10-02-03 William Brennan Jr, Louis Brandeis, Richard Fine, and racketeering by judges in Los Angeles County, California

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:39:25 -0800
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: RE: FACT BASED DISCUSSION: William Brennan Jr, Louis Brandeis, habeas corpus, and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914), US Judge John Walter, US Magistrate Woehrle, California Judge David Yaffe, California Judge Charles McCoy, and the ongoing false hospitalization of Richard Fine.

 

Scott and John:

The habeas corpus was routinely called by the late Justice William Brennan Jr "The Great Writ", and a "Cornerstone of the United States Constitution".  The late Justice Louis Brandeis referred to it as the greatest achievement of the English-speaking legal system - establishing Liberty by law.

Let me offer again the simplest facts regarding Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914), which you could review and ascertain or refute in the online papers in no time at all:

a. Sheriff was rightly named by Fine as Respondent, since he is holding Richard Fine.
b. Sheriff refused to respond, and never responded to the Hebeas Corpus petition of Fine.
c. Kevin McCormick appeared on behalf of Judge Yaffe and the Los Angeles Superior Court.
d. Kevin McCormick failed to file the required certifications as Counsel of Record for such parties.
e. Kevin McCormick filed papers with declaration by counsel alone.
f.  Kevin McCormick was not involved in the case prior to May1, 2009.
g. Kevin McCormick, therefore, was not a competent fact witness in the matter at all.
g. No declaration by Judge Yaffe or any other responding party can be found in the habeas corpus papers.
h. No signature whatsoever by Judge Yaffe or any other responding party can be found in the habeas corpus papers.

Please notice, that all the facts and the claims above do not require any true legal analysis, where I am not qualified at all. These are all facts "on the face" of the papers, regarding names, dates, signatures, certifications.

Regarding the validity of the case as a whole, I am eagerly expecting the NEFs of the Complaint and purported Judgment, if Brad would be allowed access to the records on February 8, 2010. I have been repeatedly denied access to the records by the Clerk of the Court, United States District Court, Los Angeles.

Let me add that the case of Richard Fine is a high visibility case, where the prisoner is a former US Prosecutor.  The habeas corpus petitions of prisoners, which I have reviewed in various courts, are routinely abused across the United States.   It is a right that was medieval in origin. Yet, we who live in Los Angeles County, California, are struggling in 2009 to restore such medieval right!

Truly,

Joseph Zernik, PhD
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345
Please sign our petition - Free Richard Fine: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine
Patriotic pics of Beyonce' Knowles, Sharon Stone, and Charlize Theron,
Coming soon- deep house music!
__________

Most records in the respective caption can be found at: http://inproperinla.com/
Use the "Find" function in your browser (typically "Control F") and query for "fine_v_sheriff" [underlines, but no quotes].
You would get to the section of the archive holding the relevant papers.

jz

__________
At 12:02 PM 2/3/2010, you wrote:

Scott:
The secondary proof of the claims I made is that Fine was never held in jail proper, he never participated in almost a year in the three times a day mandatory counts of all inmates. Instead, he is kept confined in a hospital, for almost a year, while not sick.

Furthermore, the sheriff refused to allow access to the arrest and booking records, and finally, following inquiry by LA Supervisor Antonovich on my behalf, the legal department claimed that pursuant to California Public Records Act the sheriff was not required to allow access to records which do not exist... [1]

What the Sheriff provided instead of the arrest and booking papers, required by law, was fraudulent printout from a computer system that claimed that Richard Fine was arrested and booked by the non-existent Municipla Court of the City of San Pedro. [1] The arrest of Richard Fine was witnessed by many, and was reported by media. [2] It took place in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, in the City of Los Angeles. [2] 
Again, all records are provided online for your convenience, so that you may comment on the facts in the matter.

jz

[1] Correspondence of Supervisor Antonovich, who inquired on behalf of Zernik with the Sheriff Baca for the arrest and booking papers of Mr Fine and Mr Gottschalk, and response by the Sheriff's Department, that they were not required by California Public Records Act to produced records which did not exist. Instead, the Sheriff provided fraudulent printouts from its computer systems that listed the arrest and booking of Fine as taking place in the non-existent Municipal Court of the City of San Pedro.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25555341/10-01-08-Supervisor-Antonovich-Los-Angeles-County-repeat-mailing-of-January-8-2010-response-from-Sheriff-Lee-Baca-in-re-Richard-Fine-papers-inclu
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24785963/10-01-04-Richard-Fine-Reply-to-Sheriff-Lee-Baca-Re-False-Arrest-Booking-Papers-s

[2] Media reports of arrest of Fine in the City of Los Angeles , Superior Court of California
http://inproperinla.com/09-03-04-full-disclosure-network-att-richard-fine-jailed-in-attempt-to-disqualify-la-judge.pdf
http://inproperinla.com/09-03-05-met-news-court-sentences-disbarred-attorney-fine-to-jail-for-contempt.pdf

__________

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:44:38 -0800
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Judges in the United States are prone to racketeering, evidence from California and elsewhere...

Scott:

Your response seemed to consider the claim of racketeering by judges as scandalous, or even incredible.  Attorney Gottschalk can provide you with the exact case captions. He seemed to be an encyclopedia of judicial corruption.  

California and US judges were prosecuted for racketeering in:
a) San Jose California
b) San Diego California

Outside of California there were conviction of judges for racketeering in:
c) Cook County, Illinois (Chicago, Greylord)

Currently there is prosecution of judges for racketeering in:
d) Luzerne County, PA.

Currently, a major case of judicial corruption is being prosecuted, with all papers sealed, for unclear reasons, so that the public has hardly any information, and in violation of Sixth Amendment right for public trial (I am referring to the right of the public, since I assume that the sealing in this case was meant to benefit the defendants), at:
e) El Paso Texas.

Finally:
I provided the US Attorney General office ample evidence of racketeering in the Los Angeles Courts already in early 2008, well before Richard Fine was arrested.  The US Attorney General office refused to respond.  Thereafter, Senator Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Diane Watson issued Congressional  Inquiries on the US Department of Justice and the FBI on my behalf:
Why they would not respond to my requests for equal protection of the 10 million residents of LA County. 
The responses provided by Director of the US Attorney General Office, Kenneth Melson, and Assistant Director Kenneth Kaiser of FBI to United States Congress, are the subject of my current complaint to the DOJ IG.  I claimed that;
a) Such responses reflected refusal of US officers to perform their duties and provide equal protection, and
b) Such responses reflected fraud by US officers on US Congress.

The two gentlemen never contradicted my claims of racketeering by the judges in Los Angeles. Instead, they provided false and deliberately misleading responses, such as:
a) That I never proved "federal investigational jurisdiction" it the matter, and
b) That I never claimed any "specific violation of federal law".

Needless to say, if such claims of racketeering by judges in Los Angeles County were out to lunch, I doubt that Senator Feinstein and Congresswoman Watson would have issued inquiries on my behalf.

IN SHORT - Claiming that judges in the United States are prone to racketeering in no news any longer, surely not scandalous.