09-12-19 Kindly urging David Pasternak to resign from his Treasurer position at the Chancery Club

Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 23:26:58 -0800
To: "David Pasternak"
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Kindly urging Mr David Pasternak to resign from his position as Treasurer of the Chancery Club.
Cc: jvandekamp@dl.com, "Mohammad Keshavarzi" , jenna.moldawsky@bryancave.com, "Amberg, John W." < jwamberg@BryanCave.com >, "Todd Boock"  , sandy_shatz@countrywide.com, mwachtell@buchalter.com, kdicarlo@cmda-law.com, "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge " <12136177176@efaxsend.com>, "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" <12136217952@efaxsend.com>, "Cindy F. Pasternak" , "John Patton"

The favor of a response within 2 business days is requested

December 19, 2009

David J Pasternak, Esq
Pasternak, Pasternak, Patton
By email to

Dear Mr Pasternak:

Since you failed to provide a timely response regarding detailed evidence of racketeering by you and others at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, I urge you to resign from your position as Treasurer of the Chancery Club. Your expedient resignation would spare the Club and its distinguished members any further embarrassment.

Wouldn't that be a nice gesture by you towards the members during this holiday season?

Truly,

Joseph Zernik

cc:
Mr van de Kamp
Others of interest.
__________________

Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:53:19 -0800
To: jvandekamp@dl.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Pleasantly surprised by "READ" acknowledgements by a large number of members of the Chancery Club

John K. VAN DE KAMP
President, Chancery Club
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
333 S. Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1530
213.621.6511
jvandekamp@dl.com

Dear Mr van de Kamp:

I was pleasantly surprised today by the expedient "READ" acknowledgements by a large number of members of your club. However, I hope that you, as President would respond on the matters.

Would the Club, as such, take any steps -
a) To ensure that Mr Pasternak respond in a timely manner with reasonable explanation of his conduct in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), which for all purposes amounted to racketeering in broad daylight - at the Court.
b) To initiate corrective actions regarding large-scale false imprisonments generated by the LA Superior Court, which are no doubt a Human Rights disgrace of historic proportions.
I would be grateful for your response on the matters.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik

__________________
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:27:14 -0800
To: "Jz12345@Earthlink. Net"
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Requesting Mr Pasternak and the Chancery Club to provide reasonable explanations for conduct that amounted to racketeering.

To: members of the Chancery Club, Los Angeles:

Please take notice of the December 16, 2009 letter to your treasures - Mr David Pasternak, linked and copied below. The letter requested Mr Pasternak's timely response and reasonable explanation for conduct that for all practical purposes appeared as racketeering at the courts.  I hope that a distinguished club such as yours would ensure that those listed among its leadership, such as Mr Pasternak, were not engaging in criminal conduct.  Overwhelming credible evidence was accumulated from a large number of real estate cases, which indicated that Mr Pasternak was routinely involved as a central figure in racketeering at the courts.

Mr Pasternak owes his explanation not only to this writer, but also to the members of your Club and to the public at large. Moreover, it was expected that those of you who were bound by either California Code of Judicial Ethics, and/or Code of Conduct of US Judges, would initiate corrective actions if Mr Pasternak would not provide reasonable timely explanation for his conduct.

Such allegations bear significance far beyond the matter at hand, since it was further alleged that the conduct of Mr Pasternak and his colleagues in the alleged racket, which was the primary reason that LA County was propelled by FBI to the distinction of "the epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud."  It was and is the epidemic that bred the current financial/integrity crisis, which is crippling the US today, and which harmed workers and investors world-wide.

Your club is uniquely qualified to review such matters.  It listed on its roster individuals such as Mr David Burcham. Mr Burcham organized in 2000 the Loyola Law School symposium on the Rampart scandal (1998-2000).  He wrote:

judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit.   How could so many participants in the criminal justice system have failed either to recognize or to instigate any meaningful scrutiny of such appalling and repeated perversions of justice? 

we felt a particular obligation to ensure that no aspect of the Los Angeles criminal justice system, including the lawyers and judges, escaped scrutiny. A law school, with its concern for all aspects of the justice system, is the obvious place for such an examination.

Your club also listed on its roster Mr Alejandro Mayorkas. Any reasonable person reviewing the history of the Rampart scandal would have to conclude that he was involved in engineering and/or execution of the cover-up in that case, as framer of the Consent Decree (2001) in US v City of LA et al (2:00-cv-11769)    The outcome was the ongoing false imprisonment of thousands of Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons). There simply was no reasonable explanation for the conduct of US agencies in the aftermath of the Rampart scandal - in allowing the Rampart-FIPs to remain falsely imprisoned to this date - as evidenced in both media and official reports. [12] [13]

In sum: This note alleged that the large-scale false imprisonments, the numerous real estate fraud cases, and the unprecedented financial institution fraud centered at Countrywide (today - Bank of America Corporation) were all manifestations of the same phenomenon - described in official reports as "[sub]cult of criminality tolerated in the ranks" of the Los Angeles justice system. [13]

I look forward to receipt of reasonable explanations from Mr David Pasternak regarding his conduct, and from your distinguished club - in re: including Mr Pasternak among its leadership - or for that matter - among your membership. One could also wish that your distinguished club would adopt the cause of bringing the false imprisonments in Los Angeles County to an end.  It is a Human Rights disgrace of historic proportions.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik

I. P.S.
1) A digitally signed copy of the letter to Mr Pasternak was posted at:
http://inproperinla.com/09-12-16-req-explanation-by-pasternak-for-notice-re-status-conference-n-check-$6000-dated-nov-16-2009-s.pdf
2) Further information was posted in blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
3) I would be glad to appear before you distinguished club in any of its meetings, and provide detailed evidence of racketeering by your treasurer, Mr David Pasternak, and others at the Los Angeles Superior Court.
4) One was left wondering regarding the choice of name - "Chancery Club" - since the evidence showed that judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court engaged in real estate fraud in collusion with Mr David Pasternak under the purport of presiding in Equity Courts.
Linked Records:
[12] PBS FRONTLINE: One reference for the low, conservative estimate of 10,000, compared to an estimate of 8,000 by the LA District Attorney office, 15,000 by criminal defense attorneys, and 30,000 by others - LAPD Blues -False Imprisonments (2001, updated 2008) - PBS Frontline http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-rampart-first-trial-01-05-01-pbs-frontline_rampart-false-imprisonments-s.pdf
[13] LAPD BLUE RIBBON REVIEW PANEL: Best reference on why the Rampart-FIPs are still imprisoned - by an official panel of experts, commissioned by the LAPD itself, led by civil rights activist, Atty Connie Rice - established LA County justice system as corrupt, and called for "External Investigation" - which was never instituted - Rampart reconsidered (2006) - LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-rampart-blue-ribbon-review-panel-2006-report.pdf

_________________

Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:34:29 -0800
To: "David Pasternak" , <13105531540@efaxsend.com>
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Timely response requested within 2 business days. Re: purported caption Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) - Request for explanation of notices received via USPS and a check dated Nov 16, 2009
Cc: "Mohammad Keshavarzi" , jenna.moldawsky@bryancave.com, "Amberg, John W." < jwamberg@BryanCave.com >, "Todd Boock"  , sandy_shatz@countrywide.com, mwachtell@buchalter.com, kdicarlo@cmda-law.com, "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge " <12136177176@efaxsend.com>, "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" <12136217952@efaxsend.com>
Dr Z
Joseph Zernik, DMD, PhD
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750; fax: 801 998-0917; email: jz12345@earthlink.net

RE: Purported caption Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) - Request for explanation of Notices received via USPS and a check dated Nov 16, 2009*

Timely response requested within 2 business days

To Attorney David Pasternak
By email to:
By fax to: <13105531540@efaxsend.com>

Dear Mr Pasternak:

Please accept this notice as a request for clarifications regarding recent notices received from your office via USPS first class mail at my post office box #526 in La Verne, California, 91750.  Concerns were raised that these notices in particular, and your conduct relative to my property at 320 South Peck Drive, Beverly Hills, California, 90212 in general, evidenced various kinds of fraud, including, but not limited to mail fraud.

Recent notices referenced in this notice included:  (1) Purported Notice of Cancellation signed by David Pasternak, dated November 16, 2009, post stamped November 17, 2009, [1] and  (2) Notice of payment signed by David Pasternak, dated November 16, 2009, including a copy of check # 4323, in the sum of $6,000, 1st Century Bank, Los Angeles, Acct # 122243761, no account name printed on the check, signed by Lisa Kalaydjian, dated November 16, 2009, to the benefit of "Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court", post stamped November 16, 2009. [2]

1) Regarding purported Notice of Cancellation signed by David Pasternak, dated November 16, 2009, post stamped November 17, 2009 [1] :

a)  You marked the notice as pertaining to case captioned Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  In the past two years Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and the Clerk of the Court John A Clarke denied multiple requests to certify that such caption was a matter litigated under the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  The conduct of alleged fraudulent caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) on the grounds of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and under the guise of litigation of such court were of particular concern given the fact that purported Plaintiff in such caption, Nivie Samaan, was represented by Attorney Mohammad Keshavarzi of  the law-firm of Sheppard Mullin. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy was previously a Partner in the same law-firm. Moreover,  Presiding Judge Charles McCoy was notified over recent years numerous times of alleged fraud in the conduct of Mohammad Keshavarzi, including but not limited to the purported November 9, 2007 Motion of Appointment of David Pasternak Receiver. [3], [4].  Presiding Judge Charles McCoy failed to initiate any corrective actions during these years. 
One must notice in this regard that  former Presiding Judge Welch of neighboring San Bernardino County, California, was also tied to numerous cases of real estate fraud. [5]
Please provide evidence that such caption was indeed a matter litigated under jurisdiction of Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.

b) You marked the matter as Presided by "Hon Terry B Friedman".  Terry B Friedman failed to present due assignment order as presiding judge in such purported caption. Moreover, Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and the Clerk of the Court John A Clarke, denied multiple requests in the past two years to certify that Terry B Friedman was presiding judge in such purported caption.
Please provide evidence that Terry B Friedman was indeed duly assigned Presiding Judge in such purported caption, and was engaged in judicial acts (vs extrajudicial conduct) in this matter.

c) You stated (p1) "Continued Status Conference previously scheduled to be held....".  No such status conference ever appeared on the Calendar of the Court.
Please provide evidence that Status Conference that  you purported to cancel ever appeared on the Calendar of the Court.

d) You addressed the purported notice to "Parties and their Attorneys of Record Herein"
However, your Service List named twice "Countrywide Home Loans, Inc" with the false designation of "Non-Party".  Various records purported to be records issued by the court  interchangeably designated "Countrywide Home Loans, Inc" as "Parties in Interest", "Plaintiff", "Defendant", "Cross Defendant", "Intervenor", etc - all with no legal foundation at all.  However, none designated Countrywide as "Non Party".
Please explain the use of party designation that appeared false on its face.

e) You included "Countrywide Home Loans, Inc" in your service list, whereas no such entity existed for many months at the time you issued the purported notice.
Please explain the inclusion of a non-existent entity as a purported party to litigation.

f) You listed John Amberg, Jenna Moldawsky, and/or Bryan Cave, LLP in your service list, addressed to parties and attorneys of record, as counsel for Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. Even when Countrywide Home Loans, Inc existed as a corporate entity, the evidence showed that the attorneys and law-firm that you listed were not Attorneys of Record for such entity. After the take-over of Countrywide Financial Corporation by Bank of America Corporation (BAC), July 1, 2008, I contacted the office of BAC General Counsel on multiple occasions, and I was invariably informed by senior staff of that office that Bryan Cave, LLP was not authorized as Attorneys of Record. However, BAC never took action to stop such allegedly fraudulent appearances by attorney from Bryan Cave, LLP.
Please provide evidence that John Amberg, Jenna Moldawsky and/or Bryan Cave, LLP were in fact Attorney of Record for Countrywide Home Loans, Inc, at the time that such entity existed.

g) You signed your purported Notice as "Receiver".  The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles failed to maintain Book of Judgments, in contradiction with its own published Local Rules of Court.  Therefore, there was no way to confirm your purported due appointment as "Receiver".  All specimen of the purported appointment order document in my possession were false on their faces - bearing invalid authentications - dated prior to the date of the purported order itself. [6], [7], [8], [9] Moreover,  Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and the Clerk of the Court John A Clarke, denied multiple requests in the past two years to certify that David Pasternak was duly appointed Receiver in a caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400).
Please provide evidence that David Pasternak was duly appointed Receiver in a caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400).

2) Regarding notice of payment and copy of check # 4323, in the sum of $6,000, 1st Century Bank, Los Angeles, Acct # 122243761, no account name printed on the check, signed by Lisa Kalaydjian, to the benefit of "Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court".

a) No account name was printed on the check referenced above.
Please provide the name of account and account owner(s) for 1st Century Bank, Los Angeles, Acct # 122243761.

b) The check was marked by hand "Receivership Estate for 320 South Peck Drive".
Please provide the legal foundation for the existence of such "Receivership" and such "Estate".

c)  The check provided evidence that funds indeed existed in such account.
Please provide a reasonable explanation for the source of funds in such account.

d) The check provided evidence that you engaged in various monetary transactions in such account.
Please provide copies of comprehensive bank statements for all transactions during the lifetime of such account.

e) The check was marked to: "Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court".  Evidence documented that all previous funds paid to the Clerk of the Court, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, by various parties in relationship to purported caption Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) were designated "Journal Entry". Moreover, Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and the Clerk of the Court John A Clarke, denied multiple requests for explanation of the final designation of such "Journal Entry" funds.
Please provide a reasonable explanation for the destination of such funds.

f) The check was signed by Lisa Kalaydjian, who I was informed and believed was employed by your law-firm as Notary Public. Your name and the name of Lisa Kalaydjian previously appeared on Grant Deeds that were opined as fraud [11], pertaining to the same property - 320 South Peck Drive, Beverly Hills, California, 90212.
Please provide a reasonable explanation for the authority of Lisa Kalaydjian to sign as authorized person on such account.

g) In the comment line, the check noted "Paragraph 8 Judgment". However, the purported judgment record that was attached in the same communication was missing Proof of Service by party or Certificate of Service and Notice of Entry by Clerk.  Therefore, such records must not be deemed an honest, valid, and effectual Judgment of any court.
Please provide a reasonable explanation for the legal foundation for monetary transaction documented in this check, which on its face appeared as money laundering.

Mr Pasternak, I hope that you would take the time to carefully review this matter and to respond in a timely manner.  Surely you realize that these notices alone evidenced numerous predicated acts, more than the number required by US law for conviction on charges of racketeering.  Moreover, your role in the purported caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), in the caption of Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737) and other cases retrieved from various sources provided overwhelming credible evidence of your role in (a) conduct (b) of an enterprise (c) through a pattern (d) of racketeering activity.

Truly,

Dated: December 15, 2009                
La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California     Joseph H Zernik 
                                                
                                                        By: ______________
                                                JOSEPH H ZERNIK
                                                PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
                                                Fax: 801 998 0917
                                                Email

* Digitally signed copy of this letter, with easy links to referenced records and documentation of transmission was posted at:
http://inproperinla.com/09-12-16-req-explanation-by-pasternak-for-notice-re-status-conference-n-check-$6000-dated-nov-16-2009-s.pdf

Linked records:
[1] Notice of Cancellation signed by David Pasternak, dated November 16, 2009, post stamped November 17, 2009
 http://inproperinla.com/09-11-16-pasternak-notice-cancellation-of-status-conference-s.pdf
[2] Notice of payment and copy of check # 4323, in the sum of $6,000, 1st Century Bank, Los Angeles, Acct # 122243761, no account name printed on the check, signed by Lisa Kalaydjian, to the benefit of "Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court"
http://inproperinla.com/09-11-16-pasternak-check-$6000-to-clerk-s.pdf
[3] November 9, 2007 Motion for Appointment of Attorney David Pasternak Receiver, by Attorney Mohammad Keshavarzi included Exhibit 1, which in declaration under penalty of perjury was defined as "August 9, 2007 Judgment". In fact the record that was included under Exhibit 1 was not a judgment at all.
http://inproperinla.com/07-11-09-motion-appointing%20pasternak%20receivercpver-s.pdf
[4] November 9, 2007 Reporter's Transcript, included statements by Attorney Mohammad Keshavarzi in open court, purporting to explain the false judgment record that was included in the November 9, 2007 Motion.  In open court Attorney Mohammad Keshavarzi stated that he recognized no written judgment of the court.  Instead, he was seeking the appointment of David Pasternak for the enforcement of an "Understanding" that was the outcome of a "Dialog" that he had held with Jacqueline Connor, a judge best remembered for her role in derailing the First Rampart Trial (2000):
http://inproperinla.com/07-11-09-la-sup-ct-transcripts-samaan-v-zernik-doc-58-s.pdf
[5] San Bernardino Sentinel news report tying former Presiding Judge of Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino to numerous real estate fraud cases.
http://inproperinla.com/09-09-11-former-san-bernardino-county-superior-court-presiding-judge-sustpect-of-real-estate-frauds-san-bernardino-county-sentinel.pdf
[6] Although the Presiding Judge and Clerk of the Court denied multiple requests for certifying the purported November 9, 2007 Order Appointing Pasternak Receiver, a certified copy was eventually obtained through financial institutions that colluded in the alleged fraud: USC Credit Union and United Title. Note that the order was signed by Judge John Segal with the date of November 9, 2007, whereas the false Proof of Service was dated October 26, 2007.  Such fraudulent records were alleged to be "The Fingerprints of the LA-JR (alleged LA Judiciary Racket), and were found also in records of Marina v LA County (BS109420) - the false March 4, 2009 Judgment, which led to the false imprisonment of Attorney Richard Fine, and in Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286) - in false Summary Judgment vindicating the "not permitted" payments to all Superior Court of California, County of Los Angles judges, which led to the signing of pardons by the Governor of California on February 20, 2009. As was the case in Samaan v Zernik and in Galdjie v Darwish, the Clerk of the Court and Presiding Judge of the Court refused to certify the latter two captions as matters under jurisdiction of the Superior Court of California.  The preponderance of the evidence indicated that Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), Galdie v Darwish (SC052737), Marina v LA County (BS109420), Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286) were not part of the Index of All cases of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, but instead - were all part of the Equity/Enterprise Track of the LA-JR.
http://inproperinla.com/07-11-09-purported-order-appointing-pasternak-receiver+pos-original-certified-from-usc-cu-united-title-s.pdf
[7] Purported November 9, 2007 Order Appointing Pasternak Receiver - signed by judge November 9, 2007, falsely bearing Proof of Service dated October 26, 2007
http://inproperinla.com/07-11-09-purported-order-appointing-pasternak-receiver+pos-conformed-vol-ix-filed-by-keshavarzi-s.pdf
[8] Purported November 9, 2007 Order Appointing Pasternak Receiver - signed by judge November 9, 2007, falsely bearing Proof of Service dated October 26, 2007
http://inproperinla.com/07-11-09-purported-order-appointing-pasternak-receiver+pos-original-vol-vii-filed-by-keshavarzi-s.pdf
[9] Purported November 9, 2007 Order Appointing Pasternak Receiver - signed by judge November 9, 2007, falsely bearing Proof of Service dated October 26, 2007
http://inproperinla.com/07-11-09-purported-order-appointing-pasternak-receiver+pos-conformed-vol-ix-filed-by-pasternak-s.pdf
[10] Purported November 9, 2007 Minute Order, missing Certificate of Mailing and Notice of Entry by Clerk.
http://inproperinla.com/07-11-09-purported-minute-order-vol-vii-s.pdf
[11] Opinion of highly decorated FBI veteran James Wedick regarding fraud by David Pasternak and Lisa Kalaydjian in grant deeds pertaining to property at 320 South Peck Drive, Beverly Hills, California, 90212
http://inproperinla.com/07-12-17-grant-deeds-wedick-s-opinion-s.pdf
cc:
Mohammad Keshavarzi, Esq.
Sheppard. Mullin., Richter & Hampton LLP
333 South Hope Street. 48th Floor
Los Angeles. CA 90071-1448
Telephone: 213620.1780
Facsimile: 2l3.620.1398
By email:

John Amberg. Esq.
Jenna Moldawsky. Esq.
Bryan Cave, LLP
120 Broadway. Suite 300
Santa Monica. CA 90401-2386
Telephone: 310.576.2100
FacsiTlile: 310.576.2200
By email: 
< jwamberg@BryanCave.com >

Sanford Shatz. Esq.
Todd A Boock. Esq.
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
5220 Las Virgenes Road, MS: AC-11
Calar:asas, CA 91302
Telephone: 818.871.6045
Facsimile: 818.871.4669



Michael Wachtell, Esq.
Buchalter Nemer
1000 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1500
Los Angeles. California 90017-2457
Telephone: 213.891.0700
Facsimile: 213.630.5760
E-Mail:

Kathryn E. DiCarlo, Esq.
Cummings, McClorey, Davis. Acho & Associates. P.C.
3801 University Avenue, Suite 560
Riverside. CA 92501
Telephone 951.276.4420
FacsuniJe: 95,1.276.4405
E-Mail:

Charles McCoy
Presiding Judge
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
<12136177176@efaxsend.com>

John A Clarke
Clerk of the Court
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
<12136217952@efaxsend.com>

Various regulators and law enforcement agencies.

Other government agencies and NGOs.

09-12-19 What is a Ronald George system?

Ronald George Systems are large database management systems in US and state government agencies, including, but not limited to courts and correctional facilities (jails and prisons) and in public corporations, including, but not limited to financial institutions, which were introduced in the past quarter century with no publicly accountable validation (no certified functional logic verification) and were part of large-scale fraud on the American people. 

Ronald M George is the current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of California.  Around 1985, according to his official biography he served in leadership positions at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  At that time, Sustain - a case management system - was installed at the latter court, which was an early example of such fraud on the people. To this date, Chief Justice Ronald George denied repeated requests for comments and explanation for his role, if any, in the installation of Sustain at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  The system includes various features, which must be deemed fraud by design and fraud in operation.  The simplest one to explain was the feature that allowed running full cases as if they were litigated under the jurisdiction of the California Superior Court, when if fact they never were.  

Examples of such cases included, but were not limited to: (a) Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737),  (b) Marina v LA County (BS109420), and (c) Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286).  The first was an example of how the system was employed to deprive a person of property, the second how it was employed to deprive a person of liberty, and the third how it was employed to deprive all 10 million residents of LA county of the prospect of honest court services in years to come. In all three cases, the Presiding Judge and Clerk of the Court denied repeated requests to certify the cases as matters that were in fact litigated under the jurisdiction of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. They denied repeated requests to certify the respective judges as duly assigned to such matters, and the respective judgments as judgments of the Superior Court of California. It was alleged that such vague and ambiguous conditions could never have emerged had it not been for the installation of the CMSs at the LA Court and the manner in which they have been operated ever since.

Beyond Sustain, other noted examples of Ronald George Systems included, but were not limited to:

1. Inmate Information Center of the Sheriff's Department, County of Los Angeles.  It allowed the listing online of inmates, as if they were arrested and booked in compliance with the fundamentals of the law, when in fact - there were no records to support the arrest and booking of such inmates. Such inmates were in fact held as fraudulently imprisoned, "off the record" and "off the inmate count".  The prime example was in the arrest and booking of Richard Fine. It was listed as if it took place on March 4, 2009, at the Municipal Court of San Pedro. In fact, no such agency existed since around 2002. Moreover, the Sheriff's Department fraudulently claimed that the missing arrest and booking papers were held by such non-existent agency.
2. PACER & CM/ECF - the dual docketing system installed in the 2000s in US Courts across the country, which allowed the same type of fraud that was allowed in Sustain in the past quarter century. The key fraudulent feature in these systems were the NEFs, which provided the authentication of court records as honest, valid, and effectual, and such which should be given "full faith and credit".  The NEFs were implemented in a manner that allowed only authorized attorneys access to such records, while access to the public was denied, in what must be deemed violation of US Supreme Court decision in Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978).  Furthermore, many US Courts implemented features where email notices containing the NEFs would be automatically eliminated at the end of 30 or 60 days.  It was claimed that there could not possibly be an honest explanation for such features implemented in the dual systems of PACER & CM/ECF, and that the implementation of such systems was with no authority at all.
3. EDGE - the underwriting monitoring system at Countrywide/Bank of America, which allowed fraud in underwriting of residential loans, and which led to losses to US Taxpayers in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
4. SEC, Office of Thrift Supervision, Office of Trade Commission - complaints logging systems of US banking regulators. Evidence demonstrated that the systems allowed operators to eliminate complaints against Countrywide, which were filed prior to the publication and wide recognition of the current financial/integrity crisis.  Therefore, such agencies informed US Congress that there had no data to warn them in advance of the pending crisis.
5. California Commission on Teachers’ Credentialing - the data base of the California Department of Education related agency, which purported to keep honest records of California teachers credentialing.

The examples above demonstrated the wide range of applications where Ronald George Systems were implemented to defraud the American people. It was alleged that the fundamental failure of the US government to establish process and procedures for validation of such systems prior to their implementation was a material deficiency, which must be immediately addressed by US Congress through new legislation.

It was further claimed the failure to take action to validate such systems posed unreasonable risks to US and international financial markets, in violation of the Basel Accords, which the US claimed to be a good faith party to.

It was further alleged that case management systems at the courts were a notable exception, where existing law was sufficient to allow enforcement -through promulgation of the federal and states rule making enabling act. All case management systems at the courts must, by definition be deemed as local rules of courts, since any computer system was an assembly of assertions - or a collection of rules of operations, and therefore - a case management system of a court  - was in fact a collection of rules of operation of the local court.

See also related item: Kozinski Fraud.


I. CC

• Prof Richard Posner, University of Chicago Law School - as a request for the initiation of corrective actions.
• Law school faculty
• James C Duff, Director, Administrative Office of the US Courts
• Glenn A Fine, Inspector General, US Dept of Justice - as an addendum to complaint about wide-spread corruption of the justice system in Los Angeles County, and refusal of FBI and U.S. DOJ senior officers to accord Equal Protection, providing instead fraudulent responses to inquiries by U.S. Congress.
• Other Inspector Generals - as an addendum to complaints about widespread corruption in Los Angeles County, and refusal of US government to enforce the law.
• Mark J. Sullivan, Director, US Secret Service: As a request for investigation, pursuant to the US Secret Service mission statement and primary investigational jurisdiction - in safeguarding the integrity of the financial system - particularly - large computer systems.
• NavanNaethem Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
• Nout Wellink, Chair, Basel Accords Committee
• Lee Baca, Los Angeles Sheriff, as a repeat request to access the warrants of RF and NR1 - to inspect and to copy.

II. The Usual

IN SHORT - KOZINSKI MUST RESIGN!

"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.

09-12-19 Too late? Too early? Claire Wolfe got the answers...

"America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe
And see her speech.

09-12-19 Automated response from Los Angeles Superior Court

X-MSK: CML=2.501000
X-PMX-Quarantine-Approved: 31452CDR409K3X29L6RRTOHASNHFK7
From: istb-security@lasuperiorcourt.org
To: jz12345@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: Case management systems (CMSs) of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:35:28 +0000 (GMT)
X-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;
X-ELNK-AV: 0
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;
--pmx-boundary-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
At the direction of Court Counsel, and as set forth in Court Counsel's letter to you of October 13, 2009, this email has not been delivered.

Information Security Department
Los Angeles Superior Court
--pmx-boundary-1
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

09-12-19 Requesting Chief Justice Ronald George's comments regarding the computer systems of the Los Angeles courts.

       
Ronald George & the California Supreme Court


Dr Z
Joseph Zernik, DMD, PhD
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750; fax: 801 998-0917; email: jz12345@earthlink.net

The favor of a response within 10 business days was requested.

December 18, 2009
Hon Ronald George, Chief Judge
Supreme Court of California
350 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102-4797
By USPS certified mail.

Re: Case management systems (CMSs) of the Superior Court of California, County of Los
Angeles.

Dear Chief Justice George:

In the process of preparation of papers for publication in peer-reviewed scholarly journals and also in
preparation for presentations in scholarly conferences, I find it necessary to again approach you and
request your comments regarding Sustain the CMS of the civil division of the Superior Court of
California, County of Los Angeles. The overriding question, raised in my previous letters, was
regarding your role, if any, in the overall decision making process, in the definition of the systems
specifications, in validation of its integrity, and in its final installation and operation as we see it today.
Serious concerns were raised regarding integrity of the system and your official biography indicated that
you served in leadership positions at the Los Angeles Courts around the years that the system was
installed. Doubtlessly, the installation of the system amounted to a sea change in the administration of
the courts. Therefore, it was extremely unlikely that those in leadership positions were uninvolved, or
unaware of critical decisions that were made in this regard.

Decisions, then made, reshaped the justice system in Los Angeles County. Major detrimental effects on
the administration of justice and on the Human Rights of the 10 million LA County residents were
attributed to the CMSs then installed in the civil and criminal courts. Therefore, I would be grateful for
any comments that you would be willing to provide on the record in this regard.

As it stands today, three cases were likely to be at the focus of the presentation: Galdjie v Darwish
(SC052737), Marina v LA County (BS109420), and Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286). The first was
an example of how the system was employed to deprive a person of property, the second how it was
employed to deprive a person of liberty, and the third how it was employed to deprive all 10 million
residents of LA county of the prospect of honest court services in years to come. In all three cases, the
Presiding Judge and Clerk of the Court denied repeated requests to certify the cases as matters that were
in fact litigated under the jurisdiction of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. They
denied repeated requests to certify the respective judges as duly assigned to such matters, and the
respective judgments as judgments of the Superior Court of California. It was alleged that such vague
and ambiguous conditions could never have emerged had it not been for the installation of the CMSs at
the LA Court and the manner in which they have been operated ever since.

In the latter two cases, the Presiding Judge and Clerk of the Court also denied repeated requests for
access to public records - the registers of actions (California dockets) to inspect and to copy. In the
former case, where access to the register of actions was gained, it provided what must be deemed
conclusive evidence of nothing less than the operation of an enterprise by a racket at the court.
Moreover, in all three cases other courts were involved in the matters as well, calling into question their
integrity as well.

Such conditions prevailing in the Los Angeles Courts for almost three decades could not possibly escape
the notice of federal law enforcement agencies. However, when the question was raised before the
highest level officers of the US Department of Justice last year, through congressional inquiries, on my
behalf, responses of such officers were less than honest.

Obviously, such claims and such allegation were not lightly made. Therefore, one would hope that you
would favorably consider my request and provide some input regarding such serious concerns and
your role in shaping the justice system of Los Angeles County, as we know it today.

Wishing you and your family happy holidays and the best for the New Year!

Truly,



Joseph H Zernik

PS

Needless to say, I am no attorney. My relevant professional training was remote at best as a research
scientist in biochemistry and molecular biology. The only expertise which I might be able to claim, and
which I did not even know I possessed until a few years ago, was in analyzing word and computer data
patterns and identifying fraud in large database management systems. As a child I was identified as
gifted and was sent to computer classes in a high level engineering school using mainframes and
punch cards. I was not attracted to the field, and never used my computer skill professionally afterwards.
However, in recent years, I realized that I was well qualified in analyzing systems that most would
consider user unfriendly, and with no direct access to the databases or the code, which most fraud
experts would consider quintessential:

• An analyst confirmed concerns I raised regarding the central accounting system of a public corporation in the healthcare field.
• Complaint I filed with the California Department of Education regarding a school district electronic pupil educational records, and separately regarding the management of the database of the California Commission on Teachers Credentialing, ended up a year and a half later in determination of "violation of the law", and the hasty departure of senior administrators.
• In January 2007, barely a month after hearing the name Countrywide for the first time I filed a complaint with FBI correctly diagnosing the large scale fraud in EDGE - its underwriting monitoring system. In March 2007 I also provided FBI a correct early estimate at hundreds of billions of dollars of the liability to US taxpayers - and received a death threat in return.
• My correct diagnoses of courts CMSs was probably best demonstrated in Fine v Sheriff (09-71692) at the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. I correctly predicted the intention of that court to issue a sham order (Dkt #4) in response to the Emergency Petition of the falsely imprisoned Richard Fine. I therefore filed my protest in advance (Dkt #2) - an Ex Parte Request for a leave to file papers in a sham court action.

CC:
Presiding Judge Charles McCoy
Clerk of the Court John A Clarke
Others