10-11-15 Calendars and Clerks of the US Courts – Additional Evidence of Fraud on the Courts in Litigations Involving Bank of America and Government Officers // Fraude por los jueces en litigios participación de Bank of America

 

Brian Moynihan_ _  _ __ _ _ _ _ Ben Bernanke
 
_ Judge Jed Rakoff _ _Judge Virginia Phillips

 

Henry Paulson _ _ _Ken Lewis

Los Angeles, November 15 – Joseph Zernik, PhD, and Human Rights Alert (NGO) submitted a report for international peer-review, providing additional evidence of Fraud on the Courts in litigations at the US courts, involving Bank of America Corporation and/or government officers:
1) SEC v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829) – conducted by Judge JED RAKOFF at the US District Courts, Southern District of New York – complaint under cause of action of Securities Fraud;
2) Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) – conducted by Judge JOHN WALTER and Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE, at the US District Court, Central District of California - Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, and
3) Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) – conducted by Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS and Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE, at the US District Court, Central District of California – Complaint under cause of action of Deprivation of Rights under the Color of Law.
All three cases originated from matters involving alleged criminality by government officers: In the former case – Chair of the Federal Reserve BEN BERNANKE and former Treasury Secretary HENRY PAULSON, and in the latter two cases – alleged racketeering by judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. In addition, the first and third cases involved alleged criminality by the most senior officers of Bank of America Corporation – former President KEN LEWIS and current President BRIAN MOYNIHAN.
The report centered on public access and validity, or lack thereof, of Calendars of the US courts and the critical role of the Clerks of the courts in ensuring the integrity of the Calendars and other court records – to prevent the conduct of pretense proceedings and pretense litigations by judges of the US courts.
The survey encompassed 22 of the 95 US district courts, showing that only 14 of the 22 district court provided any public access to Calendars of the Courts. Some of the district courts, where access to the Calendars was entirely denied were the Central District of California (California Eastern, Northern, and Southern Districts permitted limited access), Delaware, and Georgia Middle and Northern Districts. Even in courts, where access to Calendars was provided, such access was limited, and the Calendars lacked in validity. The US District Court, District of Columbia, was found unique in the extent of access permitted to its Calendars. In none of the three cases, listed above, was any access to Calendars permitted by the courts.
In contrast, Calendars of the Courts are considered part of the fundamental Books of Courts, and public records that are essential for allowing the public to “keep a watchful eye on government” (Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc, 1978). The report concluded that compliance of the US district courts with the First Amendment right of the public to access court records to inspect and to copy was arbitrary and capricious.
The report further reviewed the duties and responsibilities of the Clerks of the US courts, who are bound by Oath of Office, in the safeguard of integrity of the courts, comparing conditions that prevail today to the rampant corruption that prevailed in the US courts a century ago, during the Robber Baron Era. Reform of the US courts in the late 19th and early 20th century spanned decades, and key to it was the Salary Act of 1919 (Statutes at Large 40, 1919: 1182), which placed the Clerks of the US courts under the authority of the US Attorney General. The paper opined that transfer of the authority over the Clerks to the US judiciary in the mid 20th century was a central event in undermining the integrity of the US courts, and that implementation of PACER and CM/ECF by the Administrative Office of the US Courts, completed only in recent years, entirely undermined the autonomy of the Clerks in maintenance of valid and honest court records.
The report noted that in the three cases, which were the focus of the review, there was not a single valid court record, duly attested/authenticated by a Clerk, who was identified by name and authority, and bearing his/her graphic or digital signature.
Accordingly, the report called upon US Congress to initiate reform of the US courts, centering on enactment of federal rules of PACER and CM/ECF, and again placing the Clerks of the US courts under the authority of the US Attorney General. The report also opined that until reform of the US courts was accomplished, it was unlikely that the US would be able to establish effective banking regulation and stabilize its financial markets.
Previous report, published in an international computer science journal with Editorial Board listing scholars from six European nations and Canada, opined large-scale computer fraud in PACER and CM/ECF. [1]
LINKS:
[1] Zernik, J: Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, International Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining 1:69-83 (2010)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38328585/

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.

http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert http://inproperinla.com/ http://pressroom.prlog.org/Human_Rights_Alert/ 
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ 
http://josephzernik.blog.co.uk/ 
http://menchenrechte-los-angeles.blogspot.com/
http://droitsdelhommealertelosangele.blogspot.com/ 
http://ireport.cnn.com/people/HumanRightsA?numResults=10&view=documents