The Honorable Audrey Collins, Chief Judge
US District Court, Central District of California
C/O Angela Bridges
By email Angela_Bridges@cacd.uscourts.gov
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 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
13) US Secret Service
14) US State Department – UPR Office
15) UN High Commissioner of Human Rights – UPR Office.