Indictments/convictions of state judges by US Dept of Justice/FBI, or lack thereof, according to Public Integrity Section annual reports 1985-2007 demonstrate uneven enforcement efforts.
A. INTRODUCTION
In December 2008, in conjunction with the
indictment of former New York State Supreme Court Justice Spargo, the FBI
released in New York the following prepared statement1:
.
"This case should
demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial
corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the
most serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society."
[underline added – jhz]
.
Data analysis below reflects an
attempt to establish whether FBI’s enforcement efforts are consistent with its own stated
policy.
.
B. REPORTED INDICTMENTS/CONVICTIONS OF STATE JUDGES 1985-
2007
.
Table 1: Enforcement outcome per year 1985-2007
Indictments/convictions of state judges per annual reports of the Public Integrity
Section of US Dept of Justice. Enlarged view:
C. ENFORCEMENT OUTCOME 1985-2007 VS DEMOGRAPHIC DATA O
F STATES AND TERRITORIES, 2008 ESTIMATES
.
No data were readily found for the numbers of state judges in
each state and territory. In an attempt to normalize actions by
the US Department of Justice relative to estimated size of the state judiciaries, data were
provided for the population of the several states and territories.
.
Table 2: Indictments of state judges per annual
reports of the Public Integrity Section of US Dept of Justice 1985-
20075, and media reports for 2008-9, compared to demographic estimates for 2008 [6]. Enlarged view:
D. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS
.
General
.
1. The number of indictments/convictions over the years demonstrates distribution that is far from normal.
.
2. Various models can explain such abnormal distribution. Given the long tenures of judges, it is
unlikely that corruption of the judiciary appears in bursts. Therefore, one of the more plausible
explanations for the data is in uneven enforcement efforts, with bursts of activity, for example –
1985-87, followed by years of minimal or no efforts at all.
.
3. The number of indictments/convictions relative to state/territory populations shows abnormal distribution as well.
.
Large Sun-Belt States: California, Texas & Florida
.
4. Particularly striking is the absence of any indictments over a quarter century in California, Texas, and Florida, three large sun-belt states, with combined population of close to 80 millions.
.
5. Various models can explain such abnormal distribution. For example – large differences in
integrity among the state judiciaries, with California, Texas, and Florida being of integrity that is
significantly better than that of other states. Media report and court actions do not support such
a model (see below).
.
6. A more plausible model explaining the data – failure to enforce equal protection in these states.
.
Nevada
.
7. Nevada fits the class of sun-belt states, but its population is much smaller than that of California, Texas, and Florida. The absence of any indictments or convictions in Nevada in the years covered here - 1985-2007, is particularly striking given the reputation of Nevada state courts.
.
8. In 2006, the Los Angeles Times, ran an acclaimed series of detailed reports10 regarding alleged rampart corruption of the Nevada state judges. One report quoted an opinion of
“…the incestuous nature of a judiciary fueled by friendships and campaign money."
Another report was titled:
“In Las Vegas, They're Playing With a Stacked Judicial Deck”.
The subtitle read:
“Some judges routinely rule in cases involving friends, former clients and business associates -- and in favor of lawyers who fill their campaign coffers.”
.
9. No evidence that FBI took any action at all – alleged failure to enforce equal protection in Nevada.
.
Los Angeles County, California
.
10. The population of Los Angeles County, California, per 2008 estimates11, was 10,363,850. Therefore, LA County, in and of itself, was more populous than 49 of the states and territories. No indictments/convictions of state judges were found in Public Integrity Section annual reports for 1985-2007, or in media reports for 2008-9. The absence of any indictments in Los Angeles, over a period of quarter century is amazing, given the overwhelming evidence of widespread corruption of the courts, with the Rampart scandal of 1998-2000 at the low point mark, and the continued false imprisonment of the 10,000 Rampart-FIPs an inexplicable tolerance by US Government of an ongoing, severe human rights abuse under the color of law.
.
11. KNBC, Los Angeles, reported in October 200812 that ALL judges in LA County (~500) took
payments of ~$45,000 per year per judge from LA County, which were ruled by court to be “not permitted”[13]. During the same years that judges took such payments, the same judges did not disclose to parties in cases involving LA County that they received such payments that were “not permitted”. For some years, where data were analyzed, no judgment by court was ever issued against LA County. In lay language such payments would therefore likely to be called “bribes”.
.
The KNBC report opened with a statement by activist John Rizzo, in re: Los Angeles County:
“Los Angeles has the best courts money can buy”.
.
12. Att Richard Fine, who led the efforts to expose this scandal, had been incarcerated for over a
month, and his imprisonment may be indefinite- purported to be for contempt14. It at least
appears as retaliation, intimidation, and harassment of a witness, victim, informant.
.
13. Opinion letter by veteran FBI agent, decorated by US congress, by US Attorney General, and by Director of FBI, indicates that judges of LA Superior court were involved in real estate fraud.[15]
.
14. Evidence shows that the alleged corruption of the LA Superior Court is also tightly related to
obstruction of justice and conduct that is likely to be deemed racketeering by the Legal
Department of Countrywide, under its former Chief Legal Officer, Sandor Samuels. Moreover,
email notice by the same decorated veteran FBI agent quoted above, indicates that the reason for the obviously aimless investigation of wrongdoing by Countrywide, is the desire to cover up the corruption of LA Superior Court judges.[16]
.
15. Computer system installed in the LA Superior Court in 1985 is alleged to be a “voting machine” scandal, producing alleged fraudulent court records on a daily basis for the past quarter century.[17]
.
16. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system , the LA Superior Court eliminated a series of public records that are critical for the safeguard of the integrity of the courts, including, but not limited to: Book of Judgments, Registers of Actions, Calendars of the Courts, Index of All Cases, Index of All Prisoners.
.
17. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system, the LA Superior Court has been denying public access to public records for the past quarter century in wholesale abuse of Common Law and First Amendment rights. It adopted an unpublished rule:
“Sustain is privileged –for the court only”[18].
.
18. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system, the LA Superior Court failed to update its Local Rules of Court on critical matters, such as entry of judgment, for the past quarter century, and therefore is operating with no valid published Rules of Court[19].
.
19. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system, the LA Superior Court adapted a “Local Custom” of “waivers of service and notice” of court orders, issued unilaterally by judges of the superior court. Such local custom was routinely denounced by the California Commission on Judicial Performance, but it continues even to this date.
.
20. As evidenced by the Blue Ribbon Review Panel (2006) report [20] commissioned by the LAPD itself, and by PBS Frontline [21], the LA Superior Court judges continue the false imprisonment of at least 10,000 confirmed Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) a decade after largescale investigation (at times 200 investigators assigned to it) confirmed that they were convicted and sentenced based on false evidence. Such evidence was generated by police through framing, and at times also false confessions - extracted through torture. Regarding the findings of the Rampart scandal, the following opinions were published:
.
“…judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit. How could so many participants in the criminal justice system have failed either to recognize or to instigate any meaningful scrutiny of such appalling and repeated perversions of justice?”
.
“…we felt a particular obligation to ensure that no aspect of the Los Angeles criminal justice system, including the lawyers and judges, escaped scrutiny.”
.
- Prof David W. Burcham, then Dean, and Prof Catherine L. Fisk, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, Rampart symposium, 2000
.
“Any analysis of the Rampart scandal must begin with an appreciation of the heinous nature of what the officers did. This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states. “
.
“…and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.”
.
- Erwin Chemerinsky, today Dean of Irvine Law School, University of California, 57 Guild Prac 121, 2000.
.
Needles to say, there is no way to justify the continued false imprisonment of the Rampart-FIPs a decade later. The Rampart FIPs are mostly black and latino, and by their sheer number and
duration of false imprisonment they dwarf the detentions at Guantanamo Bay. It is a disgrace
of historic proportions. If nothing else, this paper is aimed as a request for President Obama
to act to end this disgrace before the end of his first 100 days in office, when it is still seen as part of wrongs by a previous administration.
.
21. In contrast with the overwhelming evidence of alleged widespread corruption of the LA Superior Court, there is no evidence that FBI took any action at all. Moreover, there is evidence suggesting patronizing of the LA Superior Court corruption by the FBI – alleged failure to enforce Equal Protection in Los Angeles County.
.
22. Conditions of the US justice system, such as seen in LA County, California, are
alleged severe violations of International Law, including, but not limited to the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 2, 7,8,10, 11 & 12.
Footnotes
1 Based on report by the Time Union December 11, 2008.
2 http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/pin/
3 Based on media reports, no PIN annual report available.
http://inproperinla.com/09-02-11-two-pennsylavnia-judges_indicted.pdf
4 Based on media reports, no PIN annual report available.
http://inproperinla.com/08-12-11-usdoj-not-fbi-indicts-ny-state-judge-spargo-ny-s.pdf
5 Based on Public Integrity Section annual reports as described in Table 1, above.
6 Based on US Bureau of Statistics data, copied from Wikipedia, April 9, 2009.
7 All reported Illinois indictments resulted from enforcement in 1985-7, given that no names were mentioned, it was difficult to ascertain the degree of overlap, or lack thereof, between actions reported in the individual years.
8 LA County population - based on California State Government's Population Bureau, estimate for January 1, 2008. Data copied from Wikipedia April 9, 2009
9 In 2008, the Los Angeles Times, ran an acclaimed series of detailed reports on alleged corruption of the Nevada state judges. FBI took no action at all.
10 http://inproperinla.com/06-06-14-los-angeles-times_series-on-las-vegas-judges-renews-calls-for-reform.pdf
11 based on California State government's population bureau, estimate for January 1, 2008. Data copied from Wikipedia April 9, 2009
12 KNBC, Los Angeles, report on October 16, 2008:
http://inproperinla.com/08-10-16-knbc-illegal-payments--la-sup-court-judges-s.pdf
13 Ruling by California Court of Appeal, 4th District, San Diego, October, 2008 –
http://inproperinla.com/08-10-10-cal-ct-app-4th-dist-la-county-judges-payments-not-permitted.pdf
14 The indefinite incarceration of Richard Fine followed his demand for disqualification for a cause of Judge Jaffe, on of the judges who received the payments from LA County, which were deemed by court “not permitted”.
http://inproperinla.com/09-03-04-full-disclosure-network-att-richard-fine-jailed-in-attempt-to-disqualify-la-judge.pdf
15 The opinion was by veteran FBI agent James Wedick, best remembered for his performance in the Abscam affair.
http://inproperinla.com/07-12-17-wedick.memo.notarized.deeds.zernik.2009.02.05-s.pdf
http://inproperinla.com/07-12-17-grant-deeds-wedick-s-opinion-s.pdf
16 http://inproperinla.com/08-08-21-refusal-to-investigate-fbi-wedick-letter-s.pdf
17 Findings relative the fraudulent nature of “Sustain” the case management system produced by The Daily Journal – the largest legal newspaper in California, and installed with no public scrutiny around 1985, are summarized in:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-computers-&-the-courts-abstract-&-figures.pdf
18 This unpublished rule was repeated verbatim once by Supervising Judge Gerald Rosenberg, in open court, as the justification for denial of access to public records, and a second time by staff in the office of then Presiding Judge Stephen Czuleger, for the same purpose.
19 Review of the failure to update the Rules of Court on critical matters such as entry of judgment:
http://inproperinla.com/.0Heading-152-conclusions-us-constitution-non-compliance.pdf
20 Blue Ribbon Review Panel, 2006 report:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-rampart-blue-ribbon-review-panel-2006-report.pdf
21 Frontline PBS report on false imprisonments in LA:
http://inproperinla.com/01-05-01-pbs-frontline_rampart-false-imprisonments-s.pdf
