Friday, February 5, 2010

10-02-05 More about Richard Fine, Equity Courts in Los Angeles, California, and the mysterious finances of the courts

          

          Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:51:01 -0800
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: RE: 10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts ” on the premises of the Superior Court  of  California, County of Los Angeles

Dear Wolf: 

You offered an opinion, while being ignorant of the facts.  I doubt that your opinion had any legal validity, either. There are no equity courts per se in the United States.  All courts are courts of law.  There are equitable remedies offered by Courts of Law pursuant to statute.  A true Equity Court operated by Maxims of Equity, and was bound by neither Statute nor by Common Law.  That is what was in fact implied in Brad's statement, that there were, or that there are, courts, which operated in Los Angeles County, California, which were not bound by either California or United States law.  In short - racketeering courts of the Equity/Enterprise Track. (Equity - for Equity Court, and Enterprise - as per RICO Enterprise)

Here are some additional facts:
  • The cases, which I identified, where the Superior Court of California falsely listed all fees as "Journal Entry", and where the Clerk of the Court refused to disclose the true destination of such funds, coincided with claims by attorneys, who were "connected with the court" that such captions were conducted by the "Equity Court". 
  • In such cases none of the judges who purported to preside held an Assignment Orders
  • In such cases none of the Referees/Commissioners who purported to preside held Appointment Order
  • In such cases none of the court orders/judgements cases were ever entered.
  • In such cases, the Clerk of the Court refused to certify any of the records as records of the Superior Court of California.
The purported arrest of Richard Fine was a prime example of this "Equity/Enterprise Track" of the Los Angeles Superior Court. Marina v LA County (BS109420) fulfilled all conditions #2-5, above.  In parallel, the court refused to allow access to the Registers of Actions (dockets) of the case, which would have provided the definitive proof of the racketeering, through fulfillment of condition #1, above.

Additional indirect evidence that the case of Marina v LA County (BS109420) was never deemed by the courts as a true case of the Los Angeles Superior Court was in its treatment by the United States courts.  The Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine - Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) at the US District Court, LA,  and the Emergency Petition at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - Fine v Sheriff (09-71692) were both conducted without any Register of Actions (docket) ever being produced.  There simply was and there is no way that an honest and valid review could be conducted, to ascertain that the imprisonment conformed with the fundamental of the law absent such essential foundation as the docket of the case.   To wit - in her scholarly Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Carla Woehrle never mentioned even once the caption of the case, which she purported to review.  Likewise - the word "warrant" was never mentioned in that Report and Recommendation either, in a case which involved a warrantless arrest.

Moreover, both court actions at the US District Court, LA and at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit were conducted "off the record", without entering any of the records, from commencement to the termination.  No valid NEF was ever issued in either case.  

Final evidence that Marina v LA County (BS109420) was never deemed a valid court action was provided by the fact that the Sheriff Department of Los Angeles County refused to list it as the foundation for the false hospitalization of Richard Fine.  Instead, it falsely listed an unknown action at the non-existent Municipal Court of the City of San Pedro.

Conditions in Los Angeles County, California, demonstrate that US agencies abandoned for at least 20 years the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California, to be abused by racketeering judges. Such conditions were likely to be deemed by international courts of Human Rights as severe violation of ratified International Law.

In any event, I expect Brad as one of these attorney, who were "connected to the court", and who provided statement regarding operation of "Equity Courts" in Los Angeles County, to explain his statement, which appears as an attempt to provide legitimacy to racketeering by the judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court.

Joseph Zernik


At 03:17 PM 2/5/2010, you wrote:
There are no courts of equity in L.A. county as such.  All superior courts have equitable powers and for that reason, all superior courts are "courts of equity" and "courts of law".

Wolf

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 05:24:13 -0800
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: jz12345@earthlink.net
Subject: Fwd: 10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts” on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

Dear All:

If I ever receive a response from the Court, I would surely let you know.

Truly,
[]
Joseph Zernik, PhDhttp://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!

Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 05:21:53 -0800
To: "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" <2136217952@metrofax.com>, "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge " <2136177176@metrofax.com>
From: joseph zernik
Subject: 10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts” on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
Please accept the digitally signed attached letter, copied below.
____________
10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts” on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
TO Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke;
By fax: "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" 2136217952@metrofax.com , "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge 2136177176@metrofax.com
 
Response is kindly requested within 10 days.
Dear Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk John Clarke:
In the past few years I have independently heard statements from three attorneys, who may be considered “close to the court”, regarding operation of “Equity Courts” in Los Angeles County, California.
I would be grateful for your clarifications on the matter:
Are there at present any “Equity Courts” in operation on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles?
 
Respectfully,
Dated: February 05, 2010               
La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California                 Joseph H Zernik, PhD 
                                                                                               
                                                               []
                                                                                    By: ______________
                                                                                                JOSEPH H ZERNIK
                                                                                                Phone: 323.515.4583
                                                                                    PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
                                                                                                Email
                                                                                    Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
                                                                                    Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs



Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:51:01 -0800
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: RE: 10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts ” on the premises of the Superior Court  of  California, County of Los Angeles

Dear Wolf: 

You offered an opinion, while being ignorant of the facts.  I doubt that your opinion had any legal validity, either. There are no equity courts per se in the United States.  All courts are courts of law.  There are equitable remedies offered by Courts of Law pursuant to statute.  A true Equity Court operated by Maxims of Equity, and was bound by neither Statute nor by Common Law.  That is what was in fact implied in Brad's statement, that there were, or that there are, courts, which operated in Los Angeles County, California, which were not bound by either California or United States law.  In short - racketeering courts of the Equity/Enterprise Track. (Equity - for Equity Court, and Enterprise - as per RICO Enterprise)

Here are some additional facts:
  • The cases, which I identified, where the Superior Court of California falsely listed all fees as "Journal Entry", and where the Clerk of the Court refused to disclose the true destination of such funds, coincided with claims by attorneys, who were "connected with the court" that such captions were conducted by the "Equity Court". 
  • In such cases none of the judges who purported to preside held an Assignment Orders
  • In such cases none of the Referees/Commissioners who purported to preside held Appointment Order
  • In such cases none of the court orders/judgements cases were ever entered.
  • In such cases, the Clerk of the Court refused to certify any of the records as records of the Superior Court of California.
The purported arrest of Richard Fine was a prime example of this "Equity/Enterprise Track" of the Los Angeles Superior Court. Marina v LA County (BS109420) fulfilled all conditions #2-5, above.  In parallel, the court refused to allow access to the Registers of Actions (dockets) of the case, which would have provided the definitive proof of the racketeering, through fulfillment of condition #1, above.

Additional indirect evidence that the case of Marina v LA County (BS109420) was never deemed by the courts as a true case of the Los Angeles Superior Court was in its treatment by the United States courts.  The Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine - Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) at the US District Court, LA,  and the Emergency Petition at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - Fine v Sheriff (09-71692) were both conducted without any Register of Actions (docket) ever being produced.  There simply was and there is no way that an honest and valid review could be conducted, to ascertain that the imprisonment conformed with the fundamental of the law absent such essential foundation as the docket of the case.   To wit - in her scholarly Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Carla Woehrle never mentioned even once the caption of the case, which she purported to review.  Likewise - the word "warrant" was never mentioned in that Report and Recommendation either, in a case which involved a warrantless arrest.

Moreover, both court actions at the US District Court, LA and at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit were conducted "off the record", without entering any of the records, from commencement to the termination.  No valid NEF was ever issued in either case.  

Final evidence that Marina v LA County (BS109420) was never deemed a valid court action was provided by the fact that the Sheriff Department of Los Angeles County refused to list it as the foundation for the false hospitalization of Richard Fine.  Instead, it falsely listed an unknown action at the non-existent Municipal Court of the City of San Pedro.

Conditions in Los Angeles County, California, demonstrate that US agencies abandoned for at least 20 years the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California, to be abused by racketeering judges. Such conditions were likely to be deemed by international courts of Human Rights as severe violation of ratified International Law.

In any event, I expect Brad as one of these attorney, who were "connected to the court", and who provided statement regarding operation of "Equity Courts" in Los Angeles County, to explain his statement, which appears as an attempt to provide legitimacy to racketeering by the judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court.

Joseph Zernik


At 03:17 PM 2/5/2010, Wold wrote:
There are no courts of equity in L.A. county as such.  All superior courts have equitable powers and for that reason, all superior courts are "courts of equity" and "courts of law".

Wolf

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 05:24:13 -0800
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: jz12345@earthlink.net
Subject: Fwd: 10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts” on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

Dear All:

If I ever receive a response from the Court, I would surely let you know.

Truly,
[]
Joseph Zernik, PhDhttp://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!

Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 05:21:53 -0800
To: "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" <2136217952@metrofax.com>, "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge " <2136177176@metrofax.com>
From: joseph zernik
Subject: 10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts” on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
Please accept the digitally signed attached letter, copied below.
____________
10-02-05 Operation of “Equity Courts” on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
TO Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke;
By fax: "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" 2136217952@metrofax.com , "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge 2136177176@metrofax.com
 
Response is kindly requested within 10 days.
Dear Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk John Clarke:
In the past few years I have independently heard statements from three attorneys, who may be considered “close to the court”, regarding operation of “Equity Courts” in Los Angeles County, California.
I would be grateful for your clarifications on the matter:
Are there at present any “Equity Courts” in operation on the premises of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles?
 
Respectfully,
Dated: February 05, 2010               
La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California                 Joseph H Zernik, PhD 
                                                                                               
                                                               []
                                                                                    By: ______________
                                                                                                JOSEPH H ZERNIK
                                                                                                Phone: 323.515.4583
                                                                                    PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
                                                                                                Email
                                                                                    Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
                                                                                    Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs _______________________________________
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:58:00 -0800 To: lawsters@googlegroups.com From: joseph zernik Subject: Mysterious finances of the Los Angeles Superior Court;  Timely response is kindly requested. Brad: With all these budget war-stories, you still avoid the true question: How comes the largest county court in the United States is operating like a corrupt organization, with no audited public, financial statements,  and with all the signs on the wall of widespread public corruption. The other question that needs to be addressed is: Why  FBI and US Dept of Justice have allowed it to go on like this for at least 20 years, refusing to provide the 10 millions who reside in Los Angeles County equal protection under the law. In review of enforcement action of the Section on Public Integrity of the US Department of Justice, there was not a single enforcement action in Los Angeles in the past 25 years, while the evidence of widespread corruption is patently displayed. The California "retroactive immunities" of SBX-2-11 do not provide the judges of the LA Superior Court any immunity from the "federal option", as vividly demonstrated in the case of the plea bargain of Rafael Perez.  Let the FBI and US Dept of Justice start the criminal prosecutions of the judges of the LA Superior Court...  The evidence is all out there, there is not much left for investigation... The case secret taking for over a decade of the "not permitted" payments, uncovered by Richard Fine, combined with the statistics of litigations involving LA County as a party, should be sufficient evidence in RICO prosecution: Conduct of an enterprise in a pattern of racketeering activity... If it were a supermarket chain, resorting to the same accounting practices, and similar conduct, its managers would be behind bars a long time ago.  And here, you refer to Charles McCoy, who together with John Clarke is operating a large-scale racket, as if he were a legitimate judge, and as if his statements on the budge have any validity at all... In short - If there is a budget shortfall, maybe it is time for FBI to step in and stop embezzlement of the public coffer by the judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court. There simply is no explanation consistent with honest operation of a court for the set of facts offered below as questions to Charles McCoy and John A Clarke, which they have so far refused to address. Joseph Zernik At 08:18 PM 2/5/2010, you wrote:
Aw come on, Brad. Mother government can print all the C notes she wishes. The whole taxation issue appears more and more to be only another assault on us all. jANET --- On Fri, 2/5/10, Brad Henschel wrote:
From: Brad Henschel
Subject: Re: Fwd: Mysterious finances of the Los Angeles Superior Court; Timely response is kindly requested.
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
Date: Friday, February 5, 2010, 7:49 AM
Judge McCoy told me that the LA superior court has a 50 Million dollar reserve of money which would allow it to operate for two months if they didn't get any money from the state to operate.  In the recent News Enterprise article, McCoy announced the lay off of 350 clerks to save money. 
     As the State taxes business which are barely hanging on, they will kill those businesses putting more and more people out of work.  Those people will get unemployment which the state will need more money to pay out, so they will always go with their perpetual answer MORE TAXES.  As they continue to tax they will be going after fewer and fewer sources as the higher taxes kill off more and more businesses, until the Government has no more money and no more employees to kill off the remaining businesses.  THEN businesses will make a comeback along with formerly illegal businesses, such as drug sales, tobacco sales, prostitution, and gambling to a lesser extent.
    For libertarians this will be nirvana.  - Brad
 
HENSCHEL NOTICE OF PRIVACY & CONFIDENTIALITY:
This message is private and confidential. It contains confidential and privileged information which is both privileged & confidential 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, 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. Cal. Penal Code 632.
From: joseph zernik
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, February 5, 2010 5:06:04 AM
Subject: Fwd: Mysterious finances of the Los Angeles Superior Court; Timely response is kindly requested.
Dear All:
If I ever receive a response from the Court, I would surely let you know.
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!
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:59:21 -0800
To: "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" <2136217952@metrofax.com>, "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge " <2136177176@metrofax.com>
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Mysterious finances of the Los Angeles Superior Court; Timely response is kindly requested.
Please accept the digitally signed attached letter, copied below.
____________
TO Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke;
By fax: "John A Clarke- Clerk of the Court" 2136217952@metrofax.com , "Charles McCoy -Presiding Judge 2136177176@metrofax.com
Response is kindly requested within 10 days.
Dear Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk John Clarke:
I am informed that the Court is facing a budge short-fall.  Perhaps under such circumstances it would be advisable for the two of you to shed some light on the mysterious finances of the Court:
1) Already in 1999 the Washington-based "Insight Magazine" published a series of articles regarding shady corporations controlled by the judges of the LA Superior Court, which held substantial sums of money from unclear sources and for unclear purposes.  The evidence showed that the judges continue to hold such corporations to this date.
The questions are:
a) For what purpose did the judges create such corporations?
b) What is the source of the funds held by such corporations?
c) What is the purpose of such funds?
2) The LA Superior Court, as a corporation/organization has not published an audited financial statements in years, or for that matter, any financial statement whatsoever.  The annual reports do not include even a letter by an accountant/auditor.  Charles McCoy, Presiding Judge, and John A Clarke, Clerk of the Court, refused requests for copies of such reports, if they ever existed.  In contrast, similar courts, across the nation, publish audited financial statements in their annual reports.
The question are:
a) Why are the Presiding Judge and the Clerk of the Court refusing to publish any audited financial statements?
b) Were the Court’s finances ever audited?
3) I have previously identified a series of cases where all fees were falsely designated as "Journal Entry", where in normal cases they were designated "Filing Fees", "Motion Fees", "Stipulation Fees". Accountancy textbooks consider false use of "Journal Entry" as a cardinal sign of financial fraud.  Both Charles McCoy, Presiding Judge, and John A Clarke, Clerk of the Court refused to disclose the designation of funds that were collected as fees, but were falsely listed as "Journal Entry".
The questions are:
a) What were the reasons for the false designation of fees for court services in such cases as "Journal Entry"?
b) What was the final destination such "Journal Entry" funds?
 
Respectfully,
Dated: February 05, 2010               
La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California                      Joseph H Zernik, PhD
                                                               []
                                                                                                               
                                                                                                By: ______________
                                                                                                JOSEPH H ZERNIK
                                                                                                Phone: 323.515.4583
                                                                                                PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
                                                                                                Email
                                                                                                Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
                                                                                                Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs
Posted by at No comments:

10-02-05 Requesting Brian Moynihan and Ed O'Keefe to report fraud by management - Sandor Samuels to the Audit Committee of Bank of America Corporation.

   

Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:22:11 -0800
To: "Moynihan, Brian T" O'Keefe, Ed", "Attention General Counsel Ed O'Keefe and President Brian Moynihan, C/O Ryan, Patrick C -Legal"
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Request for Brian Moynihan - President of BofA, and Ed O'Keefe - General Counsel,  to inform the Audit Committee of BofA pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) of Fraud by Management - Sandor Samuels  - Associate General Counsel. Timely response requested within 10 days.
Cc: "Mary Schapiro", "Bailey, Kevin", "John Dugan"


RE: Request for Brian Moynihan, President of BofA and Ed O'Keefe - General Counsel, to inform the Audit Committee of BofA pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) of Fraud by Management - Sandor Samuels  - Associate General Counsel.

To Brian Moynihan - BofA President, and to Ed O'Keefe - BofA General Counsel;
Copied to Mary Schaprio - Chair, SEC, John Dugan - Director, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Andrew Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York, and the Basel Committee.
By email and by fax.

Dear Mr Moynihan, and Mr O'Keefe:

Please accept this request by Dr Joseph Zernik, stockholder, that you report to the Audit Committee of BofA , pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), fraud by management - Sandor Samuels - Associate General Counsel of BofA.  The fraud was and is by Sandor Samuels in collusion with others, including, but not limited to his friend, Attorney David Pasternak. Such fraud was opined by two fraud experts of the highest reputation, James Wedick and Robert Meister.

Such fraud included:

a) Fraud against stockholders of Countrywide Financial Corporation and Bank of America Corporation, including, but not limited to false certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) in periodic reports;

b) Large-scale fraud in Countrywide relative to false underwriting and the funding of extremely unworthy US government-backed, uniform residential loan applications, under the guise of true underwriting, using the fraudulent case management system "EDGE" for underwriting monitoring.

c) Fraud, extortion, harassment, intimidation and retaliation against Dr Joseph Zernik, after he uncovered such large-scale fraud by Countrywide and filed complaints in that regard with FBI. Such extortionist conduct against Dr Joseph Zernik continues to this date.

In December 2006-January 2007, Dr Zernik uncovered the large-scale fraud at Countrywide against stockholders and against the US government, and he filed complaint to that effect with FBI, where he correctly projected liabilities to the US Government at the hundreds of billions of US dollars as result of such fraud.  Subsequently, Countrywide, under the guidance of Sandor Samuels engaged in malicious litigation under the caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), where Countrywide and later BofA appear to this date under the false party designation of "Non-Party", and where Sandor Samuels falsely appears as "Person in Interest". Under the caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide, and later Bank of America filed hundreds of false banking records, declarations, motions, and purported orders and judgments, all without exception false and deliberately misleading. 

In the course of such litigation, Countrywide and BofA, under the guidance of Sandor Samuels, also engaged in false appearances by Counsel - Bryan Cave, LLP, which continued even when the office of General Counsel of BofA under General Counsel Timothy Mayopoulos repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was not authorized to appear on behalf of BofA in the respective caption.

To simplify review of the multiple types of fraud involved in the case, the Audit Committee of BofA was repeatedly requested to review only 6 key Countrywide/Bank of America records from such malicious litigation, all alleged or opined as fraud. [1]  However,  correspondence of Dr Zernik with General Tommy Frank, former member of the Audit Committee, would lead one to conclude that the Audit Committee was never informed of the complaints filed by Dr Zernik pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), and likewise, that the Audit Committee was never informed of  the fraud by management - by Sandor Samuels - Associate General Counsel, and others.

Although conduct of Sandor Samuels and Countrywide/BofA under caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) was extreme, the pattern of fraud by the Legal Department of Countrywide under Sandor Samuels in courtrooms across the United States was well established in the Case of Borrower Hill (01-22574) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and the Case of Borrower Parsley (05-90374) in Houston Texas.  The latter case also included a one- year study by the United States Trustee regarding litigation practices of Countrywide in courts across the nation.

Therefore, Mr Moynihan and My O'Keefe are herein requested to perform their duties pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) and inform the Audit Committee of Fraud by Management - by Sandor Samuels, Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation.

Response is kindly requested within 10 days, informing stockholder Dr Joseph Zernik whether Brian Moynihan - President, and Ed O'Keefe - General Counsel, performed such duties pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002).

Respectfully,
Dated: February 05, 2010                
La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California                       Joseph H Zernik, PhD  
                                                                                     []
                                                                                  By: ______________                                                                                                            JOSEPH H ZERNIK
                                                                                                            PO Box 526, LV CA 91750
                                                                                                                                Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
                                                                Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs

[1] List of Six key records that the Audit Committee of BofA was requested in previous complaints pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) to review as fraud by Sandor Samuels and others.
http://inproperinla.com/09-04-17-list-of-six-key-records-for-bac-audit-committee-review-s.pdf
   
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)