Quiz Questions:
(click on the image to enlarge view)
1. How many acts of racketeering (Predicated Acts per RICO - Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization) by David J Pasternak can you detect in the records on this page alone? (click on the images to enlarge view)
2. How many racketeers can you identify between the figures on the right and the narrative on the left, and how many Predicated Acts per RICO can you count for all combined?
First Prize - tickets for two for the Justice Ball, July 19, 2008, where the winner may have a chance to meet some of the leaders of the racketeering ring - Pasternak, Samuels, and probably some of the racketeers/judges as well...
1. Two Grant Deeds from Records of Samaan v Zernik, that are the Core of the Fraudulent Conveyance of the Property by Pasternak.
Grant Deed recorded by Pasternak 12/17/07a. Was not at all the one "approved" by Court
b. Has the name of the Grantee covered by white-out and typed over - it is impossible to ascertain what, if any, was acknowledged by the Notary Public
c. Grantee: "David Pasternak for Joseph V Zernick [sic-jz] per case sc087400"lacking in legal foundation - a "case" is not a legal authority.
Court Approved Grant Deed
12/7/07
a. Was not at all the one recorded .
b. Instrument (left panel): Grantor is "Joseph Zernik, an unmarried man".
c. Notary Acknowledgement (right panel): Pasternak scribbled his own signature for the notary, but the seal is of notary Lisa Khalaydjian.
d. Notary Acknowledgement (right panel): Missing signature of Grantor , therefore the Notary acknowledged a blank instrument.
2. Combined, these instruments invalidate any purported appearance of validity that the instrument recorded with the Registrar might have had:
a. Obviously, an instrument executed by either David Pasternak and acknowledged by either Pasternak and/or Khalaydjian must not be trusted in this case. The record presented in court on December 7, 2007 inherently taints both Pasternak and Khalaydjian - Khalaydjian - for providing Pasternak with blank acknowledgments with her seal, and Pasternak for using such paper for fraudulent purposes.
b. Closer inspection shows that the record that was recorded in the office of the Registrar is dated Nov 27, 2007. Therefore, Pasternak already had it in his possession on Dec 7, 2007, when he presented the court the other instrument, in a deliberate attempt to deceive.
3. Dec 7, 2007 Proceedings before Judge Patricia Collins - Court Racketeering at its Worst:
a. Was part of racketeering by the LASC and its judges in this case - it was handled all along "off the books" (and that is why the books are concealed) - the "Guantanamo Bay in LA" procedure...
b. Was held as the second ex parte appearance for that morning, with no notice as required by law, 24 hours in advance.
c. Judge Collins had no idea regarding the case.
d. Judge Collins did not even have the court file of the case in the court room.
e. Judge Collins could not possibly read and comprehend the records that were brought for her approval - about 100 pages of complex financial and real estate records.
f. Judge Collins had no interest and did not even attempt to comprehend the matter. The appearance started in mid morning, and she was concerned that she would be late for lunch, as she stated herself.
g. In blatant defiance of the Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, Pasternak requested, and Judge Collins approved on that morning two ex parte gag-orders against Zernik, prohibiting him from speaking for his own defense, as Defendant in pro per
h. When asked to justify in court why such were urgent procedures that required ex parte applications, Pasternak responded that he needed more money, and as long as Zernik was allowed to speak, he could accomplish his [racketeering- jz] acts.
i. Pasternak requested, and Judge Collins approved a classic racketeering agreement - an indemnity agreement for Mara Escrow to entice the company to participate in racketeering activity with the court.
j. Judge Collins had her own racket on the side - while she signed the orders presented to her by Pasternak in court, she in fact invalidated all acts of that morning by the invalid recording of the proceeding in the Register of Action, where an invalid proceeding and an invalid adjudication were recorded. That was a typical maneuver by the judges of the LASC, they expected that the litigants abide by the illegal orders that they pronounced in court, but held themselves innocent, since they secretly invalidated such orders later in chambers - the "cross your fingers behind your back" maneuver...
No comments:
Post a Comment