Tuesday, April 5, 2011

11-04-06 Habeas Corpus in the United States // Habeas Corpus en los Estados Unidos // 在美国人身保护令



Availability of Habeas Corpus petition forms does not amount to the safeguard of the right for Habeas Corpus. 

Access to honest courts for review of Habeas Corpus petitions is a different matter:

  • Review of the prisoners' records in Los Angeles and Marin Counties, California, shows that about half of them are held with invalid legal records. [1]
  • The case of Richard Fine documented his holding in solitary confinement for 18 months under fraudulent records, stating that he was arrested and imprisoned on the grounds and by authority of the non-existent "Municipal Court of San Dedro".  His Habeas Corpus petition was subject to multiple levels of fraud in review under the US District Court, Central District of California, US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, and Supreme Court of the United States. [2,3]
The evidence of large-scale false imprisonments in California was central to the 2010 Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations.  The report was incorporated into the official Staff Report with reference to "corruption of the courts and the legal profession". [4]

Fay v Noia (1963) the late Justice Brennan wrote for the Supreme Court:
  • "The basic principle of the Great Writ of habeas corpus is that, in a civilized society... if the imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law, the individual is entitled to his immediate release".
A key finding in the final report of the Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the United States in 2010 was the dismantling of Habeas Corpus rights in the United States, and the Human Rights Council of the United Nations called upon the United States to restore such rights, including the rights of Habeas Corpus for detainees in Guantanamo Bay.

The right for Habeas Corpus petition was effectively dismantled in the United States.

[1] Zernik, J: Data Mining as a Civic Duty  Online Public Prisoners' Registration Systems, International Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining 1: 84-96 (2010)
[2] April 20, 2010 Motion to Intervene and related papers in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court
[3] Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) in the US Supreme Court - denial of the right to file papers in the Court
[4] 10-04-19 Human Rights Alert (NG0) submission to the  United Nations Human Rights Council  for the 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States as incorporated into the UPR staff report, with reference to "corruption of the courts and the legal profession".

At 12:18 AM 4/6/2011, Bob wrote:
See the attached habeas-related forms Alice Marcott of the Pinellas County Sheriff Office graciously sent me upon request.

I had called half a dozen or more places asking for them and gotten frustrated with the phone equivalent of blank stares of non-understanding.

I sent a simple public records request by email yesterday afternoon and received this lovely answer this afternoon.

I love it when things work the way they should.

------- Forwarded message -------
From: "Marcott,Alice"
To: "'bob@bobhurt.com'"
Subject: FW: Habeas Corpus Blank forms
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 15:50:52 -0400

Mr. Hurt,

Attached are the Writ of Habeas Corpus forms given to Pinellas County Jail inmates upon their request.

Alice M. Marcott
General Counsel's Office
Pinellas County Sheriff's Office
amarcott1 at pcsonet dot com

11-04-05 US-Iraq Judicial Cooperation Launched! // La cooperación judicial Unidos e Irak lanzada! // 美伊司法合作推出!

The synergy in this case is promising better than ever outcomes!

The United States Department of Justice Seal

Joint Coordination Committee for Law Enforcement and Judicial Cooperation Meets in Iraq
April 5th, 2011 Posted by Tracy Russo
Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole was in Iraq this weekend for the first meeting of the Joint Coordination Committee (JCC)  for Law Enforcement and Judicial Cooperation. The committee, as established by the U.S.-Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement, seeks to:
  1. Support the further integration and security of the Iraqi criminal justice system, including police, courts, and prisons.
  2. Exchange views and best practices related to judicial capacity building and training, including on continuing professional development for judges, judicial investigators, judicial security personnel, and court administrative staff.
  3. Enhance law enforcement and judicial relationships to address corruption, and common transnational criminal threats, such as terrorism, trafficking in persons, organized crime, drugs, money laundering, smuggling of archeological artifacts, and cyber crime.

11-04-05 Fraud in the Los Angeles Superior Court to Benefit Bank of America // Fraude en la Corte Superior de Los Ángeles a beneficio de Bank of America // 在洛杉矶高级法院以诈骗洛杉矶的美国银行效益

Sandor Samuels_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Bryan Moynihan

Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles – Fraud on the Court in a Quiet Title action 

Bank of America continues racketeering in the Los Angeles Superior Court, while Bank of America Associate General Counsel Sandor Samuels is titled President of Bet Tzedek - "The House of Justice" - and claims to engage in “repairing the world”.

California Judge: PETER J MEEKA
Clerk of the Court: JOHN A CLARKE

Los Angeles, April 5 - In Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) Plaintiff Susan Lomas tries to protect her rights through a Quiet Title action, against alleged fraud by Bank of America and others in foreclosure procedures.
A pattern of false and deliberately misleading court records is found in the case, presided by California Judge PETER J MEEKA, Clerk of the Court JOHN A CLARKE:
  1. None of the minutes were certified by the Deputy Clerk of the Court;
  2. None of the minutes were noticed and served by the Court;
  3. Proceedings were repeatedly listed in the minutes as “off of the record”;
  4. No Initial Case Management Conference was ever held;
  5. Plaintiff has been repeatedly denied access to the Register of Actions (California civil docket), where the true registration of the proceedings (or lack thereof) would be discerned, and
  6. An online “Case Summary” is published by the Court, which would lead a naïve reader to conclude that valid and effectual proceedings were held and rulings were entered by the court.
In sum
Combined, the records indicate that:
  • The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles is engaged in fraud to benefit Defendant Bank of America through the conduct of pretense litigation in the Court;
  • The Court is denying Plaintiff Susan Lomas access to the court, equal protection, and due process of law, and
  • Conduct of the Superior Court of California should be deemed serious violation of the Human, Constitutional, and Civil rights of Plaintiff Susan Lomas.
[i] 11-03-20 PRESS RELEASE Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) Bank of America Continues Racketeering in the Los Angeles Superior Court
[ii] 11-03-20 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) in the Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles online “Case Summary” and Minutes

11-04-05 Welcome Australia! // Bienvenido Australia! // 欢迎来到澳大利亚!

Last New Visitor

Visited April 5, 2011