10-01-15 Notice to members of the Basel Accords Committee, copied to Brian Moynihan, President of Bank of America Corporation

 

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 01:24:05 -0800
To: "Members of the Basel Accords Committe, including Kevin Bailey"
From: joseph zernik

Subject: SEC v Bank of America Corporation (1-09-cv-06829), and US v UBS-AG (09-CR-60033)Concerns regarding integrity of US Courts and US banking regulation
Cc: "Moynihan, Brian T" 

To members of the Basel Accords Committee, including Kevin Bailey - Deputy Comptroller of the Currency, and US representative to the Committee.

RE: SEC v Bank of America Corporation (1-09-cv-06829), and US v UBS-AG (09-CR-60033) - integrity of US Courts and US banking regulation, or lack thereof.

Dear members of the Basel Accords Committee:

Please take notice of the motion copied below, filed by mail on January 14, 2010 with the US District Court, Vermont. The motion may initially appear as unrelated to banking regulation. The two cases the were discussed in it pertained to deprivation of Liberty and deprivation of First Amendment Right of Free Speech.  However, the thrust of the motion was in claims of very large scale shell-game fraud (Flimflam) in the dual docketing systems of the US Courts - PACER & CM/ECF. Installation of such systems was recently concluded following a decade-long project.  However, the systems were materially deficient in  lacking publicly-accountable validation (certified, functional logic verification).  Moreover, the data presented in the motion demonstrated incontrovertibly that such systems, combined with denial of the common law right to access court records, were routinely used to pervert justice.  The core of the fraud and deceit in the system was opined to be in the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings) and their RSA-encrypted digital signatures.

Not mentioned in the motions were the following cases related to banking regulation:

a) SEC v Bank of America Corporation (1-09-cv-06829): My requests for the NEFs in this case in the past half year were repeatedly denied. Therefore, such litigation, which was routinely reported by US media as the hallmark of US banking regulation in the past year, is at least of unknown validity.  However, additional circumstantial evidence, e.g. - failure to docket summons in this case, in contradiction with the law, and refusal to provide copies of the summons in this case upon requests, indicated that the case most likely was an invalid litigation - a show trial with no consequences at all, conducted through collusion of attorneys for Bank of America Corporation, SEC, and the court.

b) US v UBS-AG (09-CR-60033): Similar concerns were raised regarding this high visibility case, and request for the NEFs in that case is underway.

It is inconceivable that a banking regulation of any integrity could be instituted in the US on the foundation of national justice system that was thoroughly lacking in integrity.  The fundamental deficiency is seen in failure to institute by law mechanisms for publicly-accountable validation (certified, functional logic verification) of case management systems, in the courts, in prisons, in financial institutions, and at regulatory agencies.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs
Patriotic pics of Sharon Stone, Beyonce' Knowles, and Charlize Theron,
Coming soon- deep house music!

CC: Brian T Moynihan, President, Bank of America Corporation.