NEW & IMPROVED DRAFT REQUEST FOR SPECIAL COUNSEL

ERIC HOLDER

Attorney General of the U.S.A.

_________________________________________________________

Seeking immediate comments and suggestions on the DRAFT below, much of the evidence was posted or linked in blog http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/

– Joseph Zernik

09-10-29 NEW & IMPROVED DRAFT

TO ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

We respectfully request that Attorney General Eric Holder, on behalf of the Government of this Country, perform its duties pursuant to ratified International Law, and also pursuant to international accords, to which this Country and its Government claim to be parties in good faith.

Our Rights are deprived:

1) We allege deprivation of our Human Rights –

For Liberty (Article #3), Security of Person (Article #3), Equal Protection under the Law (Article #7), Effective National Tribunals for Effective Remedy of Acts Violating Human Rights & Rights Granted by the Constitution of this Country and its Amendments (Article #8), Not Be Subjected to Arbitrary Arrest (Article #9), Fair and Public Hearing by an Independent and Impartial Tribunal, in the Determination of our Rights and Obligations and of any Criminal Charge against us (Article #10).

2) We allege deprivation of our Common Law Rights –

To Access Court Records to Inspect and to Copy.

Such deprivation of Rights is affected by those who were charged with the protection of our Rights:

1) We allege racketeering by Judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles -

Which the Government of the State of California is not ready, willing, or able to address.

2) We allege that ample, credible evidence of the conduct of such Judges as an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, was documented, back at least to the Rampart Scandal (1998-2000) and its aftermath -

(a) The Rampart Scandal investigation (1998-2000), which ended with no report, (b) the First Rampart Trial (2000), which was derailed, (c) The ongoing false imprisonment of the many thousands, almost exclusively Black and Latinos, who were falsely convicted and falsely sentenced - through framing of false evidence, through torture to extract of false confessions, and through routine false testimonies by police. (d) Official reports - the latest - Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006) - called for an “External Investigation”, which was never instituted.

3) We allege that credible evidence of the conduct of such Judges was found more recently in secret payments to all Judges by the County, for over a decade, which were ruled “not permitted”, and labeled “Bribes” (1990s – present) - and in their conduct after the matter was exposed -

Derailing of the litigation in Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286), which stemmed from this matter, and hiring of a lobbyist to pass a law, intended to circumvent the ruling of the California Court of Appeals, and passed in violation of the rules of debate of the California Legislature, nevertheless – a law that demonstrated that the Judges and the Judicial Counsel of California were of the opinion that the Judges were all liable for violations of the law.

4) We allege that credible evidence of the of conduct of such Judges was found more recently in a collection of individual cases –

Most of which were real estate-related, and in which corruption and/or criminal conduct is alleged of the legal profession, financial institutions, and law-enforcement, including, but not limited to banking regulators.

5) We allege that credible evidence of the conduct of such Judges was found in the most notorious of these individual cases – the false jailing of Attorney Richard Fine –

With only false and misleading records to form its legal foundation, but no valid, effectual records at all, where the Sheriff refused to allow access to the Arrest and Booking records, which originated from a derailed litigation in Marina v LA County (BS109420), and where corruption and/or criminal conduct of the legal profession and law enforcement is alleged.

We are readily familiar with the causes of such conditions in Los Angeles County, California:

1) We allege that conduct of such Judges was enabled by the Court’s computerized case management systems -

Which the Court falsely established as “Privileged”, through unpublished Rules, and to records of which, the Court falsely denied public access for a quarter-century.

2) We allege that conduct of such Judges was facilitated by elimination of the public records of the Court –

Which were the Book of Judgments, Index of All Cases, Calendar of the Courts, and Registers of Actions (Dockets).

3) We allege that conduct of such Judges was facilitated by inadequate and/or false and/or missing Local Rules of Court –

Including, but not limited to: (a) Unpublished Rules, which established the courts computer records as “Privileged”, (b) The Unpublished Rules pertaining to Entry of Judgment – which the Court refuses to disclose, and (c) The false Rules regarding Referrals, intended to circumvent the Law, which requires Appointment Orders, which led to the false jailing of Attorney Fine, and which led to derailing of Sturgeon v LA County as well.

4) We allege that conduct of such Judges was enabled by the Sheriff Department’s computerized case management system -

Which allowed to arrest, book, and keep people jailed with no legal foundation, while generating the false representation of compliance with the law.

5) We allege that conduct of such Judges was enabled by the Sheriff Department’s denial of access to records that are public records by Law -

Such as the Arrest and Booking records of Inmates held by the Sheriff Department.

Our requests for help, previous to your term in office, were frustrated:

We allege that responses on this matter, provided in August-September 2008 by senior U.S. Department of Justice Officers to U.S. Congress – the Honorable Diane Watson and the Honorable Dianne Feinstein - were false and deliberately misleading.

Therefore, we respectfully request the help of your good offices:

By immediately appointing a Special Counsel pursuant to 28 CFR §600 for a limited time, limited mandate, to guarantee, through investigation, and prosecution - if needed:

1) Public access to public records to inspect and to copy;

2) Integrity in operations of the offices of the Clerk of the Court and the Presiding Judge of the Court, with honest, published Local Rules of Court, and

3) Integrity of the case management systems of the Court and the Sheriff Department.

Conditions in Los Angeles County, California are extreme, but we hear the plight of the People all over these United States. We pray that repair of the Justice System in Los Angeles County, California, will set the course for Justice all over the States.