California Judge Jacqueline Connor
Central figure in alleged racketeering at the Los Angeles Courts
Complaint for Public Corruption and Racketeering against Jacqueline Connor - Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court
Executive Summary [1]
Los Angles, August 9 - complaint was filed with US Attorney Office, Central District of California, by Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, against Judge Jacqueline Connor of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, for Public Corruption and Deprivation of Rights at both the Civil and Criminal Divisions of the Court. The complaint alleged that Judge Jacqueline Connor was a leader of racketeering at the Court. Moreover, the complaint claimed unique public policy significance, since Judge Connor was a key figure in the Rampart scandal (1998-2000) - the largest corruption scandal of the justice system in the history of the United States and a key event in history of the Los Angeles justice system. Furthermore, such judge, alleged as key figure in racketeering, imposed, according to media reports, capital punishments on criminal Defendants at the Court.
At the Civil Division - the complaint detailed the leading role of Judge Jacqueline Connor in conduct of pretense litigation in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), opined as real estate fraud by the Court, and alleged as perversion of justice and racketeering from the bench.
Others named as perpetrators in the case included, but were not limited to:
Judge Allan Goodman, Judge John Segal, Judge Linda Hart-Cole, Judge Terry Friedman, Supervising Judge Gerald Rosenberg, and Presiding Charles McCoy, Judge (ret) Gregory O'Brien Judge (ret) Patricia Collins, and Clerk John Clarke - all of the Los Angeles Superior Court, and Attorney David Pasternak � former President of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and also former President of Bet Tzedek ("The House of Justice") - a prominent Los Angeles Jewish charity.
Multiple judges of the Court colluded in the presiding in the case with no Assignment Orders, and the Clerk of the Court, John A Clarke, refused to certify the case as litigation of the Superior Court of California.
Plaintiff never paid her filing fee in the case, but the Clerk refused to dismiss the complaint. All consequent fees collected by the Clerk were designated in the Register of Actions (California civil docket) as "Journal Entry", whereas in other cases of the Court such fees were designated as "Filing Fees", "Motion Fees", "Stipulation Fees", etc. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke refused to disclose the ultimate designation of the funds. Accountancy texts consider misuse of "Journal Entry" as a cardinal sign of high-level financial management fraud.
No minutes, orders, or judgment were ever authenticated in the case. No judgment was ever entered in the case and no writ of execution was ever issued. Regardless, Attorney David Pasternak forcibly took possession of real property on behalf of the Superior Court. He then proceeded to issue on behalf of the Court Grant deeds, which were opined by Fraud Expert as "fraud being committed".
The complaint provided evidence of void, false on their faces, and deliberately misleading court minutes, orders, and judgment, which were routinely issued by Judge Jacqueline Connor in the case, but which were nevertheless inserted in the court file and acted upon by Judge Connor, as if they were valid court records.
Two events were listed as notable evidence of the alleged fraud and perversion of justice by Judge Jacqueline Connor in the case:
a) On June 6, 2007, Judge Connor conducted an ex parte proceeding in a dark courtroom, where Countrywide Financial Corporation was permitted to appear under false party designation of "Non Party" with a fraudulent request for a gag/protective order. In such off the record, off the calendar proceeding Judge Jacqueline Connor issued a ruling, which was represented in court as a valid court ruling, and was later acted upon by Judge Connor as such. However, in the Register of Actions (California civil docket) Judge Connor recorded the proceeding as "Proceeding not recorded", Countrywide's paper, which was filed on that date was eliminated from the paper court file, and no minutes were ever entered in the paper court file either.
b) On September 10, 2007, Judge Connor recorded in the Register of Actions a hearing that was never heard, and a ruling that was never ruled - after she consented to be removed from the case following Disqualification for a Cause. In such alleged fraud, Judge Connor recorded a fictitious hearing and fictitious ruling pertaining to fraud in Countrywide's banking records, which she had previously falsely admitted as evidence in the case.
The complaint alleged that Judge Jacqueline Connor's routine fraud technique in Samaan v Zernik involved issuing void, not voidable records, which could appear to a naive reviewer as merely inadvertent errors. Judge Connor, nevertheless, treated such void, false on their faces records, as honest, valid, and effectual court records.
At the Criminal Division - the complaint alleged that Judge Jacqueline Connor engaged in fraud and perversion of justice, while presiding with no authority at all in the First Rampart Trial (2000) - the People v People v Edward Ortiz, Brian Liddy, Michael Buchanan, et al. The litigation originated from Rampart scandal investigation (1998-2000) - the largest corruption scandal of the justice system in the history of United States. Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, founding Dean of the University of California, Irvine Law School, opined in 2001: "This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted."
As noted by media already in 2000, Judge Connor had been directly involved in conduct of LAPD officers and district prosecutors - the subject matter, which was purportedly reviewed in the prosecution. She was also reported to have been unusually close to the Defendants and a key witness - Rafael Perez, prior to eruption of the scandal. Furthermore, she had also made discriminatory public comments pertaining to the subject matter prior to the onset of the prosecution. Nevertheless, Judge Jacqueline Connor failed to recuse from the case.
Judge Connor consequently ruled to exclude much of the prosecution's evidence in the case. After jury nevertheless convicted three of the Defendants, she issued from home a ruling, claiming that her inadvertent errors in the case "fatally biased" the jury. Therefore, she reversed jury convictions. Her conduct in the case was described by media as "unprecedented".
Through such conduct in the First Rampart Trial it was alleged that Judge Jacqueline Connor undermined judicial review of criminalities that were part of the Rampart corruption scandal, and that she was central to the ongoing false imprisonment of thousands of Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) - victims of the Rampart scandal, who have never been released to this date. The official Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006) documented judges of the Court as central to the continued false imprisonment of the Rampart-FIPs, and called for "external investigation" of the Court, which has never been instituted to this date.
The complaint also alleged, based on anonymous accounts by criminal defense attorneys, pertaining to other criminal prosecutions, that competent investigation would discover plenty of additional evidence of Judge Jacqueline Connor's alleged corruption in other prosecutions at the Criminal Division of the Court.
Overall, the complaint alleged that only through combined review of Judge Connor's conduct at both the Civil and the Criminal Divisions, the full scope of her alleged corruption and her leading role in racketeering at the Court would be discovered.
Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States.
LINKS:
[1] For ease of access to the hyperlinks provided in instant complaint, an online copy was also posted online at:
10-08-09-Complaint-Filed-with-US-Attorney-Office-against-California-Judge-Jacqueline-Connor-for-Public-Corruption-and-Racketeering-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35592511/
CC:
1) Prof David Burcham - former Dean, Loyola Law School
2) Prof Erwin Chemerinsky - Dean, Irvine Law School
3) Attorney Connie Rice - Los Angeles Advancement Project
4) UPR Office of the United Nations
5) UPR Office of the US State Department:
6) The Honorable Dianne Feinstein - Senator from California
7) US Senate and House of Representatives - Judiciary Committees
No comments:
Post a Comment