Friday, January 29, 2010

10-01-29 Fact Based Discussion: Judge Gary Feess and US v City of LA et al

Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 19:12:13 -0800
From: joseph zernik
Subject: FACT BASED DISCUSSION: Judge Gary Fees, the Rampart scandal, and Consent Decree in US v City of LA et al (2:00-cv-11769)

I would like to initiated discussion of the following point, from recent postings, under Fact-Based Discussion:

Brad listed here Judge Gary Fees as some kind of positive example, not being a dictator like Judge Manuel Real, if I got it right.  The LAPD Rampart Scandal was mentioned, if I got it right, as one of Judge Gary Fees credentials.

Please notice, and any fact-based comments would be appreciated:

Although Brad did not provide the caption,  US v City of LA et al (2:00-cv-11769) is most likely the reason that Brad associated Judge Gary Fees with the Rampart scandal.   One should note that the caption of this landmark case, is one of the key cases that I previously listed as likely to be Kozinski Fraud.  I therefore requested access to court records, to ascertain the facts in the matter. However, the US District Court, to this date, denies access to records of this case, with no legal foundation at all. I  was denied my First Amendment Rights by the US District Court LA.  I was neither allowed access to the paper records, nor to the NEFs.

The reasons that I requested access to the records in the first place, and the reason that following denial of access, I consider it likely to be a Kozinski Fraud were:
a) No summons were issued in this case.
b) The Consent Decree, of June 2001, was never entered.
c) Accordingly, Judge Gary Fees, who later served as "Overseer" for Civil Rights in LA from 2001-2009, pursuant to the purported Consent Decree in US v City of LA et al,  failed to enforce the key provisions of the Consent Decree: (i) access to certain computerized databases, and (ii) Periodic financial disclosures by undercover narcotic officers.

In sum: The demeanor of Judge Gary Fees in court may be more pleasant than that of Judge Manuel Real.  However, once First Amendment rights - access to court records -  are restored in LA County, and full evidence is accessible in court records of US v City of LA et al, it is most likely to be found that Gary Fees engaged in Fraud on all 10 millions who reside in LA County in his conduct under such caption and in his conduct as "Overseer". 

Joseph Zernik

1) One should note that we who live in LA County, California, shared the distinction of a federal "Overseer" during the past decade with the detainees in Guantanamo Bay and with prisoners in the California prison system.  It is further alleged, that upon review of the facts in each of the three cases, appointment of "Overseers" by the Justice Department of the Bush administration would be found to have been a fig leaf, nothing more, and none of the three "Overseers" performed his duties.  

2) The fact that access to computerized databases of the justice system in LA was a key provision of the Consent Decree, and the fact that the LAPD refused to comply, lend support to my claims of the central role of such unvalidated computer systems in corruption of the justice system.  At least the framers of the Consent Decree thought so.