10-08-21 Shepard v Krage (09C03210) at the Los Angeles Superior Court - Alleged Racketeering by Judge Deborah Sanchez and Financial Institution // Shepard v Krage (09C03210) en el Los Angeles Tribunal Superior - Presunta extorsión por Juez Deborah Sánchez y la Institución Financiera

Judge Deborah Sanchez
Los Angeles Superior Court


Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:14:01 +0300
To: lawsters@googlegroups.comFrom: joseph zernik
From: Joseph Zernik
Subject: RE: BELLFLOWER JUDGE RUNS AMOK

I consider a complaint to Commission on Judicial Performance an entirely inappropriate venue for the circumstances.

The conduct of Judge Sanchez described below should be deemed criminal in nature.  The refusal of legal professionals to recognize the large-scale criminality at the Los Angeles Court, and insistence on ignoring the opinions of expert legal scholars, fraud experts, and an official review panel is incomprehensible.
 
The essence of the racketeering in the case is of Mr Krage is not yet fully proven. However, it looks increasingly likely that Judge Sanchez resorted to the routine, by running a pretense August 17, 2010 proceeding on Defendant Krage.  So far it came out that she never signed any order at the end of the  proceeding, in contrast with what she pronounced in open court.

I am still trying to have Mr Krage obtain the full Reporter's Transcript, the Minutes, and the Register of Actions.

• I expect that the Transcript would be consistent with Mr Krage's account and also with the fraudulent online "Case Summary" of the Los Angels Superior Court.
• I expect that the Minutes will be found to be unsigned, missing the "Certificate of Mailing/Notice of Entry by Clerk" - making the Minutes invalid, and the entire proceeding an "off the record" proceeding.
• I expect that the Register of Actions in the Court's case management system will show no registration of the proceeding, or invalid "sloppy" registration of the proceeding.

It is the same routine over and over again, from the pretense May 2002 "Bench Trial" of Barbara Darwish by "Muni Judge" John Segal - to take her 6- unit Santa Monica rental property, through the pretense March 4, 2009 "Sentencing Hearing" of Richard Fine by Judge David Yaffe - to affect his indefinite solitary confinement, to the pretense February 18, 2010 "Order Appointing Receiver" in Karimi v Mithawaila by Judge Pro Tem Endman - to affect looting of a corporation, and most recently in the pretense August 17, 2010 Unlawful Detainer proceeding of Jim Krage by Judge Deborah Sanchez - to take his home.

It is the alleged Los Angeles Superior Court Judiciary Racket in action.  


Filing a complaint with the Commission on Judiciary Performance in a racketeering matter is an insult to intelligence and dignity of the people.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)

Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States.

http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://josephzernik.blog.co.uk/
http://menchenrechte-los-angeles.blogspot.com/
http://droitsdelhommealertelosangele.blogspot.com/
http://inproperinla.com/
http://pressroom.prlog.org/Human_Rights_Alert/
http://ireport.cnn.com/people/HumanRightsA?numResults=10&view=documents
_____________________________
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION: FREE RICHARD FINE:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine
_____________________________
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION CALLING UPON THE UNITED NATIONS TO ISSUE A TRUE AND EFFECTUAL 2010 REPORT ON THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE UNITED STATES:
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/ushumanrights
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES?
*  "On July 26, 2010, Laurence Tribe, Senior Counsel for the United States Department of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, delivered an important speech to the Conference of Chief Justices, challenging them to halt the disintegration of our state justice systems before they become indistinguishable from courts of third world nations."
Prof Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law School (2010), per National Defender Leadership Institute
http://www.nlada.net/library/article/national_dojspeechto%20chiefjustice07-26-2010_gideonalert
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?
*     "Innocent people remain in prison"
*     "...the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of..."
LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24902306/
*   "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit." 
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2000)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29043589/
*   "This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted."     
Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2000)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/274339
_____________________________
At 06:25 PM 8/21/2010, you wrote:

Brad, check your date of bankruptcy stay of December 23, 2010.  There is one statutory exception where a judge can rule on their own disqualification, when they deem the challenge frivolous.  Perhaps you ought to address that or demostrate that it is serious challenge on its face.

Wolf

---

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 12:24:27 -0700
From: crusaderjd@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: BELLFLOWER JUDGE RUNS AMOK
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com

Below is my complaint to the CJP using the facts set forth by Dr. Zernik.  I think would be a good test to see if the CJP will take action in such a blatant act in excess of state court jurisdiction. - Brad
================================================================COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, California 94102

August 17, 2010

Complaint - L.A. Superior Court Judge Deborah Sanchez, Bellflower Sup. Ct. Dept. 2
BELLFLOWER JUDGE ACTS WITHOUT AND IN EXCESS OF JURISDICTION

On August 17, 2010 Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Deborah Sanchez, in the Bellflower Courthouse Dept. 2, decided she didn’t have to obey either a Bankruptcy Court Stay or the laws on Disqualification of a Judge.

In post-foreclosure Unlawful Detainer case #09C03210, Shepard Investments v James Krage, Judge Sanchez decided she herself could assume federal jurisdiction and rule on the validity of a Bankruptcy Stay that was issued on December 23, 2010 and that the Bankruptcy Court had ruled to still be in effect.

When Defendant Krage questioned her right to rule on the Federal question by Disqualifying Judge Sanchez for Bias and Prejudice, Judge Sanchez ignored the Procedures proscribed by law (Code of Civil Procedures 170.1 and 170.3) and Ordered her own Disqualification stricken, instead of letting an independent Judge rule on it, as prescribed by law.

Plaintiff Shepard Investments Inc had previously lost 3 tries in Bankruptcy Court to get Relief from the Stay, so they convinced the local judge to make a federal decision and give them a Writ of Possession.

Shepard Investments is a renegade Foreclosure Auction purchaser that has violated the law many times to get quick possession of homes they bought at foreclosure auctions.

Page 2 - Sanchez Complaint
August 17, 2010


Defendant Krage successfully forced Shepard Investments to dismiss 2 previous Unlawful Detainers, because 1) they didn’t timely file the Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale, and 2) they bought the property under a Fictitious Business name (Summer Creek Homes) that they hadn’t renewed in 4 years.

Most Unlawful Detainers that Shepard Investments have won could be overturned with either violation, and both violations occurred in over 50 post-foreclosure Unlawful Detainer cases.
The main points here are that a California Judge should not assume Federal Jurisdiction to rule on the validity of a Federal Bankruptcy Stay, and that a Judge should not rule on her own Disqualification for Allegations of Bias and Prejudice. Only Federal Judges can rule on the validity of a Stay, and State Judges are not allowed to rule on their own Disqualification, but rather must have the Disqualification Allegations heard by an independent Judge, as required by law.
By violating the Automatic Bankruptcy Stay, Judge Sanchez violated her oath of office, Violated the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, violated the Rules of Conduct for State Judges in California, and acted without and in excess of her jurisdiction as a State Judge. (See Pulliam v. Allen, (1984) 466 US 522)

Brad Henschel, JD
Currently an Inactive Member of the State Bar of California
HENSCHEL NOTICE OF PRIVACY & CONFIDENTIALITY:
This message is private and confidential. It contains  both confidential and privileged information under state and federal law and/or exempt from disclosure under law, including but not limited to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510-2521. NO reader may disclose, reveal, distribute or copy this email. If you get this e-mail in error, notify me immediately by electronic-mail reply and delete this original message. No recording, printing or sharing of this email, which has been sent over telephone lines, is allowed, and recording it is illegal without my consent. Cal. Penal Code 632. 
     "How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg?   Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."  - Abraham LincolnFrom: joseph zernik
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
Cc: "Smith, Darcy (USMS)" ; "Shell, Thomas(USMS)"
Sent: Wed, August 18, 2010 11:15:45 AM
Subject: BELLFLOWER JUDGE RUNS AMOK
Additional evidence of alleged collusion by judges and financial institutions in racketeering in real estate matters at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
.
Please sign the petition:
Calling upon the UN Human Rights Council to issue an honest and effectual 2010 Report on the US justice system and Human Rights in the United States.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/calling-upon-the-un-human-rights-council-to-issue-an-honest-and-effectual-2010-report-on-the-us/

_______________________________________________
BELLFLOWER JUDGE RUNS AMOK

On August 17, 2010 Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Deborah Sanchez, in the Bellflower Courthouse Dept. 2, decided she didn’t have to obey either a Bankruptcy Court Stay or the laws on Disqualification of a Judge.

In post-foreclosure Unlawful Detainer case #09C03210, Shepard Investments v James Krage, Judge Sanchez decided she herself could assume federal jurisdiction and rule on the validity of  a Bankruptcy Stay that was issued on December 23, 2010 and that the Bankruptcy Court had ruled  to still be in effect.

When Defendant Krage questioned her right to rule on the Federal question by Disqualifying Judge Sanchez for Bias and Prejudice, Judge Sanchez ignored the Procedures proscribed by law (Code of Civil Procedures 170.1 and 170.3) and Ordered her own Disqualification stricken, instead of letting an independent Judge rule on it, as prescribed by law.

Plaintiff Shepard Investments Inc had previously lost 3 tries in Bankruptcy Court to get Relief from the Stay, so they convinced the local judge to make a federal decision and give them a Writ of Possession.

Shepard Investments is a renegade Foreclosure Auction purchaser that has violated the law many times to get quick possession of homes they bought at foreclosure auctions.  

Defendant Krage successfully forced Shepard Investments to dismiss 2 previous Unlawful Detainers, because 1) they didn’t timely file the Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale, and 2) they bought the property under a Fictitious Business name (Summer Creek Homes) that they hadn’t renewed in 4 years.

Most Unlawful Detainers that Shepard Investments have won could be overturned with either violation, and both violations occurred in over 50 post-foreclosure Unlawful Detainer cases.
The main points here are that a California Judge should not assume Federal Jurisdiction to rule on the validity of a Federal Bankruptcy Stay, and that a Judge should not rule on her own Disqualification for Allegations of Bias and Prejudice.   Only Federal Judges can rule on the validity of a Stay, and State Judges are not allowed to rule on their own Disqualification, but rather must have the Disqualification Allegations heard by an independent Judge, as required by law.