tell the jury the relationship between the Little Angels School and the Unification Church?

A: Legally they are separate organizations.
However, the Little Angels Art School is part of
the general education program of the Unification
Church. (TR. 5596.)

Mr. Pak had testified earlier that the "construction of the

school was under Reverend Moon's total spiritual guidance

and cooperation based on a worldwide effort." (TR.

26/ On cross examination the Government again tried to establish that the Foundation was a business organization (Footnote Continued)