10-05-29 OCC Case #01070442: Further details regarding racketeering schemes by Bank of America, and Countrywide before it, in courts across the US // Caso # 01070442 OCC: otros detalles relativos a los regímenes de chantaje por parte de Bank of America, y antes de Countrywide que, en los tribunales en los EE.UU. // OCC Case # 01070442: Weitere Details zur Erpressung Systeme durch Bank of America und Countrywide, bevor es, in den Gerichten in den USA

John Dugan
US Comptroller of the Currency








John Dugan,
US Comptroller of the Currency
Kevin Bailey
Deputy Comptroller of the Currency
By email

RE: OCC Case #01070442: Further details regarding racketeering schemes by Bank of America, and Countrywide before it, in courts across the US.

Dear Comptroller Dugan and Deputy Comptroller Bailey:

Please notice clarifications to press release posted online, copied below. 

Ongoing refusal of Office of the US Comptroller of the Currency to enforce the law on Bank of America and Brian Moynihan places US and world markets at risks that are difficult or impossible to assess.  Needless to say - such conduct by the Comptroller of the Currency defies any notion of risk reduction.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik, PhD
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345
http://www.examiner.com/x-38742-LA-Business-Headlines-Examiner
Please sign our petition - Free Richard Fine: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine
Patriotic pics of Beyonce' Knowles, Sharon Stone, and Charlize Theron,
Coming soon- deep house music!

CC:
1) US Congress, and  Congress Banking Committees
2) Mary L Schapiro - SEC Chair
3) Basel Accord Committee on International Banking
4) National banks, research departments
5) Law school faculty
_________________________

Complaint Alleging Racketeering by Bank of America and Brian Moynihan Pending Before Comptroller of the Currency  

In response to press release, comments were left which made it clear that the nature of alleged court racketeering schemes was not clear enough, so here are some clarifications:

"through appearances of false counsel under the false party designation of 'NON PARTY' under caption of Samaan v Zernik"

What? I can't make sense of this article. But, as a Bank of America customer, I have no doubt this guy's a crook.

Posted 3 hours ago by "mikecurse" (R)

Dear "mikecurse":

Realizing that most honest persons would have difficulty in understanding the range of routine convoluted criminal schemes employed by large US banking institutions in courts across the United States, here are some additional details, which did not fit into the press release format:

1) PARTY DESIGNATIONS SCHEME - In civil litigations of the Superior Court you have Plaintiff, Defendant, Cross-Defendant, Intervenor,etc. However, there is NO such party designation as "NON PARTY". Countrywide and Bank of America have been filing papers alleged as obstruction and extortion in the courtroom for 2.5 years under party designation "NON PARTY". Think about it as if in a football game, a third team appeared on the field, assisting one of the two legit teams, listed on the score board as "NON TEAM".
Sandor Samuels, Associate General Counsel of Bank of America appeared in the same case under the false party designation of "INTERESTED PERSON".

2) FALSE COUNSEL SCHEME - The idea is that counsel appears without being authorized to appear by his client - in this case - Bank of America. That way, Bank of America purports to have no liability for conduct of such counsel, retained by Bank of America, but not as counsel of record in the given caption. The scheme is made even more fraudulent when Bank of America or Countrywide (and others - it is a common scheme) retain such counsel with "no communications with client clause" - to ensure deniability. Think about it as if you hired a hit man to kill somebody, with "no communications with client" clause in the contract, hoping to maintain deniability for the conduct of the hit man.
A reference was provided to a 72 page memorandum opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm, Judge, Houston Texas, who described the schemes in great detail in the unrelated case of Borrower Parsley in that court.[1] In March 2008, in the Houston Court Countrywide made promises to Judge Bohm to cease such fraudulent practices in courtrooms across the US (the Court of Judge Bohm engaged in a full year study of Countrywide's fraudulent practices in courts across the US. However, Countrywide, and Bank of America after it, continue such practices to this date in Los Angeles, California.

3)FILING OF FABRICATED BANKING RECORDS - For those of short memory, one should recall that the collapse of Countrywide in January 2008 was unrelated to the performance of its loan portfolios. Instead - it was the market's reaction to the publication by the New York Times, that Countrywide was caught in the Pittsburgh Court of Hon Thomas Agressio, Case of Borrower Hill, filing as evidence "RECREATED LETTERS". [2] Countrywide and Bank of America after it, continue the practice to this date in the Los Angeles Courts.

Mind you, all of this is taking place after Kenneth Lewis III  had to step down as President of BofA January 1, 2010, as concerns were mounting that he would be prosecuted for securities fraud.  Brian Moynihan was appointed to replace him as President of BofA - to ensure investors and others of integrity of Bank of America senior management.  However, Brian Moynihan rise to the top was marked by his appointment on December 10, 2008 to replace Timothy Mayopoulos as Bank of America General Counsel. The evidence produced in the case at hand documented that Mayopoulos halted racketeering conduct at the courts, Moynihan permitted it to be resumed full speed.

Please also keep in mind that all of this is taking place after SEC and US banking regulators repeatedly promised US Congress and the international community to "shore up" US banking regulation.

LINKS:
[1] Case of Borrower Parsley - Houston, TX, Judge Bohm Memorandum Opinion
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25001966/
[2] Case of Borrower Hill - Pittsburgh, PA
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25003494/

Posted very recently by "jz12345" (R)

The original press release and comments:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ef3_1275085991&c=1#comments 

10-05-28 Honest, Valid Response Requested by Office of Comptroller of the Currency on Complaint Alleging Racketeering by Bank of America and Brian Moynihan // Honestidad, respuesta válida requerido por la Oficina del Contralor de la Moneda en la imputación relativa a la extorsión por parte de Bank of America y Brian Moynihan // Ehrlich, gültige Antwort vom Amt des Comptroller of the Currency auf Rüge Schutzgelderpressung durch die Bank of America und Brian Moynihan Requested

Honest, Valid Response Requested by Office of Comptroller of the Currency on Complaint Alleging Racketeering by Bank of America and Brian Moynihan

Washington DC, May 28 – in letter to Comptroller of the Currency – John Dugan and to Deputy Comptroller – Kevin Bailey, their personal attention was requested in effort to obtain an honest, valid response from the Office of Comptroller of the Currency on complaint against Bank of America and its President - Brian Moynihan, where conduct was alleged, which amounted to racketeering.  For over two and a half years Bank of America and Countrywide before it employed illicit court appearances by false counsel, who was not counsel of records.  It was a repeat of a routine which was rebuked by the Hon Jeff Bohm, US Bankruptcy Judge in Houston Texas, in his March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion. [1] Countrywide made promises to Judge Bohm not engage in such fraud in the courtrooms any longer. Regardless, the letter claimed that Bank of America continued the practice to this date at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, through appearances of false counsel under the false party designation of "NON PARTY" under caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400).  Such appearances in the past two and a half years were alleged as part of obstruction and extortion. [2] Such conduct was also incompatible with the stated Outside Counsel Procedures of Bank of America. [3] Of particular concern was the fact that whereas such practices were halted under the tenure of Timothy Mayopoulos as General Counsel of Bank of America, they were resumed within 24 hours after the December 10, 2008 ouster of Mr Mayopoulos and the appointment of Brian Moynihan to replace him as General Counsel. 

Following long delays in response by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency on Case #01070442, assistance was requested by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California. Through the good offices of the Senator, a May 10, 2010 letter was finally obtained from the Comptroller of the Currency, which was purported to be a response on Case #01070442. [4]  However, upon review, such response appeared invalid and false on its face, as detailed in the May 28, 2010 letter to the office of the Senator. [5]
Therefore, the help of the good offices of Senator Feinstein was again sought in obtaining a valid, verified response from the Comptroller of the Currency on the complaint against Bank of America and Brian Moynihan, Case #01070442. [5]
The letter to Comptroller Dugan and Deputy Comptroller Bailey was copied to House and Senate Banking Committees.  John Dugan and other banking regulators repeatedly promised the US Congress to “shore up” US banking regulation.  The letter was also copied to the Basel Accords Committee on international banking. Conduct of the US is claimed to stand contrary to its duties and obligation in international law and accords.
###

LINKS:
[1]  March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion by Judge Jeff Bohm - rebuking litigation practices of Countrywide.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25001966/
[2] May 5, 2010 Countrywide, Bank of America and its President Brian Moynihan - Compilation of Records - Evidence of Racketeering
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30975368/
[3] December 11, 2008 Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27932516/
[4]  May 10, 2010 letter by Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, purported as response on Case #01070442
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32133208/
[5] May 28, 2010 Request filed with Senator Feinstein for help in obtaining a valid, verified response from Comptroller of the Currency on Case  #01070442 against Bank of America.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32135449/

10-05-28 With a little bit of help... // Con un poco de ayuda... // With a little bit of help...

Competing with star gazing and sports stories in Los Angeles is tough, but with a little bit of help from Bank of America and Superior Court judges, we can make it...

Page Views

Select a date range

                                                 Yesterday                         Current Week                         Last Week Sunday to Saturday                         Current Month                         Last Month                         Current Year                         Last Year 

Your Page Views

1,606

Los Angeles Average 

1,137

Business & Finance Average 

285

10-05-28 Fraud on Congress, Racketeering by Judges in Los Angeles County, California, Alleged in Complaint // Fraude en el Congreso, el chantaje por los jueces en el Condado de Los Ángeles, California, alegados en el Queja //Betrug auf Congress, Erpressung durch Richter in Los Angeles County, Kalifornien, im Beschwerde gerügte

This article is part of Los Angeles' City Secrets

Fraud on Congress, Racketeering by Judges in Los Angeles County, California, Alleged in Complaint

May 28, 12:30 PMLA Business Headlines ExaminerJoseph Zernik

Previous

CommentSubscribe

ShareThis

Human Rights Alert (NGO)

(Photo: Human Rights Alert)

Washington DC, May 28 – complaint filed by Joseph Zernik, PhD, and Human Rights Alert (NGO) with Glenn Fine, Office of Inspector General, US Department of Justice, alleges fraud on US Congress and denial of equal protection in Los Angeles County, California, by Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI, and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US Attorneys Office. [1] Office of the Inspector General is charged with conducting “independent investigations… of United States Department of Justice personnel… to detect and deter … fraud, abuse, and misconduct, and to promote integrity… and effectiveness in Department of Justice operations”. The complaint alleged that in August-September 2008, Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI, and Kenneth Melson – then Director of US Department of Justice Office of US Attorneys, provided responses to US Congress, which constituted the fraud on US Congress and also denial of equal protection to the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California. The responses by the two US officers came in response to inquiries filed on the Department of Justice by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California, and the Hon Diane Watson, Congresswoman from Los Angeles. The 2008 congressional inquiries sought response by the Department of Justice on complaints filed by Dr Zernik in early 2008, which claimed racketeering by the judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court, the hallmarks of which were large scale false imprisonments, including the ongoing false imprisonment of the thousands of Rampart FIPs – victims of the Rampart corruption scandal (1998-2000) and real estate fraud by judges under the guise of litigations, in a county, which had been distinguished by FBI already in the early 2000s as the “epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud”.
Today’s complaint by Dr Zernik and Human Rights Alert also provided additional new evidence of the racketeering by judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. It was claimed that the hallmark of such conduct today was in the ongoing alleged false imprisonment of Richard Fine, 70 year old, former US prosecutor, with no warrant ever issued, and no judgment/conviction ever entered in his case. Also noted in the complaint were the pardons signed by the Governor of California on February 20, 2009, for all judges who were and are taking “not permitted” payments. The complaint filed today by Dr Zernik and Human Rights Alert again emphasized that investigation of such complaints was the primary authority of the Office of Inspector General, and also part of its stated mission.
Copies of the complaint were filed with US Congress – Committees on the Judiciary, and also with US State Department and United Nations Office of High Commissioner of Human Rights – as part of the pending 2010 review by the United Nations of Human Rights in the United States.
###
LINKS:
[1] May 28, 2010 Complaint filed with DOJ-IG - fraud on US Congress, denial of equal protection in Los Angeles County, California.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32125872/

More About: Corruption of the justice system in Los Angeles · Judicial Corruption in the United States

ShareThis

10-005-25 Richard Fine on CNN –Correction of Errors in CNN Reporting // Richard Fine en la CNN-Corrección de errores en la presentación de informes de CNN // Richard Fine auf CNN-Korrektur von Fehlern bei CNN Reporting

Washington DC, May 24 - the CNN report provide erroneous information regarding the core facts in the case of Richard Fine: "Superior Court Judge David Yaffe found Fine in contempt after he refused to turn over financial documents and answer questions when ordered to pay an opposing party's attorney's fees, according to court documents."

There are no honest, valid, and effectual court documents in the case of Richard Fine.  That is the hallmark of the corruption in his case and in the cases of thousands of others who are falsely held in Los Angeles County, California.

As documented in a UTube clip, Motion to Intervene was filed in the case of Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court, Washington DC. [1]  The Motion to Intervene did not address the various arguments brought up by Richard Fine himself in the application to US Associate Justice Ruth Ginsburg.  Instead, it argued that Richard Fine must be immediately released for the simple reason that there were no records, conforming with the fundamentals of the law, to provide the legal basis for his confinement. 

Therefore, the filing provided detailed evidence of the alleged fraud in respective records of the various agencies of the justice system:

(a) The Los Angeles Superior Court -  refuses to this date to allow access to the Register of Actions (California civil docket) in the case, in disregard of First Amendment rights;

(b) The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department - insists to this date on fraudulently claiming that Richard Fine was arrested and booked at an by the authority of the non-existent "Municipal Court of San Pedro";

(c) The US District Court, Los Angeles - purported to conduct a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, but served minutes, orders, judgment, and mandate with no valid authentication at all;

(d) The US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - likewise served orders,  judgments, and a mandate unsigned, and with no authentication at all.

The US Supreme Court handled such filing the same way the other courts did - the papers simply vanished.  A declaration [2] posted at Scribd detailed what took place:  The exhibits to the declaration provided the conformed copies that were received from the US Supreme Court as evidence of the filing.  It also recorded the phone call with the US Supreme Court  the next day: Supreme Court Counsel Danny Bickell initially tried to deny that the papers were filed and were held in his possession.  Later he stated that he had not yet made the decision whether the papers would or would not appear in the Supreme Court docket of Fine v Sheriff (09-A827). When asked whether he was the Clerk of the Court or whether he was authorized as Deputy Clerk, he admitted he was neither. 

Regardless, Mr Bickell stated that he would made the decision... And indeed he apparently did - the papers simply vanished with no Due Process at all...

No discrepancy notice or any other notation ever appeared in the docket to document the filing...  Forget about the First Amendment right to to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances..." The US Supreme Court disregarded it, just like the lower courts...

The reason that the US Supreme Court refused to hear the case as presented by Fine is likely to be of the same nature - there was no judgment or mandate in the case to take the application of Richard Fine from, and therefore, the US Supreme Court had no jurisdiction in the matters that Richard Fine brought before that court.

For such reasons, the case and the filings of Richard Fine, futile as they may be, are of historic significance.  Richard Fine, in his filings, documented in great detail the alleged fraud in the US justice system from top to bottom. [3] 

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION -  FREE RICHARD FINE

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine

LINKS:

[1] UTube clip - filing at the US Supreme Court in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRKUbhmoCpU

[2] 10-04-22 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court Dr Zernik’s Declaration RE Court Counsel Danny Bickell and Filing at US Supreme Court

http://www.scribd.com/doc/31430464/

[3]  Human Rights Alert submission to the United Nations:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/31632549/

10-05-19 Human Rights Alert: PowerPoint presentation, as forwarded to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder, as part of the 2010 UPR

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/

10-04-19 Press Release: Human Rights Alert (NGO) Filed UPR Report with the United Nations

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/

10-04-18 Human Rights Alert: Final submission to the United Nations for the 2010 Universal Periodic Review of the US 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/

10-04-19 Human Rights Alert: Final Appendix for Submission to the United Nations for the 2010 UPR of the United States

http://www.scribd.com/doc/31136665/

10-05-10 Human Rights Alert: Human Rights in the Digital Era – A Call for Publicly Accountable Validation of the justice system case management and online public access systems

Comments - sort by newest to oldest

• 
  This article smells of the conspiratorial ravings of the same sort that got this guy in the pickle he's in. He's in willful defiance of the court and continues to be. These claims about missing documents or issues related to whether they're conformed or not is scarcely credible and there is no contention at all that the guy is NOT in continuing defiance of the court.
  
  Hand over the financial documents, stop defying the court.

  Posted 2 hours ago by "dorbie" (R)

  Quote | 

  Flag Comment

     (0)

  Delete Comment?                      No                     Yes

• 
  Quoted comment by dorbie: This article smells of the conspiratorial ravings of the same sort that got this guy in the pickle he's in. He's in willful defiance of the court and continues to be. These claims about missing documents or issues related to whether they're conformed or not is scarcely credible and there is no contention at all that the guy is NOT in continuing defiance of the court.
  
  Hand over the financial documents, stop defying the court.

  
  And your response smells of the arrogant condescension of the same sort that armchair legal scholars use to justify their apathy toward the oppression of fellow human beings.
  
  Gosh, it's fun being a know-it-all, ain't it?

  Posted 1 hour ago by "CaptainAntarctica" (R) 

  Quote | 

  Flag Comment

     (0)

  Delete Comment?                      No                     Yes

• 
  Quoted comment by dorbie: This article smells of the conspiratorial ravings of the same sort that got this guy in the pickle he's in. He's in willful defiance of the court and continues to be. These claims about missing documents or issues related to whether they're conformed or not is scarcely credible and there is no contention at all that the guy is NOT in continuing defiance of the court.
  
  Hand over the financial documents, stop defying the court.

  
  "dorbie" failes to explain why the Sheriff of Los Angeles, even in response to Supervisor of Los Angeles County, Michael Antonovich, refused to provide copy of the warrant and booking records of Richard Fine - public records by California Public Records Act, and insisted on fraudulently claiming that Richard Fine was arrested at and by the authority of the non existent "Municipal Court of San Pedro".
  LINKS:
  [1] 10-01-08 Supervisor Antonovich, Los Angeles County, repeat mailing of January 8, 2010, response from Sheriff Lee Baca in re: Richard Fine papers including the fraudulent attachments:
  http://www.scribd.com/doc/25555341/ 
  

  Posted 24 mins ago by "jz12345" (R) 

  Quote | 

  Flag Comment

     (0)

  Delete Comment?                      No                     Yes

• 
  PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION: FREE RICHARD FINE
  http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine  

  Posted 22 mins ago by "jz12345" (R) 

10-05-24 Richard Fine on CNN - report and a comment // Richard Fine en la CNN - Informar y Comentar // Richard Fine auf CNN - Bericht und Kommentar

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/24/jailed.lawyer.richard.fine/index.html?hpt=C1


COMMENT LEFT BY JOSEPH ZERNIK

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION -  FREE RICHARD FINE

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine

Please notice on UTBUE clip documenting the filing of Motion to Intervene in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court, Washington DC. [1]

The Motion to Intervene did not address the various arguments brought up by Richard Fine himself in the application to US Associate Justice Ruth Ginsburg.  Instead, it argued that Richard Fine must be immediately released for the simple reason that there were no records, conforming with the fundamentals of the law, to provide the legal basis for his confinement.   Therefore, the filing provided detailed evidence of the alleged fraud in respective records of the various agencies of the justice system:

(a) The Los Angeles Superior Court - which refuses to this date to allow access to the Register of Actions (California civil docket) in the case;

(b) The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department - which insists to this date on fraudulently claiming that Richard Fine was arrested and booked at an by the authority of the non-existent "Municipal Court of San Pedro";

(c) The US District Court, Los Angeles - which purported to conduct a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, but served minutes, orders, judgment, and mandate with no valid authentication at all;

(d) The US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - which likewise served orders,  judgments, and a mandate unsigned, and with no authentication at all.

The US Supreme Court handled such filing the same way the other courts did - the papers simply vanished.

A declaration posted at SCRIBD detailed what took place:  The exhibits to the declaration provided the conformed copies that were received from the US Supreme Court as evidence of the filing.  It also recorded the phone call with the US Supreme Court  the next day: Supreme Court Counsel Danny Bickell initially tried to deny that the papers were filed and were held in his possession.  Later he stated that he had not yet made the decision whether the papers would or would not appear in the Supreme Court docket of Fine v Sheriff (09-A827). When asked whether he was the Clerk of the Court or whether he was authorized as Deputy Clerk, he admitted he was neither.  Regardless, he stated he would made the decision... And indeed apparently he did - the papers simply vanished with no Due Process at all...

No discrepancy notice or any other notation ever appeared in the docket to document the filing...

Forget about the First Amendment right to to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances..." The US Supreme Court disregarded it, just like the lower courts...

The reason that the US Supreme Court refused to hear the case as presented by Fine is likely to be of the same nature - there was no judgment or mandate in the case to take the application of Richard Fine from, and therefore, the US Supreme Court had no jurisdiction in the matters that Richard Fine brought before that court.

For such reasons, the case and the filings of Richard Fine, futile as they may be, are of historic significance.  Richard Fine, in his filings, documented in great detail the alleged fraud in the US justice system from top to bottom. [2]

LINKS:

[1] UTube clip - filing at the US Supreme Court in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRKUbhmoCpU

[2]  Human Rights Alert submission to the United Nations:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/31632549/

10-05-19 Human Rights Alert: PowerPoint presentation, as forwarded to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder, as part of the 2010 UPR

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/

10-04-19 Press Release: Human Rights Alert (NGO) Filed UPR Report with the United Nations

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/

10-04-18 Human Rights Alert: Final submission to the United Nations for the 2010 Universal Periodic Review of the US  

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/

10-04-19 Human Rights Alert: Final Appendix for Submission to the United Nations for the 2010 UPR of the United States

http://www.scribd.com/doc/31136665/

10-05-10 Human Rights Alert: Human Rights in the Digital Era – A Call for Publicly Accountable Validation of the justice system case management and online public access systems

CNN REPORT

Ex-lawyer jailed 14 months, but not charged with a crime

By Abbie Boudreau, Emily Probst and Dana Rosenblatt, CNN Special Investigations Unit

May 24, 2010 -- Updated 1417 GMT (2217 HKT)

Former Beverly Hills lawyer Richard Fine is led back to his cell at L.A.'s Men's Central Jail.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Former Beverly Hills lawyer has been in solitary confinement for 14 months
• Richard Fine, 70, is not charged with a crime; he's being held in contempt
• Supreme Court decides Monday it won't hear the case

Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- Once a dapper Beverly Hills attorney known for his bow tie, Richard Fine has been held in solitary confinement at Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail for 14 months, even though he's never been charged with a crime.

Fine, a 70-year- old taxpayer's advocate who once worked for the Department of Justice, is being held for contempt of court.

Superior Court Judge David Yaffe found Fine in contempt after he refused to turn over financial documents and answer questions when ordered to pay an opposing party's attorney's fees, according to court documents.

Fine says his contempt order masks the real reason why he's in jail. He claims he's a political prisoner.

"I ended up here because I did the one thing no other lawyer in California is willing to do. I took on the corruption of the courts," Fine said in a jailhouse interview with CNN.

More details on the Special Investigations Unit's blog

For the last decade, Fine has filed appeal after appeal against Los Angeles County's Superior Court judges. He says the judges each accept what he calls yearly "bribes" from the county worth $57,000. That's on top of a $178,789 annual salary, paid by the state. The county calls the extra payments "supplemental benefits" -- a way to attract and retain quality judges in a high-cost city.

While the practice of paying supplemental benefits is common in California, most high-cost cities elsewhere don't hand out these kinds of benefits. Judges in Miami, Chicago and Boston receive no extra county dollars.

Video: In jail but not charged with a crime

Video: L.A. attorney in solitary confinement

Video: Attorney was 'shut up and locked away'

RELATED TOPICS

• Los Angeles County
• Los Angeles County Jail
• Civil Trials

Judges in Los Angeles County not only have the highest state salaries in the nation, they also get tens of thousands of dollars in county benefits. These payments, Fine says, mean judges are unlikely to rule against the county when it is involved in a lawsuit.

In the last two fiscal years, Los Angeles County won all but one of the nine trials that went before a judge, according to Steven Estabrook, the county's litigation cost manager.

"The reason I'm here is the retaliation of the judges," Fine says. "They figured they're going to throw me in jail and that way they feel that they can stop me."

Fine's decade-long crusade against the judges eventually led to his disbarment last year. Joe Carlucci was the lead prosecutor for the California State Bar. Carlucci says whenever Fine lost a case, he would appeal and argue the judges were corrupt.

"What he ultimately did was to delay proceedings, to level false accusations against judges," Carlucci says. "All of those lawsuits were found to have been frivolous and meritless."

Judge Yaffe and county officials refused to comment on Fine's case while it's still pending.

"Fine holds the key to his jail cell," Kevin McCormick, one of the court's attorneys, pointed out in a court filing. In other words, Fine will go free once he hands over the documents the court seeks and answers the judge's questions.

The technical term is "coercive confinement" -- jail-time until a person follows a judge's order.

"He's probably done more time than most burglars, robbers and dope dealers," says Sterling Norris of the public-interest group Judicial Watch.

Norris says Fine's confinement has gone on too long.

Norris won a case in 2008 that found county payments to judges unconstitutional. The California Legislature swiftly passed a bill that enabled counties to continue paying the extra benefits.

"I think it's a lack of judicial integrity to say enough is enough," Norris says. "We've got a man, 70-year-old attorney, in jail for over a year on coercive confinement and that is way beyond the pale. No matter what else he may have done, that is improper."

Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, calls the length of Fine's contempt confinement an "anomaly."

Fine's jail cell could be used for a more violent offender, Whitmore added. In fact, Los Angeles County's jails have in recent months released hundreds of inmates before their terms were up due to budget constraints.

Fine took his pencil-and-paper fight from solitary confinement to the U.S Supreme Court, which ruled Monday it would not hear the case. The court offered no explanation.

Meanwhile, Fine's family stands behind him -- even in the face of home foreclosure.

"My husband has always been the straightest arrow, hardworking, very successful attorney, and for this to happen to him is unbelievable," says Maryellen Fine, his wife of 27 years.

"I'll look back with tears with all the time I might have missed with the family," Fine says tearfully just before he is handcuffed and walked back to his cell.

"We don't know what is going to be next," says Fine's daughter, Victoria. "Every day is just one more day where I think maybe I'm going to get a phone call that says dad's coming home."