10-09-18 Richard Fine Released with no Due Process - Additional Evidence of False Imprisonment

Former US Prosecutor Richard Fine released last night - with no due process of law - additional evidence of false imprisonment

Los Angeles, September 18 - 70 year old, former US prosecutor Richard Fine was released last night from a year and a half of solitary confinement with no evidence that his release was the outcome of due process of law. California law is explicit in stating that the Sheriff must not take any person into custody, or release any person from custody, without valid court orders to such effect. The release of Richard Fine with no evidence of court order to that effect, however, matches his taking into custody with no warrant and with no judgment/conviction or sentencing ever entered in his case.

Combined, Richard Fine's taking into custody and his release with no due process of law provide evidence of false imprisonment through collusion of Judge David Yaffe, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and Los Angeles County Sheriff Leroy Baca.

As documented in court actions filed by Richard Fine over the past year and a half, such conduct was fully patronized by the United States courts - national tribunals for protection of rights - 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.

Richard Fine 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.

Richard Fine attempted to have his habeas corpus reviewed by the United States courts, from the US District Court, through the US Court of Appeals, to the Supreme Court of the United States; however, all United States courts involved in the matter denied Richard Fine access to valid judicial review; instead, Richard Fine was subjected only to pretense judicial review, while false and deliberately misleading dockets were published online, affecting the pretense that Richard Fine’s case was indeed accorded valid and effectual judicial review and was duly denied.

Human Rights Alert (NGO) 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, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems and online public access systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system.

10-08-30 Fraud Opined in Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the US Courts

Patrick Leahy - Chair, US Senate Judiciary Committee

Fraud Opined in Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the US Courts
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. 

Material deficiencies were identified in all systems, which were examined. 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. Invalid case management and online public access systems were described, which enable collusion between judges and large financial institutions in pretense court proceedings, which undermined any prospect of effective banking regulation in the United States. 
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 further called for restoration of public access to judicial records, which were now concealed in case management systems of the courts, in apparent violation of First Amendment rights. The paper further claimed that only upon restoration of public access to such records, the full scope of judicial misconduct in the United States would be exposed.  Therefore, the paper also called for the establishment of Truth and Reconciliation Commission - for review of conduct of the judiciary in the United States.  Patrick Leahy, Chair of the Senate's Judiciary Committee previously proposed the establishment of such commission for review of conduct of the US Department of Justice.
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, [1] 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. [2]

Expert opinion previously issued by an international Computer Science expert, based on manuscripts authored by Dr Zernik, which analyzed Sustain - the case management system of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, stated "credible evidence" of "fraud" and called for review of the system by US-based Computer Science experts. [3]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.
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
LINKS
[1] 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[2] 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
http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-2-courts-pending-publication-s.pdf
[3] 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:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30454036/

10-08-27 RE: Richard Fine - demande de rétablissement de l'accès à la justice déposée auprès de Laurence Tribe - Senior Counsel, USDOJ

 

Laurence Tribe_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Richard Fine

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 [1] 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:
[1] 10-08-27 Request for Restoration of Access to Justice Filed With Senior Counsel Laurence Tribe in re: Richard Fine s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36516113/

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

10-08-22 Letter to Prof Laurence Tribe: PRACTICAL OVERVIEW: The alleged Los Angeles Judiciary Racket (LA-JR) and failure of US banking regulation

Laurence Tribe
Harvard Law Professor
Special Counsel
US Department of Justice

RE: PRACTICAL OVERVIEW:
The alleged Los Angeles Judiciary Racket (LA-JR) and failure of US banking regulation
Prof Laurence Tribe
Senior Counsel
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.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)

CC:
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. [1]  The direct links between the LA-JR and Brian Moynihan, President of Bank of America Corporation (BAC) - CFC successor, are likewise documented below. [1]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. [1]  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. [2] 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.  [1]

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
[1] 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/[2] Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts
http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-2-courts-pending-publication-s.pdf


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.
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

10-08-22 Plainte contre le racket LA Cour supérieure juges Collins Patricia, Lisa Hart-Cole, autres

Judge Lisa Hart-Cole
Los Angeles Superior Court

10-08-22      RE: SC087400- Complaint against then Judge Patricia Collins, Judge Lisa Hart-Cole, Attorney David Pasternak, Old Republic International (NYSE:ORI) and others - for public corruption and racketeering by judges, financial institutions, and large law-firms in pretense proceedings at the Court.

Los Angles, August 22 – complaint [1] was filed with US Attorney Office, Central District of California, and Prof Laurence Tribe - Senior Counsel, US Department Of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, by Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, against former Judge Patricia Collins, Judge Lisa Hart-Cole, Attorney David Pasternak, Old Republic International (NYSE:ORI), and Attorney Richard Ormond (Buchalter Nemer, LLP) - for public corruption and racketeering in pretense proceedings at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  Others named as accused in the complaint were Judge Jacqueline Connor, Presiding Judge Charles McCoy,Judge in Charge of Writs and Receiverships David Yaffe, Clerk of the Court John A Clarke, and Court Counsel Fredrick Bennett, who were all alleged as central figures in conduct of a racketeering enterprise at the Court.

In early December 2007, Attorney David Pasternak, acting as pretense “Receiver” on behalf of the Court under Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), was perpetrating real estate fraud, as later opined by highly-decorated FBI veteran, fraud expert James Wedick. Target of the fraud was Beverly Hills property of Complainant Zernik.  Judge Jacqueline Connor had instigated the scheme two years earlier.

To accomplish the fraud, collusion by Mara Escrow, a subsidiary of ORI – a large financial institution, was required. However, Complainant alerted Mara’s Senior Escrow Officer Liz Cohen that she was about to perpetrate real estate fraud. Therefore, Ms Cohen refused to collude with Attorney Pasternak and the Court.

On December 7, 2007, to overcome the hurdles, Attorney David Pasternak and others engaged in two pretense “Ex Parte Proceedings” in two separate courthouses on the same morning:

1)        In the first “Ex Parte Proceeding”, at the Beverly Hills Courthouse, Attorney David Pasternak, acting as pretense “Receiver” - with no valid and effectual Appointment Order, and Attorney Richard Ormond, on behalf of Mara Escrow, appeared before Judge Lisa Hart-Cole to request Court approval of various documents, never previously seen by Complainant, including, but not limited to:

a.        “Grant Deeds”, which were later opined as “fraud”;

b.        “Indemnity Agreement” for Mara Escrow – for future criminalities, and 

c.        Gag Orders – to prohibit pro se Defendant from speech in defense of self with escrow or with the title company, who were conspiring with Attorney Pasternak, the Court, and others to commit real estate fraud.

At the onset, Defendant filed a Peremptory Challenge with Judge Hart-Cole.  In the proceeding that ensued, both Judge Hart-Cole and Attorney Richard Ormond refused to disclose the name of the latter, or the identity of the party, which he represented in Court in the proceeding.            

Consequently, Judge Hart-Cole issued Minutes of Recusal. However, later she secretly “disposed” of the Minutes in Sustain - the Court’s case management system, effectively eliminating the proceeding from the record.

2)        In the second “Ex Parte Proceeding”, at the Santa Monica Courthouse, Judge Patricia Collins introduced Attorney Pasternak as an “Ad Hoc Receiver”.  In response to then Defendant Zernik’s objections for abuse of Free Speech and Possession rights in such “Ex Parte Proceeding”, Attorney Pasternak justified the need for the proceeding in his shortage of funds.  Judge Collins then pretended in open court to approve Attorney Pasternak’s requests.  However, Judge Collins secretly created for the proceeding void registration and void Minutes in Sustain – with no certification by Clerk.

Consequently, on December 17, 2007, Attorney Pasternak concluded the fraud in conveyance of title on the property.  However, the fraud in conduct ofSamaan v Zernik continues to this date – the case continues to be listed as “Pending” – since no Judgment was ever entered in the case.

The complaint alleged that the mere notion of conducting such proceedings at the Court reflected the impunity of the enterprise.

Pretense “Receiverships” by Attorney Pasternak in other cases at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, were documented in complaints previously filed with the US Attorney Office.  The scheme was claimed as part of the larger enterprise, founded in the conduct of pretense proceedings and issuing of pretense minutes, pretense orders, and pretense judgments.  Sustain, the case management system of the Court, was alleged as the enabling tool of the racket.

The complaint, was claimed of high public policy significance, since David Pasternak, who was alleged in a series of complaints as a central figure in the enterprise, was former President of the Los Angeles County Bar Association, former Member of the California Judicial Council, and former President of Bet Tzedek (“The House of Justice”) – a prominent Los Angeles Jewish/legal charity.  Therefore, the complaint alleged that his conduct reflected widespread public corruption of both the California courts and the legal profession.

Moreover, the complaint alleged that conduct of Samaan v Zernik was unique in documenting conditions, where the Los Angeles Superior Court was not only permissive and conducive, but also coercive of criminalities by financial institutions.  The complaint alleged such conditions - collusion of judges, large financial institutions, and large law-firms in an enterprise - undermined any prospect of establishing effective banking regulation in the United States.

The complaint quoted the official Blue Ribbon Review Panel (2006), which concluded that the Los Angeles Superior Court “must be investigated”, and highly decorated FBI veteran, Fraud Expert James Wedick, who opined (2008) “investigation should be immediately instituted”, as well as Congressional Inquiries on FBI and US Department of Justice by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator, (2008, 2010) and the Hon Diane Watson, Congresswoman, (2008) in related matters.  Complainant asked the US Department of Justice to institute such investigation and accord equal protection to all 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California. 

Judges were previously prosecuted for racketeering in San Jose and San Diego, California, and in Cook County, Illinois.  Judges are today prosecuted for racketeering in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.  Judges are also prosecuted in El Paso Texas, and large-scale corruption of the courts and the legal profession is under investigation in Florida.  Senior Counsel Laurence Tribe recently warned of deteriorating conditions at the state courts in the US, comparing them to those of “third world” nations.

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 in the United States.

LINKS

[1] Complaint

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36266839

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

Additional evidence of alleged collusion by judges and financial institutions in racketeering in real estate matters at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
.
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.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/calling-upon-the-un-human-rights-council-to-issue-an-honest-and-effectual-2010-report-on-the-us/ 

_______________________________________________

Deborah L. Sanchez,Judge

Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

BELLFLOWER JUDGE RUNS AMOK

On August 17, 2010 Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Deborah Sanchez, in the Bellflower Courthouse Dept. 2, decided she didn't have to obey either a Bankruptcy Court Stay or the laws on Disqualification of a Judge.

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.

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

10-08-14 Petition Launched, Calling the UN to Issue Honest and Effectual Report on the US Justice System, Human Rights in the United States

Los Angeles, August 14 – Human Rights Alert (NGO) launched an online petition, calling upon the Human Rights Council of the United Nations (UN) to engage in a thorough review of the justice system in the United States as part of the first ever - November 2010 -  UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States,  The petition further called upon the UN to issue in November 2010 an honest and effectual UPR Report, asking the United States to take effective measures to restore integrity of its judiciary and its justice system.

The petition stated that conditions now prevailing in the United States amounted to large-scale abuse of the people by the government of the United States. Moreover, such conditions posed risks that were difficult to assess to world peace and welfare.  

The petition cited conditions, which were documented in both state and United States courts, be it civil, criminal, bankruptcy, or family courts, and which were documented in reports filed by stakeholders as part of the UPR process, providing evidence of widespread corruption of the justice system in the United States: 

·        Executions continue, at times, as the outcome of judicial conduct that would be deemed unreasonable by any reasonable person.

·        Torture was allowed to become part of government conduct, and confessions extracted through torture were admitted in courts.

·        With privatized, for profit prisons, the United States holds a prisoner population that is entirely out of proportion with any other developed, democratic nation; Minorities are imprisoned in vastly disproportionate numbers.

·        Large-scale false imprisonment of juvenile was exposed in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, as part of the Kids for Cash scandal, and is yet to be fully corrected; Large-scale false imprisonments were exposed in Los Angeles County, California, as part of the Rampart scandal a decade ago, which the US government is refusing to correct.

·        Regardless of United States government promises, detentions in Guantanamo Bay were never brought to an end; Proceedings, which such detainees were subjected to, violate international conventions.

·        Attorneys, who represented clients in civil rights matters, or in causes that were not favored by government or by judges, suffered harsh retaliation, or even imprisonment.

·        Whistleblowers were routinely subjected to harsh retaliations, while the perpetrators - be it government officials, large corporations, or others, suffered no consequence at all.

·        Racketeering by judges in the United States was and is prosecuted in some courts, but in other cases, even when exposed with indisputable evidence, the United States government refused to take action.

·        Large banks and financial institutions colluded with judges in looting of homeowners across the United States under the current financial crisis; Even when fraud in the courts by financial institutions and law-firms was exposed and acknowledged by the Courts, such financial institutions and law-firms suffered no consequences at all.

·        Credible evidence was provided of racketeering by judges, attorneys, and/or judicial officers in receiverships and conservatorships.

·        Judges, all the way from state courts to the Supreme Court of the United States, introduced the practice of issuing rulings, orders, and judgments, that were not signed by judges and/or were not authenticated/attested by the clerks; Such rulings, orders, and judgments could not possibly be deemed valid court records; They were enforced nevertheless.

·        Computerized case management and online public access systems were installed in the US and state courts, which effectively denied public access to true and honest court records  - to inspect and to copy; Such systems effectively concealed what the courts deem effectual signatures and stamps that were required to set such records honest, valid, and effectual court records.

The petition called upon the UN to engage in such review of the justice system of the US, if not for the sake of the safeguard of the Human Rights of the people of the United States, then out of concern with dysfunctional banking regulation in the United States. The petition claimed that there was no way to establish honest and effectual banking and corporate regulation under current conditions at the United States courts today.  Reckless conduct by United States banks inflicted harm on workers and investors worldwide. Therefore, an integrity crisis was at the foundation of the current economic depression, and economic conditions were not likely to improve unless integrity of government was restored.

LINKS:

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

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/calling-upon-the-un-human-rights-council-to-issue-an-honest-and-effectual-2010-report-on-the-us/

WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?

*     "Innocent people remain in prison"*     "...the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of..."
LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24902306/

*   "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit." 
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001) 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29043589/

*   "This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted."     
Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001) 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/274339