page counter []
"...it's difficult to find a fraud of this size on the U.S. court system in U.S. history... where you have literally tens of thousands of fraudulent documents filed in tens of thousands of cases." Raymond Brescia, a visiting professor at Yale Law School

* "Los Angeles County got the best courts that money could buy". KNBC (October 16, 2008) * "Innocent people remain in prison" LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006) * Los Angeles County is "the epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud." FBI (2004) * “…judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit." Prof David Burcham, Loyola Law School, LA (2000) * “This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states… and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.” Prof Erwin Chemerinksy, Irvine Law School (2000) * "Condado de Los Angeles tiene las mejores canchas que el dinero puede comprar".KNBC (16 de octubre de 2008) * "Las personas inocentes permanecen en prisión" LAPD Blue Ribbon Panel de Revisión Report (2006) * Condado de Los Angeles es "el epicentro de la epidemia de bienes raíces y el fraude de la hipoteca." FBI (2004) * "... Los jueces juzgado y condenado a un asombroso número de personas por crímenes que no cometieron." Prof. David Burcham, Loyola Law School, LA (2000) * "Esta es una conducta asociada con los dictadores más represivos y los estados de la policía ... y los jueces deben compartir la responsabilidad, cuando es condenado a personas inocentes." Prof. Erwin Chemerinksy, Irvine, la Facultad de Derecho (2000)

Thousands of Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) remain locked up more than a decade after official, expert, and media report documented that they were falsely prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced in the largest court corruption sandal in the history of the United States...

Blue Ribbon Review Panel report (2006):


Nuestro derecho a acceso los expedientes publicos, nuestra libertad y nuestros derechos humanos fundamentales están todos conectados en las caderas!

10-10-01 Corruption of the California courts noticed by the United Nations

In summer 2010, the staff report of the Human Rights Council of the United Nations, as part of the first ever, 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States, noticed and referenced the Human Rights Alert April 2010 submission, pertaining to "corruption of the courts, the legal profession, and discrimination by law enforcement in California".

10-10-01 United Nations Human Rights Council Records for 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States

Sunday, May 16, 2010

10-05-16 Requesting Chief Judge Collins to ensure no perversion of Fine v State Bar, Disclose unpublished Local Rules of Court// Solicitud de Juez Presidente Collins para garantizar que no perversión de Fine v Colegio de Abogados, Revelar inéditas Reglas Locales de la Corte // Anfordern von Chief Judge Collins, um sicherzustellen, keine Perversion of Fine v State Bar, Disclose unveröffentlichten Local Rules of Court

Npbjjpedwpxbz2xpys_medium10-05-16 RE: Fine v State Bar II (2:10-cv-00045) Requests for: a) Assurances of no perversion in the case, and b) Disclosure of the unpublished Local Rules of Court.

The Honorable Audrey Collins, Chief Judge
US District Court, Central District of California
C/O Angela Bridges
By email Angela_Bridges@cacd.uscourts.gov

The favor of a response within 10 days id requested 
RE: Fine v State Bar II (2:10-cv-00045) Requesting Chief Judge Collins: a) Assurances of no perversion in the case, and b) Disclosure of the unpublished Local Rules of Court. 

Dear Chief Judge Collins:

Notices were previously filed with your good offices to reliably inform you of alleged perversion of justice in captions of Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) and Zernik v Connor at al (2:09-cv-01550), both pertaining to alleged deprivation of rights, at the court of Magistrate Carla Woehrle.  Accordingly, requests were made pursuant to the Code of Conduct of US Judges that you initiate corrective actions.  No response by you, or authorized by you, was received to this date. In the meanwhile, yet another case of this nature – Fine v State Bar II (2:10-cv-00048) was referred to Magistrate Woehrle.
The two captions, listed above, had common origins – in alleged widespread corruption of the judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. Likewise, both actions were filed as attempts to protect individuals against alleged deprivation of rights by such state judges in National Tribunal for Protection of Rights.

The two captions listed above, and several others, originating from similar circumstances, were all referred to Magistrate Carla Woehrle, and conduct of her court was the subject of my previous notices to you, effectively alleging obstruction and perversion of justice at the court of Magistrate Carla Woehrle:
1) In both cases referenced above, clerk of the court Terry Nafisi refused to respond on the question:

  • Were the dockets in such cases constructed pursuant to the authority of the Clerk of the Court?
  • Were the dockets in such cases honest, valid, and effectual dockets of the US court, pursuant to US law?

2) In both cases entries were made in the PACER dockets by individuals, who were employed by the court, but who were not authorized as Deputy Clerks.
3) In both cases adulteration was alleged by staff of the Clerk of the Court of commencing records, and later – access was denied to the same commencing records – to inspect and to copy.
4) In both cases the Court of Magistrate Carla Woehrle engaged in the notice and service of minutes, orders, judgments and mandates with false and deliberately misleading authentication records – NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings), which were missing the digital Court Stamps. Pursuant to the US District Court General Order 08-02 such records could not possibly be deemed as records that required “full faith and credit” – however, they were falsely and misleadingly represented as such in the online public access system PACER, from which all NEF were omitted.
5) In both cases, Magistrate Carla Woehrle issued in such records, served with invalid authentication, minutes, orders, and reports and recommendations, which a reasonable person would deem contrary to the law.  
6) In both captions listed above, Magistrate Woehrle permitted the appearances of counsel who were not counsel of record, and where the evidence suggested that they appeared with “no communications with clients”- part of a routine of alleged perversion, best documented in the March 4, 2009 Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm, in an unrelated case.
7) In both cases the Clerk of the Court later denied access to court records which would have provided direct evidence of the alleged wrongdoing by the Court.
8) In both cases, case number were assigned, which linked such civil actions to unrelated actions of criminal nature.  The same was already established also in the case at hand – Fine v State Bar II (2:10-cv-00045).
  • 2:10-cr-00048-CAS USA v. Chokchoyma et al 
  • 2:10-cr-00048-CAS-1 Samart Chokchoyma 
  • 2:10-cr-00048-CAS-2 Moun Chau 
  • 2:10-cv-00048-JFW-CW Richard I. Fine v. State Bar of California et al 
  • 2:10-mc-00048-ABC Rodriguez (closed 03/17/2010) 
Therefore, please accept this notice as a repeat request to initiate corrective actions relative to the two captions, list above: Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) and Zernik v Connor (2:08-cv-01550).

Therefore, please also accept this notice as a request that you secure the current caption of Fine v State Bar II (2:10-cv-00045) from similar alleged perversion at the Court of Magistrate Carla Woehrle.

Therefore, please also accept this notice as a request that you disclose the Local Rules of Court, pertaining to the following issues:
1) The practices and procedures of the Court pertaining to authentication of Court records in NEFs.
2) The practices and procedure of the Court pertaining to certification of filing of records by parties authorized in CM/ECF (emailing of NEFs to such parties), and the reason the Clerk of the Court routinely fails to forward such critical records to parties who are not authorized in CM/ECF.
3) Omission of all authentication records – the NEFs -  from the online public access system – PACER.
4) Denial of public access to such authentication records – the NEFs, even when explicitly requested - the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings).
5) The practice of issuance of invalid authentication records, as seen in the Court of Magistrate Woehrle – failing to include the digital Court Stamp.
6) The practice of service of minutes, orders, and judgments with such false and deliberately misleading authentication records.
7) The practice of permitting appearances by Counsel who are not Counsel of Record.
8) The routine referral of cases originating from alleged widespread corruption of the judges of Los Angeles Superior Court to Magistrate Carla Woehrle, in what appears as far from “random” referral pattern.
9) Case numbers designation in CM/ECF, which appears to link entirely unrelated cases, and which appears to be taken by the Court as permitting the handling of such cases in manners that are not permitted otherwise.

Surely, you realize that your expedient response on these matters would further justice in the case at hand - Fine v State Bar II (2:10-cv-00045), moreover – it would help restore confidence in the US District Court, Central District of California, as a National Tribunal for Protection of Rights, pursuant to ratified International Law.


Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (HRA), NGO
1) Clerk of the Court Terry Nafisi
2) Court Counsel Attorney Lydia Yurtchuk
3) The Honorable Patrick Leahy, Senator  - Chair, US Senate Judiciary Committee
4) The Honorable Dianne Feinstein Senator from California, Member of the Judiciary Committee
5) The Honorable John Conyers Jr, Congressman Chair, US House Judiciary Committee
6) The Honorable Christopher Dodd, Senator - Chair, Senate Banking Committee
7) The Honorable Barney Frank, Congressman - Chair, House Financial Institutions Committee
8) The Honorable Carl Levin, Senator - Chair, Senate Committee on Investigations
9) UN High Commissioner on Human Rights
10) US Marshal Service
12) FBI
13) US Secret Service
14) US State Department – UPR Office
15) UN High Commissioner of Human Rights – UPR Office.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please Sign Petition - Free Richard Fine // Por favor, Firme la petición - Liberar a Richard Fine

RICHARD FINE was arrested on March 4, 2009 and is held since then in solitary confinement in Twin Tower Jail in Los Angeles, California, with no records,  conforming with the fundamentals of the law, as the basis for his arrest and jailing.

Richard Fine - 70 year old, former US prosecutor, had shown that judges in Los Angeles County had taken "not permitted" payments (called by media "bribes"). On February 20, 2009, the Governor of California signed "retroactive immunities" (pardons) for all judges in Los Angeles. Less than two weeks later, on March 4, 2009 Richard Fine was arrested in open court, with no warrant. He is held ever since in solitary confinement in Los Angeles, California. No judgment, conviction, or sentencing was ever entered in his case.

Please sign the petition: Free Richard Fine -