Monday, August 25, 2008

08-08-25 Claims against Jacqueline Connor



The claims listed below are such that can be easily proven independently from each other, based on records of the court itself. And yet, combined - they provide the necessary solid base for the unifying claims of racketeering from the bench. One must realize that with one unifying claim of racketeering, and some 36 independent claims for abuse of civil rights of a U.S. citizen by official of the State, under color of law, we provide a reliable foundation to support the racketeering claim. However, this is by no means an exhaustive list of claims from the records of Samaan v Zernik - these are just the ones that immediately came to mind.


Claim #1 – Racketeering from the bench.

  • Running Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) to appear as a true LA Superior Court litigation, when in fact it was a racketeering enterprise litigation, under the guise of court litigation.
  • Conspiring with Samaan, Jae Arre, Countrywide, and others, to engage in real property fraud against Zernik, under the guise of Specific Performance, real property rights litigation, of the LA Superior Court.

Claim #1 – by allowing and running on July 6, 2007 and July 23, 2007 hearings by Countrywide for a purported
Protective (gag) Order, “off the record proceeding”, per the Register of Actions

Claim #2 - by denying access to court file from November 2005 till August 2067.

Claim #3 - by claiming to enter judgment into a Judgment Book that is not a public record, with no access to the public.

Claim #4 – by entering into the record a fraudulent Nov 1, 2005 Minute Order-Assignment Order by Judge LINDA LEFKOWITZ; in fact – dated Jan 30, 2006, a time when Judge LINDA LEFKOWITZ was no longer a Supervising Judge.

Claim #5 – by presiding with no valid assignment order and no authority (and no immunity) at all.

Claim #6 – by denying Zernik access to Court File, to Minute Orders, to Notices

Claim #7 – by ,making invalid entries in court file of Minute Orders that were neither served nor noticed to Zernik, as required by California Rules of Court #1.6

dClaim #8 – by running an “off the record “ Initial Status Conference”, Jan 30, 2006 and failing to run litigation per due process requirement.

Claim #9- by running a false Demurrer hearing on Jan 30, 2006, then recording it as in paper court file as Denied, in the Register of Actions as Granted, and then secretly disposing of the minute order in
electronic court file.

Claim #10 - by posting Trial Date only after her disqualification, while making false claims in that regard on April 22, 2007 - to deny extension of Discovery Cutoff Date.

Claim #11- by claiming in open court April 26, 2007 that she signed an order for sanctions, but never doing so, thereby colluding with Fraud and Deceit by Keshavarzi.

Claim #12 - by secretly entering in electronic court file, but not in paper court file, a fictitious July 9, 2007 Minute Order of purported “telephonically” held hearing on reconsideration of the sanctions,
purportedly granted, when in fact in open court she denied such application.

Claim #13 - by entering in paper court file a May 14, 2007 Minute Order - denying ZERNIK’s ex parte application for a hearing on reconsideration of the sanctions, while secretly disposing of that same minute order in electronic court file with no notice to parties.

Claim #14 - by entering in electronic court file, but not in paper court file a June 9, 2007 MInute Order. a "telephonically" held hearing on reconsideration of the sanctions, which was purportedly granted.

Claim #15 - by running an ex parte application for a gag order by Counrywide on July 6, 2007 “off the record” and “off the calendar” at a time the court was listed as Dark.

Claim #16 - by ruling on July 12, 2007 in open court that her Disqualification per CCP §170.3 was an untimely Peremptory Challenge per CCP§170.6.

Claim #17- by continuing to preside with no authority at all (and no immunity at all) after disqualification for a cause of July 12, 2007.

Claim #18 – by secretly writing on July 23, 2007 an untimely Answer and Strike to Disqualification for a Cause of July 12, 2007, backdating it to July 12, 2007, failing to have it certified or mailed by the clerk, then making an invalid entry of such minute order with no service or notice into paper court file.

Claim #19 - by allowing the July 23, 2007 proceedings where Countrywide apeared again unlisted in Minute Orders and in court records, and its counsels listed at times as for Defendant and at times as for Plaintiff.

Claim #20 - by claiming in open court on July 23, 2007 that she signed a gag order at Countrywide’s request, but in fact secretly entering in court file a denial of their proposed gag orders.

Claim #21 –by failing to have the purported Aug 9, 2007 Judgment served on parties, yet claim to have served and entered it in paper court file.

Claim #22 –by not entering judgment in the electronic Book of Judgments at all on Aug 9, 2007, but claiming to have entered judgment on Aug 9, 2007

Claim #23 – by running a deceptive Aug 14, 2007 Ex parte application for “entry of Judgment”, yet claiming that judgment was entered on Aug 9, 2007.

Claim #24 – by running a deceptive Aug 21, 2007 Ex parte application for “entry of judgment”, yet claiming that judgment was entered on Aug 9, 2007.

Claim #25 – by deceptively issuing on Aug 28, 2007 a minute order, back-dating it to Aug 21, 2007, and stating in it that judgment was entered on Aug 9, 2007.

Claim #26- by claiming in open court on Aug 30, 2007 that she entered judgment on Aug 9, 2007.

Claim #27 – by claiming in open court that she was going to sign an order appointing Gregory O’Brien Escrow Referee, but in fact generating an invalid, inadequate minute order for a discovery referee
Claim#28 – by entering such Aug 30, 2007 Minute Order into paper court file with no service or notice to Zernik.

Claim #29 – by colluding with KESHAVARZI in fraud and deceit and providing him copy of such deceptive minute order, and allowing him to furnish O’BRIEN with such minute order and a copy of an order
instead of the judgment, as the legal foundation of his authority.

Claim #30 –by posting on Sept 11, 2007, after disqualification for a cause on Sept 10, 2007 a false and fictitious Sept 10, 2007 Minute Order of a purported hearing on that day on fraudulent COUNTRYWIDE records, then back-dating it to Sept 10, 2007.

Claim #31 –by transferring the Samaan v Zernik file to Judge GOODMAN after disqualification with no authority at all and no reassignment order.

Claim #32 – under Connor’s tenure, the clerk’s office constructed a secret volume “IV continued”, which Zernik was denied access to even after he was allowed access to other volumes. This volume
included Countrywide's pleadings and other records that the court considered sensitive.


Claim #33 – by generating a false and misleading Aug 9, 2007 Summary Judgment against Zernik

Claim #34 - by initiating the elaborate deception on the entry of judgment on Aug 9, 2007.

Claim #35 – by continuing the elaborate deception on the entry of judgment on Aug 14, 21, and 30, 2007.

Claim#36 - by engaging in interference in Attorney Client relationship in hearing on Aug 21, 2008, per Att. Hoffman declaration.

Claims #37- by colluding with KESHAVARZI and O’BRIEN in fraud and deceit on appointment of the Escrow Referee


1) Nov 1, 2005 Minute Order by Judge LINDA LEFKOWITZ from paper court file– Re-Assignment of Samaan v Zernik to Judge CONNOR; in fact – issued on Jan 30, 2006, when Judge LEFKOWITZ was no longer Supervising Judge and Master of Calendar, and therefore had no authority to issue such Minute Order.
  • Did Judge LEFKOWITZ collude in this fraud? How was the Minute Order issued?
  • Who is the clerk who signed on it? (but never mailed it)

2) Jan 30, 2006 Minute Order – electronic court file, secretly disposed/vacated with no notice to parties.

3) July 9, 2007 Minute Order from electronic court file- in fact fictitious.

  • What was the basis for Judge CONNOR issuing such minute order.
  • Does she have any evidence of the “telephonically” held hearing ever taking place?

4) July 12, 2007 Minute Order by Judge Connor – Answer and Strike for Disqualification.

  • How was it inserted into court file?
  • When?
  • By whom?

In fact it is a minute order of July 23, 2007 - later than allowed by law for a judge's response for disqualification for a cause.

No clerk's certificate of mailing and notice of entry is on file.

5) Aug 9, 2007 Minute Order – Summary Judgment –paper file. In fact entered on Aug 14, 2007.

  • Who entered it into paper court file?
  • When?
  • What is the basis for the claims in it that the judgment was served in open court on parties?

6) Aug 21, 2007 Minute Order – For Entry of Judgment – paper file. In fact entered and mailed Aug 28, 2007.

  • Who was the clerk whose signature appears as the one
    who mailed it on Aug 21, 2007 ?

7) Aug 30, 2007 Minute Order – Deliberately defective Assignment of Judge O’BRIEN as Escrow Referee.
Judge O’BRIEN held such Minute Order by Sept 7, 2007. His secretary claimed it was provided by KESHAVARZI. The question is how such fraudulent Minute Order was issued, how it got to KESHAVARZI, and how did it go from KESHAVARZI to O’BRIEN, and how could O’BRIEN even consider such paper sufficient to allow him to engage in a court procedure. Or was he in conspiracy with Connor to pretend that he had authority?

8) July 23, 2007 Minute Order claiming gag order will be signed, but order denied.

  • Question is why did COUNTRYWIDE counsel not notice the order, as ordered.
  • Did they approach the court and try to get a copy of the signed order? Or were they in conspiracy with Connor to pretend that the order existed?

9) Sept 10, 2007 Minute Order by Connor, recording a hearing on CCP §128.7 relative to fraud in COUNTRYWIDE records.

  • In fact, entered Sept 11, 2007, after disqualification, when she had no authority to enter such minute order.
  • In fact - A fictitious minute order - no such hearing ever took place.
  • Did the clerk mail such minute order to KESHAVARZI? He seemed to know of its existence.

10) Register of Actions – Case History in Sustain – almost all entries by Connor are misleading. The dates listed on the left column as dates of filings are in fact arbitrary dates entered by the operator. The true dates of entry of various data are in fact in the Audit Data files for each data entry. The difference between the two dates can be several years in some cases.

a. Primary example: until early 2008, all copies of the Register of Actions carried on page No. 1 a bizarre array of 3 entries going back as far as 2000, in a case where claims were filed in October 2004… not even the underlying events took place yet in 2000… The content of page one of Case History was the first hint that all dates data in Sustain are unreliable.

b. One of the entries on page No 1 appeared as a notice:


While the court claimed that any interest of COUNTRYWIDE in this case was a “conspiracy theory” by ZERNIK.

c. After April 2008 the content of page 1, which ZERNIK often listed as prime evidence for fraud by the court in litigation records disappeared – with no evidence for a nunc pro tunc or any other explanation for this late revision in Case History.

11) Under Connor the Court Reporter who prepared the Aug 21 .2007 transcript adulterated it as described in Att Hoffman’s declaration

12) Under Connor, ZERNIK was denied access to Court file, as described in Alex Garcia declaration


Part III - response to Justice Pioneer.


Justice Pioneer raised common arguments -
1. Zernik is the cause of the real estate fraud by the court, since he did not listen to his attorneys, and later appeared in pro per.
2. Zernik based his writing on opinions, not facts, and grouped judges like Connor and Friedman, who have little in common.

D. Justice Pioneer suggests that Zernik made claims that are based on opinions, not facts, and grouped together judges, where there is very little common between them, like Terry Friedman and Jacqueline Connor.

1. Regarding claims - see next blog posting.

2. Grouping together Terry Friedman and Jacqueline Connor.

The short answer is simple: Justice Pioneer is basing his letter on opinions. Zernik bases his writing on facts in this regard. Both Friedman and Connor engaged in racketeering from the bench. Therefore they are listed together.

The long answer to this question is complex, exactly like any attempt to explain how a person that was committed to public service, to justice, to truth, is transformed in a power position into a corrupt judge.

3. Power corrupts, and absolute power absolutely corrupts.

It is not clear that the judges understand the limits of their power. Alternatively - they may understand it fully well, and the system requires a major adjustment, as proposed by groups like jail4judges.

Some of the judges felt that there is no limit to their authority, whereas in fact, they had no authority and no immunity at all - since none had an assignment order. Connor was the only one who clearly figured it out:

a) she furnished herself with a fraud assignment order from Judge Linda Lefkowitz, and

b) she avoided signing any valid orders. Either she did not issue orders that she said that she would issue, or she issued deliberately defective orders.

To some degree, one may also sadly state that it has to do with smarts. There is no doubt that Jacqueline Connor is by far the sharpest, and most devious of the judges Zernik encountered in Court. And Terry Frieman is no Jackie Connor. On that Zernik is in full agreement with Justice Pioneer.

4. An example:

a) Terry Friedman:

i) In February-March 2008, Judge Terry Friedman, set on Defendant Zernik a total of $22,000 in sanctions, and found Zernik in contempt.

  • The reason: Zernik asked Countrywide, Sandor Samuels, and Angelo Mozilo in 2007 (prior to Friedman's action in the case) to either authenticate or repudiate certain records that Countrywide provided Samaan, and Zernik claimed were the core of the court house fraud.
  • Since then such records were indeed confirmed for Zernik as fraud by fraud specialists. Countrywide still refuses to respond.
  • But Countrywide did not want to be asked this question. In fact it also asked in court that Judge Friedman provide declaratory relief- and state that Countrywide does not have to answer the question whether or not the records produced by Countrywide in legal subpoena were fraud.
  • In response, Zernik asked that the court provide declaratory relief and state that Zernik does not have to pay the IRS anymore.

ii) Therefore, in January 2008 Friedman ruled that in 2007 Judge Connor entered a protective gag-order on Zernik.

  • However, such order never existed. In court file there are proposwed orders marked "DENIED".
  • Even in 2008 no such order was ever presented.

iii) In February-March 2008 Friedman ruled ex post facto that Zernik was in vioalation of such order. In fact, he threatened to jail Zernik for such ex post facto violation.

In general: One may say that Judge Friedman operated under the assumption that he had unlimited authority, and upon review all his actions would be justified.

b) Jacqueline Connor:

The missing protective order that was found in ex post facto by Friedman, was a fraudulent protective order, that Connor failed to issue, lik all most orders in this case.

  • In June July 2007 Countrywide felt pressure since Zernik, who got involved in the case late, was getting on their tail rather quickly.
  • Priot to that, they pretended not to be involved in the case at all. On July 6, 2007 they appeared in court for an ex parte appearance at a time that the court was Dark (both literally and figuratively), for a gag order against Zernik.
  • Jacqueline Connor ran an "off the record" gag order hearing.
  • But she never isssued any gag order.

In general: On maq say that she operated under the assumption that she had no authority, and tried not to leave any definitive record whatsoever.

5. Countrywide and the Courts - Connor v Friedman:

Zernik noticed this paradoxical contrast early on. Judge Friedman presided in court first time in january. In Feb or March Zernik approached Countrywide, through their counsel - John Amberg, with a proposal for settlement. Zernik said that he believed that Samuels is seeking legitimacy after the collapse. Therefore his involvement in Jewish community affairs.

However, in the current affair, he was asking Friedman, who is not capable of such dishonesty, to act in a way that will eventually possiby make Friedman more liable than Connor.

6. Inner v outer circle of the racket.

Zernik is of the opinion that Connor was in the inner circle of the racketeering enterprise of the court, whereas Friedman was in the outer circle, or a total outsider. Connor had deep understanding of how the racket operated, Friedman had none.

For such reasons, not only is Friedman listed together with Connor, but Frieman, upon review, may be found liable where Connor may not.


Justice Pioneer appears to assume that Zernik is basing it all on his own findings:

1) Please check below Blog entry under [07.30.2008] - opinion letter by fraud specialist. The writer is one of the top authorities on fraud, and he reviewed two Grant Deeds generated by and for the LA Superior Court. He provided an opinion letter that raised substantial concerns. His opinion letter in effect says that:

David Pasternak, former President of “Bet Tzedek” – House of Justice, operating as an Officer of the LA Superior Court, committed real-estate fraud in December 2007.

2) Grant Deeds also posted here, one copy under [July 3, 2008], and another under [June 12, 2008]. No fraud expert is required to see that David Pasternak was engaged in fraud. I informed him of that in writing in advance, already in October 2007. But nobody in this town could see fraud for a fraud.

3) On such matters, FBI Fraud Expert recommends to state and federal authorities that:
“an immediate investigation should be instituted in an effort to ascertain the circumstances behind any fraud being committed so that appropriate local, state, and federal authorities can be notified, including the appropriate court."

4) Zernik's attorneys never told him about the frauds. He had to figure them out himself one by one. Zernik first got involved in the case in December 2007 (filed October 2005). Attorney Charles Cummings represented him all the period before then, from mid 2005 to Feb 2007. He entirely co-opted with Connor in her courtroom fraud. Had Zernik figured it out half a year earlier, it would have been a different story.

5) BY January 2007, with help from a Deputy Commissioner in California Dept of Real Estate. Mr Fiva Prieto, and an FBI agent who insisted on remaining anonymous, I figured out some of the frauds. That was the easy part. 21) The difficult part was that no real estate attorney in town would agree to file the compulsory counterclaims for fraud and deceit in the court of Jacqueline Connor. The excuses were ridiculous. 22) Finally, months later, I had the straight answers: First: Steven Lovette – from Woodland Hills, explained to me that by then (May-June 2007) I have become “radioactive”, implying that any attorney who would touch my case with a 10 foot pole would suffer the consequences. 23) And later, Att Larry Rothstein (also Woodland Hills), explained to me that I should never file any claims on fraud and deceit with Connor, since: a) she would never accept fraud as fraud., and b) she is likely to retaliate against me.

6) Once Zernik was convinced of Connor's corruption, he filed his first disqualfication for a cause, July 12, 2007. Connor simply responded with deceit: Instead of responding in one of several ways prescribed by law - she ruled in open court that Zernik's filing per CCP §170.3, was in fact an untimely filing of a peremptory challenge, per CCP §170.6, and therefore she issued a strike.

7) And yet, by the time of summary judgment, I had a whole list of frauds figured out (albeit, Connor continued a hearing on leave to amend answer, which I had to file in pro per). In summary Judgment hearing I had pretty good evidence of Fraudulent Inducement – through forgery of the Pre-qualification Letter [ date of blog ]. 12) Samaan – plaintiff, was a cosmetics sales woman in a department store, far from qualified by either income or by assets for the purchase. She misrepresented herself (straw buyer) to me as an active realtor. 13) Much later I found out that in loan applications (fraud as well, an forged signatures as well), she misrepresented herself as making her income exclusively ($400,000, elsewhere $4,000,000 per year) as sole owner and president of a corporation – Spellbound Inc., retailing crystal balls, Tarot Card, anointment oils and divining objects. 14) At the time of Summary judgment hearing, I also had on calendar a hearing scheduled a few weeks down on motion for sanctions against Sheppard Mullin and Att Mohammad Keshavarzi (counsel for Samaan) per CCP §128.7 - for filing the Countrywide fraud records (no attorney would file such motion for me either). 15) On the Fraudulent Inducement – which was fully demonstrated- Connor ruled simply “Red Herring”. 16) I am considering making a suggestion to the California Judicial Council, for inclusion in the next edition of the Judge’s Bench Book, for use in LA County only: Only two alternative rulings allowed on claims of civil Fraud and Deceit – a) “Red Herring”, or b) “Tuna Salad”. Ruling of Red Herring and Tuna Salad is not allowed! 17) And the Countrywide records pending hearing on fraud – Connor ruled that such were no material disputable fact. Albeit, one was Samaan’s purported underwriting letter (certified fraud by now). The other was a fraud record of the real estate contract. 18) Connor allowed the fraud contract produced by countrywide, to be first time admitted by Samaan in reply brief to summary judgment. 19) A year and a half earlier, in January 2006, she engaged in a Statute of Frauds fraud in demurrer proceedings on Statute of Frauds.

8) August 9, 2007 Summary Judgment by Connor, was entirely based on some obvious frauds by Countrywide, which Connor, sharp as she is, just could not figure out... Such fraud records are by now examined and confirmed by fraud experts as well.

9) On Sept 10, 2007 Judge Connor was disqualified for a cause by Zernik in pro per, 2nd time. Back to Pioneer's suggestion on listening to attorneys:None of them, ever, dared to tell Zernik the truth about Connor. And even after Zernik figured it out, no attorney in town would dare to serve a disqualification statement for a cause on her, Zernik had to do it himself, in pro per, twice.

10) After Connor's 2nd disqualification, Sept 10, 2007, the execution of a judgment that was never entered, and therefore “in no case is … effectual for any purpose” per CCP §664, became the task for Allen Goodman.

11) Judge Goodman, also with no assignment and no authority at all, was per his own disqualification statement is “a long-term close personal friend of the chief legal counsel [of Countrywide – Sandor Samuels].

24) Almost a month after he took the file – again with no authority and no assignment, on October 3, 2007, Allan Goodman recalled his best friend Samuels, and recused. In one of the strange acts that is related to the machination of the racketeering in the court, he secretly invalidated/vacated his recusal order in chambers, with no notice to parties. My opinion is that Allan Goodman was willing to engage in racketeering only up to a certain limit. And proposals made to him regarding racketeering in this case by Retired Judge O’Brien, an ADR neutral, were the reason for his recusal.

25) In my opinion Retired Judge O’Brien is an enthusiastic racketeer.

26) After Judge Allan Goodman’s recusal, the case was moved to Judge Joseph Biderman. He is the only judge in Santa Monica house that had interaction with this case, and refused to get involved in any way. He recused immediately, but he did not disclose the reason for his recusal. And he failed to act per California Code of Judicial Ethics, Canon D(q1):

  • D. Disciplinary Responsibilities
  • (1) Whenever a judge has reliable information that another judge has violated any provision of the Code of Judicial Ethics, the judge shall take or initiate appropriate corrective action, which may include reporting the violation to the appropriate authority.

27) Instead, like everybody else, he chose to comply with the LA County Code of Silence (“LACCS”)

28) The case was then moved to John Segal. John Segal in my opinion is an enthusiastic racketeer. In my opinion there is sufficient evidence regarding his conduct in this case to put him in the same league as Connor.

x) in his first hearing in the case, with both parties present, Judge John Segal asked Kesahvarzi to produce a proposed order for receiver. When Zernik protested, it was made into anoticed motion. Eventually it was a 4 day-notice hearing.

4) Purportedly, Pasternak,. starting Nov 9, 2007, was enforcing the execution of a judgment by court per CCP §437c, for Specific Performance, an Aug 9, 2007 judgment “awarded” (but never entered) by Judge Connor.

28) After his recusal the case move to Judge Lisa Hart-Cole. She never presided even in one proceeding, I filed with her a 170.6 immediately. And yet, from that short experience there is sufficient evidence that I can form an informed opinion – Judge Hart-Cole is an enthusiastic racketeer. She has no respect to any constitutional rights, and she would allow any travesty in the court room for a large corporation.

20) Terry Friedman. He engaged in it as Presiding Judge, albeit with no re-assignment order, and therefore with no judicial authority and no immunity at all – like all other judges and judicial officers involved (per 42 USC §1983 and related case law). to perform under presiding Judge Terry Friedman (albeit with no re-assignment order). I quoted here only a small part of it. And I also do not like to rely on one expert either, because of concerns for various types of unpleasant situation with witnesses in the past.

21) So at present, I am busy trying to break down a very complex, very convoluted white collar crime story with multiple fraud levels on top of the other.

Justice Pioneer Letter, Response part II.

Part II.
The evidence is overwhelming, not insufficient as Justice Pioneer believes. The outcome of this situation is difficult to predict. But we insist only on truthfullness and compliance in step one: The Books of Court must be open as public records. , it is our Constitutional First Amendment right.

Part I of the response was blogged under Tikkun LA 2008

C) We are far beyond guessing between fact and opinion...and the urgent request for congressional assistance over the 4th of july weekend worked like magic...

The mailing on the 4th of July weekend was to 35 congressman/ women and senators, certified, overnight, personal delivery, with return receipt. They each got a book of about 220 pages of dense, boring legal documents. But thanks to help from the office staff we colored the cover with light green palm trees and sky-blue ocean waves...

When I started my follow-up calls, I had no problem at all. They all knew which book I was asking about. Zany? Driven over the edge? Nope, just practical. We established though that mailing some important contancts.

And here I must thank again my congresswoman- the Honorable Diane Watson, who did wanders in assisting in this matter.
1) She had the Assistant Director of the FBI responding on the issues.
2) And at present, the Honorable Watson is inquiring with the U.S. Justice Department regarding my unanswered request, a couple of months ago, whether the U.S. Justice Department would consider appointing a U.S. Special Counsel to review some matters.

The reason for the request for a Special Counsel, is that experience shows that there is no law-enforcement or court capable of addressing such matters in LA. And the California Attorney General, Jerry Brown, has abdicated his duties in these matters.

Mr Justice Pioneer, in your letter you suggest that I may have no facts, only opinions. You cannot be further from the truth. I have sufficient documentary evidence from the court itself to convict most of the judges who participated in that farce of a litigation of racketeering several times over. That is due to their habit of producing secret false trial court litigation records in electronic court file.

With access to electronic court file records, I was able find enough predicated acts in the records of a case of a judge that I never even saw, but was asked to review the records of. It is a judge that was by then appointed to a U.S. Court.

You may realize the problem is the opposite of what you think. The problem is not that I have no evidence. The problem is that I have too much evidence. The results of opening the books may be devastating to the California Judiciary. Not only in Los Angeles, but in appellate and U.S. courts. And it may very result in reevaluation of the conduct of some judges that are in their graves… all based on the records. And that is the true reason why the FBI and the DA and Jerry Brown would not touch it. And that it the reason why a Special Counsel is required.

We have no business getting involved in what procedures would be used in the investigation, or who and why would be prosecuted. Mostly these are public policy issues, where we can only contribute our input.

D. A situation that may be catastrophic and one of a kind in the anals of the U.S. judiciary, may require unusual solution - "Truth and Reconciliation" committe? Federal Jurisdiction for some years?

However, the books have to be opened, and the truth has to be told. That is the First Amendment right of each and every one of us. And no politician or judge has the right to bargain our rights.

But then we may need a committee for Truth and Reconciliation, so that it may be possible to retain at least some of these judges. I cannot see how you can get rid of a whole generation of judges in Los Angeles in one shot. There may also be a need to declare some temporary Federal jurisdiction in LA.

Obviously the system of nomination, elections, appointments in Los Angeles did not produce a reasonable outcome.

Similarly, there must be a review under Federal authorities of the checks and balances in reviewing performance of the judiciary in California. Obviously, the California Commission on Performance of the Judiciary failed miserably. The Commission may be under-funded, but its existence serves to create a camouflage of due process review. That commission in its current shape and form must disappear.

The California Judicial Council may need to answer some questions as well. In my opinion, on the background of the conditions of the judiciary in California, it is impressive that among its 5-year goals the Council listed impartiality of the judiciary as first.


Obviously any of the opinions in this letter are of the writer alone. This blogger may hold opinions that are similar or different, but he writes them himself. Here a response was allowed to be voiced that in fact does not spare the blogger as well.

August 23, 2008

Dear Mr Justice Pioneer,

Thank you for your anonymous letter (see copy in the right side column of the blog), received today by mail. Obviously, you care. You bothered to search and find my mailing address, not that it is difficult to find... and you bothered to write me a 3-page letter in 10-p, single-space, narrow margins... with a footnote!

I wish we received some more letters like yours. Both Erwin Chemerinsky, in his independent committee Rampart report, and more recently Judge Letts, overseer of the LAPD Consent Decree, talk about the "Culture of Silence" in law enforecment and the justice system in LA. Both hold this culture to be a signficant problem in and of itself. You explain that you fully agree with my observations, and you give me third-hand hearsay for evidence. With that you rush to enter the judgment on Judge Connor: “she belongs in prison and not on the bench”.

But to balance that out, you open with questioning whether I am zany or driven over the brink... and then you go on to diagnose - the problem: I could have saved myself all this trouble, had I only listened to my good attorneys...

I know for a fact that Jacqueline Connor says exactly the same thing about me for over a year now ...

Well, it is obvious you are not her. Therefore, the only remaining alternative is that you must be a male, middle-aged or older, modern-orthodox, jewish, criminal defense attorney, with good number of years of experience in the halls of justice in LA. What you described I mostly knew already. In one of the background articles I read something like - she would not hesitate to issue the death sentence either...

It made me cringe..

Well, well, well - where should I start?

A. You sign as Justice Pioneer, but sent me an anonymous letter explaining how scared you are of retaliation... But we both agree that the situation has deteriorated into wide-spread public corruption.

Your concern is of course very real. I see it daily...But to answer your question from the opening lines - no I am not zany, and no, I am not driven over the edge. I am just not afraid anymore. At some point, I am not sure exactly when, I realized that it was my karma (Tikkun, whatever)...

The same fraud, in variations, was played many times in the last quarter century or so in the LA County courtrooms. I am happy to spend a few years of my life dealing with this issue on a daily basis. And I put into it many hours that could have been much more profitably or more pleasantly otherwise spent.

But I know that it is a worthy cause, and that it will make a difference in the life of many people for many years to come, albeit, they wouldn't even know it. If you will, I am doing it also on behalf of the Jewish attorneys and judges that were involved in it in recent years. Asking forgiveness from the Los Angeles community at large.

I am confident that we will manage to achieve some level of success in this endeavor, if only we keep my efforts steady. It even says so in the Book of Daniel – (see above)!

I am fully committed to the issue, until the day that I know that we made a small, yet tangible and significant, positive change in the law-enforcement and justice system of LA County. And I know exactly what is that small tangible change that should be our goal:

Open LA County Book of Judgments to the public at large - It is our (9.5 millions that the court claims to serve) guaranteed First Amendment Right!
One which has been abused for an estimated 25 years, by none other than the court! This is the most populous county in the U.S. and the largest superior court. Who more than the court should be the model for compliance with the U.S. Bill of Rights... here in Los Angeles, as a beacon for all those south and east of us…

Nothing represents more clearly than the First Amendment the ideas of the Founding Fathers and the Framers of the Constitution.

These ideas were the foundation for U.S. involvement in Europe in WWII. Some try to scare me - telling me that if I keep doing what I am doing I will end up as a civil rights martyr...I don't think so. There was one explicit death threat, from a source related to Countrywide, but that was way back. I try to keep some level of alert, and make sure that I do not hold unique information that was not distributed for too long. Some say it is foolish, that I am wasting my ammunition. I see it as my life insurance policy. My previous target for opening the Book of Judgments was 10 days from the 4th of July, 2008. That was the reason for the Urgent Request for Congressional Assistance that you asked about (see below under July 7, 2008).

Congratulation, Mr Justice Pioneer! Please consider yourself a winner, and a fully vested partner! Your letter with the Hebrew date on top, immediately reminded me what the next target date should be. Let’s try to get the Book of Judgments opened by the time of Closing of the Gates: Neilah - Thursday, October 9, 2008

So here it goes: We challenge the Jewish community to take a leadership position, on behalf of all that live in Los Angeles, and consider it our responsibility to bring the LA Superior Court back into compliance with the U.S. Constitution by Opening the Books by the time of Closing of the Gates, October 9, 2008.

There are some very good reasons why the Jewish community should consider it its choice to be sensitive to degradation of the justice system in society they live in.

The first step, is compliance with the First Amendment… the right of the people to inspect and to copy the books of courts. And foremost among them- the Book of Judgments. The relevant authority is the First Amendment, and Nixon v Warner Communications (in re: the tapes). But that law is older than the U.S. Constitution, since, already in common law they figured out that transparency is the most cost-effective measure in the safeguard of the integrity of the courts and prevention of corruption. And exactly for the same reason, it is inexplicable why the LA Superior Court is holding its Books of Court off limit to the public for some 25 years by estimate.

I hold that corruption of the courts in LA is directly related as an outcome, in part, to the hiding of the books of courts. And I also have the evidence for that. This is not merely a correlation. Mr Justice Pioneer, you described the current situation as:

widespread corruption in the court system”.

The last I spoke on the subject with Mr Steven Goldman, Chief of the White Collar Crime Squad, and described to him my findings, he responded almost with the same words:

“If what you are saying is true, it is wide-spread public corruption, and it is well above my head.”

Therefore, ever-since, he never took any action that I know of in this regard. Surely he showed no interest in obtaining my evidence.
And therefore, opening of the books will not only serve to demonstrate that the people are determined to uphold their rights, where they were betrayed by the judiciary and law enforcement. The opening of the Books of Court, in and of itself is a remediation measure.

B. TIKKUN LA, 2008: What can we do to get the Books of Judgments open by October 9.

We call upon all people of good will to make an effort to generate as many phone calls, faxes, and letters from U.S. citizens to the office of:
Presiding Judge – Stephen Czuleger. LA Superior Court Stanley Mosk Courthouse 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 Phone: 213 974 5600 Fax: 213 617 7176 1) Please call, fax, or write Presiding Judge Czuleger. 2) Please leave your name and phone number, and state that you are a U.S. citizen, if applicable, over 18. 3) Please ask that the office of the Presiding Judge inform you when you would be allowed to exercise your First Amendment right to inspect and to copy the Book of Judgments. 4) Please provide us that same information, for a petition: A) You may email your information through this web page, either through the box at upper right of the screen, or through the comments input areas throughout the blog. b) Otherwise, you may also email the same information to <> Before Yom Kippur we will deliver the petition to the office of the Presiding Judge, hoping to have as many U.S. citizens as possible, asking to safeguard their bill of rights. If you have kids in school, please try to ask the teachers to explain the concept to the kids, maybe prepare flyers so that they may take them home. We hope that they convince their parents to demand their FIRST AMENDMENT right. In your email notice please also indicate if you support the request for appointment of a U.S. Special Counsel (see below).

Response to Mr Justice Pioneer.
End Part 1.