Sunday, October 31, 2010

10-10-31 The "Universal Plan" for "Legal Abuse Syndrome" - from the Lawster discussion group.

Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:16:21 +0200To: lawsters@googlegroups.comFrom: joseph zernik
Subject: The "Universal Plan" for "Legal Abuse Syndrome"
List-Post: <>, <>List-Help: <>, <>List-Archive: <>

On the personal side: 
I don't believe that there could possibly be a "universal plan" for addressing the "legal abuse syndrome".
One way to think about it, is by comparing it to robbery, physical violence, or rape victims.  Each addresses the trauma in a different way, for better or worse.  For those who feel that they are not able to proceed with their lives without help after the trauma, help should be offered.
Abuse of the people by the powers that be has been the story of mankind since time immemorial.  To a large degree the trauma today may be the result of cognitive dissonance.  Many of the victims mistakenly thought that in the US, in the 21st century, certain rights were guaranteed.  It may be difficult to re-build their gestalt after the rude awakening.
That said, the "Universal Plan" may be in educating the young, that no rights are guaranteed.  In each generation those in power would try to abuse it, and in each generation the people must fight to safeguard their fundamental Human Rights, or else - lose them.
At 09:10 PM 10/31/2010, you wrote:
I don't feel impotent at all and I feel like I am revolutionizing in my way the best and most powerful way I can.  People are being heard and courts are forced to be fair and then sometimes a little justice happens.  I won't go on negative campaigns.  I just don't have it in me.  My husband died at the hands of these wrongdoers.  I have passion.  I put my piece of the puzzle anyplace it fits to accomplish the overall goals.  My cases are tragic and so unfair.  What little I can do with a powerful law helps some.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Bob Sherin <> wrote:

Karin, Sure, I believe you're a national expert on that.  But what good is expertise without a grand plan that everyone supports.  This is the way to move an issue forward.  Given such a system, I've been successful throughout life on a few equally important fronts.  Am chomping at the bit to tackle this accordingly.
Need strategy, tactics and the specialized knowledge to put it over the top.  It really isn't very hard if everyone moved in the same concentrated direction.
Heck, we've got Meryl's outrage, the millions of which she's unjustly deprived, the murderer of Steve Esdale's Father walking the streets of Sarasota County,  a law enforcement agent protected by law enforcement and the courts, a recent murder case in Palm Beach County appearing thrown by the prosecution, which failed to put in a scintilla of evidence of the abundant, the probate court good ol boy network ripping off estates all over Florida, the Bankruptcy Court playing footsies with the lawyers and experts to siphon funds, our free speech being rolled over, in fact, a codified Bar rule depriving lawyers of their Constitutional rights, decent judges, such as Matthew McMillan  harassed by the system and removed, the Bar's star chamber that denies its members and the public due process, Bar racketeering with Florida Lawyers Mutual Insurance Corporation, the Farah law firm of Jacksonville stealing hundreds of thousands from clients' trust funds as determined by a Bar audit yet the Bar finds no probable cause to proceed further, beau-coup lawyers breaking all the rules with impunity, the UPL process being used, not to protect the public, but to achieve a stranglehold over problem solving while it runs roughshod over nonlawyers, our legal citadel, The Florida Bar, covering-up, misrepresenting cases, failing to produce evidence sought from it and destroying said evidence when it suits their case.   What in God's name are you all waiting for?
Who's committing perjury or legitimately being disciplined, while interesting, shouldn't be the focus this group, in my opinion.  Rather wiping all this wrong out with all of our energy ought to be.
To me, action is way, way overdo.  I love this group, but I must admit to smiling at each post because we're stymied in impotency, when the system is there to make a big difference.  I rest my case.
Bob Sherin, nl

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 1:39 PM, legal abuse syndrome <> wrote:
I do expert witness on the ADAAA and the PTSD caused by litigation.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Bob Sherin <> wrote:
Bill, though I am outraged and can write, I have no idea where and how to begin.  A team player, I need everyone's intellect to guide me: In which venue do I start? How much scope do I take on? What is the first subject I tackle? Then, it's everyone's expertise on subject-matter, so I'm truly authoritative.
That is my idea of team playing.  I don't believe any of us, without help from the rest, can begin to put this across.  Given the input, I'm ready to devote myself, such as my talents are.  You can conceive of it thusly: We constitute a PR agency:  How would the best PR organization strategize this?  Then give me a tactical outline.  I'll do the rest -- in spades.
Bob Sherin, nl ____________
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 1:10 PM, william scott <> wrote:
The internet gives us the opportunity to be effective.  Let me have your work when you think it is appropriate to do so – we never know when one person’s actions leads to another’s attempt to achieve justice.
I too was on Les’s program.  Went to the mid-year Florida Bar meeting in Boca Raton as a media representative (they tried to deny me entrance) and was told by more than one Florida Bar Board member that my comments had caused a stir – whatever that means.  I had been previously suspended on June 10 – when I asked when the stir was received, they clammed up – no desire to expose themselves to a free speech retaliation claim – which I have without regard to my Les W appearance.
William Sumner Scott
3109 Grand Avenue, #183
Miami, FL 33133
305 961-9949 ____________
From: [] On Behalf Of Bob Sherin
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 12:12 PM
Subject: Les Winston has Impact; We need to do more!!!
Want you all to know that Les Winston's series "Disbarring the Florida Bar" is playing big on the Internet. 
A fellow with a legal problem who contacted the Bar about adverse Counsel's alleged misconduct got nowhere (as we all know), then began researching the Bar, coming upon Les' programs.  After hearing my segment, also reading my story in Coral Gables Living (, he approached me with an elementary legal problem.  We've been going back and forth on the pleading, where, if justice is honest, he ought to win.  His is not a problem demanding Jack's tall mind but law 101: Dismissing a Motion for Declaratory Judgment, failing conditions precedent, ripeness, exhaustion, etc.
So I wanted Les to know the impact of his work.  One by one, we're creating a peaceful revolution within Constitutional constraints.  And I want to add, I believe we're not doing enough to reach the public and turn things around
Bob Sherin, nl (nonlawyer)
Dr. Karin Huffer
Counseling and Forensic Psychology
Marriage Family Therapist
ADA Title II and Title III Specialist
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lawsters" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

10-10-31 More on elements of computer fraud opined in the online access and case management systems of the US courts - from OAK discussion boa

Comment by Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles, CA 14 hours ago[]
Computer Fraud Opined in the Online Public Access and Case Management Systems of the US Courts in Paper Submitted for International, Peer-reviewed Law Journal
[for full text of this comment, see:
10-10-30 Computer Fraud Opined in Online Public Access and Case Management Systems of the US Courts in Paper Submitted for International Peer-reviewed Law Journal]

 Dr. A. D. Jackson
Comment by Dr. A. D. Jackson 12 hours ago
In El Lago County ((nom de plume)) IN, some time back there was a problem with incompatible computer systems wreaking havoc between different offices and sometimes in the same office. Electronic records didn't square with paper or other electronic records until computer systems were replaced and unified. Whether that and California being broke has anything to do with it, I'm in no position to know but only posed the question.

I am also aware of some judges making wrong rulings when they didn't seem to understand the law. An inbecile can make errors on the law and no doubt will, but the errors will be random as the goof will screw up things for both sides in about equal proportion. But when "misunderstanding" of the law tends to beneft politically connected lawfirms and vested interests, that clearly is not random error. As far as intentional violations of civil rights, we have addressed that in correspondence to appropriate government officials who often choose to do nothing, which topic we have also addressed.

The prospect of bias and conflict of interest in the Fine case has received considerable comment and no doubt arose in his pleadings. One would hope that Fine had been released much sooner. The hour is late, and I drone on too long.



Comment by Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles, CA 8 hours ago
Dear Dr Jackson:
Very interesting stories indeed... A person like me, with no legal training, is a bit surprised by your story spinning discussion style. Let's try to be more structured in our discussion of the matter at hand. How about agreeing first on the definition of fraud and the respective elements of Fraud.
Here are some definitions:
a) Fraud is a deliberate misrepresentation which causes another person to suffer damages.
b) Fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual.
Therefore, for conduct to be found as fraud, it should include the following elements:
a) False
b) Deliberately misleading
c) Intended for gain or to inflict harm on others.
Do we agree so far?
P.S. I used the Richard Fine case only because people were familiar with it. I had by now a whole archive of alleged Fraud on the Court at the US courts, derived from US courts from coast to coast... After I submitted the first manuscript I was asked to cut it down in size 5-fold. Let's see what the reviewers will say about the short version. 


Comment by Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles, CA 10 minutes ago[]
It appears that Dr Jackson tacitly admitted that today the online records published by the US courts are false.
a) This element requires also the demonstration of "Reliance".
Today counsel, parties, and the public at large effectively rely on PACER dockets and PACER records as their primary, if not exclusive route for access to the US court records. When one goes to the offices of the clerks, and requests to inspect and to copy records, pursuant to First Amendment rights, the clerks routinely refer the public to PACER on computer terminals, which are installed and available in the offices of the clerks. Records, upon request, are then printed off these terminals.
b) The deliberately misleading nature of the system is further demonstrated by the denial of access in PACER to the authentication records (NEFs and NDAs), which are available only in CM/ECF. Therefore, parties, counsel, and the public-at-large, are referred to a system, where they would not be able to distinguish between valid and effectual judicial records, such that command "full faith and credit", and void, not voidable records.
c) Furthermore, as documented in the paper, which was submitted for peer-review, the PACER dockets today hold both types of records. The courts, and counsel who are authorized in a given case, can distinguish between the two types of records. Parties, unauthorized counsel, and the public-at-large cannot.
d) The deliberately misleading nature of the systems is further documented by denial of access, upon explicit written requests to the various US courts and courts of appeals, for First Amendment right to inspect and to copy the NEFs or NDAs in various cases.
e) The deliberately misleading nature of the systems is further documented by the refusal of the clerks to certify the PACER dockets, albeit, without ever admitting or informing the requester that such dockets, in certain cases, are false court records.
f) The clerks of the courts, and also the Chief Judge of the US District Court, Central District of California, refused to correct false and deliberately misleading records, which had been published online in PACER, even after they were reliably informed of the fraudulent nature of such records, in disregard of the Code of Conduct of US Judges.
As documented in the paper, which was submitted for peer review, such systems are routinely employed by the US courts from the US district courts, through the courts of appeals, to the Supreme Court of the United States to deprive persons of Liberty and the Right for Possession. 


Comment by Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles, CA 1 second ago []

Welcome Italy - Latest new visitor! // Benvenuti Italia - Ultime nuovo visitatore!



Last New Visitor

Visited October 31, 2010