.

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):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24902306/

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

Monday, May 17, 2010

10-05-17 Request State Department Response on UPR report // Solicitud de respuesta del Departamento de Estado sobre el informe de la UPR // Request Response State Department für die UPR-Bericht

10-05-16 Requesting Responses by US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, in re: UPR of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations.  

Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 16:41:42 +0300
To: upr_info@state.gov
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Human Rights Alert - UPR Powerpoint Presentation
Cc: "Smith, Darcy \(USMS\)" , "Senator Feinstein- DC"<1-202-228-3954@metrofax.com>, "Senator Feinstein- SF" <1-415-393-0710@metrofax.com>, "Rep Barney Frank - Chair, House Financial Services Committee"<1-202-225-6952@metrofax.com>, "Attention Rep Barney Frank" <1-202-225-0182@metrofax.com>, "Attention Senator Christopher Dodd - Chair, Senate Banking Committee" < 1-202-224-1083@metrofax.com>, "Attention Senator Leahy-Judiciary Committee"  <1-202-224-3479@metrofax.com>, "Representative Conyers - House Judiciary Committee" <1-202-225-0072@metrofax.com>, "Senator Carl Levine" <1-202-224-1388@metrofax.com>


Hillary Clinton
Secretary of State
c/o UPR Office
State Department
The favor of a response within 10 days is requested.
Dear Secretary of State Clinton:

Please accept the Powerpoint presentation, copied and linked below, [1] as part of ongoing efforts to communicate with the US State Department regarding Human Rights Alert submission to the UN as part of the 2010 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the United States. The Human Rights Alert submission focused on the role of unvalidated online public access and case management systems of the US courts in alleged abuse of Human Rights of US residents at the US courts.  Communication with the State Department regarding such submissions was recommended both by the US and by the United Nations.  We hope that such communications would be helpful in producing a more effective response by the US State Department in its own August 2010 submission to the UN  2010 UPR. 

Truly,
[]
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (HRA), NGO
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

LINKS:
[1]
Human Rights Alert - powerpoint presentation - UPR report and proposed UN UPR resolution.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31480721/10-05-16-Power-Point-Presentation-Human-Rights-Alert-Universal-Periodic-Review-report-and-proposal-for-UN-resolution-s

CC:
1) US Congress
2) UN High Commissioner on Human Rights
3) Urban Justice Center, NYC.
_________________________
Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
Outline of the first ever Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the United Nations of Human Rights in the United States:
       April 2010 -    Reports by stakeholders due with the UN.
       August 2010 -   Response on the reports by the US State Dept due with the UN
       November 2010 -  Review session and report by the UN
       > November 2010 - US State Dept-UN discussion on future goals.
       2014 -  Next UPR by the UN of the US
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
Submission as part of 2010 UPR of the US:
       Core Allegations serious widespread violations of Human Rights by the US federal courts
       enabled by the new computer systems of the federal courts PACER & CM/ECF.
       Resulting Alleged violations
       False imprisonment
       Abuse of the right for possession
PACER & CM/ECF
       New computer systems of the US courts were established US-wide by the Administrative Office of the US Courts.
       The project took over a decade to complete
       The cost was estimated at the low $ billions
PACER & CM/ECF
       Separate and unequal access systems
       Parties in litigation are segregated
       PACER access is permitted to the public and pro se litigants
       CM/ECF access is permitted to attorneys authorized by a given court in a given case.

Due Process & Fair Hearings
       Due Process - a fundamental Civil Right in US law
       Fair Hearings - a fundamental Human Right in ratified international law
       Disambiguation of court rules and court procedures - a cornerstone of Due Process & Fair Hearings:
       Published Rules of Court
       Right for Notice and Service of court records
       Right to access court records to inspect and to copy
 
Full Faith & Credit
       Core issue defining court records (orders, judgments) that are honest, valid, and effectual
       Alternative court records that may be:
       Proposed order and judgments, 
       Unentered (lodged) orders and judgments
       False court records.
Full Faith & Credit
       US Constitution, Article IV, 1:
   Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state. And congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
Full Faith & Credit
       US Act of May 26, 1790:
   That the act of the legislatures of the several states shall be authenticated by having the seal of their respective states affixed thereto; That the records and judicial proceedings of the courts of any state shall be proved or admitted, in any other court within the United States, by the attestation of the clerk, and the seal of the court annexed
Full Faith & Credit - Paper Records
The procedures were well established for generations:
       Assigned judge would verify orders/ judgments by hand signature and date.
       Authorized clerk would authenticate the record by hand signature and date with court seal/stamp.
       Verified and authenticated records were entered in court files as such and thereby became public records.
Full Faith & Credit - Digital Records
Unreasonable ambiguity emerged:
       No Rules of Courts were published pertaining to verification and authentication of court records
       Based on Users Manuals of federal courts across the US:
       NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings) are the new authentication instruments.
       RSA-encrypted Court Stamp replaced the hand signature of the clerk and the seal of the court.
Digital Records
US Court, Central District of California
In the specific case of the Los Angeles Court, an unsigned, unauthenticated General Order 08-02 further defined the procedures:
O. Certification of Electronic Documents. Pursuant to Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 44(a)(1) and 44(c), the method of electronic certification described
herein is deemed proof of an official court record maintained by the Clerk of Court.
The NEF contains the date of electronic distribution and identification of the United
States District Court for the Central District of California as the sender. An
encrypted verification code appears in the electronic document stamp section of the
NEF. The electronic document stamp shall be used for the purpose of confirming
the authenticity of the transmission and associated document(s) with the Clerk of
Court, as necessary. When a document has been electronically filed into CM/ECF,
the official record is the electronic recording of the document kept in the custody of
the Clerk of Court. The NEF provides certification that the associated document(s)
is a true and correct copy of the original filed with the court.
Deficiencies in Digital Records Integrity
       Failure to publish the new Rules of Court
       Order, judgments were separated from the authentication instruments NEFs
       PACER displays orders, judgments without the authentication at all.
       PACER does not permit public access to the authentication instruments.
       PACER what appears to the public as signatures in the PACER dockets may or may not be associated with digital signatures in the NEFs.
Deficiencies in Digital Records Integrity
       PACER access to dockets was permitted to court staff, who were NOT authorized as deputy clerks.
       CM/ECF the system permits the issuance and notice and service of NEFs bearing no court stamp at all.
       CM/ECF no electronic public access is permitted to NEFs which are electronic records
       CM/ECF allows access to NEFs only to attorneys who are authorized by a given court in a given case.
The Culmination of Deficiencies in System Integrity
       The court marks as entered albeit with no valid authentication large volume of records that are not authenticated, and are not valid and effectual court records.
       Such records are noticed and served on parties to litigation, with no court stamps, or with no NEFs at all.
       Even accomplished, experienced attorneys are mislead relative to validity of court records.
Sample Evidence
       Court filings, court minutes, orders, & judgments, which were served with invalid NEFs or no NEFs at all.
       Evidence of denial of access to court records particularly to NEFs.
       Evidence of refusal of senior US officer to initiate corrective actions.
Valid NEF
US Court, Central District of California
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914)
(click to enlarge image)
Invalid NEF
US Court, Central District of California
Mandate of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit in Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914)
Conclusion -I
       Orders and Judgments are routinely issued and served by the US courts, which are not authenticated.
       A reasonable person is likely to conclude that such records did require full faith and credit.
       The evidence is compelling that considerable ambiguity was introduced into defining the validity of court records, even by accomplished attorneys.
Conclusion II
       The public, and pro se litigants are unable to discern such valid from invalid, since access to NEFs is denied.
Proposed Solution
Publicly accountable validation (certified functional logic verification) of such systems in the courts -- pursuant to the Rulemaking Enabling Act.
Exhibits
       Declaration re: Attempt to access court records September 18, 2009
       Declaration re: Attempt to access court records December 31, 2009
       Declaration re: Attempt to access court records March 25, 2010
Proposed UN-UPR Resolution
       Compelling evidence was provided of unreasonable ambiguity in the US federal courts public access and case management systems PACER & CM/ECF, relative to verification and authentication of court records, such that require full faith and credit.
Proposed UN-UPR Resolution (cont)
2) Concerns were raised that established principles of Due Process and Fair Hearing were undermined, or not fully sustained in PACER & CM/ECF:
       Published Rules of Court
       Right for Notice and Service of court records
       Right to access court records to inspect and to copy
Proposed UN-UPR Resolution (cont)
3) The US is called upon to document that such principles of Due Process and Fair Hearings are fully sustained in PACER and CM/ECF.
4) Publicly accountable validation of case management and public access systems of the courts is recommended in courts of all member nations.
Expert Opinions
       To be completed


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 -

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine