Thursday, November 12, 2009

09-11-12 RE: Oct-Dec 2000 - Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be investigated as suspect of racketeering?

Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be investigated by DC Public Integrity Section as a suspect central figure in Los Angeles Racketeering ?
RE: October-December 2000 - Alleged Racketeering that was the subject matter of the First Rampart Trial, and obstruction/perversion of justice in the trial itslef, where she falsely presided as a judge.

Los Angeles Superior Court

The basic claim is that once the evidence from the civil court is reviewed, anybody in his right mind would demand to reopen the Rampart investigation with Judge Jacqueline Connor as the main suspect of racketeering that ended up in the false imprisonment of thousands, who have never been released to this date. Maybe Rafael Perez would finally take the stand...

A. EVIDENCE PRIMARILY FROM CIVIL COURTS:
Impact on Legal Professionals
My first attorney Charles Cummings, I guess got intimidated, and never disclosed to me the fraud by Countrywide and never filed counterclaims for fraud and deceit. I figured out he was under the influence in December 2006. In December 2006, I approached both California Dept of Real Estate and FBI. At that time I did not even suspect involvement of Judge Connor, of whom I knew nothing. Both agencies advised me that it was fraud, and that I had to find an attorney who would file counterclaims ASAP. For more than half a year from January to June I was seeking such an attorney... Could not find one...In July, an experienced real estate attorney explained to me - that nobody would dare file such papers in Judge Connor's Court... She would retaliate...
I also know what happened when an attorney who did not know the rules of her courtroom, Ed Hoffman, appeared for 10 minutes. He came back shaken... Then he demanded to withdraw papers that had his name on them, and that was it...

I received some anonymous tips, for example, an anonymous letter from a criminal defense attorney... He explicitly listed his concern regarding retaliation. He did not waste ink... at the end of the first paragraph he says:
"My opinion is that she belongs in prison, not on the bench..."

The issue of intimidation of criminal defense attorneys appears also in the Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006), although no judge is mentioned by name.

Impact on integrity of the judicial process
Any reasonable person would would review the case of Samaan v Zernik, would conclude that in fact it was a venue for the perpetration of crime. That the crime took place - real estate fraud- was indeed opined by fraud expert - a highly decorated FBI veteran. However, the claim here is that the litigation starting before the very first day that she appeared, and ending after the last day that she appeared, was committed to the perpetration of alleged crimes. Numerous instances of alleged fraud were identified, the number and convoluted nature of her conduct in simultaneously carrying out these numerous schemes, was at times mind boggling. At the end it is alleged that the simplest way to prove her criminal intent in the litigation is simply based on the written records that she produced. Some of it is provided in these pages. Of particular notice are the records that she produced on the first (January 30, 2006) and last day of her appearance (September 10, 2007), Each of these, on its own, reflected multiple alleged frauds ( See postings).
One notable example was the issue of intimidation of counsel to prevent the protection of clients against fraud in real estate. I ended up filing the counterclaims on fraud and deceit - called "compulsory" - in pro per. She first postponed the hearing, then denied the essential right.
In March 2007, since I was clueless, I obtained review of sample proceedings and an opinion from the office of Lionel Johnson, which came back as "Errors in Adjudication", and basically stated that she ruled upside down routinely.
In August 2007 I engaged Ed Hoffman. I was still not in position to comment on the law, but I knew that her rulings on findings of fact were deliberately false. Although we had major time stress, Atty Hoffman refused to believe my claims, and insisted on reviewing major part of the records on his own. He then returned and stated that it was all flawed based both on the fact and the law. We filed a massive motion for reconsideration on her purported Summary Judgment, only to have him intimidated by her, and then insist on withdrawing any paper carrying his name... after it was already filed.

Impact on integrity of other judges and coordination in alleged crimes
She appears to have unusual impact on other judges, and fraud that she allegedly instigated could easily generate cooperation by 9:10 judges in West District.
It was also obvious that the California Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Los Angeles) is thoroughly involved in the alleged real estate fraud in this case, and supported it in full.
The evidence regarding involvement of the Court of Appeals comes also from various other sources:
- Events relative to the appeals in Galdjie v Samaan, which it is doubted could be explained in a manner consistent with the fundamentals of the law.
- Events relative to petitions and appeals in Samaan v Zernik , likewise were inconsistent with the fundamentals of the law. to give just a couple of examples - the court tried to coerce Defendant to engage in appeal from a judgment which had never been entered. Separately - the court allowed plaintiff to enter a notice of cross appeal from nothing - no order or judgment was listed that the appeal was taken from. The reason - Plaintiff never acknowledged the validity of the judgment, while falsely claiming to press for its execution...
But more than all, the role of the California Court of appeals, 2nd District, can be seen through a series of rulings, that ambiguated the nature of entry of judgment, that ambiguated the nature of notice of entry of judgment, and finally - through Galdjie v Darwish - ambiguated the real property purchase agreement as well.

Impact on Initiating Crime
It is alleged that upon combined review of Samaan v Zernik and Galdjie v Darwish any reasonable person would conclude that they were cookie cutter real estate frauds. The former - also opined by expert. The latter - not yet so. But beyond that - any reasonable person would conclude that in both cases, judges were involved in the matter even before the complaints were filed in court - in short - that such fraudulent complaints were by solicitation, or at least by advanced coordination.
The complaints in both cases were of breach of contract, by a straw buyer, who first perpetrated fraud (as opined in the case of Samaan) by providing false documentation of qualification. The complaint failed to include a contract, and was based on vague "oral modification of written real estate contract". It is alleged that no attorney would file such complaint, unless he/she are clearly informed that there was a willing recipient in court.
This is one reason for claiming that the Courts in Los Angeles are largely responsible for the fact that the county was designated "epicenter of the epidemic"

B. EVIDENCE PRIMARILY FROM CRIMINAL COURTS
Evidence from the Criminal Courts
In reading of the papers from the Rampart scandal, what was awkwardly missing was the motive. Thousands of persons were falsely convicted and falsely sentenced to particularly long terms, with no reason at all?
Regardless, Judge Connor emerges as the central figure in the affair, both before it was discovered, and also after.
What motivated it all? At the end - the evidence is circumstantial -
1) It involved the undercover narcotic officers.
2) It started with the theft of 6 lbs of cocaine by Rafael Perez from police safe. That quantity was unlikely for personal use.
3) The cases of the victims, often involved planting of drugs to frame evidence.
4) The Consent Decree included a key provision of periodic financial disclosures by undercover narcotic officers. Alarmingly - that provision was one that could never be enforced.
5) Already some 2 decades earlier, Los Angeles County was established - in relationship to Iran-Contra, as an area where law-enforcement agencies were controlling the drug markets for profit, as documented in Special Report in December 1997.
A reasonable person, is likely to conclude based on such evidence and more, that the motive for the Rampart Scandal was tied to the control of drug distribution and profiteering from such by law-enforcement. In such view, the judges who engaged in the false convictions and false sentencing, were in effect that ultimate controllers of such illicit profiteering.

A separate question of alleged criminal conduct pertains to the role of judges in preventing the release of the Rampart FIPs, even to this date. If one accepts that the judges were not involved in the false imprisonment in a manner that was driven by criminal intent - then there is no possible way to explain their conduct today.

C. OTHER RELATED ISSUES
Then there is the LA Time profile, which, once you realize what we are talking about, you read a bit different..
It was discovered that in March 1997 she had written a glowing letter of commendation for then-police Officer Rafael Perez’s testimony during a kidnapping trial in her courtroom. Then, more than three years later, after Perez admitted to corruption, she quipped at an awards dinner in June that Perez’s lawyer–who was in attendance–should not come near her courtroom with his client.
Both sets of comments raised eyebrows–especially as she began making pretrial rulings in favor of the accused officers. Some wondered if she should have recused herself from the case. Victor Chavez, the presiding judge of the Superior Court, said he saw no reason for her to step down.
...
She’s soft-spoken from her bench, forcing lawyers to lean forward as she verbally eviscerates them.

Then there is this passage that once you know what we are talking about, you read very differently... it is December 24, 2000, after she reversed jury verdicts.
Attorney Winston Kevin McKesson, who represents ex-cop-turned-informant Rafael Perez, said he was disappointed by the ruling. “However, it’s really not surprising when you consider that what was at issue in this case went to the very heart of the criminal justice system,” McKesson said. “I think it is very difficult for this judge, who has spent the vast majority of her adult life in that system, to allow a jury decision that questions the system to stand. I think she felt threatened by the jury’s verdict.”

D. PATRONAGE OF JUDGE CONNOR BY FBI
Evidence from the Rampart scandal
1) The conduct of FBI and U.S. Attorney during the Rampart Scandal, cannot be reasonably explained. The fundamental question is: how it happened that the investigation of the largest ever corruption scandal, and at that - corruption of the local justice system, was left for the local justice to investigate, prosecute, and judge.
2) One cannot imagine that Judge Connor would have dared to engage as presiding judge in the First Rampart Scandal and undermine it, the way she did, with world media focused on her conduct, unless she knew that she had full backing by FBI.
3) No federal agency made any effort to free the Rampart FIPs in the past 10 years.

Evidence from Samaan v Zernik
1) In my first approach to law enforcement, in December 2006, I was assisted and advised, both by FBI and by California Dept of Real Estate, in fact - beyond what they are allowed to do by law.
2) In both cases - once I filed a detailed report - and it became clear who was involved - no further help was provided.
3) I attempted to file my first complaint against Connor to FBI in May 2007, when I had sufficient evidence. I called twice, talked with two different duty officers, with the exact same response. I said I wanted to complain about a State Judge, they asked for the name, I provided the name, they hung up. FBI never hung up on me in numerous phone calls before and after...
4) What emerges from the email by James Wedick, is that FBI agreed that I was and am the victim of fraud, also agreed that judges were involved, but tried to induce me to file a complaint where no judges would be mentioned.
5) I had a similar experience by phone with FBI. I considered it almost an attempt to incriminate me. There is no way that I could ever produce a half way logical complaint if I eliminate any mention of the role of judges, unless I fabricated something along the way. Even without it - filing a declaration, where you deliberately omit the critical pertinent information on the matter of the declaration, is in violation of the law, the way it was explained to me.
FBI seems to be conflicted on the issue ... I guess they have been through quite a lot together... I believe it should be delegated elsewhere, possibly the Public Integrity Section.

E. THE IMPLICATIONS OF FBI PATRONAGE OF JUDGE CONNOR AND THE LA-JR


F. THIS IS AN APPEAL AND SOLICITATION OF ANONYMOUS PERSONAL STORIES OR EVIDENCE
It is obvious to me that in the community of criminal defense lawyers, and also among real estate lawyers Judge Jacqueline Connor has a clear and defined record. I would be grateful for any anonymous stories in comments on this page.. Just go to some internet cafe, and tell us what you know... Please add some details, so that there would be credibility to such anonymous message... Check out the anonymous letter above... He definitely was helpful in making clear to me what we ar talking about.

It is alleged that combined review of the records from both civil an criminal courts, is likely to lead a reasonable person to conclude that Jacqueline Connor is and was in fact, for at least a decade, a central racketeering figure in Los Angeles County, and that through her conduct in the First Rampart Trial, she deliberately affected the obstruction/perversion of justice, and also directly affected the ongoing false imprisonment of thousands of persons, whose exact number remains to be discovered.

Grounds for overturning verdict:
In this case, the alleged impropriety is the improper reliance by the jury on an issue never proffered
by the prosecution nor articulated as a theory underlying the charges of conspiracy, false reports
or perjury.
The failure to decide whether or not there was an accident is fatal to the conviction of Mr. Buchanan
under these counts alleging perjury.
Misconduct, whether simply inadvertent, misguided or deliberate, still deprives defendants of their
right to a fair trial.
Penal Code section 1181.5 permits the granting of a new trial when the court has misdirected the jury
in a matter of law, or has erred in the decision of any question of law arising during the courts of the
trial or whether the prosecution has engaged in prejudicial misconduct.
Evidence available to the court suggests that in fact the jurors were misdirected in the law, that the
law was misapplied and that the misapplication resulted in the denial of a fair trial on the merits.

Admissibility of affidavits:
The people correctly argue that statements made, conduct, condition or events can be considered
but evidence of the mental processes of the jurors is strictly forbidden. However, this restriction
does not, contrary to the prosecution’s argument, prohibit advocates from “piercing the veil”
of deliberations.
The key consideration in determining whether affidavits or other evidence of juror misconduct are
admissible relate to the corroborative nature of the evidence, whether the statements or evidence
are open to corroboration by sight, hearing or the other senses.
Where there are objectively verifiable portions of the statements, it is only logical that the court may
consider them while disregarding the inadmissible portions … the court is allowed to take
the declarations into consideration as a whole in order to determine whether or not jury
misconduct occurred.
The argument offered by the prosecution that they did not seek any affidavits because this would be
improper in some way is not compelling. The state of the evidence therefore leaves the
statements undisputed.
The jurors did not agree that there was or was not an accident. Why they reached this conclusion
one way or another deals with impermissible mental processes. The fact that they did not reach an
agreement is admissible.

Significance of great bodily injury:
The trial record consistently shows that this first scenario, that no officer was hit, was the only theory
pursued by the prosecution throughout the trial.
The defense and the jury were presented with a single theory which the prosecution now claims
could have arisen from any number of different acts… . It was not contemplated by any of the parties
nor the court that there was more than one act upon which the people were relying.
The court is aware, as is any neophyte to the criminal justice system, that we have our own language
that must be learned and learned well by any practitioners… .
Certainly had the court been aware that the jury assumed there was such a charge as great bodily
injury, the rulings as well as the instructions would have been different.
The court does not suggest that the people deliberately exploited the misstatement or deliberately
deceived the jury into believing that there is such a crime as a “GBI charge” or “ADW with GBI.”
However, the fact remains that the shorthand referrals that are accepted on a daily basis in police
stations, on police reports, in district attorney offices and defense attorney offices were not corrected
in their presentation to an uninformed lay jury. The misconduct by the jury in proceeding on the
improper basis that there was such a crime is not at all unreasonable in light of the circumstances
presented to them… .

Conclusions:
The court does conclude that there was jury misconduct, though unintentional, misguided and
inadvertent, in the consideration of improper facts.
While recognizing the enormous pressure on the community, on the police force, on the district
attorney’s office and on the courts to “fix” the Rampart scandal, this court is only interested
in evaluating the fairness of the proceedings in this court and determining whether justice was done
in this case. This court cannot and should not consider the political ramifications of future lawsuits or
future prosecutions. The defense in this case has presented compelling arguments to support their
argument that the defendants did not receive a fair trial.
The court cannot simply look the other way and ignore the improprieties, innocent or not, intentional
or unintentional, that served to deny a fair trial in this case.
While the court cannot and will not presume to guess whether a correction of the errors would result
in any different verdict, it most certainly concludes that the verdicts in this case cannot stand.


LINKED DOCUMENTS

1) Nov 17, 2000 LA Times report

2) December 23, 2000 LA Times - reversing jury verdict in First Rampart Trial

5) Rampart False Imprisonments - PBS (2001)

6) Rampart First Trial - PBS (2001)

8) July 12, 2007 Filing for Disqualification for a cause in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400)

9) Sept 10, 2007 Filing for Disqualification for a cause in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400)


Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be investigated by DC Public Integrity Section as a suspect central figure in Los Angeles Racketeering ?
RE: October-December 2000 - Alleged Racketeering that was the subject matter of the First Rampart Trial, and obstruction/perversion of justice in the trial itslef, where she falsely presided as a judge.

Is there any law enforcement agency that is capable to address the situation in Los Angeles County?

Please enter comments below.

"This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of
judicial corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most
serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society,"
said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared statement.

09-11-12 Should Kenneth Kaiser and Kenneth Melson be deemed patronizers of racketeers?

What is posted here, is just a small fraction of what was filed with FBI in the past three years. I tried to focus here on schemes that repeat themselves over and over, in the cases of Judge David Yaffe relative to Richard Fine in Marina v LA County, in the case of Judge Connor in Samaan v Zernik, in the case of Sturgeon v LA County in the case of Judge John Segal in Galdjie v Darwish. in the case of Terry Friedman in Hanks v Woods. It is those schemed that you find repeated, that are the most convincing evidence of the conduct in a pattern of racketeering...

Los Angeles Superior Court
This is no Flim Flam
This is allegedly a full blown, well-established racket....Evidence is provided on these pages for (1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity.
Such conduct pertains directly to the Human Rights of 10 millions who reside in Los Angeles County, and it also pertains directly to stability of financial markets in the U.S. and beyond...

Welcome to the

LA-JR!
(alleged LA-Judiciary Racket)

Alleged Specialty: Real estate fraud with high affinity towards financial institutions.
  1. It is alleged that the LA-JR closely colluded with Countrywide, and that the joint enterprise ended in collapse of Countrywide. You can't eat the cake and have it too...
  2. There is no way to explain consistent with public policy and the U.S. Constitution, the conduct of Senior U.S. Officers, who forced the merger of Bank of America Corporation with Countrywide and Merrill Lynch.
  3. Letter by NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, provided evidence for what was claimed by others to be criminal conduct by both the U.S. Officers and Bank of America Officers.
  4. Here it is claimed that credible, large volume evidence, demonstrated that the Legal Department of Countrywide was a corrupt organization well before the collapse, that U.S. agencies were fully informed, 5) Here it is claimed that effectively, through the merger, the Countrywide group took control of the office of General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation. The evidence is two fold:
a) The reports of the old General Counsel being led by security out of the builiding in the midst of negotiation with Merrill Lynch.
b) That the conduct of Bryan Cave, LLP, which is alleged to be essential racketeering, never ceased for one minute with the merger. However, resistance to it could be found in telephone conversations with senior staff of the office of General Counsel of Bank of America all the way to early 2009. That is claimed to be the reason that Bryan Cave- i.e. Sandor Samuels pressed for the court room false actions against me when I communicated with Bank of America.

The risk incurred to financial markets is unreasonable...
Sandy is now Associate General Counsel at BAC - streamlining as usual ...

Sandy Samuels
Sandor Samuels- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Jacqueline Connor
Associate General Counsel- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - -Judge
Bank of America Corporation- - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LA Superior Court
Alleged Racketeer- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Alleged Racketeer


Your best and brightest say that FBI refuses to perform its duties in order to protect alleged widespread corruption of the Los Angeles Judges...

We who live in Los Angeles, kindly request responses from FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice:
  • Why do FBI and U.S. DoJ patronize racketeering in the Los Angeles courts?
  • Why do FBI and US DoJ patronize racketeering in Countrywide, and now Bank of America
  • Why is there no indictment of Sandor Samuels?
  • Why is there no indictment of Jacqueline Connor?
Alleged deception by U.S. Dept of Justice and FBI in communications with U.S. Congress
  • In August -September 2008, the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator, and the Hon Diane Watson, Congresswoman, filed Congressional Inquiries on FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice, why they would not respond to my complaints about racketeering by the judges of the LA Superior Court?
  • The responses provided by the two officers whose photos appear above, were false and deliberately misleading.
  • The correspondence with congress is linked below.
  • Can anybody explain what justification Mr Melson and Mr Kaiser found for providing false and deliberately misleading responses to U.S. Congress?
Alleged long term denial of Equal Protection of the 10 millions who reside in Los Angeles County
  • The request was simple - restoration of the public's right to access court records - to inspect and to copy...
  • I never asked them to clean up the place either...
  • I realized it was too big a job. what I asked was simple, and it could be accomplished overnight....
  • Restore public access to public records... That would be enough...
Denial of access to court records is the direct cause of continued alleged severe abuse of Human Rights in the case of falsely imprisoned Atty Richard Fine:
  • Today- the LA Superior Court denies access to the Register of Action (California docket) in the case of the falsely imprisoned Richard Fine's case.
  • It is also clear why- that docket is likely to provide conclusive evidence of criminality by Judge David Yaffe.
Absent access to the docket, how could anybody consider reasonable the claims of honest judicial review, in court rulings that:
  • Richard Fine's jailing conformed with the fundamentals of the law...
  • Richard Fine's habeas corpus petition denied by U.S. Magistrate Carla Woehrle and U.S. Judge John Walter at the U.S. District Court... (took them 3 months to review)
  • Petition originating from the habeas corpus proceedings, was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit... Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, and Circuit Judges Richard Tallman, and Richard Paez...
All of that was done, without ever producing the docket... I guess that is why Alex Kozinski is advertised as a brilliant jurist and a champion of civil rights... I have no legal education, but I cannot see how anybody could review a Habeas Corpus with no access to court records...they are inseparable...
  • Could anybody in the justice system explain how this habeas corpus worked with no docket?
  • And how did it happen that no attorney in Los Angeles dares open his/her mouth?
FBI denies Equal Protection, even when a highly decorated FBI veteran opined crimes were being perpetrated and recommended an immediate investigation.
  • Below is a letter by a highly decorated FBI veteran who opined that the LA Superior Court was engaged in real estate fraud, and recommended to initiate an immediate investigation...
  • Could anybody in the justice system explain what justification they have for allowing the judges of the LA Superior Court to continue the racketeering in this case in broad daylight?
  • Could anybody in the justice system explain why they deny a resident of LA County Equal Protection against racketeering by Sandor Samuels and Jacqueline Connor?
Denial of access to court records is direct cause of continued alleged severe abuse of Human Rights of all who reside in Los Angeles County:
  • The prospect of any integrity in court services in Los Angeles County is now held captive by the court in false ligiation of Sturgeon v LA County
  • As was shown in filing with the court itself, they derailed such litigation to the point that one cannot even tell who the judge is or was.
  • The way that such litigation is conducted cannot reasonably be considered consistent with the law.
  • The court is denying access to the Register of Actions of this litigation, which would be instrumental in providing the definitive evidence of perversion/obstruction of justice in that litigation.
Your best and brightest say that you are refusing to perform your duties to protect alleged widespread corruption of the Los Angeles Judges.
  • Below is an email from the same decorated veteran... explaining that FBI would not investigate because of the concern that the would uncover the widespread corruption of the Judges of the "Los Angeles Circuit" as he called it...



LINKED RECORDS

1) August 21, 2008 Email from James Wedick in re: Refusal of FBI to investigate.

2) Opinion Letter of FBI veteran James Wedick regarding real estate fraud perpetrated on Dr Zernik by the LA Superior Court.

3) August September 2008 Correspondence between U.S. Congress and FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice.

    We are looking for informed, educated votes. Please check the evidence first, and here is a link for racketeering in Wikipedia...

    SHOULD KENNETH KAISER AND KENNETH MELSON BE DEEMED
    PATRONIZERS OF RACKETEERS?
    Please vote by entering a comment below.
    __________________

    "This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of
    judicial corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most
    serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society,"
    said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared statement.

    09-11-12 RE: Jan 30, 2006 - Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed Flimflam artist, or a serious crime figure?

    Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed FLIM FLAM ARTIST? Or maybe a RACKETEER?
    IN RE: January 30, 2006
    Los Angeles Superior Court








    Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed FLIM FLAM ARTIST? Or maybe a RACKETEER?
    IN RE: January 30, 2006
    Please enter comments below.
    ________________________________
    "This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society," said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared statement.

    09-11-12 RE: Nov 9, 2006 - Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed Flimflam artist or a serious crime figure?






    "This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society," said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared statement.

    09-11-12 Re: July 6, 2007 Should Judge Jacqueline Connor and Bank of America's Sandor Samuels be investigated as racketeering suspects?

    Should Judge Jacqueline Connor and Sandor Samuels - Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation, together with Bryan Cave, LLP attorneys, be investigated on allegations of racketeering?

    RE: July 6, 2007: Off the Record Proceeding to benefit "Non Party" Countrywide (today Bank of America Corporation), in collusion with Sandor Samuels,today - Associate General Counsel, Bank of America Corporation and alleged racketeer, and Bryan Cave, LLP - Jeff Modisett, John Amberg, Jenna Moldawsky.
    Alleged: corruption/perversion/obstruction of justice, financial institution fraud, falsification of court records, falsification of bank records, destruction of court records, production of false financial institution records in response to legal subpoena, abuse of civil rights under the color of law, tampering with witnesses, numerous predicated acts, alleged on that day alone, as part of conduct of an enterprise in a pattern of racketeering.


    Los Angeles Superior Court

    Now - in a joint enterprise...
    Sandy Samuels
    JACQUELINE CONNOR_ _ _ _ _ _SANDOR SAMUELS
    JUDGE_ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ASSOCIATE GENERAL COUNSEL
    LA SUPERIOR COURT_ _ _ _ _ BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION
    ALLEGED RACKETEER_ _ _ _ _ ALLEGED RACKETEER


    Everyday is special, but July 6, 2007 was more special:

    1) Judge Connor was running a proceeding in a "dark courtroom", "off the record", "off the calendar"

    2) She was doing so to cater to a financial institution - Countrywide Financial Corporation, today - Bank of America Corporation, and such conduct continues to this date... under Judge Terry Friedman

    3) It directly involved the then Chief Legal Officer of Countrywide - Sandor Samuels, and also CEO Angelo Mozilo, both of whom held direct reporting duties to regulators... The former serves today as Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation.

    4) It was not any run of the mill proceeding, it was proceeding for a Protective Order, which in fact was filed at a time that no Protective Orders were allowed to be filed any longer. Moreover, any reasonable reader* would conclude that it was no Protective Order to start out, It was in fact - a Gag Order.
    The reasons that were listed for the request, included, but were not limited to:
    a) Dr Zernik met a Rabbi in the Rabbi's Chambers, and discussed with him some issues that pertained to Countrywide.
    b) Dr Zernik talked on the phone with a retired judge, and discussed with him some issues that pertained to Countrywide.
    c) Dr Zernik talked on the phone with a former senior underwriter who was dismissed by Countrywide two years earlier, after she refused to cooperate in fraud on the U.S. Government and on Dr Zernik.
    * Excluding Atty Tom Green and Atty Jerry Brown, Office of Attorney General of California, they reviewed specifically the matter of this alleged criminal conduct, and found it to be a "private matter", which the office of Attorney General of California should not get involved in.

    5) It was designed to prevent Dr Zernik from obtaining evidence, or demanding responses from Countrywide on the production in response to subpoena of underwriting records of Nivie Samaan's loan applications, over 400, which were repeatedly produced 5 times, and which should be deemed as fraud as a whole, and each separately.
    Bank of America Corporation refuses to answer any questions on the subject to this date.
    I am not sure which Pillars of the Basel Accords it would fall under, the records produced by Countrywide, which Bank of America refuses to answer on, included but were not limited to alleged: invalid accounting, financial institution fraud, to wire fraud, to obstruction... and led to intimidation/harassment/retaliation against witnesses/informants/victims, who were Joseph Zernik, and the former senior underwriter - Diane Frazier.

    6) It was alleged that it provided evidence of the conduct of the Legal Department of Countrywide - today- Bank of America Corporation - as a corrupt organization, it demonstrated the total collapse of any appearances of Internal Audit, External Audit, or compliance at Countrywide, already in 2004...

    7) It involved false appearance of Bryan Cave, LLP, as Counsel of Record, which they were not, a scheme that continues to this date, under Bank of America Corporation, under the guidance of Sandor Samuels. Such scheme, as used by Countrywide in the employment of Outside Counsel was detailed and rebuked in Texas in March 2008, but continues to this date at the Los Angeles Superior Court.

    8) Bryan Cave, LLP, appeared and filed papers on that date, and numerous times after that, under the false and deliberately misleading, fabricated, self-designation of "Non Party". The court itself designated Countrywide on that day as "Plaintiff", but to this date, the court allows Bank of America to appear as "Non Party", while the court itself designates it interchangeably as "Plaintiff", "Defendant", "Cross-Defendant","Intervenor", "Real Parties in Interest", all with no legal foundation at all...

    9) Such campaign of alleged harassment and abuse was initiated in response to requests for help regarding fraud banking - as opined by fraud experts - of Countrywide. Such requests were forwarded directly to Angelo Mozilo, who advertised on the web his commitment 24/7 to fraud fighting, and to Sandor Samuels, who then served as Chair of the Board at Bet Tzedek- the House of Justice, and who advertised on the web that he was launching a campaign against fraud in Southern California, particularly - housing fraud...

    10) As part of such campaign, and under such allegedly perverted litigation, which could not be part of any court action in U.S. or California court, 2 Judgments for Contempt were purported to be generated by the Los Angeles Superior Court against Dr Zernik, one at the request of Countrywide, and the other at the request of Bank of America, under claims that Dr Zernik was harassing these corporations... Serious sanctions were issued, exceeding >$30,000, and threat of jailing was issued as well.

    11) The whole affair is deemed replicated but to the extreme, in what is taking place in the past year in the alleged harassment and later false imprisonment of Att Richard Fine, by Judge David Yaffe, to cater to LA County and two large privately held construction companies. Combined, they document the Los Angeles Superior Court, in its alleged conduct of an enterprise in a pattern of racketeering activity...

    Note: In January 2008 FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice announced an intensive investigation into any possible criminality at sub-prime lenders. In May 2008, in reporting to U.S. Congress, FBI and U.S. Dept of Jusrtice stated that they were "Speeding up" the investigation. To this date, no indictment was ever filed, and also- FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice refuse to investigate any complaints filed regarding the matters described above.
    A note from a highly decorated FBI veteran, explained that the reason was - concerns that they would have to expose the wide spread corruption of the judges of the LA Superior Court.

    Linked Records:
    1) June 20, 2007 Advertisement on the web, by Sandor Samuels, of his campaign against fraud, under Bet Tzedek - the House of Justice: "Who are you going to call?" He solicited fraud victims requests for help. The whole web site disappeared within 24 hours after Dr Zernik filed with Samuels his request for help against fraud by Samuels.
    2) June 22, 2007 Dr Zernik's letter to Sandorr Samuels - Chief Legal Officer of Countrywide, regarding fraud in banking records (as opined by fraud expeert), which were used to pervert justice (as opined by another fraud expert - FBI veteran- possibly the most decorated alive). The letter was hand-delivered at Bet Tzedek offices.
    3) June 23, 2009 Angelo Mozilo web page. Recipient of the "Albert Schweitzer Award",Angelo Mozilo advertised on the web his "Fraud Hotline 24/7" .
    Angelo Mozilo "Code of Business Ethics" downloaded March 2007
    4) June 25, 2007 Dr Zernik's first email to Angelo Mozilo, CEO, and Sandorr Samuels - Chief Legal Officer of Countrywide, regarding fraud in banking records, which were used to pervert justice.
    5) July 1, 2007 The Bet Tzedek website came back up, with pages from 2005
    6) July 2, 2007 Dr Zernik's Second email to Angelo Mozilo and Sandor Samuels, demanding to stop the fraud.
    7) July 3, 2007 - Initiation of Retaliation/Obstruction - First letter from Bryan Cave, LLP, on behalf of "Non Party" Countrywide, notice of the proceeding, which as it turned out, was in a "Dark Courtroom", of the calendar. Later, it also turned out that Bryan Cave, LLP, was appearing, but not Counsel of Record, part of a standard Countrywide scheme, described in Texas court, see below. The case number is false, the signature does not even show that the writer is an attorney, and Protective Orders and discovery motions were not allowed at that time.
    8) July 6, 2007 - Moving Papers by Countrywide as "Non Party". These papers were eliminated from court file. This copy is the one served on Dr Zernik. The "offending" conduct included: Talking with a rabbi in his chambers, speaking with a retired judge on the phone, speaking with an employee that Countrywide had fired two years earlier... The request was to prohibit Dr Zernik from any speech with anybody who had been "associated" with Countrywide.
    9) July 6, 2009 No Minute Order could be found in paper court file for this proceeding, which must be deemed a criminal act by Judge Connor,Sandor Samuels, Bryan Cave, and Countrywide. However, a false minute order, and false notations were found in electronic court file, which parties cannot usually access.

    10) July 6, 2007 - Proposed Protective Order - "Denied."
    However, Countrywide and Bank of America have engaged in additional fraud, continued to this date, claiming that there was a Protective Order or Restraining Order issued. They never produced the paper, but that never stopped them from making the fraudulent claims.
    11) July 6, 2007 - Proposed Joint Stipulation - unsigned
    12) Register of Actions for July 2007, demonstrating the fraud in court records:
    13) Register of Actions for false date of July 2004 (before filing of the complaint - demonstrating that all dates are user defined, not machine stamps at all) - in fact was entered on July 24, 2007, listing Countrywide as "Real Parties in Interest". In open court Judge Connor, who entered this fraudulent note, claimed that any suggestion that Countrywide had interest in the case were "conspiratorial theories".
    14) In the online Case Summary (not a court record- but published by the court) - Countrywide is listed as a Plaintiff, Intervenor, and Cross-Defendant at once:
    15) Outside Counsel Procedures of Bank of America Corporation, which explicitly prohibits "obstructionist" conduct, it also porhibits appearance by counsel who is not authorized, but Bank of America Corporation allows to this date Bryan Cave, LLP, to appear, althhout senior staff of the general counsel office of BAC stated that Bryan Cave LLP was not authorized to appear.
    16) March 5, 2008 memorandum opinion of Judge Jeff Bohm in case of Borrower Parsley in Houston Texas, which detailed and rebuked the use of false Outside Counsel by Countrywide, which Bank of America is not continuing after the merger.
    17) January 2009 Bank of America Corporation "Code of Ethics"

    Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed FLIM FLAM ARTIST, or maybe a RACKETEER?
    RE: July 6, 2007: Off the Record Proceeding to benefit "Non Party" Countrywide (today Bank of America Corporation), in collusion with Sandor Samuels,today - Associate General Counsel, Bank of America Corporation and alleged racketeer, and Bryan Cave, LLP - Jeff Modisett, John Amberg, Jenna Moldawsky. Alleged: Corruption/Perversion/Obstruction of Justice, Financial Institution Fraud, Abuse of Civil Rights under the Color of Law, numerous predicated acts, alleged on that day alone, as part of conduct of an enterprise in a pattern of racketeering.

    "This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial
    corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most serious
    of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society,"
    said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared
    statement.

    09-11-12 Re: July 9, 2007 Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed Flimflam artist, or a serious criminal?

    Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed a Flimflam artist? Or maybe a racketeer?
    RE: JULY 9, 2007 - Fictitious Proceeding - alleged falsification of court records, as part of
    alleged sanctions fraud in collusion with Sheppard Mullin


    Jacqueline Connor
    Alleged Racketeer

    July 9, 2007 was a minor episode - Judge Jacqueline Connor entered on that day a fictitious, false and deliberately misleading Minute Order. Just the daily routine - production of false trial court litigation records, assuming that the parties would never even get to see these records.

    The main reasons I bring it in here are:

    1) Conduct of an enterprise in a pattern of racketeering activity...
    Because it was part of a sanctions scheme (alleged fraud to be precise) by Judge Connor in collusion with Mohammad Keshavarzi (Sheppard Mullin). The Presiding Judge of the court, Charles McCoy, was noticed, as usual, hoping that he would ask his colleagues in Sheppard Mullin to stop the alleged racketeering in the courtroom with Judge Connor. But I guess it was irresistible.
    It was almost identical to the sanctions scheme that ended up with the false imprisonment of Atty Richard Fine. I am posting it here for public education, and I will refer law enforcement to the web page, in noticing them that Richard Fine is falsely imprisoned by Judge Yaffe and others.
    It is the repetitive pattern of these alleged crimes that is the best evidence of the racketeering at the LA Superior Court.

    2) Public access to court records in the only way to safeguard minimal integrity in the courts
    Because some people pretend that they do not understand what is wrong with hidden records. That is what is wrong - non stop falsifications.

    3) Flim Flam at the California Court of Appeal, 2nd District
    Because eventually you must stop and think: Why do they bother?
    Racketeering in Los Angeles Courts and the California Court of Appeal, 2nd DistrictAnd then you realize that there must be readers for the false records, otherwise, they would not bother. Finally you realize the self-evident - that the LA Superior Court forwards the Registers of Actions to review courts without notice to parties... That of course creates a uniquely, I hope, Los Angeles style of justice: People go to the California Court of Appeal, 2nd District, and they make arguments based on records that they never even got to see. But the Justices of the Court of Appeals base their decisions on such records that they secretly get from the LA Superior Court, behind the backs of the parties... routinely...Simply through terminals installedat the California Court of Appeals, 2nd District for Sustain - the "privileged" case management system.In short - anybody who pays an attorney to go to appeal must be either uninformed or inclined to subscribe to abusive style of justice...
    Basically - we live in Los Angeles in the digital-medieval era... The court managed to use digital technology to take us back into the deep past...

    July 9, 2007 Minute Order for a fictitious proceedings that never took place in reality.

    The Court reporter that is listed denied that she had any such proceeding on file. I never talked with Judge Connor “telephonically” in my life. And the party line company can check that I never had an account and I could not conduct such phone hearing. This fictitious minute order was part of an elaborate sanctions fraud, in collusion with Mohammad Keshavarzi, Sheppard Mullin, very similar to the Flim Flam that Judge Yaffe was running with Atty Joshua Rosen on Atty Richard Fine. However, Judge Yaffe went all the way with it to false imprisonment…

    Well, I am sure that Jacqueline Connor can claim a few thousands false imprisonmetns, so one by David Yaffe really does not count…

    Linked Records:
    1) July 9, 2007 Minute Order from electronic court file (no comparable minute order was found in paper court file)
    http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-samaan-v-zernik-court-filing_07-07-09-fictitious-minute-order-by-judge-connor-in-sanctions-fraud-s.pdf

    Should Judge Jacqueline Connor be deemed FLIM FLAM ARTIST? Or maybe a RACKETEER?
    RE: JULY 9, 2007 - Fictitious Proceeding - alleged falsification of court records, as part of
    alleged sanctions fraud in collusion with Sheppard Mullin
    Please vote in the Comments below_________________________________
    "This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial
    corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most
    serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society,"
    said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared
    statement.