Los Angeles, October 20 – Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, released records documenting that the United States courts have effectively established a policy excluding from the First Amendment right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” papers, which documented judicial corruption. Moreover, to accomplish such policy, the records showed US judges and court personnel colluding in Fraud on the Court, and tight linkage was demonstrated between such conduct, abuse of Human Rights, and failing banking regulation in the United States.
The series of cases originated at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and was opined as real estate fraud [ ] by a Fraud Expert – FBI veteran, who had been decorated by US Congress, by US Attorney General, and by FBI Director. The beneficiaries of the alleged racketeering at the Los Angeles Superior Court, led by California Judge JACQUELINE CONNOR, included Countrywide Financial Corporation, and later Bank of America Corporation. ANGELO MOZILO (then CEO of Countrywide), SANDOR SAMUELS (then Chief Legal Counsel of Countrywide, today- Associate General Counsel of Bank of America), and BRIAN MOYNIHAN (then General Counsel, today - President of Bank of America), were all directly involved in the matter, as was DAVID PASTERNAK (former President of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and former Member of the California Judicial Council). [ ] Regardless of the voluminous credible evidence of alleged racketeering by Countrywide, Bank of America, and judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court, FBI and US Department of Justice refused to enforce the law in Los Angeles County, California, even after inquiries by the US Congress.
In contrast, official FBI policy, as stated in 2008, was "FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society…"
Therefore, in May 2009 petition was filed at the US District Court, Washington DC - Zernik v Melson et al (1:2009cv00805), under cause of action "To Compel US Officer to Perform His Duties". Among Defendants were KENNETH KAISER (Assistant Director of FBI for Criminal Investigations), KENNETH MELSON (then Director of US Attorneys Office), and SAMUEL BEZEK (Senior Counsel at SEC). Conduct of Judge RICHARD LEON at the US District Court, District of Columbia, was by then predictable – the US Court eliminated from the docket - with no Due Process/Fair Hearing - papers, which were duly filed, and which provided evidence of judicial corruption at the Los Angeles Superior Court. [ ]
At the US District Court, Central District of California, Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS and Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE had previously engaged in 2008-9 in similar conduct in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550), where ten judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court, ANGELO MOZILO and SANDOR SAMUELS were named among Defendants in complaint under cause of action of Deprivation of Rights under the Color of Law. The evidence provide in the case effectively documented racketeering at the Los Angeles Superior Court. At the commencement of the litigation at US District Court, Central District of California, the “Pro Se Clerk” refused to issue valid summons presented to him. Later, papers, which provided evidence of judicial corruption, were dishonestly docketed – concealed under unrelated paper and docketing text in the online PACER docket. [ ] When that practice was protested, the US District Court, Central District of California initiated the practice of selectively refusing to file, and selectively issuing perverted pretense “Discrepancy Notices” on certain papers with no Due Process/Fair Hearing. The staff of the Office of the Clerk also explicitly informed Plaintiff that Magistrate CARLA WOEHRL instructed them to issue such “Notices” on any papers pertaining to allegation of judicial corruption. [ ] Furthermore, Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE and Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS of the US District Court, Central District of California later issued a pretense “Order” - prohibiting Plaintiff from access to the US Courts in the matter. [ ] The records of the US District Court, Central District of California, also documented alleged Judicial Misconduct and Fraud on the Court – relative to the issuance and docketing of invalid pretense Court records by Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE and Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS in collusion with unauthorized court personnel. 
Conduct of the US District Court, Central District of California was therefore subject of a Petition, which was duly filed in June 2008 at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - Zernik v USDC-CAC (08-72714) – purportedly reviewed by Circuit Judges STEPHEN R REINHARDT, MARSHA S BERZON and MILAN D SMITH, JR. The Petition at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, sought to Compel Due Process Rights – issuing of valid summons and engaging in honest docketing at the US District Court, Central District of California. However, papers, which provided evidence of the denial of the right to file papers at the US District Court, Central District of California, and alleged widespread corruption at the Los Angeles Superior Court, were eliminated from the docket of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. Only unsigned orders were issued by the Circuit Judges, which were served and noticed with no authentication/certification by the Clerk of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. [ ]
Later, in April 2010, similar conduct was documented at the Supreme Court of the United States, under caption of Fine v Sheriff (09-A827). The Application, purportedly reviewed by the Conference of the Supreme Court, pertained to the imprisonment in solitary confinement of former US prosecutor Richard Fine, with no warrant and no entry of Judgment/Conviction or Sentencing, after he had exposed, publicized, and rebuked the taking of “not permitted” payments (“bribes”) by judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court, which required the enactment of “retroactive immunities” (“pardons”) for such judges.
Papers, which were duly filed as Motion to Intervene [ ] at the Supreme Court of the United States under the caption, referenced above, and which documented the parallels in alleged corruption of the Superior Court of California, of the California Judicial Council, of the US District Court, Central District of California, and of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, in the Habeas Corpus Petition of Richard Fine and the cases pertaining to Dr Zernik, referenced above, were eliminated from the docket of the US Supreme Court by Court Counsel DANNY BICKELL with no authority at all. [ ] Furthermore, upon review of records of the file of the Application at the Supreme Court of the United States, no record was found of any judicial review at all. [ ] Regardless, false and deliberately misleading notices of purported denial of the Application by the Conference of the Supreme Court of the United States was issued by unauthorized personnel. Denial of the Application was likewise falsely noted in the online dockets and journal of the Supreme Court. [ ] Therefore, the case also demonstrated disregard of the Habeas Corpus right – the “the cornerstone of the US Constitution” according to the late US Supreme Court Justice William Brennan Jr.
The cases in all courts involved also documented the key role of online public access systems (e.g. PACER) and computerized case management systems (e.g. CM/ECF) in enabling such conduct, through exclusion from the online public access system of the clerks’ authentication/certification records, and denial of access to such records by the courts, combined with perverted notice and service practices. A reasonable person would conclude that today the clerks of all courts involved deemed themselves unaccountable for the validity and honesty of any of the records in the respective online public access systems.
In recent years Human Rights Alert repeatedly called upon the United States Congress to enact federal rules of online public access and case management systems, since both state and federal courts uniformly failed to publish such rules, in apparent violation of Due Process/Fair Hearings rights. [ ]
The cases at hand were part of evidence, which was submitted to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations as part of the first ever, 2010 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the United States. [ ] Staff report of the HRC later noted “corruption of the courts and the legal profession” in California. [ ] Likewise, in July 2010 Prof Laurence Tribe, in keynote address to the Annual Conference of Chief Justices of the state courts, in his capacity as Senior Counsel, US Department of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, warned that the state courts in the United States might become indistinguishable from courts in “third world” nations. [ ]
However, the evidence now released by Human Rights Alert, showed that the even the highest United States courts - National Tribunals for Protection of Rights pursuant to ratified International Law - in fact patronized such conduct, through what must be deemed violation of the First Amendment right to file petitions, denial of Access to the Courts, denial of the Due Process/Fair Hearing rights, and Fraud on the Courts.
Moreover, combined, the cases at hand documented the tight linkage between corruption of the justice system, abuse of Human Rights, and failing banking regulation in the United States.
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 in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system.
[ ] 07-12-17 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, David Pasternak’s Grant Deeds in re: 320 South Peck Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90212, opined fraud expert and FBI veteran as fraud by James Wedick:
See also the August 21, 2008 informal letter by fraud expert and FBI veteran James Wedick, informing Defendant Dr Zernik that FBI Special Agent, who was assigned to the case agreed with him that the case involved real estate fraud, and expressing concern that FBI would not provide Equal Protection in the case, since it would involve addressing widespread corruption of the courts in Los Angeles County, California.
08-08-21 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Email letter by highly decorated FBI veteran, James Wedick, regarding refusal to Investigate FBI to provide Dr Zernik protection against real estate fraud:
[ ] 08-05-27 Zernik v Connor (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California, Dkt # 062: First Amended Complaint:
[ ] a) 09-06-29 Zernik v Melson et al (1:09-cv-00805) at the US District Court, District of Columbia – papers received by mail from US Judge Richard Leon, alleged as Denial of First Amendment rights and Judicial Fraud on the Court. - Papers Received by Mail From Judge Richard Leon - Alleged Judicial Fraud on the Court:
Please note: The records in a), above, are face pages of papers, which had been duly filed by Plaintiff in Zernik v Melson et al (1:09-cv-00805), and were later returned by mail to Plaintiff with Discrepancy Notice and no form of authentication/certification by an authorized Deputy Clerk.
Each of the papers was hand inscribed on its face page "Leave to file denied" with the date “6/29/09”and initials of Judge Richard Leon.
Therefore, the records are alleged as evidence of Denial of First Amendment right and Judicial Fraud on the Court by Judge Richard Leon in collusion with Deputy Clerk David Scott.
The records, which Plaintiff was thus denied the right to file at the court, included, but were not limited to papers, which documented fraud by judges of the Superior Court of California in collusion with Countrywide Financial Corporation.
No mention of these papers, or the purported denial of their filing by Judge Richard Leon was ever noted in the PACER docket of the caption referenced above.
b) 09-06-29 Zernik v Melson et al (1:09-cv-00805) at the US District Court, District of Columbia – purported Order by Judge Richard Leon as received by mail:
Please note: The record in (b), above, is provided as received by Plaintiff by mail from the Court. It included no form of authentication/certification by Clerk of the Court.
Regardless, the purported “Order” was docketed (Dkt #8) in the online PACER docket as “entered”.
The Court denied repeated requests for the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings), which are today deemed by the US courts as authentication/certification by the Clerk.
Therefore, the records are alleged as evidence of Judicial Fraud on the Court by Judge Richard Leon in collusion with Deputy Clerk David Scott.
[ ] a) Conduct of the US District Court, Central District of California, under Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550), was detailed in the Petition to the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, see Footnote , Below.
b) Pretense March 21, 2008 “Minutes”, issued by Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS, questioning the constitutional right for unbiased judge:
08-03-21 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California, Dkt #014 - Judge Virginia Phillips' Minutes Denying Temporary Restraining Order:
c) 08-06-06 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California Dkt #063 - purported Magistrate Carla Woehrle "Minutes" - contriving novel dishonest docketing rules, alleged as Fraud on the Court:
Please note: The above two records of the US District Court, Central District of California are deemed as Judicial Fraud on the Court, since they were issued with no “Document Stamp” in the respective NEFs, which is required pursuant to the Court’s General Order 08-02 as authentication/certification by the Clerk, a fact that could not be discerned in the PACER docket of the US District Court. Moreover, the pretense March 21, 2008 “Minutes” (b), above, was issued with no authority at all by MARVA DILLARD, Courtroom Deputy, and not by a Deputy Clerk, as required by law. Likewise, the pretense June 6, 2008 “Minutes” (c), above, was issued with no authority at all by Donna Thomas, who was – upon information and belief – Courtroom Deputy, fraudulently identified in the “Minutes” as a “Deputy Clerk”. Clerk of the Court TERRY NAFISI, and Presiding Judge AUDREY COLLINS refused to respond on repeated requests to confirm or deny the fact, alternatively – to initiate corrective actions.
[ ] See records of papers, which provided evidence of alleged corruption of the judges of the California Superior Court, and which were denied the filing though perverted “Discrepancy Notices” at the US District Court, Central District of California under:
09-04-09 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California, Dkt #105: Compiled Records of Perverted Discrepancy Notices:
[ ] 09-04-24 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California, Dkt #106 purported Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS Order Accepting Report and Recommendation of US Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE, denying Plaintiff access to US Courts in the matter:
Please note: The above record of the US District Court, Central District of California, is deemed as Judicial Fraud on the Court, since it was issued with no “Document Stamp” in the respective NEF, which is required pursuant to the Court’s General Order 08-02 as authentication/certification by the Clerk, a fact that could not be discerned in the PACER docket of the US District Court.
[ ] 08-06-24 Zernik v USDC (08-72714) at the US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit - Alleged Fraud on the Court and Undermining of Banking Regulation:
[ ] a) 10-04-20 Fine v Baca (09 A827) Motion to Intervene and related papers:
b) Complaint against US Supreme Court Counsel Danny Bickell Alleged Public Corruption and Deprivation of Rights
c) 10-07-25 Fine v Baca (09 A827) Alleged fraud in US Supreme Court:
d) 10-07-28 Fine v Baca (09-A827) Additional Evidence for Fraud at the US Supreme Court pertaining to purported denial of the Application in Conference of the Court:
[ ] a) 04-22 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court - Dr Zernik's Declaration RE: Court Counsel Danny Bickell and Filing at US Supreme Court:
b) 10-08-01 Fine v Baca (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court - Further Evidence of Fraud, Misprision of Felonies - April 29, 2010 Letter by Court Counsel Bickell Indicating "Return" of Motion to Intervene and Related Papers:
[ ]10-07-28 Fine v Baca (09-A827) at the Supreme Court of the United States - Declaration of George McDermott Re: Unsigned Letter dated April 26, 2010, by Supreme unnamed Deputy Clerk re: Denial of the Application:
[ ]10-08-13 RE: Fine v Baca (09-A827), Fine v Baca (09-1250), and Fine v Baca (10-A24) at the Supreme Court of the United States - October 2009 Term Journal - validity, or lack thereof:
[ ] 01-07-31 Human Rights Alert’s Request for the Judiciary Committees to Establish Case Management and Online Public Access System of the US Courts by Law:
[ ]10-04-19 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:
[ ]10-10-01 United Nations Human Rights Council Records for 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States - "corruption of the courts and the legal profession" in California
[ ] 10-07-26 Prof Laurence Tribe's Keynote Remarks at the Annual Conference of Chief Justices s
Tags: judicial corruption, supreme Court of the United states, banking regulation, habeas corpus rights, first amendment rights
Marked as: approved
Views: 8532 | Comments: 3 | Votes: 0 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 1
|Liveleak on Facebook|