* "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):
10-10-01 Corruption of the California courts noticed by the United Nations
10-10-01 United Nations Human Rights Council Records for 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States
Sunday, December 19, 2010
10-12-18 New Evidence Filed with US Congress of Conduct of Invalid Litigation in SEC v Bank of America Corporation in Collusion with the US District Court in New York // Nuevas Pruebas de los Litigios Falsa Relacionada con Bank of America // 新的证据的虚假诉讼有关美国银行
New Evidence Filed with US Congress of Conduct of Invalid Litigation in SEC v Bank of America Corporation in Collusion with the US District Court in New York
Los Angeles, December 19 - Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, have provided US Congress with evidence of criminal conduct by Bank of America in collusion with SEC, Judge Jed Rakoff, and Clerk Ruby Krajick of the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. [[i]]
The evidence shows SEC, Bank of America, and the Court covered up alleged violations of the law by high-level corporate executives and US officers through conduct of invalid litigation in the US Court.
In 2008 the US government coerced the merger of Merrill Lynch and Bank of America. Following investigation into the merger by New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, [[ii]] financial analysts called for "criminal indictments" in the "conspiracy". The scandal was compared in significance to Watergate. [[iii]] The involved officers included, but were not limited to: Chair of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke, former US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, former BAC President Ken Lewis, and then General Counsel Brian Moynihan (today - BAC President).
Starting August 2009 litigation of the matters under Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829) was extensively and incorrectly reported on by mainstream media as enforcement by SEC of corporate and banking regulation. The litigation followed public concerns of dysfunctional regulation of financial markets in the United States.
Human Rights Alert claims that the invalid litigation was intended to create a false perception of enforcement of the law. In fact, it covered up alleged criminal acts. Human Rights Alert claims that the case also provides detailed documentation of the key role the US courts' electronic administration systems (PACER and CM/ECF) play in enabling dishonest conduct in the US courts.
The new records, including a notice and SEC Freedom of Information Act responses [i,[iv]], were filed as an addendum to requests for investigation previously filed with US Congress. Investigation and impeachment proceedings were requested against US Judge Jed Rakoff [[v]] and Clerk of the Court Ruby Krajick, [[vi]] both of the US District Court, Southern District of New York, pertaining to their conduct in SEC v BAC in apparent violation of the law.
The Court has continued to deny access to litigation records under SEC v BAC,which Human Rights Alert claims is violation of First Amendment rights. However, in response to FOIA-requests, SEC produced a record dated September 21, 2009, that is claimed to be the summons issued by clerk under SEC v BAC.
The record produced by SEC, as summons issued by the Clerk, was unsigned and had no seal of the Court. US law - 28 USC 1691 - requires that the summons be signed and under the seal of the Court.
Human Rights Alert claims that the record, produced by SEC as summons issued by the Clerk in SEC v BAC, could not be valid
The docket of SEC v BAC in PACER includes a notation that the summons was issued over a month earlier, on August 3, 2009. However, the summons was excluded from the PACER docket. The Clerk of the Court has refused to provide a copy of the summons in response to requests, and senior staff of the Clerk's office explained that the Court routinely excluded the summonses from the dockets and denied public access. Only counsel in a given case were permitted access to the summons, according the Clerk of the Court.
The August 3, 2009 docket entry is claimed by Human Rights Alert as false, as violation of US law, which requires the docketing of the summons, and also a violation of the First Amendment right of public access to court records.
Human Rights Alert claims that the false docketing of issuance of summons also demonstrates the invalidity of the PACER docket in SEC v BAC, and a lack of accountability of the Clerk for the integrity of the PACER dockets in general and the false and deliberately misleading nature of the docket of SEC v BAC in particular.
Human Rights Alert further notes that nowhere in the docket of SEC v BAC was there any indication that service of the summons was waived, or that the service was executed. However, the complaint in SEC v BAC was never dismissed by the Court.
US law - Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 4 (m) - requires that if the summons was not served within 120 days, the court must dismiss the complaint. The failure to dismiss the complaint of SEC v BAC, following the failure to execute or waive service of process within 120 days, is claimed to be in violation of the law.
The previous requests for investigation and a report, which was filed for international peer-review, detailed the invalid nature of the litigation: There is no record of a valid assignment order for Judge Jed Rakoff, minutes were not entered for the proceedings, motions were not docketed, but were purportedly ruled on, unauthorized court personnel constructed the docket. The Court denies access to the all the Clerk's authentication/ attestation records (NEFs) in the case, including, but not limited to the authentication of the purported Final Consent Judgment, making it impossible to ascertain the validity of the judicial records in the case, or lack thereof.
Human Rights Alert claims that the facts in the matter would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the conduct of the invalid litigation in SEC v BAC was the outcome of collusion by Judge Jed Rakoff, Clerk Ruby Krajick, SEC, and BAC, which was likely to have been coordinated prior to the filing of the complaint in SEC v BAC at the Office of the Clerk.
Accordingly, Human Rights Alert calls upon the US Congress to initiate investigation - and if appropriate - impeachment proceedings, against Judge Jed Rakoff and Clerk Ruby Krajick.
The US Congress has been called upon to initiate corrective actions relative to the accountability of the clerks of the US courts for electronic court records.
Reform of the US courts is claimed as essential for the restoration of corporate and banking regulation in the United States and recovery from the current economic depression.
US media are called upon to correct their previous reports and inform the public of the true nature of the litigation in SEC v BAC.
Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Human Rights Alert focuses on the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of the integrity of the justice system in the United States.
LINKS[i] 10-12-19 Addendum to Request for investigation, impeachment proceedings where appropriate, in re: JED RAKOFF - US Judge, and RUBY KRAJICK - Clerk of the Court, US District Court, Southern District of New York
[ii] 09-04-23 RE: SEC v BAC (1:09-cv-06829) State of New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo Letter to US Congress with attachments
[iii] Analysts' responses to Andrew Cuomo's letter to the US Congress
[iv] 10-12-17 RE: SEC Freedom of Information Response re: SEC v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829)
[v] 10-12-04 RE: US Judges JED RAKOFF, VIRGINIA PHILLIPS, JOHN WALTER, US Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE - Request for Investigation, Impeachment Proceedings Where Appropriate s
[vi] 10-12-08 Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation(1:09-cv-06829) - Request for Investigation, Impeachment of RUBY KRAJICK, Clerk of the Court, US District Court, Southern District of New York s
Please Sign Petition - Free Richard Fine // Por favor, Firme la petición - Liberar a Richard Fine
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 -