Requests for Interventions by U.S. & Cal Attorneys General, and Motions for Mistrial in Sturgeon v LA County
WHAT'S NEW?
1) Requests filed for Interventions and investigations by U.S. and California Attorneys General
Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286) was a litigation of high public policy significance. It involved payments by LA County to ALL LA Superior Court judges, for over a decade, over $45,000 per judge per year, which were ruled in October 2008 by California Court of Appeals, 4th District as "not permitted" and were labeled by media as "bribes", and which involved criminal liability for ALL LA Superior Court judges.
Requests for interventions in said litigation were filed with the U.S. and California Attorneys General - on constitutional questions. The questions at hand involved the largest Superior Court in the U.S., serving more that 10 million residents of LA County, California, which in the past 25 years, operated with published Rules of Court that had no relationship to reality, and effective Rules of Court that were unpublished, and were concealed from the public. Such constitutional questions were particularly notable relative to the Rules of Court of the LA Superior Court regarding the Entry of Judgment. There was no way to know if and when judgments were entered in Sturgeon v LA County, if any.
Requests for investigations were filed with the U.S. and California Attorneys General - of alleged criminality of the LA Superior Court relative to alleged fraud in entry of judgments as seen in three other cases: First - relative to jailing of Att Richard Fine in Marina v County (BS109420), and second and third relative to the taking of real estate properties in Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737) and Samaan v Zernik (SC087400). Such alleged criminality involved in all three cases Judge David Yaffe, directly , or through the Department of Writs and Receivers, which he managed. The latter two cases directly involved alleged criminality by Judge John Segal and by Att David Pasternak, and the last case also directly involved alleged criminality by Judges Terry Friedman and Jacqueline Connor.
2) Motions were filed for Mistrial/To Vacate Judgments and Orders
Motions for Mistrial, alternatively - to Vacate Judgments and Orders were filed. The basis for Mistrial was Misconduct by the Court, which doubles as Intervenor in the case, and who engaged in - (1) The running of litigation with secret Rules of Court, as detailed above, (2) The denial of access to litigation records, in apparent violation of Nixon v Warner Communication, Inc (1978), (3) The use of apparent fraud to excuse the denial of access to litigation records - claiming that online published records were the Register of Actions of such litigation, and (4) The ambiguation of litigation records to the point of meaninglessness.
Intervenor, the LA Superior Court, generated and kept secret records of the litigation, and in parallel published online false and deliberately misleading records of such litigation. Among numerous discrepancies in such litigation records the following were noted:
1) In Sturgeon v LA County, Justice James A Richman claimed to preside, signing his papers as "Sitting by Assignment as Judge of the LA Superior Court", but Intervenor, the LA Superior Court, routinely referred to him as "Not an Assignment".
2) Intervenor failed to included in purported litigation records that were published online the rulings and opinions of the 4th District court of Appeals, San Diego, and there was no reason to believe that Intervenor deemed such rulings and opinions as effectual litigation records.
3) Intervenor failed to included in purported litigation records that were published online the rulings and judgments of Justice Richard A Richman of the 1st District Court of Appeals, San Francisco, and there was no reason to believe that Intervenor deemed such rulings and judgments as effectual litigation records.
4) Intervenor falsely listed various proceedings and rulings by Justice James A Richman as by another judge altogether.
BACKGROUND
1) LA Superior Court is allegedly controlled by a cult of criminality.
The requests for interventions and investigations claimed that the LA Superior Court was controlled by a cult of criminality, with full knowledge of law enforcement agencies, which were not ready, willing, or able to address the problem. It was claimed that such conditions of the justice system in LA County led to the ongoing false incarceration of the thousands of Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) almost exclusively black and Latinos, a decade after the investigation into the Rampart corruption scandal. The false incarceration of the Rampart-FIPs was claimed to be directly related to criminality by Judge Jacqueline Connor.
Conditions of the justice system in LA County were claimed to be in severe violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - ratified International Law.
2) Demand for corrective actions by the U.S. Government
We who live in LA County expect and demand that the U.S. Government free us from the tyranny by the cult of criminality at the LA Superior court, accord us Equal Protection under the law, and establish Fair Tribunals, all pursuant to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - ratified International Law.
FILING RECEIPT:
PAPERS FILED IN COURT CAN BE VIEWED AT:
http://inproperinla.com/
Under:
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome... especially any tips regarding corruption of the courts in Los Angeles. Anonymous tips are fine. One simple way to do it is from internet cafes, etc.