Why was this blog created?
All further in-house efforts to further justice in the US justice system are futile. These efforts are only worthwhile to the degree that they provide additional documentation of the widespread corruption of the US justice system.
Our focus must be on the international community.
In November 2010 the United Nations will review for the first time ever the Human Rights record of the United States. Corruption of the justice system was the core of reports filed by Human Rights Alert and others for the April 2010 deadline.
In August 2010 the US State Department is scheduled to respond on the reports, and in November 2010 the UN will conduct the review session and issue the report, and set goals, which the US would be asked to reach between 2010 and the next scheduled review in 2014.
Between now and November 2010, we must focus on informing and lobbying the nations that sit on the review panel, to ensure that the most effective report is issued.
This blog was created in hope that the French Government would support a UN UPR report that calls upon the US federal government to provide equal protection under the law to all who reside in the United States.
Please call or write your elected representatives. Please ask that the French Government support in November 2010 the issuance of a UPR report by the United Nations, which calls upon the US government to abide by its duties and responsibilities pursuant to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
S'il vous plaît appelez ou écrivez vos représentants élus. S'il vous plaît demander que le soutien du gouvernement français en Novembre 2010, la publication d'un rapport par les Nations Unies, qui invite le gouvernement américain à respecter ses obligations et responsabilités en vertu de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l'homme.
S'il vous plaît signer la pétition - Libérer Richard Fine
Richard Fine - 70 ans, ancien procureur des États-Unis, a montré, que les juges de comté de Los Angeles avait pris «interdit» les paiements (appelé par les médias "pots de vin").Le 20 Février 2009, le gouverneur de Californie a signé «immunités rétroactives" (amnesties) pour tous les juges à Los Angeles. Moins de deux semaines plus tard, le 4 Mars, 2009 Richard Fine a été arrêté en audience publique, sans mandat. Il est détenu depuis en isolement cellulaire à Los Angeles, en Californie. Aucun jugement, condamnation ou la peine n'a jamais été inscrit dans son cas.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
An Urgent Call of Legislative ActionLos Angeles, August 30 - Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, submitted paper for peer-review and consideration for publication in top-tier law journals, opining large-scale fraud in case management and online public access systems of the courts in the United States. Digital voting machines were previously shown to be vulnerable to malfunction and malfeasance. Likewise, the current study outlined conditions of digital case management and online public access systems that govern the courts, jails, and prisons in the United States and documented large-scale abuse of such systems.
Moreover, a "chain reaction" effect was documented, where the US courts, up to the Supreme Court of the United States, engaged in pretense review of cases originating from pretense actions of the California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles.
Corrective actions were outlined, which were urgently needed - comprehensive review and the establishment of publicly and legally accountable validation of all case management and online public access systems at the courts, jails, and prisons.
The paper opined that such actions were likely to affect restoration of effective banking regulation, access to the courts, the rule of law, and the safeguard of Human Rights in the digital era.
Two pervious papers, peer-reviewed and pending publication by international computer science journals opined fraud in the Los Angels County, California, Sheriff's Department "Inmate Information Center" - the online public access system - which enabled unlawful imprisonments,  and in PACER & CM/ECF - case management and public access system of the US District Court, Central District of California - which enabled the conduct of pretense court actions. 
Key WordsLiberty, Access to the Courts, Human Rights, Rule of Law, Fraud, United States Courts, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, Digital Signatures, Relational Databases, Functional Logic Verification, Case Management Systems, Online Public Access Systems, Prisoners' Registration
 A peer-reviewed paper, opining fraud in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department "Inmate Information Center":
Data Mining as a Civic Duty - Online Public Prisoners Registration Systems - pending publication, SONET2010
http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-1-prisons-pending-publication-s.pdf A peer-reviewed paper, opining fraud in PACER & CM/ECF at the US District Court, Central District of California:
Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts
 Qualified opinion of Prof Eli Shamir, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, regarding fraud in Sustain - case management system of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles:
Friday, August 27, 2010
10-08-27 RE: Richard Fine - demande de rétablissement de l'accès à la justice déposée auprès de Laurence Tribe - Senior Counsel, USDOJ
10-08-27 RE: Richard Fine - request for restoration of access to justice, and for corrective actions re: publicly and legally accountable validation of case management and online public access systems of the courts, jails, and prisonsExecutive Summary Los Angles, August 27 – request  was filed by Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, for restoration of access to justice in the case of the imprisoned, 70 year-old, former US prosecutor Richard Fine. The request was filed with Prof Laurence Tribe - Senior Counsel, US Department Of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative.
Richard Fine, had exposed, publicized, and rebuked the taking by California judges in Los Angeles County of "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 County, California.
Less than two weeks later, on March 4, 2009, “Sentencing Proceeding” for contempt was conducted on Richard Fine at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, which was never validly recorded by the Court. Instead, the Court published false and deliberately misleading online records. The request claimed that the March 4, 2009 “Sentencing Proceeding” was only a pretense, which was never deemed a valid court proceeding by the Court itself.
On March 4, 2010, Richard Fine was arrested in open court by the Warrant Detail of Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department – albeit with no warrant at all. Richard Fine has been held ever since in solitary confinement – albeit no judgment/conviction, or sentencing was ever entered in his case. Instead, the Sheriff’s Department insisted on holding him under false and deliberately misleading online inmate registration records, stating that he was arrested and booked on location and by authority of the non-existent “Municipal Court of San Pedro”.
The request detailed Richard Fine’s attempts to have his habeas corpus reviewed by the United States courts, from the US District Court – Central District of California, through the US Court of Appeals – 9th Circuit, to the Supreme Court of the United States. In all United States courts involved, no valid judicial records were ever entered by the courts. Court minutes, judgments, mandate, decisions were either not signed by the judges and/or not authenticated by the clerks of the respective courts. Concomitantly, false and deliberately misleading dockets were published online by all courts involved, which would lead a reasonable person to conclude that Richard Fine’s case was indeed accorded valid judicial review, and that his petitions, appeal, and applications to the various US courts were duly denied. Therefore, the request claimed that Richard Fine was denied access to justice, and was instead subjected only to pretense judicial review at the US courts – National Tribunals for Protection of Rights.
The request further provided documentation and/or expert opinions regarding the inherent invalidity of case management and online public access systems of all courts involved, as well as the Sheriff’s Department. Such systems enabled the holding of prisoners under pretense of lawfulness, the conduct of pretense court proceedings, and the issuance of invalid court records, as part of pretense of judicial review:
a) Online public dockets were implemented at the courts, where the authority of the clerk was never invoked, and where the clerks were unaccountable for validity of the records;
b) Online prisoners’ registration systems were implemented in the jails, where authority of record supervisors was never invoked, and where records supervisors were unaccountable for validity of the records;
c) In all agencies involved the matter published online false and misleading records, while public access to public records was denied, and
d) All courts, which were inspected, failed to publish local rules, establishing procedures governing the implementation, validation, and use of case management and online public access systems at the courts.
Senior Counsel Laurence Tribe was requested to accord due process in acceptance, review, and response on the request for restoration of Richard Fine’s access to justice. With it, Senior Counsel Laurence Tribe was requested to initiate corrective actions through comprehensive review and publicly and legally accountable validation of all case management and online public access systems at the courts, jails, and prisons.
The request claimed that any action by Senior Counsel Laurence Tribe to affect the restoration of Richard Fine’s access to justice and to establish by law the validation of case management and online public access systems of the courts, would affect substantial impact on restoration of access to justice in the United States, the rule of law in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond, and the safeguard of Human Rights in the digital era.
Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice system in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management and online public access systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the courts and Human Rights in the United States.LINKS:
 10-08-27 Request for Restoration of Access to Justice Filed With Senior Counsel Laurence Tribe in re: Richard Fine s
Monday, August 23, 2010
10-08-22 Lettre au Professeur Laurence Tribe: INFORMATIONS PRATIQUES: La prétendue Los Angeles judiciaire Racket (LA-JR) et l'insuffisance de la réglementation bancaire des États-Unis
Harvard Law Professor
US Department of Justice
RE: PRACTICAL OVERVIEW:
The alleged Los Angeles Judiciary Racket (LA-JR) and failure of US banking regulation
Prof Laurence Tribe
Access to Justice Initiative
US Department of Justice
Dear Prof Tribe:
In case you have no time to review the records attached to my complaints, previously filed with your office, and to study the history of the LA-JR over past decades, you may find the following Practical Overview a helpful guide.
The Overview was originally written in response to comment by an online reader, who blamed today's Attorney General ERIC HOLDER for conditions now prevailing in Los Angeles County, California. Needless to say, the problem is decades old.
The Overview emphasizes the transition of the court and financial institutions into the digital era, and failure of the US government to adequately manage the transition, as key to accelerated breakdown of lawful government frameworks.
I would be glad to provide you detailed evidence in support of the statements below.
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
1) United Nations Human Rights Council
2) Basel Accords Committee
3) US Congress Banking and Judiciary Committees
A PRACTICAL OVERVIEW
The Alleged Los Angeles Judiciary Racket (LA-JR) and Failure of US Banking Regulation
GENERALThe following is not intended as advocacy for US Attorney General ERIC HOLDER. However, one must realize that problem is decades old, and confronting the LA-JR and failing US banking regulation is a tall order.
The LA-JR controls the largest county court in the United States (~600 judges and commissioners), and the most populous county in the country (>10 millions residents), which according to FBI brought us, and the world at large, the current financial crisis. Already in the early 2000s, FBI reports concluded that Los Angeles County was "The epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud, which is a high national priority to fight".
The direct links between top management at Countrywide Financial Corporation (CFC), which triggered the current crisis and the LA-JR are fully documented below.  The direct links between the LA-JR and Brian Moynihan, President of Bank of America Corporation (BAC) - CFC successor, are likewise documented below. A. KEY EVENTS IN EVOLUTION OF THE LA-JR AND BREAKDOWN OF US BANKING REGULATION (1980-2010)1) IRAN CONTRA SCANDAL - ~1982-1992CIA and FBI were involved in wholesale drug trafficking, where the target was Los Angeles County, California. One aspect of the scandal, which was entirely overlooked in the 1997 US Department of Justice Special Report in the matter, was any discussion of the outcome - collusion by federal and local justice system agencies in large-scale violations of the law. It is claimed that the Iran-Contra Scandal created conditions, which compromised any prospect of rule of law in Los Angeles County, California, for decades to come.
2) SUSTAIN ~1985SUSTAIN and other computerized case management systems at the Los Angeles Superior Court are deemed invalid. Main features of the systems are similar to those listed below under PACER & CM/ECF.
The Los Angeles Superior Court was at the forefront of installation of case management systems, which led to further precipitous deterioration in integrity of the courts. Such systems are deemed the enabling tools of the LA-JR in its current manifestation in both the civil and criminal divisions. The systems were installed during the tenure of today's California Chief Justice RONALD GEORGE in leadership positions at the Los Angeles courts.
SUSTAIN, which is now used also in other state courts in the United States, was developed and is maintained by the Los Angeles County based DAILY JOURNAL - the largest legal newspaper in California.
3) COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (CFC) ~1990s-2000s The evidence is overwhelming of evolution of Los Angeles County-based CFC into a corrupt organization, and the tight collusion between CFC and the LA-JR.  It is claimed that CFC would not have evolved the way it did, absent the infrastructure of the justice system in Los Angeles County, California.
4) RAMPART SCANDAL INVESTIGATION - 1998-2000 Large-scale corruption of the courts and large-scale false imprisonments were covered up by US agencies, by permitting the local Los Angeles County agencies to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate their own corruption.
5) LOS ANGELES OFFICE OF OVERSEER FOR CIVIL RIGHTS - 2001-2009Operation of the Office under US Judge GARY FEESS must be deemed upon review as further cover up of massive corruption.
6) PACER & CM/ECF - 2000sThe online public access and case management systems of the US courts are deemed invalid, as detailed in a paper, peer-reviewed by an international, academic, computer science conference.  The systems enabled the conduct of pretense litigations and the online publication in PACER of pretense minutes, orders, and judgments of the courts.
All US district courts and US Courts of Appeals, which were examined, without exception:
a) Failed to publish Local Rules of Court, detailing the nature of valid signatures by judges and by clerks in the system.
b) Employed the systems to curtail public access to court records, in apparent violation of the common law right to access court records - to inspect and to copy, which was re-affirmed by the US Supreme Court as First Amendment right in Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc(1978). The most common documents, which are hidden from public access, are the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filing) - which the courts deem today as authentication/attestation by the Clerk.
c) Implemented authentication/attestation records (NEFs/NDAs), which must be deemed invalid on their faces, as to form.
Combined, the defects listed in a)-c), above, inherently undermined the central role of the Clerk of the Court as an accountable check and balance in the safeguard of integrity of the courts.
7) E-SIGN ACT - 2002 It is claimed that the law, as enacted, and failure/inability of US government to promulgate the law, left the nature of signatures largely undefined in the digital era. Such conditions are claimed as central in deterioration of integrity of both the courts and financial institutions.
8) COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (CFC) COLLAPSE - 2008
The collapse of CFC in January 2008 ushered in the current financial crisis. The US directed merger of CFC with BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION (BAC) must be deemed upon review incomprehensible.
Contrary to the current focus on investigation of events related to the coerced merger of BAC with MERRILL LYNCH, the earlier merger of BAC and CFC should be the focus of attention. Refusal of US agencies and senior US officers to liquidate CFC, and the forced merger of CFC with BAC led the evolution of BAC into a corrupt organization, with fully documented, direct links to the LA-JR. 
B. KEY PATRONIZERS OF THE LA-JR:1) Some, but not all at the US DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, including, but not limited to:
CARLA WOEHRLE - US Magistrate;
VIRGINIA PHILLIPS - US Judge;
JOHN WALTER - US Judge;
AUDREY COLLINS - Chief Judge;
TERRI NAFISI - Clerk of the Court.
2) Some, but not all at the US COURT OF APPEALS, 9TH CIRCUIT, including, but not limited to:
ALEX KOZINSKI - Chief Judge
RICHARD PAEZ - Circuit Judge
RICHARD TALLMAN - Circuit Judge
MARY M SCHROEDER - Circuit Judge
ANDREW KLEINFELD - Circuit Judge
A WALLACE TASHIMA - Circuit Judge
N.R. SMITH - Circuit Judge
STEPHEN REINHARDT - Circuit Judge
STEPHEN S TROTT - Circuit Judge
KIM M WARDLAW - Circuit Judge
MOLLY DWYER - Clerk of Court
3) Some, but not all at the US Supreme Court, including, but not limited to:
WILLIAM SUTER - Clerk of the Court
DANNY BICKELL - Court Counsel
4) US ATTORNEY OFFICE & FBI BRANCHES, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA;
5) ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS - former US Attorney, Central District of California (today Director of US Department of Justice Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services);
6) KENNETH KAISER - Assistant Director of FBI for Criminal Investigations;
7) KENNETH MELSON - former Director of US Attorneys Office at US Department of Justice (today Director of US Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives);
8) GLENN A FINE - US Department of Justice Inspector General.
In contrast, you would find US Senator DIANNE FEINSTEIN fighting for over a decade to compel the US Attorney Office to institute effectual Public Corruption and Civil Rights Division in southern California, and US Representative DIANE WATSON a strong supporter of the cause.LINKS
 July 11, 2010 complaint filed with SEC and US Controller of the Currency, alleging racketeering by Bank of America Corporation and its President Brian Moynihan at the Los Angeles, California Courts:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32907453/ Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts
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. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Los Angeles Superior Court
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
10-08-18 Additional Evidence for Racketeering by Judges and Financial Institutions at the Los Angeles Courts // Evidencia adicional para la extorsión por los jueces y las instituciones financieras en el Los Angeles Cortes
Please sign the petition:
Calling upon the UN Human Rights Council to issue an honest and effectual 2010 Report on the US justice system and Human Rights in the United States.
In post-foreclosure Unlawful Detainer case #09C03210, Shepard Investments v James Krage, Judge Sanchez decided she herself could assume federal jurisdiction and rule on the validity of a Bankruptcy Stay that was issued on December 23, 2010 and that the Bankruptcy Court had ruled to still be in effect.
When Defendant Krage questioned her right to rule on the Federal question by Disqualifying Judge Sanchez for Bias and Prejudice, Judge Sanchez ignored the Procedures proscribed by law (Code of Civil Procedures 170.1 and 170.3) and Ordered her own Disqualification stricken, instead of letting an independent Judge rule on it, as prescribed by law.
Plaintiff Shepard Investments Inc had previously lost 3 tries in Bankruptcy Court to get Relief from the Stay, so they convinced the local judge to make a federal decision and give them a Writ of Possession.
Shepard Investments is a renegade Foreclosure Auction purchaser that has violated the law many times to get quick possession of homes they bought at foreclosure auctions.
Defendant Krage successfully forced Shepard Investments to dismiss 2 previous Unlawful Detainers, because 1) they didn't timely file the Trustee's Deed Upon Sale, and 2) they bought the property under a Fictitious Business name (Summer Creek Homes) that they hadn't renewed in 4 years.
Most Unlawful Detainers that Shepard Investments have won could be overturned with either violation, and both violations occurred in over 50 post-foreclosure Unlawful Detainer cases.
The main points here are that a California Judge should not assume Federal Jurisdiction to rule on the validity of a Federal Bankruptcy Stay, and that a Judge should not rule on her own Disqualification for Allegations of Bias and Prejudice. Only Federal Judges can rule on the validity of a Stay, and State Judges are not allowed to rule on their own Disqualification, but rather must have the Disqualification Allegations heard by an independent Judge, as required by law.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
10-08-14 pétition lancée, appelant l'ONU à émission honnête et efficace Rapport sur le système de justice des États-Unis, droits de l'homme aux États-Unis
LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)