The previous post offers eloquent arguments and explains why you, DennisW, believe Kerry and Heinz to be liable.
That is not what you said previously and to which I responded. What you said was that "actually he broke the laws of Massachusets." As you know, lawyers on both sides have diverrging opinions about the law, and it is the function of the courtse to decide what law is. I consequencly asked you to show where it was unequivocally shown that he broke the law. You first replied by pointing to an article which said the he did not brake the law and then to an article which offers nothing but various hypotheticals.
If you said, "I personally was persuaded Kerry had bracken the law" or "I believe he broke the law," there would be no discussion.
As it stands, your initial claim remains unsupported. As for the hair-splitting legal arguments on the matter, I cannot contribute to them: I am not an attorney and do not qualify thus.
In any case, thank you for explaining in detail what led you to your beliefs.
Sorry that is not my belief. It is fact that if you frequent Massachusetts waters in your brand new yacht and dock there a bit....Then Massachusetts will demand payment of use/excise tax. Despite your claim that it is actually berthed in “no taxation” Rhode Island
Especially when you own two residences in Massachusetts and none in Rhode Island, Massachusetts will say to you that the real home of your boat is in Massachusetts. A good number of people try the same scam as John Kerry and some get away with it until they are squealed on. Some get away with it forever I’m sure.