IN PRO PER IN L.A. // בעצמו, בלתי מיוצג: 2010/01/15

Friday, January 15, 2010

10-01-15 Proposing a simple review standard to US Office of Comptroller of the Currency.

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:05:46 -0800
To: "US Office of Comptroller of Currency"
From: joseph zernik
Subject: RE: Case #00971981 - Complaint against Bank of America Corporation, for conduct that was alleged as amounting to racketeering in the courts in Los Angeles County, California - review procedures.

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

RE: Case #00971981 - complaint against Bank of America Corporation, for conduct that was alleged as amounting to racketeering in the courts in Los Angeles County, California - review procedures.

Dear Office of Comptroller of the Currency:

In a phone call today with Sonya, a phone representative at OCC, I was glad to hear that after two "escalations" Bank of America finally filed two letters with OCC, dated January 8, 2010, as a response to the complaint referenced above, dated September 29, 2010. However, I was also informed, that following OCC's standard procedures, while the bank was allowed to view my complaint, I would not be allowed to view the response.

I therefore filed today a Freedom of Information Act request for the records. Regardless, based on past experience, it was unlikely that I would get any of the records prior to OCC's determination in this matter.

Past experience in the same and related matters included, but was not limited to:

a) A complaint to Office of Thrift Supervision CASE #0507312007 against Countrywide Bank, in 2007, on the same matter.
Thrift Supervision practiced the same review standards as described above. When I later obtained records through a Freedom of Information Act request, it became apparent that Countrywide provided Office of Thrift Supervision false and deliberately misleading responses, unsubstantiated, and inherently illogical. Regardless, such responses were accepted and quoted verbatim as the determination by that office.

b) A complaint to OCC, # 00974775 against Union Bank, filed in 2009, currently under appeal, on a related matter.
Union Bank's has refused in the past 2.5 years to allow me any any access to my own banking records in this matter. The response to OCC was likewise - a narrative with no documentary substantiation at all. Such response was nevertheless accepted by OCC, and the complaint was closed.

Therefore, since I would be able neither to see Bank of America's response on my complaint, nor to reply prior to OCC's determination, I am writing to propose a review standard that I suggest would amount to fundamental integrity in banking regulation:

In my complaint I provided links to records to substantiate each and every one of my claims. I request that OCC would not accept any response from Bank of America on my complaint, unless it provided documentation to substantiate the narrative of the response.

I hope that you share my concerns regarding integrity of banking regulation under the current crisis, and would therefore accept this simple suggestion.

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:
1) Kevin Bailey - Deputy Comptroller
2) Basel Accords Committee
3) Mary Schapiro - SEC
4) David Kotz - SEC-IG
5) Eric Thorson - Treasury-IG

10-01-15 Government or private sector?

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.

10-01-14 Carol Ann Davis and the Harris County, Texas, Sheriff's Office online inmate information system

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:26:22 -0800
To: Shirley Pigott MD
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Re: IMG00029-20100114-1051.jpg

Hi Shirley:

Linked below [1] are the compiled data and analysis. The information regarding Carol Ann Davis, finally appeared after midnight, Pacific Time, under Carol Ross. The Sheriff's Office system should be deemed suspect, and should require publicly accountable validation (certified functional logic verification) - to remove an apparent hazard to the liberty of all who reside in Harris County, Texas.

10-01-14 Carol Ann Davis and the Online Public Records of the Sheriffs Office of Harris County, Texas.

Interest in the Harris County Sheriffs Office case management system (CMS) arose following an email from a Texas fellow, Dr Shirley Pigott, regarding the taking of Carol Ann Davis, her friend. Interest was also in reviewing the Harris County CMS as a comparison to the CMS of the Sheriffs Department of Los Angeles County, California and the online Inmate Information Center - which were deemed fraudulent by design and in operation. The online system of the Harris County Sheriffs Office, in this superficial review, initially appeared exemplary in its integrity compared to the Los Angeles County, California, Sheriffs Department CMS all listed inmates had SPN numbers issued, and all courts that were listed could be identified as existing courts, compared to the large percentage of entries in the Los Angeles CMS who had no booking number issued, and who had fictitious court listings. However, further analysis of the Harris County, Texas, data - attempt to correlate the SPN numbers with Booking Date - failed to reveal correlations. Finally - the glaring deficiency remained: Carol Ann Davis, who was taken over 12 hours earlier, and was claimed to be held by the Harris County Sheriff, was never listed on the system at all.

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!

[1] http://www.scribd.com/doc/25251302/10-01-14-Carol-Ann-Davis-and-the-Harris-County-Texas-Sheriff-s-Office-online-Inmate-Public-Information-s

At 09:19 PM 1/14/2010, Shirley Pigott MD wrote:

Please respond to group.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:46 PM, joseph zernik <jz12345@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hi Shirley:
Thanks for the information. I was just doing the routine Jose Rodriguez etc check on the system, and it appeared as exemplary compared with the Los Angeles equivalent... with the small exception:
It is entirely unreasonable for a person to be held this long by government and not be listed on the system.
Could you please be a bit more specific:
a) What time and date, place. was Carol Ann Davis taken? Thursday, Jan 14, 2010 10:45 am
b) Who took the photo? Shirley Pigott MD
c) Did that person witness the taking? yes
d) Was a warrant served? It was reported to have been served, but not at the location where the arrest was made
e) Did the persons who took her represent themselves as police? Sheriff Deputies? I don't know
f) How did you know that she was in the custody of sheriff of harris county? This was reported to me by Keith Schmidt, paralegal and bailbondsman
g) Did anybody talk with her by phone after the taking? Yes, her common-law husband Will Park
jz
At 06:17 PM 1/14/2010, Shirley Pigott, MD, wrote:

This is where Carol Ann Davis is, in the holding area, Harris County Sheriff's Department Inmate Processing Division. She was arrested by two women and one man.
http://www.hcso.hctx.net/PublicSvcs/ipc/
We think someone filed a fraudulent charge that she was harassing a public official. This is what Congressman Ron Paul's office told me I was doing when I asked them to help me turn in criminal evidence on Mari Robinson at the Texas Medical Board.
Her name has not yet been entered into the computer registry.
We have no explanation as to why the officers who arrested her were driving the Ford Explorer with the apparently fraudulent Texas License plate unregistered in the Texas database.
--
Shirley Pigott MD
Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="IMG00029-20100114-1051.jpg"
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="IMG00029-20100114-1051.jpg"
X-Attachment-Id: 0.1

--
Shirley Pigott MD