10-09-19 Correcting False Reporting by the Los Angeles Times re: Release of Richard Fine

From: jz
Sent: Sep 19, 2010 5:17 PM
To: newstips@latimes.com, lawsters@googlegroups.com
Cc: DARCY SMITH , Laurence Tribe , larry@tribelaw.com, lguinier@law.harvard.edu, rkennedy@law.harvard.edu, minow@law.harvard.edu, d.ramirez@neu.edu
Subject: Correcting misleading reporting by the Los Angeles Times in re: Release of Richard Fine

To the Editor:

Please accept the correction, below, to your misleading September 18, 2010 report "Attorney Richard Fine spent a year and a half behind bars on contempt-of-court charges. Is that justice?" [1] 

The report provided the readers false information, starting with its first sentence: "Richard Fine -- was released Friday from Los Angeles County Jail after spending a year and a half behind bars on contempt-of-court charges."

The true facts in the matter are that Richard Fine was both taken into custody and released from custody with no due process of law and with no valid and effectual court records to provide the legal foundation for the conduct of Sheriff Leroy Baca in this matter.

Isn't time that the Los Angeles Time start responsibly reporting regarding the conduct of the justice system in this county?
Truly,
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)

[1] Attorney Richard Fine spent a year and a half behind bars on contempt-of-court charges. Is that justice?
__________________________
Former US Prosecutor Richard Fine released last night - with no due process of law - additional evidence of false imprisonment

Los Angeles, September 18 - 70 year old, former US prosecutor Richard Fine was released last night from a year and a half of solitary confinement with no evidence that his release was the outcome of due process of law. California law is explicit in stating that the Sheriff must not take any person into custody, or release any person from custody, without valid court orders to such effect. The release of Richard Fine with no evidence of court order to that effect, however, matches his taking into custody with no warrant and with no judgment/conviction or sentencing ever entered in his case.
Combined, Richard Fine's taking into custody and his release with no due process of law provide evidence of false imprisonment through collusion of Judge David Yaffe, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and Los Angeles County Sheriff Leroy Baca.
As documented in court actions filed by Richard Fine over the past year and a half, such conduct was fully patronized by the United States courts - national tribunals for protection of rights - from the US District Court, Central District of California, through the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Richard Fine had shown that judges in Los Angeles County had taken "not permitted" payments (called by media "bribes"). On February 20, 2009, the Governor of California signed "retroactive immunities" (pardons) for all judges in Los Angeles. Less than two weeks later, on March 4, 2009 Richard Fine was arrested in open court, with no warrant. He is held ever since in solitary confinement in Los Angeles, California. No judgment, conviction, or sentencing was ever entered in his case.
Richard Fine attempted to have his habeas corpus reviewed by the United States courts, from the US District Court, through the US Court of Appeals, to the Supreme Court of the United States; however, all United States courts involved in the matter denied Richard Fine access to valid judicial review; instead, Richard Fine was subjected only to pretense judicial review, while false and deliberately misleading dockets were published online, affecting the pretense that Richard Fine’s case was indeed accorded valid and effectual judicial review and was duly denied.
Human Rights Alert (NGO) 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, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems and online public access systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system.