FREEDOM OF THE PRESS? WHERE?

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS? WHERE?

By phone they explained that they had to be defensive...
And below they state that I have to get permission from Countrywide to publish my press release...


My press release was out for a week on PRWeb, and actually had nice visibility statistics... until today...

Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:52:33 -0800

To: "PRWeb Direct"

From: joseph zernik

Subject: Re: FW: dispute hold of PRWeb release 617791

I find your note below misleading and offensive. I never implied Countrywide was a party. I stated that as defendant, I hold that Countrywide provided Plaintiff with fraudulent documents, "and Countrywide claims it is merely a witness." If I read it correctly, what you say is that Countrywide did not challenge the statement regarding fraudulent documents, but claimed it implied it was a party? Does not make sense to me...In fact, in various documents in Samaan v Zernik the court designated Countrywide any of the following:

• Defendant
• Cross-complainant
• Intervenor
• Objector
• Real Party in Interest
• Non-Party

It appears that the Court, like PRWEB was bending over backwards to accommodate countrywide.

Joseph Zernik

At 04:16 PM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
Hello Mr. Zernik,

We are notifying you that we have put the press release 617791 entitled"Samuels - Countrywide Chief Legal Counsel to Answer Today in Case InvolvingAlleged Fraudulent Documents" on Dispute/Hold status.PRWEB releases are taken off line and put on Dispute/Hold when and if weare notified of potentially libelous information or a serious inaccuracythat affects a person, company or organization named in the release.Releases may also be put on hold when we learn that the information in arelease may violate copyright law or PRWEB's Terms of Service or when weare informed that the submitter does not have authorization to releaseinformation on behalf of the organization or person named in the release.In this case, we have been informed by Countrywide that this releaseinaccurately implies that Countrywide and Mr. Samuels are a party to thecase Samaan v. Zernik, which is in fact incorrect and therefore misleading.Since PRWEB relies on users to submit accurate information in theirpress releases, we cannot be the arbiters of whether to put the releaseback in circulation. We will only take the release off dispute hold whenand if both parties submit to us that the original or revised releaseshould be taken off Dispute/Hold.

Thank you.

For your reference, our terms of service are located athttp://www.prweb.com/tos.php

Again, PRWEB editors will not get involved in approving or modifying the release further until and unless both you and Countrywide contact us,asking us to put this release back on line.

If you have other questions orconcerns, please contact us.

Best,

Nicole Albright--

PRWeb Editorial StaffPRWeb International, Inc.2084

TRYING TO GET INVESTIGATORS FOCUSED...

TRYING TO GET INVESTIGATORS FOCUSED...

Is everybody and his brother ADHD?
Let's get focused for a minute for a change...

Jan 16, 2008

Mr Angelo Mozilo - by email
Mr Sandor Samuels - by email

Gentlemen:

I am in receipt of a letter from Att Amberg on your behalf, a letter replete with false and deliberately misleading statements. As usual - it is just a distraction. I previously listed two documents that were key in the real estate fraud you perpetrated against me:

a) Document falsely and misleadingly represented as an Underwriting Letter dated October 14, 2004 or mid-October 2004, and
b) Document falsely and misleadingly represented as the product of fax communication from Parks in Washington State to Countrywide (a financial institution) in California (hence across state lines) on October 25, 2004, 5:03 pm.

It has been almost a year since I first asked you to state whether such and their like are genuine documents or fraudulent documents. Why don't you finally provide the straight answer instead of having Mr Amberg send redundant meaningless letters?

Mr Samuels and Mr Mozilo - there is some fundamental misunderstanding in our communications. The NYT published an article a couple of days ago regarding Mr Mozilo, where the opening paragraph stated: "All that money and nowhere to go...". In response I sent a letter to the editor where I stated that the preamble is likely to end up being invalid, and therefore the rest of the article may become meaningless. Gentlemen, I am doing my best so that you would end up separated from at least some of that money and also from the freedom to go...

The notion that I am harassing Countrywide and its employees is absurd- you are perpetrating real estate against me in collusion with Nivie Samaan, Mohammad Keshavarzi of Sheppard Mullin, and others. I am communicating only with the two of you, to the best of my knowledge I have never sent a note to any other employee (except Att Boock, copied below) in many many months.

The notion that my statements were false and defamatory, or that I would retract them was likewise misguided. I address these communications to you, Mr Samuels and Mr Mozilo (...not Countrywide, ...not employees, ...not executives, just you two as individuals), and I suggest that you two immediately take the necessary legal action if the two of you indeed feel confident that you did not collude in real estate fraud against me, and that there was no wire/fax fraud and mortgage fraud included in it as well. Making such statements regarding innocent individuals would be outrageous indeed.

The statements that Judge Connor entered a Protective (gag) Order on July 23, 2007, was in denial of reality, or hallucinatory in nature. In fact, Mr Amberg for all practical purposes admitted that he had never seen any order like that. Likewise, there is no such order in the paper Court File, and no such order is listed as "entered" in Sustain under Case History. In fact, the case of the Protective (gag) Order is one of only three that I consider qualified in the top category of "Connor Classic" - and that is from a Judge Jacqueline Connor, who is a master con-artist! (In case you are curious, the other two are: Aug 9, 2007 Judgment by Court, and Sept 5, 2007 Order Appointing a Referee - all three were missing in action...).

I fully agree with the statement: "Judge Friedman clearly stated that the Protective Order remains in full force and effect." A Protective Order that never existed, remaining in full force and effect, is still non-existent for all practical purposes. It is just an indication of Judge Friedman's work ethics, that he made such a statement regarding an Order that he had never seen... Rubber stamp does not even come close to describing that skill...

Finally - regarding your concerns that this communication is part of discovery in Samaan v Zernik - please rest assured - this letter is only an attempt to focus ongoing investigations in several states and direct investigators to the individuals and documents that would provide the road map for the sub-prime catastrophe.

Joseph Zernik

CC:
Office of California Attorney General
Office of Illinois Attorney General
Office of New York Attorney General
Office of Massachusetts Attorney General

==========================
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:43:05 -0800

To: Todd Boock

From: Joseph Zernik

Subject: Samaan v Zernik

Hi Todd -

A while ago I sent you a message predicting that Samaan v Zernik will stay with us for a while, and that in a few years we may be asked to explain Samaan v Zernik in one investigation or another...

Well as things go this time around, it is much faster than I predicted, and I have already provided your name to investigators as the person most qualified to explain the integrity, or lack thereof ,of the subpoena production by Countrywide...

Joseph Zernik

BET TZEDEK - DINNER GALA

BET TZEDEK -- HOUSE OF JUSTICE

On January 22, 2008, at Hyatt Regency Century Plaza, Bet Tzedek, a Jewish Legal Services will hold its 20th Annual Dinner Gala.

Of interest, President of the Board Sandor Samuels is colluding in fraud with Gala Chair Att David Pasternak. Details of the fraud were coordinated by two other attorneys at Countrywide – Todd Boock and Sandy Shatz, who identified themselves as Jewish observant, and threatened action if called to court during Passover, and thereby avoided discovery. The case is being reviewed before former Bet Tzedek Executive - Judge Terry Friedman of LA Superior Court, who on Friday, January 11, 2008 refused to be disqualified... Two of the direct beneficiaries of the fraud are still to join the Jewish charity – Mohammad Keshavarzi of Sheppard Mullin, and Nivie Samaan.

Tom Waits will make a rare Los Angeles appearance and perform a few songs. Dinner Tickets are $400.00 each, for more information call: call (323) 549-5813, or email tmumba@aol.com

SANDOR SAMUELS

A PERSONAL MESSAGE FROM SANDOR SAMUELS

Call Bet Tzedek
By Sandor Samuels
BT Board President 2006-2007

Whom do you call if you are elderly and someone is trying to evict you from your apartment or your house?

Whom do you call if you are a holocaust survivor and are being denied your rightful reparations?

Whom do you call if you need to care for an abandoned grandchild or niece or nephew?

Whom do you call if you live in a nursing home and are being denied appropriate care or treatment?

And whom do you call if you are being denied your rightful wages or are being forced to work in substandard conditions?

The answer to these and other legal problems afflicting the poor and the elderly in our community is a resounding BET TZEDEK. I’m proud to be the President of the Board of Directors of such an organization.

I’m especially proud of Bet Tzedek Shabbat, a new outreach campaign that we conducted on March 17th and 18th. On March 17th and 18th, Bet Tzedek’s message was delivered in congregations all across the southland. Rabbis and members of Bet Tzedek’s Board of Directors delivered a drash – a sermon – for Parshat Ki Tisa, the portion containing the thirteen attributes of God. These attributes include compassion, kindness and mercy. The message is simple yet powerful: All who are in need, come and we will try to help.

This is what we do at Bet Tzedek: try to help all who come to us. On Bet Tzedek Shabbat, nearly 10,000 congregants heard our call for more volunteers. And you, too, can be part of Bet Tzedek.

Please display the same attributes of compassion, kindness and mercy by volunteering your time to help further Bet Tzedek’s mission. Read more about our work in this e-newsletter and on our website. Then call Bet Tzedek’s Volunteer Coordinator, Robin Sommerstein, at 323-549-5814 or email her at
rsommerstein@bettzedek.org to get involved.

Thanks to the following synagogues and churches for participating in Bet Tzedek Shabbat:

Adat Ari El
Beth Hillel
Beth Jacob Congregation
Beth Shir Shalom
B'nai Benet (Simi Valley)
B'nai David
B'nai Horim
Leo Baeck Temple
St. Peter's Italian Church
Sinai Temple
Stephen S. Wise
Temple Adat Elohim
Temple Aliyah
Temple Beth Am
Temple Isaiah
Temple Israel of Hollywood
Temple Judea
University Synagogue

Samuels - Countrywide (CFC) Chief Legal Counsel to Answer Today, Friday, in Alleged Fraudulent Documents Case

Samuels - Countrywide (CFC) Chief Legal Counsel to Answer Today, Friday, in Alleged Fraudulent Documents Case

A hearing in Santa Monica on Friday, January 11, 2008, 8:30am will review Countrywide's role in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400). Defendant claims that the case is founded fraud through documents provided by Countrywide. Countrywide claimed and the court concurred it was "merely a witness". CFC President, Angelo Mozilo, and Chief Legal Cousel, Sandor Samuels, so far refused to answer regarding the documents in question. However, on December 28, 2007, Saumuels filed a "Notice of Interested Person" in the case. In response, Defendant Zernik noticed an ex parte application "for an order to show cause why Mr Samuels should not have to answer... regarding the two alledgedly fraudulent Countrywide documents.", to be heard Friday, Jan 11, 2008, 8:30am, in Santa Monica, California. Recusals/disqualification statements of at least 3 judges were to CFC. Samuels stated that he is an acquaintance of the current presiding judge.

Beverly Hills, CA () January 11, 2008 -- Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) stems from the failed attempt of Samaan to purchase Zernik's residence in 2004. Defendant claims that the case is based on invalid fraudulent Countrywide* (CFC) documents:

a) An alleged invalid Underwriting Letter, dated October 26, 2004, which was introduced as evidence in court, allegedly misrepresented as a valid Underwriting Letter dated October 14, 2004. Defendant claims that this Underwriting Letter was never part of the official 2004 Loan File produced by Countrywide in response to subpoenas. Defendant claims that the document was added to the file only in April 2007, almost 3 years after the transaction under review.

b) An alleged invalid faxed copy of a Real Estate Purchase Contract with an alleged fraudulent fax header imprint, bearing no ID or phone number, as required by FCC Regulation. Plaintiff represented in court that the document was faxed from Victor Parks, Loan Broker in Washington State to Countrywide in San Rafael, California, on October 25, 2004, 5:03pm, as shown in the fax header time stamp. Defendant alleges that fax logs show that the document was in fact the product of fax transmission between Plaintiff, Nivie Samaan, and her husband, JR Lloyd, both in Los Angeles, as part of a convoluted fax/wire fraud involving Countrywide.

Both documents originated from sub-prime Countrywide Home Loan, San Rafael Branch with support declarations by Branch Manager Maria McLaurin. Media reports from litigation in New York earlier this week, quoted Countrywide attorneys stating letters they submitted as evidence in court were "recreated" documents. Both Countrywide officers declined so far to take any action or answer any questions regarding the allegations of fraudulant documents in Samaan v Zernik.

The case is currently heard by Judge T Friedman, the 8th presiding judge in this case so far. In his "Notice of Interested Person" Samuels stated that he " is acquainted with Judge Terry B. Friedmanis" but stated that "They have not communicated about this lawsuit". Two previous judges, Allan Goodman and John Segal listed Countrywide as the reason for their disqualifications, after ruling in the case each for about a month. Judge Allan Goodman stated in his recusal that he had "a longstanding close personal relationship with the General Counsel of Countrywide".A third judge, Jacqueline Connor, was disqualified after presiding in the case for over a year. Defendant's filed statement, which led to Judge Connor's disqualification was based on the claim "Judge Connor routinely offers Plaintiff and Non-Party Countrywide preferential treatment". In her response in open court, Sept 10, 2007, Judge Connor, known also as the presiding judge in the first Rampart Trial stated:"I absolutely, adamantly deny and contest and dispute the allegations made by Mr. Zernik. I don't concede anything, but I believe in the interest of justice it is appropriate for me to recuse myself".

*Countrywide here denotes Countrywide Financial Corporation, Inc (CFC) and all its subsidiaries and affiliates, jointly and severally.

** Additinal court documents can be found at:
In Pro Per in LA

For additional information regarding this action contact:
Joseph Zernik, DMD,PhD

Email: 123456xyz @ gmail.com

NOTICE OF EX PARTE APPEARANCE FOR FRIDAY, JAN 11, 2008

Att. Keshavarzi and Att Shulkin, Samuels, Moldawsky and Boock:

I write to provide notice that at 8:30 a.m. on Friday, January 11, 2007, I will appear Ex Parte in Department J, of the West District of the Los Angeles County Superior Court located at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, California 90401, or whatever department will see the case:

1) TO IMMEDIATELY NOTICE ZERNIK OF JUDGE FRIEDMAN'S DUE ASSIGNMENT ORDER BY THE SUPERVISING JUDGE OR ANY OTHER WRITINGS THAT ESTABLISH THE AUTHORITY OF JUDGE FRIEDMAN AS JUDGE PURSUANT TO THE LAW OF CALIFORNIA OVER ZERNIK IN SAMAAN V ZERNIK

2) TO ALLOW ZERNIK FULL ACCESS TO HIS COURT FILE, PAPER AND ELECTRONIC ALIKE, PURSUANT TO HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT AND CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT Chapter 2. Public Access to Electronic Trial Court Records (2007)

3) TO VACATE A FRAUDULENT MINUTE ORDER OF SEPT 10, 2007 BY JUDGE CONNOR, PURSUANT TO CCP ?170.3(b)(4), AND IN DISREGARD OF LOCAL ORAL RULE OF COURT: NO JUDGE SHALL OVERRULE ANOTHER, WHICH IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW.

4) TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MR SAMUELS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO ANSWER DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT ZERNIK?S QUESTIONS (ENCLOSED) REGARDING THE TWO ALLEGEDLY FRAUDULENT COUNTRYWIDE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE THE KEY DOCUMENTS IN ALLEGED FRAUDULENT CLAIMS IN SAMAAN V ZERNIK.
ZERNIK CLAIMS THAT SAMUELS MUST ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS REGARDLESS OF CUT OFF DATE FOR DISCOVERY IN SAMAAN V ZERNIK, PURSUANT TO:
- SAMUELS FIDUCIARY DUTIES AND HIS PUBLIC FIGURE STATUS AS - CHIEF LEGAL COUNSEL OF COUNTRYWIDE, WHERE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN INVESTORS? EQUITIES IN COUNTRYWIDE AND OTHER CORPORATIONS ACROSS THE BOARD (unbound by discovery date cut off) WERE SHED IN RECENT DAYS FOLLOWING THE FINDING THAT COUNTRYWIDE FILED FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS IN A NY COURT REAL ESTATE LITIGATION, AND

- PRESIDENT OF BET TZEDEK, A JEWISH CHARITY FOR FREE LEGAL SERVICES, WHICH ADOPTED AS ITS MOTTO THE PURSUIT OF JUSTICE FROM MICAH?S FAMOUS VERSE:
6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?
(unbound by discovery cut off dates either)
AND WHERE SAMUELS PROFESSED HIS COMMITMENT TO FIGHT FRAUD OVER THE CHARITY'S WEB PAGES.

Please let me know if you plan to attend and whether you would oppose.

THE ALLEGED FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS CAN BE VIEWED AT:http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/

JANUARY 8, 2008 - LETTER TO MOZILO AND SAMUELS RE: FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS INTRODUCED IN LOS ANGELES COURT

JANUARY 8, 2008 - GRETCHEN MORGENSON, NYT STORY RE: FRAUD IN COURT BY COUNTRYWIDE

CHART: COUNTRYWIDE SHARE PRICE

NOTICE OF A FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT FROM COUNTRYWIDE - UNDERWRITING LETTER

NOTICE OF A FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT FROM COUNTRYWIDE - FILED IN COURT BY SAMAAN

To view an enlarged image of any of the documents, please click on the body of the image itself.

Sustain

Case History

page 195

Sustain

Case History

p 194

Sustain

Case History

page 193

EXHIBIT A

Sustain

Case History

page 1

A MERE SUGGESTION: DESIGNATE COUNTRYWIDE JUDGE IN SAMAAN V ZERNIK

NOTICE OF SUGGESTION
DESIGNATE COUNTRYWIDE* AS JUDGE IN SAMAAN V ZERNIK
Countrywide here designates CFC, Inc and/or any and all of its subsidiaries and affiliates jointly and/or severally

TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD,
Please also take notice of the following suggested stipulation:

WHEREAS, Sustain Case History pages #1, 194, 195, 196 include the following designations for Countrywide:

a) Real Parties in Interest
b) Person in Interest
c) Defendant
d) Cross Complainant
e) Non-Party
f) Intervenor;

WHEREAS, on Sept 10, 2007 Judge Jacqueline Connor was disqualified pursuant to filing per CCP §170.3, with claims largely hinging upon obstruction of justice to benefit Countrywide;

WHEREAS, since Sept 10, 2007, through case transfers among a number of judges, Defendant and Cross-Complainant has never been noticed of any Order by Supervising Judge of Re-assignment of the case;

WHEREAS, no Re-Assignment Order dated later than Sept 10, 2007 is to be found on file;

NOW THEREFORE, Defendant and Cross-Complainant Zernik is respectfully submitting that the following suggestion at least be contemplated:

DESIGNATE COUNTRYWIDE AS JUDGE!

Exhibit A is true and correct copy of pages 1, 194, 195, 196 of Sustain Case History, as received from the Clerk’s Office on Dec 31, 2007.

Sustain Audit data still missing, out of compliance with the law!

DATED: Jan 3, 2008



_____________________________________
JOSEPH ZERNIK
DEFENDANT & CROSS COMPLAINANT
in pro per


COMMENT:
The note on page 1, designating Countrywide as "Real Parties of Interest" and dated "7/24/04", was in fact entered into the system on 7/24/07 by Department "I" of LA Superior Court, where Judge Connor is Presiding Judge.
In and of itself this note shows:
a) That Sustain, the Court's Official Case Management System is unsafe and unreliable.
b) That the Court held the know-how for posting retroactively dated, invalid data in Sustain, which should never have been allowed in such a system in the first place, if properly built and managed.
c) That the Court in fact engaged in posting retroactively dated, invalid data in Sustain in Samaan v Zernik