.

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 31, 2010

10-05-31 LA Times Deficient Reporting - Case of Alfred Villalobos // Los Angeles Times deficiente presentación de informes - Caso de Alfred Villalobos // LA Times Mangelhafte Berichterstattung - Der Fall Alfred Villalobos




To: william.hennigan@latimes.com, marc.lifsher@latimes.com, letters@latimes.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: May 29, 2010 deficient reporting by LA Times in the case of Alfred Villalobos - conduct of John Reid as Judge, and David Pasternak as "Receiver"
Cc: victoria.kim@latimes.com, "Holland, Gale" , "Petruno, Tom" , metrodesk@latimes.com, timothy.rutten@latimes.com, "McGreevy, Patrick" , matt.lait@latimes.com, scott.glover@latimes, "Ware, Diedre" ,


To the Editors:

Your May 29, 2010 article, Judge refuses to unfreeze Alfred Villalobos' assets, states:  "In the end, the judge said that the receiver, David Pasternak, should remain in place." [copied below - jz]  The report remained incomplete and deficient on critical details:
·                     Was David Pasternak ever appointed by Judge John H. Reid as Receiver in the case, as required by law?
·                     Was his appointment order as Receiver, if any, ever entered by Judge John H Reid in the manner required pursuant to the California Code for such orders, in order to make them "effectual for any purpose"?
Conduct of David Pasternak, as purported Receiver albeit with no valid and effectual appointment order, as required by California Code, and grant deeds generated by him under such circumstances were previously opined by fraud expert James Wedick as fraud being committed. [1]  James Wedick, an FBI veteran, is a fraud expert second to none - he was decorated by US Congress, US Attorney General, and FBI Director.

Review of conveyances of titles by David Pasternak, linked below, [2] which were collected during a rapid search at the office of Registrar/Recorder of LA County,  revealed numerous other cases that should be deemed upon review as real estate fraud by David Pasternak, under the guise of court actions. 

Therefore, it is alleged that David Pasternak was uniquely instrumental in propelling Los Angeles County already in the early 2000s to be distinguished by FBI as "the epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud." 

David Pasternak is former President of the Los Angeles County Bar Association, former President of Bet Tzedek a prominent Jewish charity providing free legal services and specializing in assisting real estate fraud victims, and also current Secretary of the Los Angeles Chancery Club.  Therefore, David Pasternak’s conduct should be viewed as reflecting on integrity, or lack thereof, of the legal profession in Los Angeles County as a whole. Likewise, the continued employment of David Pasternak as "Receiver" by the Santa Monica Superior Court judges raises serious questions regarding integrity of the Court and its judges. [3] [4]

The Los Angeles Times would provide valuable service to all who reside in Los Angeles County, by asking the Los Angeles Superior Court for a copy of the appointment order of David Pasternak as "Receiver" by Judge Reid in the case of Villalobos, and evidence of the entry of such order as required by law to make it "effectual for any purpose."

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

LINKS:
[1]
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24991238/
07-12-17 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) David Pasternak's Grant Deeds, opined as "fraud being committed" by fraud expert James Wedick
[2] http://www.scribd.com/doc/32247617/
09-12-23 Collection of grant deeds alleged as real estate fraud cases by David Pasternak under the guise of court actions
[3] http://www.scribd.com/doc/32247118/
Of note: Presiding Judge of the San Bernardino County, California Superior Court was tied in newspaper reports to numerous cases of real estate fraud under the guise of court actions.
[4]
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32048327/
10-05-27 Los Angeles Times deficient reporting in the case of Richard Fine
One should note the similarity between deficient reporting in the case of Villalobos, and deficient reporting regarding alleged false imprisonment of Richard Fine, where the Los Angeles Times repeatedly reported the Richard Fine was imprisoned pursuant to "Judgment" for contempt by Judge David Yaffe. No such judgment was ever discovered that was entered in a manner that would make is effectual for any purpose. In parallel - the Sheriff insists on fraudulently holding Richard Fine under the false claims that he was arrested and booked on location and pursuant to authority of the non-existent "San Pedro Municipal Court." In both cases, LA Times reporters entirely rely on words spoken by judges of the Superior Court, and neglect to inspect that corresponding court records were ever executed and entered as required by law.




Alfred Villalobos, center, leaves Los Angeles County Superior Court in Santa Monica after a judge ruled that his assets would remain frozen. Villalobos’ attorneys said he needed his assets unblocked to get the money he needs to defend himself in a lawsuit by the state. (Allen J. Schaben, Los Angeles Times / May 27, 2010)




Judge refuses to unfreeze Alfred Villalobos' assets

A history of high-stakes gambling losses is cited as the main reason. Villalobos is accused in a state lawsuit of using his influence with CalPERS officials to win investment deals for his clients.

By W.J. Hennigan and Marc Lifsher, Los Angeles Times
May 29, 2010
Reporting from Santa Monica and Sacramento


A state judge on Friday cited a long history of high-stakes gambling losses as a principal reason for denying a request from Nevada pension fund marketing intermediary Alfred R. Villalobos to lift a court-ordered freeze on his assets.

Villalobos, who attended the hearing but did not speak, is a central figure in state and federal investigations of the role of investment go-betweens at public pension funds. His assets were frozen, through a court-appointed receiver, as part of a fraud lawsuit filed against him by the California attorney general's office.

Don't miss a thing. Get breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox.

Villalobos' attorneys said he needed his assets unblocked to get the money he needs to defend himself in the lawsuit. But the state opposed the move, saying he is a heavy gambler and could lose the money betting.

The judge agreed. "This isn't your normal type of gambler," said Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge John H. Reid during a morning hearing in Santa Monica. "It's highly improbable" that he would stop gambling.

This mirrors the attorney general's arguments that the Incline Village, Nev., resident has a history of high-stakes gambling. He was "such a good customer that Harrah's Casino provided a complimentary penthouse suite to him for 20 months" in Stateline, Nev., while repairs were being made to his mansion in nearby Zephyr Cove, the state said.

The judge said he was particularly troubled to find out that Villalobos ran up a $670,000 gambling debt with the El Dorado casino in Reno. "That's more than I make," he said.

The civil case against Villalobos, which seeks up to $70 million in restitution and $25 million in penalties, also names as a defendant Federico Buenrostro Jr., the chief executive of the California Public Employees' Retirement System between 2002 and 2008.

The lawsuit alleges that Villalobos, aided by Buenrostro, lavished CalPERS officials with gifts, free trips and expensive entertainment to influence them to award billions of dollars' worth of pension fund investments to his clients, including such major Wall Street private equity managers as Apollo Global Management. Villalobos was paid more than $47 million in commissions for his activities as a so-called placement agent. The suit also accuses Villalobos and his company, Arvco Capital Research, of fraudulently engaging in securities business without licenses.

Villalobos denied the accusations in the lawsuit, saying he took no money from CalPERS and did no harm to the pension system or its members. Wearing a dark pinstriped suit, Villalobos was visibly upset with the state's allegations, at times shaking his head in disagreement during the proceedings.

His attorneys attempted to convey to the judge that the receivership is overly restrictive. One of his lawyers, Daniel S. Ruzumna, said the freeze on Villalobos' possessions, such as bank accounts, 15 homes, a fleet of Bentley, BMW and Hummer automobiles and an extensive art collection, was "unprecedented" in California law.

"I don't think there's a basis to continue these onerous restraints," Ruzumna said. "If you freeze all of a person's assets, they don't have enough money to survive."

The judge, however, said that the receivership allowed Villalobos' relatives to continue living in the homes. "I think that's appropriate. It's a concession that allows him to live a fairly normal life," Reid said.

In the end, the judge said that the receiver, David Pasternak, should remain in place. The ruling, said Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown, allows the state to "now move forward to recover the millions of dollars Villalobos made as part of his fraudulent scheme to improperly influence public pension fund investments."

When the proceedings wrapped up, Villalobos left the courtroom wearing dark sunglasses, refusing to speak to anyone other than the lawyers who flanked him.

"Obviously, the judge didn't agree with us," said Ruzumna, on his way out of the courthouse. "But hopefully he'll see things differently next time."

The next hearing is slated for Aug. 23 in Santa Monica.

The continuing scandal over alleged influence peddling by Villalobos and possibly other placement agents at CalPERS has spurred proposed legislation aimed at curbing gift giving and the payment of huge commissions by placement agents.

A CalPERS-backed bill that would require placement agents to register as lobbyists and ban fees that are based on a percentage on investment deals is slowly making its way through the Legislature in the face of strong opposition from the securities and banking industries.

On Friday, the bill, AB 1743 by Assemblyman Edward Hernandez (D-West Covina), was approved bythe Assembly Appropriations Committee with Democratic support on a party-line vote. The measure now moves to the full Assembly.

william.hennigan@latimes.com
marc.lifsher@latimes.com
Copyright 2010, The Los Angeles Times

Sunday, May 30, 2010

10-05-30 Conditions in the Los Angeles County Jails - Large-Scale Human Rights Abuse // Las condiciones en las cárceles del condado de Los Ángeles - abuso de los derechos humanos a gran escala // Bedingungen in der Los Angeles Grafschaft Gefängnisse - Große Menschenrechtsverletzungen


Celeste Fremon, Editor
Witness LA
http://witnessla.com/


Dear Celeste:

We have emailed before on subjects of common interest.  Your article regarding violence in the Los Angeles County jails was appreciated.
[1] Conditions in the Los Angeles jails were further analyzed regarding the legal foundation for holding inmates by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. Such analysis demonstrated further, large-scale abuse: About 50 % of entries in the Inmate Information Center were found to based on invalid judicial records, or with no Booking Number at all! [2]

Such findings were most notable in the case of Richard Fine.  He has been held for over a year in solitary confinement.  However, the Sheriff insists on providing fraudulent records as the basis for his arrest and imprisonment - claiming that Richard Fine was arrested on location and by authority of the "San Pedro Municipal Court". No such court has existed for almost a decade.  Moreover, Sheriff Deputy at the Superior Court Annex, San Pedro denied that Richard Fine was ever arrested or booked there, or that there were any booking facilities there at all. [3]

Richard Fine is only one example, but conditions that were revealed indicate the false imprisonment of thousands of inmates in Los Angeles County, not conforming with the fundamentals of the law.  Such conditions were alleged as one of the hallmarks of corruption of the Los Angeles justice system in submission to the United Nations, as part of the first ever review of Human Rights in the United States, due November 2010. [4]

Your help in making the public aware of conditions of the jails in Los Angeles County would be appreciated.  One way to do it - advertise the petition to free Richard Fine - which is based exclusively on the fact that he has been held by the Sheriff with no legal records as foundation for the imprisonment. [2]

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

PS
This letter with link to your blog is posted on Human Rights Alert, NGO, blog as well.
LINKS
[1]
April 5, 2010 Witness LA: Three Sheriff�s Deputies Charged With Inmate Assault
http://witnessla.com/lasd/2010/admin/three-sheriffs-deputies-charged-with-inmate-assault/
[2] Analysis of record of inmates in the Los Angeles jails.
Alleged false imprisonment of thousands of inmates in the Los Angeles County jails, revealed
in data surveys of Los Angeles County jails:
a) 10-01-04-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-Jose-Martinez-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24809956/
b) 10-01-05-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-John-Smith-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24816245/
c) 10-01-16-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-VINE-vs-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-Jose-Martinez-amp-Jose-Rodriguez-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25315610/
d) 10-01-11-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-Jose-Rodriguez-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25064776/
e) 10-03-14-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Survey-of-Consecutive-Booking-Numbers-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28350775/
f) 10-01-11-Los-Angeles-Law-Library-Catalog-Data-Survey-California-Code-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25067457/
[2] Petition - Free Richard Fine
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine
[3] Human Rights Alert Submission to the United Nations.
[1] April 19, 2010 Human Rights Alert submission for the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations:
a) Press Release:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/
b) Submission:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/
c) Appendix:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/
d) UPR Tool Kit by the Urban Justice Center:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29867561/

  

Friday, May 28, 2010

10-05-28 Fraud on Congress and Racketeering by Judges in Los Angeles County, California Alleged // Fraude en el Congreso y Crimen Organizado de los Jueces en el Condado de Los Angeles, California Presunta //Betrug auf Kongress und Schutzgelderpressung durch Richter in Los Angeles County, Kalifornien Angebliche

Glenn A Fine 
US Department of Justice Inspector General
Press Release
Fraud on Congress and Racketeering by Judges in Los Angeles County, California, Alleged in Complaint to US Department of Justice Inspector General.
Washington DC, May 28 – complaint filed by Joseph Zernik, PhD, and Human Rights Alert (NGO) with Glenn Fine, Office of Inspector General, US Department of Justice, alleges fraud on US Congress and denial of equal protection in Los Angeles County, California, by Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI, and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US Attorneys Office. [1] Office of the Inspector General is charged with conducting “independent investigations… of United States Department of Justice personnel… to detect and deter … fraud, abuse, and misconduct, and to promote integrity… and effectiveness in Department of Justice operations”.   The complaint alleged that in August-September 2008, Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI, and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US Department of Justice Office of US Attorneys, provided responses to US Congress, which constituted the fraud on US Congress and also denial of equal protection to the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California.  The responses by the two US officers came in response to inquiries filed on the Department of Justice by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California, and the Hon Diane Watson, Congresswoman from Los Angeles.  The 2008 congressional inquiries sought response by the Department of Justice on complaints filed by Dr Zernik in early 2008, which claimed racketeering by the judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court, the hallmarks of which were large scale false imprisonments, including the ongoing false imprisonment of the thousands of Rampart FIPs – victims of the Rampart corruption scandal (1998-2000) and real estate fraud by judges under the guise of litigations, in a county, which had been distinguished by FBI already in the early 2000s as the “epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud”.
Today’s complaint by Dr Zernik and Human Rights Alert also provided additional new evidence of the racketeering by judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. It was claimed that the hallmark of such conduct today was in the ongoing alleged false imprisonment of Richard Fine, 70 year old, former US prosecutor, with no warrant ever issued, and no judgment/conviction ever entered in his case.  Also noted in the complaint were the pardons signed by the Governor of California on February 20, 2009, for all judges who were and are taking “not permitted” payments. The complaint filed today by Dr Zernik and Human Rights Alert again emphasized that investigation of such complaints was the primary authority of the Office of Inspector General, and also part of its stated mission.
Copies of the complaint were filed with US Congress – Committees on the Judiciary, and also with US State Department and United Nations Office of High Commissioner of Human Rights – as part of the pending 2010 review by the United Nations of Human Rights in the United States.
###
LINKS:
[1] May 28, 2010 Complaint filed with DOJ-IG - fraud on US Congress, denial of equal protection in Los Angeles County, California.
_______________

Human Rights Alert

10-05-28 Complaint filed with US Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General, alleging fraud on US Congress, and denial of equal protection in Los Angeles County, California, by Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US Department of Justice Attorneys Office, pertaining to alleged racketeering by judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.


Favor of response within 10 days is requested.

May 28, 2009

Glenn A Fine , Inspector General
Office of the Inspector General

United States Department of Justice
By fax:
c/o Pam
Investigation Division- DOJ-IG

RE: Complaint to the US Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General, alleging fraud on US Congress and denial of equal protection in Los Angeles County, California, by Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US Department of Justice Attorneys Office, pertaining to alleged racketeering by judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.

Dear Inspector General Fine:

Please accept this letter as a complaint by Joseph Zernik, PhD, and Human Rights Alert (NGO), alleging fraud on US Congress and denial of equal protection in Los Angeles County, California, by Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI, and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US Attorneys Office.  Instant complaint is filed with Office of Inspector General of the US Department of Justice pursuant to its primary investigative authority and its stated mission [underlines added –jz] – conducts independent investigations… of United States Department of Justice personnel… to detect and deter … fraud, abuse, and misconduct, and to promote integrity… and effectiveness in Department of Justice operations”.

Dr Joseph Zernik recently received from the office of the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California, response from the office of US Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General, dated April 8, 2010, and signed by Cynthia A. Schnedar, Acting Deputy Inspector General, on inquiry by the Senator on behalf o constituent Dr Zernik’s previous complaint in instant matter, originally filed with the Office of Inspector General on December 2, 2009, with additional evidence filed March 4, 2010. [1]  The response by Office of Inspector General to Senator Feinstein stated that the December 2, 2009 response was referred for review by other offices DOJ and FBI for response.  Such response by Deputy Inspector General Schnedar was deemed deficient on numerous accounts:
1)      The referral of complaints filed with the office of DOJ Inspector General against such senior DOJ officers alleging serious wrongdoing – fraud on US Congress and denial of equal protection to 10 million residents of Los Angeles County - for review by those of lower ranks in the respective offices of Department of Justice stood contrary to the primary mission and investigative authority of the US DOJ Inspector General Office:
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) conducts independent investigations, audits, inspections, and special reviews of United States Department of Justice personnel and programs to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct, and to promote integrity, economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in Department of Justice operations.
2)      Referral of such complaints against senior US DOJ officer also stood contrary to challenges previously stated by the Office of Inspector General - to restore public credibility of the US Department of Justice.
3)      No mention was made in the response by Acting Deputy Schnedar of the disposition of additional evidence filed with your office on March 4, 2010 (detailed below).   
4)      No response on the matters was received from the DOJ offices that your office referred the complaints to.

Instant complaint, therefore, is a repeat request, with additional evidence, for investigation by Office of Inspector General of the US Department of Justice of the matters stated herein, with links to key evidence, pursuant to the stated mission of the Office, and its primary investigative authority:

In early 2008 – Dr Joseph Zernik filed complaints with FBI and US DOJ alleging racketeering by judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, hallmarks of which were:
a)      Large-scale false imprisonments, including, but not limited to the ongoing false imprisonment of the Rampart FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) victims of the Rampart corruption scandal (1998-2000), who were left falsely imprisoned for over a decade, and
b)      Real estate fraud under the guise of litigations at the Los Angeles Superior Court, in a county which had been distinguished by FBI already in the early 2000s as “the epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud.”
Requests were made for equal protection:
a)      Of all 10 millions who reside in Los Angeles County - through restoration of the First Amendment right to access court records – to inspect and to copy, routinely denied by the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  It was claimed that restoration of such fundamental right, in and of itself would enable the freeing of those who were falsely imprisoned, and
b)      Return to Dr Zernik’s possession of his property at 320 South Peck Drive, Beverly Hills, which was taken under the threat of force, for private use, with no compensation at all, in what was opined by James Wedick, highly decorated FBI veteran as “fraud being committed.” [1]

In August 2008 - The Honorable Dianne Feinstein, Senator, and the Honorable Diane Watson, Congresswoman, filed inquiries on FBI and US Department of Justice on behalf of Dr Zernik: Why FBI and US Department of Justice would not respond on Dr  Zernik’s complaint, alleging racketeering by judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and requesting equal protection under the law in Los Angeles County, California.

In August-September 2008 - Responses were provided to US Congress by Kenneth Kaiser - FBI Assistant Director for Criminal Investigations, and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US DOJ, US Attorneys Office. [2] The August-September 2008 responses by the two senior US DOJ officers are the core of instant complaint to the Office of Inspector General, and are alleged herein as:
a)      Fraud on US Congress, and
b)      Effective denial of equal protection to the 10 million residents Los Angeles County, including, but not limited to equal protection of Dr Joseph Zernik against fraud opined by highly decorated FBI veteran James Wedick. [1]
Such senior US Officers falsely stated that the Dr Zernik was complaining about “foreclosure procedures.”  Dr Zernik was never party to any foreclosure procedure, bankruptcy, or mortgage default of any kind.  Additional evidence provided below, documented that such false derogatory comments were made while FBI and US Department of Justice were fully informed of the true facts in the matter.  Additionally, false statements were made that no evidence was ever provided by Dr Zernik of “any specific violations of the law.” 
The requests for equal protection of the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California, including, but not limited to Dr Joseph Zernik, were effectively denied through such false and deliberately misleading responses to US Congress.  Equal protection in Los Angeles County, California, continues to be denied to this date, while conduct of the judges of Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, in what is alleged as conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity only got worse since the time of the original complaint.  Today, the hallmark of such conduct by judges of the Superior Court, and also of the refusal by US Department of Justice to accord equal protection, is in the ongoing alleged false imprisonment of Richard Fine, 70 year old, former US prosecutor, under solitary confinement, detailed below. [3]

On February 20, 2009 – Unexpected, additional indisputable evidence emerged, supporting Dr Zernik’s claims of racketeering by the judges of Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  Such evidence was not previously filed with the US DOJ Inspector General, and is provided herein as additional evidence in this matter.  On February 20, 2009 The Governor of California signed “Retroactive Immunities” – i.e. pardons for ALL judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and others. [4] Such pardons were necessary since it had been discovered that all such judges had taken for over a decade payments (~$45,000 per judge per year), which had been ruled by court “not permitted.”

On March 4, 2009 - Richard Fine, 70 year old, former US prosecutor was arrested by the Sheriff of Los Angeles County, at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, based on oral directive by Judge David Yaffe, albeit - with no warrant ever issued, and no judgment ever entered to provide the foundation for the arrest and holding. Richard Fine has been held in solitary confinement ever since.  The letter, linked below, [3] and evidence referenced in it provide new evidence of large-scale false imprisonments in Los Angeles County, California, through conduct of judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, including, but not limited to the holding of Richard Fine, which have not been previously filed with the US DOJ. 

On November 23, 2009 and again on December 2, 2009 - Dr Zernik filed complaints with Glenn A Fine - US Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General, alleging fraud by senior US DOJ Officers - Kenneth Kaiser and Kenneth Melson, on the US Congress in their responses to Senator Feinstein and Congresswoman Watson in August-September 2008, and denial of equal protection to the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California, including, but not limited to denial of equal protection of Dr Joseph Zernik.

On March 4, 2010 - Dr Zernik filed additional evidence with US Department of Justice Inspector General regarding fraud by Kenneth Kaiser and Kenneth Melson in their responses to US Congress on inquiries by Senator Feinstein and Congresswoman Watson. [5]  The core new evidence was an August 21, 2008 letter by James Wedick, FBI veteran, who was decorated by US Congress, by US Attorney General, and by FBI Director. [6]  The letter by Mr Wedick recorded his communications with FBI on the same date, that in such communications FBI agreed with him that Dr Zernik was the victim of real estate fraud, and that it was FBI’s duty to provide protection in such case.  Such communications between Mr Wedick and FBI took place on the very same date that FBI forwarded to US Congress, through Mr Kaiser and Mr Melson, responses, which falsely stated the opposite – that Dr Zernik was complaining about “foreclosure procedures” and that there was “no evidence of specific violations of the law.” 
Of special interest are comments found in Mr Wedick’s August 21, 2008 letter, to the effect that FBI was not inclined to protect Dr Zernik, since the real estate fraud against Dr Zernik was related to widespread corruption of judges in Los Angeles County, California. [5] 

THEREFORE, Glenn A Fine, and Office of Inspector General, US Department of Justice are requested to accept instant letter as a complaint filed with US Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General, pursuant to the stated mission and primary investigative authority of the Office of Inspector General, for investigation of alleged fraud by senior US Department of Justice officers, Kenneth Kaiser and Kenneth Melson, on US Congress, and denial by the same officers of equal protection of the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California, including, but not limited to Dr Joseph Zernik, as detailed above.

Truly,
[]
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (HRA), NGO
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
LINKS:
[1] Opinion letter of highly decorated FBI veteran, fraud expert James Wedick, regarding real estate fraud, conducted under the guise of litigation at the Los Angeles Superior Court
[2] August-September 2008 Congressional Inquiries and responses by Kenneth Kaiser and Kenneth Melson - senior US officers.
[3] May 27, 2010 Letter to the editors of Los Angeles Times: Deficient Reporting on Richard Fine’s case.
[4] February 20, 2010 “retroactive immunities” – i.e. pardons signed by the California Governor for all judges who had taken “not permitted” payments.
[5] March 4, 2010 Additional evidence filed by Dr Zernik with US Department of Justice Inspector General, of fraud on US Congress by Kenneth Kaiser (FBI) and Kenneth Melson (US DOJ)
[6] August 21, 2008 Letter by highly decorated FBI veteran James Wedick regarding communications by FBI and Mr Wedick regarding real estate fraud against Dr Zernik.

  

Thursday, May 27, 2010

10-05-27 Deficient Los Angeles Times reporting on the case of Richard Fine // Insuficientes Los Angeles Times de presentación de informes sobre el caso de Richard Fine // Mangelhafte Los Angeles Times Berichterstattung über den Fall von Richard Fine

To: victoria.kim@latimes.com, "Holland, Gale" , "Petruno, Tom" , metrodesk@latimes.com, timothy.rutten@latimes.com, "McGreevy, Patrick" , matt.lait@latimes.com, scott.glover@latimes, "Ware, Diedre" , letters@latimes.com, lawsters@googlegroups.com,
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Deficient Los Angeles Times reporting on the case of Richard Fine


[]  
Victoria Kim, Reporter
Editors, Los Angeles Times

RE: Deficient Los Angeles Times reporting on the case of Richard Fine

To the Editors:

Your most recent report on Richard Fine May 25, 2010 -  like your coverage in the past year, never mentioned the key facts in the case:

It is indisputable that Richard Fine was arrested on the morning of March 4, 2009 at the Court of Judge David Yaffe, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, at the Mosk Courthouse, on North Hill Street, City of Los Angeles. 

However, no warrant for the arrest was ever discovered.  For over a year Sheriff Lee Baca insists on denying access to the California public records, which are the arrest and booking records of Richard Fine.  Instead, the Sheriff repeatedly produced false and deliberately misleading records -  claiming that Richard Fine was arrested on location and pursuant to the authority of the "San Pedro Municipal Court".
[1] As you surely know, no such court has existed for almost a decade.  Sheriff Deputy at the Superior Court of California, San Pedro Annex, insisted that Richard Fine was never booked there, and that no booking facilities existed at the place at all.

Richard Fine is only one person, but survey of the inmate data in Los Angeles County jails demonstrated that about half the inmates - thousands of persons - are held by Sheriff Lee Baca under false and deliberately misleading records.
[2]

Such conduct of the justice system in Los Angeles County, which the US Supreme Court refused to hear, was suggested to the US Senate Judiciary Committee as subject for discussion in the confirmation hearings of Elena Kagan. [3]  It was also listed as one of the hallmarks in submission to the United Nations, [4] as part of the first ever UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States, scheduled for November 2010.

The Los Angeles Times could provide great service for the people of Los Angeles County, and for the public at large by asking Sheriff Lee Baca to produce the California public records, which are the warrant and booking record of Richard Fine.

Conditions prevailing in the Los Angeles justice system are a Human Rights disgrace of historic proportion!

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

PS
Please notice the petition: FREE RICHARD FINE:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine

CC:
1) Los Angeles Legal Community
2) United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights.
3) Media and others of interest.

LINKS
[1]
10-01-08-Supervisor-Antonovich-Los-Angeles-County-repeat-mailing-of-January-8-2010-response-from-Sheriff-Lee-Baca-in-re-Richard-Fine-papers-inclu
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25555341/
[2] Alleged False Imprisonment of Numerous Other Inmates in the Los Angeles County Jails, Revealed 
in Data Surveys of Los Angeles County Jails 
10-01-04-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-
Jose-Martinez-s 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24809956/
10-01-05-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-
John-Smith-s 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24816245/
10-01-16-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-VINE-vs-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-
Data-Survey-Jose-Martinez-amp-Jose-Rodriguez-s  
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25315610/
10-01-11-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-
Jose-Rodriguez-s 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25064776/
10-03-14-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Survey-of-
Consecutive-Booking-Numbers-s 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28350775/ 
10-01-11-Los-Angeles-Law-Library-Catalog-Data-Survey-California-Code-s 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25067457/
[3] 10-05-26-Human-Rights-Alert-Proposed-Questions-for-the-Senate-Judiciary-Committee-in-Confirmation-Hearing-of-Elena-Kagan
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31986396/
[4] April 19, 2010 Human Rights Alert submission for the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of
Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations: 
Press Release:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/
Submission:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/
Appendix:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

10-05-26 Human Rights Alert Proposed Subjects for Elena Kagan Confirmation Hearing // Derechos Humanos Alerta Temas propuestos para la Confirmación Elena Kagan Audiencia // Human Rights Alert Vorgeschlagene Themen für Elena Kagan Confirmation Hearing



10-05-26 Press Release: Human Rights Alert Filed Proposed Issues for Confirmation Hearings of Elena Kagan.

Washington DC, May 26 – Human Rights Alert, Los Angeles based NGO filed with members of the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary a series of subjects, which it proposed should be raised in the confirmation hearing of Elena Kagan. [1] The central theme of the issues listed by Human Rights Alert was the new practices of the US courts, founded in online public access and case management systems, and concerns about compromised integrity of the courts and Human Rights in the US, as a result.  The questions addressed subjects ranging from evidence of the holding of numerous inmates in Los Angeles County jails under false judicial records, to the evidence of false appearances of counsel, who were not authorized as counsel of record, in the US courts.  Many of the specific examples, demonstrating the various issues, were taken from cases involving the 70 year old, former US prosecutor Richard Fine, held since March 2009 in Los Angeles, under solitary confinement, with no valid judicial records to form the foundation for his arrest and jailing. [2]
Particular emphasis was given to issues related to the verification and authentication of court records in the new systems of the courts, and the failure of the courts to publish adequate Rules of Courts in this respect. Evidence was provided of the routine issuance by US district courts and courts of appeals of minutes, orders, and judgments, which were unsigned and/or unauthenticated.  Such papers could not possibly be deemed honest, valid, and effectual court records. Therefore, their service, particularly on pro se litigants, who were denied access to authentication records in the courts’ system (CM/ECF) could not possibly serve any purpose that was even remotely related to the furtherance of justice.
The final issue raised by Human Rights Alert was the apparent urgent need to subject the US courts online public access (PACER) and case management (CM/ECF) systems to publicly accountable validation.
Copies were forwarded to the US State Department and the United Nations, as part of the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) by the United Nations of Human Rights in the United States.  In April 2010 Human Rights Alert filed submission with the United Nations, as part of the 2010 UPR, centered on the role of PACER and CM/ECF in alleged large-scale violations of Human Rights by the United States courts.
LINKS:
[1]  May 26, 2010 –Human Rights filed with the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary proposed issues to be raised in the confirmation hearing of Elena Kagan.
[2] May 25, 2010 Richard-Fine: CNN Blog – Correction of Errors in CNN Reporting

10-05-26 Human Rights Alert – Questions Proposed to the Senate Judiciary Committee for the Elena Kagan Confirmation Hearings.

Senator Patrick Leahy, Chair
U S Senate Committee on the Judiciary

Russell D. Feingold, Chair
U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on The Constitution

Senator Dianne Feinstein, Member, Senator from California
U S Senate Committee on the Judiciary

Charles E. Schumer, Chair
US Senate Subcommittee on
Administrative Oversight and the Courts

“Dianne Feinstein” <1-202-228-3954@metrofax.com>
“Russ Feingold” <1-202-224-2725@metrofax.com>
“Orrin G Hatch”   <1-202-224-6331@metrofax.com>
“Chuck Grassley”  <1-202-224-6020@metrofax.com>
“Chuck Schumer” <1-202-228-3027@metrofax.com>
“Jon Kyl “  <1-202-224-2207@metrofax.com>
“Dick Durbin” <1-202-228-0400@metrofax.com>
“Lindsey Graham no fax”
“Benjamin L Cardin” <1-202-224-1651@metrofax.com>
“John Cornyn”  <1-202-228-2856@metrofax.com>
“Sheldon Whitehouse”  <1-202-228-6362@metrofax.com>
“Tom Coburn”   <1-202-224-6008@metrofax.com>
“Amy Klobuchar”  <1-202-228-2186@metrofax.com>
“Ted Kaufman” <1-202-228-3075@metrofax.com>
“Arlen Specter”  <1-202-228-1229@metrofax.com>
“Al Franken  no fax“

Dear Chairman Leahy and Members of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary:
The following issues are proposed by Human Rights Alert, Los Angeles County, California, NGO, to the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary, as subjects to be raised in the confirmation hearing of nominee Elena Kagan to Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court.
Nominee Elena Kagan has never served on the bench. Therefore, her nomination hearing provides a unique opportunity for the US Senate to address questions pertaining to common practices of the US courts and other law enforcement agencies.  The questions listed below focus on conditions of the justice system that stem from the introduction in the past quarter century of online public access and case management systems – such as PACER and CM/ECF. 

Such systems were also at the center of recent requests for Equal Protection in Los Angeles County, California, filed with US Attorney General Eric Holder, [1] and of submission to the United Nations, as part of the 2010 Universal Periodic Review of the United States. [2]

Therefore, nominee Elena Kagan may be able to provide the US Senate unique perspectives on matters that are deemed critical for integrity of the justice system today:

1)      Holding of prisoners under false judicial records.
The most recent example is of 70 year old, former US Prosecutor Richard Fine, whose case -Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) -  was recently denied hearing by the US Supreme Court.  Therefore, nominee Kagan’s statements would not contradict any standing ruling by the Court in such matter.  The specific case is provided only as an example, to clarify the notion of “false judicial records”, not in anticipation of opinion by the nominee on the case itself: 
Media and eye witnesses reported that Richard Fine was arrested by the Warrant Detail of the Los Angeles Sheriff Department on March 4, 2009, at the court of Judge David Yaffe, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, in the City of Los Angeles.  Richard Fine has been held in solitary confinement ever since.  However, no warrant has ever been discovered to this date.  The Sheriff continues to deny access to the warrant and booking record – California public records  - and repeatedly produces fraudulent records instead -  stating that Richard Fine was arrested and booked on location and by the authority of the “San Pedro Municipal Court” – a court that ceased to exist almost a decade ago.  [3]
The case of Richard Fine is not unique at all.  Surveys of the database of Los Angeles County, California, jails showed that about half the inmates (equivalent to many thousands of persons) are likewise held under false and deliberately misleading records. [4]

2)      Appearances in the US courts of counsel, who were not authorized as Counsel of Record by their purported clients, but were nevertheless permitted to appear in the US courts.
Such practice was best documented and opined in the case of Borrower William Parsley (05-90374) Dkt #248, [5] where the Hon Jeff Bohm, US Bankruptcy Court, Houston Texas,  detailed litigation practices of Countrywide (and today Bank of America) as appearances of false counsel, unauthorized as counsel of record, and engaged with “no communications with client clause.”  Such practice may appear to a layperson as racketeering at the US Courts. However, neither counsel nor client suffered any repercussions in the case referenced above, and the evidence documented that Countrywide, Bank of America, and others, continue the practice to this date, in what cannot possibly be unnoticed by the courts themselves.
Recent examples include:
a)      Appearance of Kevin McCormick as false counsel, not authorized as counsel of record, for Judge David Yaffe and the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles in Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914);
b)      Appearance of Sarah Overton as false counsel, not authorized as counsel of record, for Judge Jacqueline Connor et al in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550). 
c)      Appearance of Jenna Moldawsky as false counsel, not authorized as counsel of record, for full 2.5 years in various courts for Countrywide Home Loans, Inc and later – Bank of America Corporation, under the latter caption (also under Samaan v Zernik SC087400 at the Los Angeles Superior Court).

3)      Failure of US Judges to initiate corrective action, even after being reliably informed of conduct that violates the Code of Conduct of US Judges.
Recent examples included notice provided to the Chief Judge of the US Court, Central District of California, Audrey Collins, of false appearances by counsel who were not counsel of record, and also alleged adulteration of court filings at the office of the clerk in the following two court captions, both at the court of Magistrate Carla Woehrle:
a)      Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914)
b)      Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550)
No evidence was found of true corrective actions.  In contrast, a letter sent as response by Court Counsel Lydia Yurtchuk was likely to be deemed upon review as false and deliberately misleading. [6]

4)      Validity of unsigned orders, judgments, mandates, which are routinely issued by US Courts of Appeals
The practice is a routine in US Courts of Appeals.  It is alleged as deprivation of access to the courts and of fair hearings in national tribunals for protection of rights – all fundamental Human Rights.

5)      Validity of minutes, orders, judgments, which are issued by US District Courts, but served on pro se litigants with defective authentications  - NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings), which fail to include the digital Court Stamp, or with no authentication at all.
The practice, which is deemed the equivalent of the practice of the US Courts of Appeals, listed in 4) above, is a routine in US District Courts.  Such practices could be seen in the two captions listed above in both the US District Court, Central District of California, and the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. [7]

6)      The almost universal denial of access by pro se litigant to CM/ECF
It is alleged that the practice created to separate and unequal access avenues to the courts, where the US courts segregate litigants at will, with no legal foundation at all.

7)      Denial of public access - including access by pro se litigants in their own cases - to NEFs – the authentication records of the US District Courts.
The NEFs, held by the US District Courts as their current authentication instruments, are universally omitted from PACER – the online public access system.  Attempts to access the NEFs by filing requests with the clerks of the District Courts – to access court records to inspect and to copy - are routinely denied.  Such practice denies the public the right to discern which records of the courts are such that require “full faith and credit.”

8)      Posting in PACER dockets of minutes, orders, judgments of the US District Courts, marked as “entered,” while such records were never authenticated by the court.
Since the public is denied access to the authentication records, the practice routinely misleads the public, which cannot discern records that were authenticated from those which were not. Furthermore, there simply is no explanation for such conduct by the courts, which would be even remotely related to the furtherance of justice.

9)      Posting of online PACER dockets, which were constructed by court staff, albeit – not staff who were authorized as Deputy-Clerks of the courts.
Current practices of the US District Courts in PACER and CM/ECF do not allow the public to discern, which of those who conducted transactions in the dockets were authorized as Deputy Clerks, as required by law, and which ones were not.  In the two captions listed above, from the Central District of California, for example, Ms Donna Thomas routinely conducted transactions in the PACER dockets, while NOT being authorized at all. [7]

10)  Employment by the US Supreme Court of staff, who are not authorized as Deputy Clerks, but nevertheless engage in transactions in the dockets of the US Supreme Court.
The practice of the US Supreme Court, which is comparable to the practice of the US District Court, listed in 9), above.  A recent example involved conduct of US Supreme Court Counsel – Danny Bickell, in the Application of Richard Fine -  Fine v Sheriff  (09-A827):
a)      Mr Bickell consented that he was not authorized as a Deputy Clerk of the US Supreme Court.
b)      Mr Bickell nevertheless sent unsigned letters, noticing the purported March 12, 2010 denial by Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy of Richard Fine’s Application.  No valid record of such denial was ever found in the US Supreme Court file itself, and no such order was ever listed among orders and decisions of the Court around that date, either.
c)      It is believed that Mr Bickell likewise entered notation in the US Supreme Court docket of the same Application purporting the March 12, 2010 denial of the Application by Associate Justice Kennedy. Albeit, the US Supreme Court online dockets are not verified or authenticated in any way at all.
d)      Mr Bickell likewise made decision to eliminate records from the docket of the same Application, with no discrepancy notice or any other notation at all. [8]

11)  Refusal of US District Court Clerks to certify PACER dockets as honest, valid, and effectual records of the courts.
Given the practices listed above, there is no way for the public to discern dockets, which were valid, honest, and effectual, from those which were not.  Furthermore, the Clerks of the US District Courts routinely refuse to certify validity of the dockets. For example – Terry Nafisi, Clerk of the US District Court, Central District of California, has denied repeat requests to certify the dockets in the two cases referenced above.

12)  Failure of the US Supreme Court to include any verification at all in its dockets displayed in the online public access system.
There is no way to ascertain who constructed such dockets, whether such dockets were constructed by authorized Deputy Clerks, and whether such dockets were deemed honest, valid, and effectual records of the US Supreme Court.

13)  Security of the PACER dockets of the US Courts, (possibly also dockets of the US Supreme Court), where unauthorized personnel is able to conduct transactions in the dockets, and issue invalid authentication records.
It is alleged that such conditions reflect inherent lack of validity of PACER and CM/ECF, and undermine integrity of the courts. Examples included the PACER dockets of the US District Court, Central District of California, referenced above.

14)  Failure of the US District Courts and US Courts of Appeals to establish in Local Rules of Court their court procedures that are inherent to the use of PACER and CM/ECF.
Transition of the US Courts from paper-based administration to digital administration of the courts amounted to a sea change in court procedures. None of the US District Courts and US Court of Appeals, whose Local Rules of Courts were examined, had established its practices in PACER and CM/ECF in Local Rules of Courts.  Such failure is of particular concern relative to the publication of local rules pertaining to verification and authentication procedures that are held as honest, valid, and effectual by the US courts.

15)  Ambiguity that was introduced in the records of the US courts and correctional institutions through unverified online public access systems.
In submission to the United Nations, it was alleged that such ambiguity, in and of itself, constituted serious violation of Human Rights, including, but not limited to Due Process and Fair Hearings.

16)  The claim that publicly-accountable validation of PACER and CM/ECF – the US Courts online public access and case management is urgently needed.
Given the list of questions above, it was proposed that there is an urgent need to subject PACER and CM/ECF to publicly-accountable validation.

Respectfully,
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert, Los Angeles

CC:
1) United States Department of State – UPR Office
2) United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights.

LINKS:
[1]  10-05-25-Human-Rights-Alert-requests-Holder-Clinton-equal-protection-of-Richard-Fine-and-numerous-others-in-Los-Angeles-County-California
[2]  April 19, 2010 Human Rights Alert submission for the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations:
·        Press Release:
·        Submission:
·        Appendix:
[3] January 8, 2010 Sheriff Lee Baca response to Supervisor Michael Antonovich in re: Arrest and booking records of Richard Fine.
[4] Alleged False Imprisonment of Numerous Other Inmates in the Los Angeles County Jails, Revealed
in Data Surveys of Los Angeles County Jails
10-01-04-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-Jose-Martinez-s
10-01-05-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-John-Smith-s
10-01-16-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-VINE-vs-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-Jose-Martinez-amp-Jose-Rodriguez-s 
10-01-11-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Data-Survey-Jose-Rodriguez-s
10-03-14-Los-Angeles-County-Sheriff-apos-s-Department-Online-Inmate-Information-Center-Survey-of-Consecutive-Booking-Numbers-s
10-01-11-Los-Angeles-Law-Library-Catalog-Data-Survey-California-Code-s
[5] March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion by the Hon Jeff Bohm in Case of Borrower Parsley  describing Countrywide litigation practices, including, but not limited to appearances by counsel who was not authorized as counsel of record, and was engaged with “no communications with client clause”.
[6] February 19, 2010 letter by US District Court, Central District of California, Lydia Yurtchuk, purported as a response for a request for initiation of corrective actions by Chief Judge Audrey Collins, and May 1, 2010 response by Dr Zernik.
[7] April 20, 2010 Supreme Court Filing of Motion to Intervene and related papers in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827)
[8] Declaration and related papers in re: Mr Danny Bickell and integrity, or lack thereof, in docket of Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court.

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