JOHN SEGAL
Judge, LA Superior Court.
Racketeering under the guise of court litigation was alleged.In Galdjie v Darwish, he ran a purported bench-trial in a real estate matter, on Defendant who was misled to appear in the Culver City Municipal Court for a purported case of the Superior Court of California.He remained anonymous in court records, listed only as -“Muni Judge.” was entered.
---
The week of Oct 15-19.
The week was overshadowed by the service, Monday, Oct 15, 2007, of filings on Judge John Segal.
These were not the typical filing per CCP 170.3, for immediate disqualification, such as served on Sept 10, 2007, on Judge Connor. Reminder: the filing on Judge Connor listed allegations amounting to: Fraud, Deceit, Adulteration of Court Records, Conspiracy, Dishonesty, Obstruction of Justice... etc. Combined, one may deem such as an allegation of Corruption of Office.
The filing on Judge Segal was titled as follows:
Notice to Judge Segal to Cease and Refrain from Acting as Presiding Judge in Samaan v Zernik Absent Due Assignment as Required by Law; Alternatively, If Such Assignment was Provided - Filing for the Purpose of Immediate Disqualification of the Honorable Judge Segal Pursuant to CCP 170.3, and Supplemental Declaration of Joseph Zernik in Support Thereof
The reason for the difference is that after Connor, neither Goodman, nor Biderman, nor Segal were duly assigned as Presiding Judges in Samaan v Zernik, as required by law. In two Ex Parte applications, on Oct 10 and Oct 11, 2007, Judge Segal was asked to correct this situation, which left him with no valid authority in Samaan v Zernik. On Oct 10, 2007, Judge Segal practically consented that he had no due assignment, but argued that it was unreasonable for me, Defendant, to expect him to get into a conflict with his supervisor, Judge Rosenberg, whose duty it was to issue such orders of assignment. On October 11, 2007, Judge Segal was more evasive, but in response to repeated questions if he received a Minute Order of Assignment he never responded with a "yes".
A person reviewing this case as a whole, may reasonably entertain the doubt, or even conclude, that such neglect to issue Assignment Orders, is part of a concerted effort not to allow any records documenting Connor's disqualification.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007, Judge Segal responded with an Order Striking Statement of Disqualification and Verified Answer of Judge John L Segal. This response does not at all address the question of the missing Assignment Order and the foundation for Judge Segal's authority. Neither does it address any of the specific examples of dishonesty and appearance of partiality that were listed in the filing. A person reviewing the case as a whole, is likely to entertain the doubt and also conclude that Judge Segal's response was dishonest.
The week was overshadowed by the service, Monday, Oct 15, 2007, of filings on Judge John Segal.
These were not the typical filing per CCP 170.3, for immediate disqualification, such as served on Sept 10, 2007, on Judge Connor. Reminder: the filing on Judge Connor listed allegations amounting to: Fraud, Deceit, Adulteration of Court Records, Conspiracy, Dishonesty, Obstruction of Justice... etc. Combined, one may deem such as an allegation of Corruption of Office.
The filing on Judge Segal was titled as follows:
Notice to Judge Segal to Cease and Refrain from Acting as Presiding Judge in Samaan v Zernik Absent Due Assignment as Required by Law; Alternatively, If Such Assignment was Provided - Filing for the Purpose of Immediate Disqualification of the Honorable Judge Segal Pursuant to CCP 170.3, and Supplemental Declaration of Joseph Zernik in Support Thereof
The reason for the difference is that after Connor, neither Goodman, nor Biderman, nor Segal were duly assigned as Presiding Judges in Samaan v Zernik, as required by law. In two Ex Parte applications, on Oct 10 and Oct 11, 2007, Judge Segal was asked to correct this situation, which left him with no valid authority in Samaan v Zernik. On Oct 10, 2007, Judge Segal practically consented that he had no due assignment, but argued that it was unreasonable for me, Defendant, to expect him to get into a conflict with his supervisor, Judge Rosenberg, whose duty it was to issue such orders of assignment. On October 11, 2007, Judge Segal was more evasive, but in response to repeated questions if he received a Minute Order of Assignment he never responded with a "yes".
A person reviewing this case as a whole, may reasonably entertain the doubt, or even conclude, that such neglect to issue Assignment Orders, is part of a concerted effort not to allow any records documenting Connor's disqualification.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007, Judge Segal responded with an Order Striking Statement of Disqualification and Verified Answer of Judge John L Segal. This response does not at all address the question of the missing Assignment Order and the foundation for Judge Segal's authority. Neither does it address any of the specific examples of dishonesty and appearance of partiality that were listed in the filing. A person reviewing the case as a whole, is likely to entertain the doubt and also conclude that Judge Segal's response was dishonest.
"This case should demonstrate that the 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,"
said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared statement.
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.