Thursday, May 20, 2010

10-05-20 Request filed with AG Eric Holder for Equal Protection in Los Angeles County – compliance of the US with international law and accords.// Solicitud presentada con AG, Eric Holder, para la igualdad de protección en el Condado de Los Angeles - el cumplimiento de los EE.UU. con el derecho internacional y los acuerdos // Antrag eingereicht mit Eric Holder AG für Equal Protection in Los Angeles County - Einhaltung der USA mit dem Völkerrecht und Abkommen.

Request filed with AG Eric Holder for Equal Protection in Los Angeles County – compliance of the US with international law and accords.
Washington DC, May 20, 2010 – Human Rights Alert, a Los Angeles County, California filed a request with US Attorney General, Eric Holder, for Equal Protection of the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County.  The letter alleged lawlessness in Los Angeles County, California, the hallmarks of which are large-scale false imprisonments and fraud by large financial institutions against the US government and against individuals.  The letter alleged that such lawlessness, and failure of the US District Court to protect Human Rights are tied to ambiguity and lack of integrity that were introduced in US court records and court procedures following the introduction – with no public oversight – of new computerized online public access and case managements  systems at the US Courts – PACER and CM/ECF.   The most notorious example of opined false imprisonments listed in the letter were the thousands of blacks and latinos – the Rampart-FIPs – victims of the Rampart scandal (1998-2000).  The alleged false imprisonment of Richard Fine, 70 yo former US prosecutor, who is held under solitary confinement and false hospitalization for over a year was also noticed, as well as the alleged false imprisonment of thousands in the Los Angeles County jails, documented in submission to the United Nations, as part of the 2010 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the United States.  The opined fraud by Countrywide Financial Corporation, Bank of America Corporation, and its President Brian Moynihan were provided as examples of fraud by financial institutions against individuals and against the US Government.  Such fraud was opined and documented in complaints filed with Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and FBI.  Los Angeles County was defined by FBI already in the early 2000s as the “epicenter of real estate and mortgage fraud.”
The letter noticed Attorney General Holder that the failure of US government to accord Equal Protection in Los Angeles County, California, was brought already in 2008 before his predecessor, Michael Mukasey, and inquiries were filed by US Congress on FBI and US Attorney General in that matter.  The responses provided by Kenneth Kaiser – Assistant Director of FBI and Kenneth Melson – Director of US Attorneys Office – were alleged as fraud on US Congress.  Accordingly, in November 2009 complaint was filed with US Department of Justice Inspector General Glenn Fine against the two senior US Department of Justice Officers, who signed the responses.   After the Inspector General failed to respond on the complaint, Senator Dianne Feinstein issued an inquiry on the Inspector General, and his response to US Congress on the matter is now overdue.
The letter to Attorney General Eric Holder called upon him to demonstrate respect by the US Government for its obligations pursuant to international law – to protect Human Rights, and pursuant to the Basel Accords – to implement functional banking regulation. The letter emphasized the failure of the first ever US president and US Attorney General, who self identify as black, to act regarding Human Rights disgrace of historic proportions – the ongoing opined false imprisonment of thousands of blacks and latinos in Los Angeles County – the Rampart –FIPs.
Response by US State Department on the submissions to the United Nations as part of the first ever  - 2010 review of Human Rights in the US – is due in August 2010, and the review session and report by the United Nations are due in November 2010.  Numerous stakeholders, including nations that are considered friendly, filed submissions with the United Nations as part of the review, alleging serious violations of Human Rights in the United States, particularly – related to the conduct of the US justice system.  It remains to be seen how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would respond on such allegations to the international community.
###
________

May 20, 2010

Eric Holder
Attorney General of the United States
By Email

The favor of a response within 10 days is requested.

RE: Repeat Request for Equal Protection of the 10 Million Residents of Los Angeles County, California – and for Respect by US Government of Its Duties and Obligations Pursuant to International Law- the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Pursuant to the Basel Accord on International Banking.

Dear Attorney General Holder:

Please accept the records, linked below, [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] as a repeat request that your office accord Equal Protection under the Law for the 10 millions who reside in Los Angeles County, California, and that the US Government respect its duties and obligations pursuant to ratified international law – the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Basel Accords on international banking.

The presentation, [1] and the Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission [2]  to the United Nations as part of  the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States, provide an overview as well as specific evidence of the alleged widespread, large-scale violations of Human Rights in Los Angeles County, California, and elsewhere in the United States.  The core allegation is that such conditions resulted from conditions of ambiguity in court records and court procedures of the US federal courts, following the introduction, with no public oversight, of new online public access and case management systems - PACER and CM/ECF.  Additional evidence to that effect is provided in a record written as solicitation of expert opinions regarding integrity, or lack thereof, in records and procedures of the US District Court, Los Angeles, as a result of the design and mode of operation of the systems. [3] The hallmarks of the resulting alleged violations of Human Rights are in (a) Large-scale false imprisonments in Los Angeles County, California, and (b) Cripples banking regulation – the evidence from Los Angeles County, California compellingly documents financial institutions fraud against individuals and against the US government.

Equal Protection in Los Angeles County, California, is specifically requested in the following cases, where compelling evidence supporting the allegations below was detailed in the records forwarded to the United Nations in the 2010 UPR Submission and Appendix, [1], [2]  and also in complaints filed with FBI and US Attorneys Office:
1)      Richard Fine’s Alleged False Imprisonment – The 70 yo former US prosecutor is held for over a year in solitary confinement in a hospital room in Los Angeles, California, with no reasonable medical justification, with no warrant ever discovered, and with no judgment or conviction ever entered in his case. 
2)      The Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) – Their number was estimated in various sources between 8,000 and 30,000 – the victims of the Los Angeles County Rampart corruption scandal (1998-2000), almost exclusively blacks and latinos, who have never been released from false imprisonments.
3)      Thousands of Allegedly Falsely Imprisoned Inmates in the Los Angeles County Jails -  The Human Rights Alert submission to the United Nations documented the routine holding of inmates with no records conforming with the fundamentals of the law.
4)      Joseph Zernik – Opined by Leading Fraud Experts as a Victim of Real Estate fraud in Los Angeles County, California, by large financial institutions and others -  The case is but one example of numerous cases evidence of which was produced in Los Angeles County, California. FBI defined Los Angeles County already in the early 2000’s, as the “Epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud.”  FBI repeatedly promised the US Congress to investigate, and speed up the investigations of such alleged criminality by financial institutions. However, in fact - FBI refuses to investigate and provide protection even when leading fraud experts reviewed the matter and opined of fraud, and even when FBI agent assigned to the case agreed already in 2008 that real estate fraud was perpetrated.  The specific case of Joseph Zernik also included direct evidence of fraud against the US government by Countrywide Financial Corporation and Bank of America Corporation, [4] which provide detailed evidence of the alleged large scale fraud against the US government, which underlies the current financial crisis.  Particularly troubling is the refusal of FBI to investigate compelling evidence of fraud by Brian Moynihan and Bank of America Corporation recipients of some $200 Billions in bailout funds.

The request for Equal Protection for the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County was first filed with your predecessor as Attorney General in 2008.  When office of the US Attorney General failed to respond, inquiries were filed by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California, and the Hon Diane Watson, Congresswoman from Los Angeles, California.  Responses were provided to US Congress in August-September 2008 by FBI Assistant Director Kenneth Kaiser, and US Attorneys Office Director Kenneth Melson.  Such responses were alleged as fraud by senior US officers on the US Congress in complaint filed in November 2009 with Glenn Fine – US Department of Justice Inspector General.  After the Inspector General failed to respond on the complaint, inquiry was issued by the Hon Diane Feinstein on the Inspector General, whose response to US Congress on the matter is overdue.

Therefore, you are respectfully requested to accord Equal Protection to the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California, where the evidence compellingly documented disintegration of the US Justice system and banking regulation.  You are also respectfully requested to demonstrate respect by the US government of its duties and obligations pursuant to International Law- the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Basel Accords on international banking.  Failure by your office to act on such matters, and allowing continued lawlessness, exposes the US and others to risks, which are difficult or impossible to assess.

Particularly troubling is the refusal, so far, of the first US President and the first US Attorney General. who self-identify as black, to take action to remedy Human Rights disgrace of historic proportions - the ongoing false imprisonment of thousands of blacks and latinos - the Rampart-FIPs.

Truly,
[]
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (HRA), NGO
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

CC:
1)      UN High Commissioner on Human Rights
2)      Basel Accord Committee on International Banking
3)      Senator Dianne Feinstein- DC
4)      Senator Dianne Feinstein- SF
5)      Rep Barney Frank - Chair, House Financial Services Committee
6)      Senator Christopher Dodd - Chair, Senate Banking Committee
7)      Senator Patrick Leahy- Chair, Judiciary Committee
8)      Rep John Conyers Jr – Chair, House Judiciary Committee
9)      Senator Carl Levine – Chair, Senate Investigations Committee

LINKS:
[1] Powerpoint presentation of 2010 UPR submission by Human Rights Alert
[2] April 19, 2010 Human Rights Alert submission for the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations:
a) Press Release:
b) Submission:
c) Appendix:
d) UPR Tool Kit by the Urban Justice Center:
[3] Human Rights in the Digital Era - solicitation of expert opinions.
[4] Addendum to complaint against Brian Moynihan and Bank of America Corporation for fraud and various other alleged criminal conduct:
[5]  Addendum to complaint filed with US Department of Justice Inspector General alleging fraud by senior US officers on US Congress in 2008 responses on complaint requesting Equal Protection for the 10 million residents of Los Angeles County, California.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28125499/10-03-09-Addendum-to-Complaint-to-DOJ-IG-Regarding-Fraud-by-Kenneth-Kaiser-Assistant-Director-of-FBI-for-Criminal-Investigations

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

10-05-17 Spain, Human Rights: The Hon Baltasar Garzon Faces Supreme Court Trial // España, Derechos Humanos: El Juez Baltasar Garzón Se Enfrenta a la Suprema Corte de Primera Instancia // Spanien, Menschenrecht: Richter Baltasar Garzón Gesichter Supreme Court Versuch


Leading Spanish judge faces Supreme Court trial

By the CNN Wire Staff
May 12, 2010 -- Updated 1333 GMT (2133 HKT)
Baltasar Garzon began investigating human rights abuses under Franco in 2008.
Baltasar Garzon began investigating human rights abuses under Franco in 2008.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Baltasar Garzon began investigating human rights abuses under Franco in 2008
  • Garzon seeking to work temporarily at the International Criminal Court at The Hague
  • Accused of starting own probe into abuses during Franco regime despite a 1977 amnesty
  • Garzon famous for pursuing high-profile cases including Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet
Madrid, Spain (CNN) -- A Spanish judge will face trial for alleged abuse of power in his probe into human rights abuses under the former Spanish dictator Francisco Franco, a Supreme Court spokeswoman told CNN Wednesday.
It happened just a day after Baltasar Garzon asked for a leave of absence from his post at Spain's National Court to work temporarily at the International Criminal Court at The Hague, Netherlands.
Garzon, who has presided over a number of cases against high-profile figures such as former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, is accused of opening his own investigation into human rights abuses under the long Franco regime -- which ended in 1975 with Franco's death -- despite a parliament-approved amnesty to all involved in such crimes in 1977.
The Supreme Court is also investigating Garzon amid allegations of wiretapping in a corruption scandal that has affected leaders of the main opposition Popular Party.
He is also facing bribery allegations relating to a course he organized at New York University while the course's sponsor was under investigation at Garzon's court.
The 54-year-old judge proclaimed his innocence in all three cases in a brief statement to reporters earlier this year. He could be removed from the bench if found guilty.
Spanish trade unions and some of the nation's leading progressive personalities, along with international human rights activists, have come to his defense, arguing that he had the right to investigate disappearances and killings under the Franco regime.
In 2008, Garzon began investigating human rights abuses under Franco, who ruled Spain for decades after winning the 1936-39 civil war. Historians say there were thousands of forced disappearances.
The year before, the Spanish Parliament, led by the current Socialist government, passed a law condemning Franco's dictatorship and calling on town halls to fund initiatives to unearth mass graves.
The 2007 law also sought to honor Roman Catholic clergy and others executed by the losing side in the war, the forces loyal to the leftist Republican government.
Last April, Varela, the Supreme Court magistrate, wrote that Garzon "tried to take control of locating and exhuming" the mass graves in his investigation.
Garzon issued "multiple rulings which for multiple reasons are against judicial reasoning, and did so knowingly, eventually constituting an abuse of power," Varela wrote.
Spain's General Council of Judicial Power now faces various immediate issues, analysts said -- whether to suspend Garzon from the bench now that a Supreme Court trial has been ordered, and whether to allow him the leave of absence.

10-05-16 Spain, Soccer: FC Barcelona v Valladoid - 4:0 // España, Fútbol: FC Barcelona v Valladoid - 04:00 // Spanien Fussball: FC Barcelona v Valladoid - 4:0

FC Barcelona vs Valladoid Pics  FC Barcelona vs Valladoid Pics    FC Barcelona vs Valladoid Pics FC Barcelona vs Valladoid Pics     

Monday, May 17, 2010

10-05-16 Non-Cases of Los Angeles Superior Court // No asuntos de Los Ángeles Tribunal Superior // Non-Cases von Los Angeles Superior Court



Marina v LA County (BS108420) and Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286) - US Supreme Court and California Court of Appeals to review non-cases of the Los Angeles Superior Court

What media reports, such as AHRC - below, and most observers failed to realize is that the legal battles on both cases that are subject of the news report at hand represent the deep seated corruption of the Los Angeles Superior Court - based on conduct of cases that the court itself never deemed valid court cases in the first place.

To wit - in both Marina v LA County - the case in which Richard Fine was purported to be arrested, and in Sturgeon v LA County - the case that purported to review the "not permitted" payments to Los Angeles County judges, judges and referees presided with no Assignment and Appointment Orders.

To wit - in both cases the purported judgments were never authenticated and never entered by the Court as required by California Code in order to make such judgments "effectual for any purpose."[1]

To wit - in both cases the Los Angeles Superior Court refuses to allow access to the Registers of Actions - the definitive court records of the cases.

Therefore, purported habeas corpus on the arrest and false imprisonment of Richard Fine - at the US District Court in Los Angeles, as well as purported appeal at the California Court of Appeal, 4th District were conducted out of compliance with fundamental rules and laws - with no dockets for the cases that the respective court purported to review.

The ongoing denial of access to court records in Los Angeles County courts, in disregard of First Amendment rights was alleged as fundamental violation of Human Rights in ratified International Law in report filed with the UN in April 2010, scheduled for review as part of Universal Periodic Review (first time ever) of Human Rights in the US in November 2010. [2]

The jurisdiction of review courts pertaining to judgments that was never entered is of course dubious at best.  Such fact is likely to be the explanation of the conduct of the Sheriff and the Los Angeles Superior Court in refusing to respond to the review courts at all. The review courts - the California Court of Appeals, 4th District, and the US Supreme Court - have developed their own avenue to respond in kind unsigned, unauthenticated decisions

Its full blown  display of the  United States "alternative justice system" in action!

Truly,

Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (HRA), NGO
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

LINKS:
[1] Search for entered judgments in Marina v LA County and in Sturgeon v LA County in the judgment archives of Los Angeles Superior Court:
[2]  April 19, 2010 Human Rights Alert submission for the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations:
a) Press Release:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/10-04-19-Human-Rights-Alert-Filed-UPR-Report-with-the-United-Nations
b) Submission:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/10-04-18-Human-Rights-Alert-Final-Submission-to-the-United-Nations-for-the-2010-Universal-Periodic-Review-of-the-US-s
c) Appendix:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/10-04-19-Human-Rights-Alert-Final-Appendix-for-Submission-to-the-United-Nations-for-the-2010-UPR-of-the-United-States-s
d) UPR Tool Kit by the Urban Justice Center:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29867561/10-04-13-UPR-Tool-Kit-Urban-Justice-Center-USA-provided-by-UN-office-of-High-Commissioner-for-Human-Rights



An Article
California Judges Losing Ground In Fight To Save Their Illegal Payments:

May 16, 2010

By Full Disclosure Watch (View author info)

Los Angeles, California -Full Disclosure Network presents a nine minute video news update on the long protracted legal battle involving a David and Goliath fight to stop judicial, bias, bribery, conflict of interest and corruption in the California Courts.

FEATURING TWO DAVIDS WHO TOOK ON JUDICIAL GOLIATH

Richard I. Fine
, jailed taxpayer advocate Attorney
Sterling Norris, Judicial Watch public interest attorney
and activist Fred Sottile who describes the circumstances of the two cases both involving Los Angeles County
.
Richard I. Fine vs Sheriff Leroy Baca, L A County and Sturgeon vs County of Los Angeles that have now reached the highest courts and are expected to be resolved within the next few days after an extraordinary legal battle against all odds. Here are some of the particulars:

THURSDAY, MAY 20, 2010

U S SUPREME COURT CONFERENCE HEARING
Richard I. Fine vs Sheriff Leroy Baca, L A County
Petition for Writ of Certiorari (Re: Appeal on Writ of Habeas Corpus)
SHERIFF BACA THROWS IN THE TOWEL AT U S SUPREME COURT

Both Richard Fine and Sterling Norris are very positive regarding the new developments that hold promise they will win in both their cases based on the following two documents:

Sheriff Baca declined to respond (see waiver here) in the U S Supreme Court on Richard I. Fine'sPetition for Writ of Certiorari that could free him from solitary "Coercive Confinement" in the L A County Men's Central Jail. He has been held there for fourteen months even though he has never been charged or convicted of a crime.

L A County and Superior Court Judges Association failed to respond in the Judicial Watch Sturgeon vs County of L. A. case causing the California 4th District Court of Appeals send this notice to respond that the case will be decided on the opening brief and oral argments presented by Judicial Watch if they do not respond by Friday May 21, 2010.

View Comments (0) | Post a comment

For more information, please check out the articles listed below:

  Theodore Boutrous - Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
   Sterling E. Norris
   Richard I. Fine
   Free Richard Fine Website
   Judicial Watch - Tom Fenton - President
   Please join this emergency show tonight, as Judge Yaffe throws homeowners attorney Richard Fine in jail today without cause - Justice4Us - Dr. Shirley Moore
   Atty Richard Fine, Imprisoned for Freedom Fighting - Brooke Kelley
   The Fine Pursuit of Exposing Corruption - Janet Levy
  Richard Fine Files Federal Suit Against California State Bar and the State Bar Court - AHRC News Services
  Attorney Richard Fine resume and some of his unique cases with societal impact - AHRC News Services
  CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS SHOWN BY COURT RECORDS DEMONSTRATES LA JUDGES TARGETED RICHARD I. FINE FOR UPHOLDING CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION AND SEEKING TO ENFORCE U.S. CONSTITUTION - AHRC News Services
  Attorney Richard Fine Challenges State Bar Action as a Gross Violation of First Amendment Rights of Freedom of Speech and to Petition the Government to Redress Grievances - Richard I. Fine
  RICHARD I. FINE FILES COMPLAINT WITH FBI TO INVESTIGATE RETALIATION AGAINST HIM FOR EXPOSING AND PROSECUTING UNCONSTITUTIONAL PAYMENTS BY LA COUNTY TO LA COUNTY JUDGES - Richard I. Fine
  Former U. S Prosecutor, While Battling Illegal County Payments to Los Angeles County Judges, Falls Victim To Identity Theft and Mail Fraud - AHRC News Services
  RICHARD FINE'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HIS ANTI SLAPP MOTION AGAINST THE CALIFORNIA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION - Richard I. Fine
  Attorney Richard Fine files suit against judges - Gary Walker
  CALIFORNIA JUDGES ON THE TAKE ..SAYS RICHARD FINE ON YOU TUBE VIDEO - Disclosure Watch - Dr. Shirley Moore
  False Imprisonment of Richard Fine in California -Appeal for Protection under International Law - Joseph Zernik
  APPEAL FOR DONATIONS FOR APPEAL TO UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT - Mardi L. Mason
  Lawyer takes a stand from his cell - Victoria Kim
  The Best Courts Money Could Buy - Free Richard Fine
  Commissioner Shaw of the 9th. Circuit Court of Appeals Issues A Stay On Disbarment of Richard Fine - Tom Shapinsky
  Letter to the U.S. Supreme Court Justices regarding California Court Corruption and the Financial Crisis - American Homeowners Resource Center
  U. S . HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY A JOKE? - Full Disclosure Watch
  Elwood Lui - Jones Day

Sunday, May 16, 2010

10-05-16 Filing with the US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit and US Supreme Court // Presentación ante la Corte de Apelaciones de EE.UU., 2 º Circuito de la Corte Suprema y los EE.UU. // Einreichung bei der US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit und US-Supreme Court



RE: Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99 -cv-160) Potential filing with the US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, and the US Supreme Court in re: Alleged honest services fraud at the US District Court, Vermont

Filing with the US Circuit Court and the US Supreme Court, as proposed by Plaintiff Huminski, below, on the matter of alleged honest services fraud in PACER and CM/ECF, and false appearances by counsel at the US court, Vermont, is something to be pondered, only for demonstration purposes....

1)  US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit was approached a number of times in requests to access the NDAs (Notices of Docket Activity) - the authentication records -  in Huminski v Town of Bennington, Vermont (03-7036) to inspect and to copy.  Access to such court records was and is denied, in disregard of First Amendment rights and the US Supreme Court decision in Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978) .
[1] Honest Services Fraud on Huminski at the US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, was alleged under such caption by then circuit judge Sonia Sotomayor, compounded by her false filing with US Senate Judiciary Committee as part of the nomination-confirmation hearings. [2]

2) US Supreme Court was petitioned in papers filed under Fine v Sheriff (09-A827), which included detailed compelling evidence of the alleged large scale fraud in PACER and CM/ECF and false appearances by counsel at the US District Court, Central District of California, and US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. [3] The US Supreme Court engaged in the same practices seen in lower courts - papers that provide compelling evidence of corruption of the judiciary and perversion of justice were simply eliminated from the record, with no Due Process at all. [4]

Therefore, the only reason to file again with the US courts on the matter would likely serve to document again the disregard of First Amendment rights - through the vanishing of papers filed to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Truly,
[]
Joseph Zernik, PhD
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345
http://www.examiner.com/x-38742-LA-Business-Headlines-Examiner
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!


LINKS:

[1]
Huminski v Town of Bennington, Vermont (03-7036) - Requests to access court records of the US Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28838352/10-03-23-Huminski-v-Town-of-Bennington-03-7036-US-Court-of-appeals-2nd-Circuit-Docket-Sheet-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27383122/04-11-05-Huminski-v-Bennington-03-7036-US-Court-of-Appeals-2nd-Circuit-Unsigned-Order-Judgment-Affirming-Vermont-Court-Judgment
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27471018/10-02-25-Huminski-v-Town-of-Bennington-Vermont-et-al-03-7036-Repeat-request-to-access-US-Court-of-Appeals-2nd-Circuit-court-records-s

[2]
Huminski v Town of Bennington, Vermont (03-7036) - Alleged Honest Services Fraud by then Circuit Judge Sotomayor, compounded by false filing with US Senate Judiciary Committee.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27386331/10-02-24-Huminski-v-Town-of-Bennington-Vermont-03-7036-Alleged-Fraud-by-Justice-Sotomayor-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27382924/09-06-04-US-Senate-Judiciary-Committee-then-Circuit-Judge-Sotomayor-apos-s-Questionnaire-Appendix

[3] 
April 20, 2010 Motion to Intervene and related papers in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30304657/10-04-20-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-Face-pages-of-five-filings-by-Dr-Joseph-Zernik-with-stamps-showing-receipt-by-the-US-Supreme-Court-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30161573/10-04-18-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-1-Amended-Motion-to-Intervene-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30161636/10-04-18-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-2-Amended-Request-for-Lenience-by-Pro-Se-Filer-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30162109/10-04-18-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-3-Amended-Request-for-Corrections-in-US-Supreme-Court-Records-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30162144/10-04-18-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-4-Amended-Request-for-Incorporation-by-Reference-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30161692/10-04-18-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-5-Amended-Appendices-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30185575/10-04-18-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-5-Amended-Appendix-IX-Zernik-s-Declaration-in-re-April-16-2010-search-for-records-in-the-Courts-microfilm-judgm

[4] Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme Court - vanishing filings
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31430462/10-04-21-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-US-Supreme-Court-Chief-Justice-Roberts-asked-to-secure-integrity-of-the-docket
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31430464/10-04-22-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-at-the-US-Supreme-Court-Dr-Zernik-s-Declaration-RE-Court-Counsel-Danny-Bickell-and-Filing-at-US-Supreme-Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31430465/10-04-23-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-US-Supreme-Court-docket-showing-no-Motion-to-Intervene-no-ruling

At 09:07 PM 5/15/2010, Rocker Scott Huminski wrote:

Why don't you file a pleading after your inquiry is not satisfactorily addressed.  I'll probably join it.  Judge Murtha absolutely hates me, so that will bring an opportunity to bring your issue to the US 2nd cir.  After the federal district, the 2d cir is considered most reknown because of the securities cases, big mafia cases, etc.
At 13:38 5/15/2010, Rocker Scott Huminski wrote:
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 13:38:34 -0400


X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 May 2010 17:38:34.0722 (UTC) FILETIME=[7181F420:01CAF455]
X-ELNK-AV: 0
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;

You picked the most connected firm in Vermont, good choice.  Within the past 5 years their partners have been appointed to Chief Justice, Vermont Supreme Court, Justice, US 2nd Cir. Court of Appeals. Paul Reiber, Peter Hall.

On May 15, 2010, 5:07 AM Dr Joseph Zernik wrote:



Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 05:07:43 -0400
From: jz12345@earthlink.net
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
Subject: Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99-cv-160) Alleged Honest Services Fraud at the US District Court in Vermont
CC: amendmentone@comcast.net


[]


RE: Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99-cv-160) Alleged Honest Services Fraud at the US District Court in Vermont

The case of Huminski v Rutland Police Department, from the US District Court, Vermont, detailed below, surprisingly mimicked in great detail the case of Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County at the US District Court, Central District of California, where Attorney Kevin McCormick engaged in false appearances for Judge David Yaffe, while not Counsel of Record in the case, where the Judicial Council of California, which retained Attorney McCormick for such false appearances, insisted on referring to the case using a false caption, corrupting the name of first Defendant as "Sheriff of Los Angeles Court", 
[1]  and were invalid NEFs were produced by the Court for all Minutes, Orders, Judgment, and Mandate served in the case. [2]

Joseph Zernik

LINKS:
[1]
Correspondence with California Judicial Council in re: Engagement of Kevin McCormick in the habeas corpus of Richard Fine.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28645522/10-03-19b-Richard-Fine-Dr-Zernik-Mr-Carrizosa-Corresponde-in-re-Case-Caption 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28787678/10-03-22-Richard-Fine-Final-Response-by-Mr-Carrizosa-California-Judicial-Council-Re-Case-Caption-s
[2] See Human Rights Alert Filing with the United Nations, linked as [3] , below.  
On May 15, 2010, 4:50 AM Dr Joseph Zernik wrote:


-----Forwarded Message-----
From: jz
Sent: May 15, 2010 4:50 AM
To: bertrand@kenlanlaw.com, Feedback@kenlanlaw.com, 1-802-775-1581@metrofax.com
Cc: joseph zernik , dlc@clearyshahi.com, plynn@IYlmlawvt.com, mking@lynnlawvt.com, mpatane@atg.state.vt.us, angelav@atg.state.vt.us, cgoldstein@atg.state.vt.us, rhooker@atg.state.vt.us, hthomas@lynnlawvt.com, aspears@lynlawvt.com, s_huminski@live.com
Subject: Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99-cv-160) February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones objection to Huminskis Motion for Limited Discovery and related issues.
May 14, 2010 

Attorney Shalmon A. Bertrand
KENLAN, SCHWIEBERT, FACEY & GOSS, P.C. bertrand@kenlanlaw.com
Feedback@kenlanlaw.com
1-802-775-1581@metrofax.com
RE: Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99-cv-160) February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones objection to Huminskis Motion for Limited Discovery and related issues.
Attorney Bertrand:
I am in receipt of your paper, referenced above, [1] and also of Judge Murthas Memo and Order. [2]  Some technical deficiencies appeared in both papers, where I request your assistance, which would require minimal effort at best, and would be critical in the safeguard of Human Rights at the US District Court in Vermont and beyond [3]:  

1)      Your service of the February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones Objection failed to include the NEF from the US District Court Vermonts CM/ECF. [1]
As is patent in the various users manuals of the US district courts, the Notices of Electronic Filings (NEFs) are today the authentication instruments of the US courts.  However, since I am not authorized in CM/ECF the Courts case management system, at the US District Court Vermont, I was denied service and notice of such critical paper through CM/ECF by the Court itself.
The record, referenced above, [1] showed the US District Court header imprint on its pages:
            Case 1:99-cv-00160-jgm Document 351 Filed 02/12/10 Page 1 of 4
It was obvious that you served Proposed Intervenor Zernik his copy of Defendant Consones paper after its filing at the US District Court in Vermont.  For such filing to be honest, valid, and effectual, you should have received by email in response to your electronic filing a Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) from the US District Court in Vermonts CM/ECF the Courts case management system.
In fact, you referred to that fact in your Certificate of Service (Dkt #351-1), where for some of the parties you stated that the authentication would be delivered VIA CM/ECF.
Therefore, I request that you forward to me the NEF for the paper you served on me, so that I would be able to discern whether the paper that you served on me was indeed a paper that was an honest, valid, and effectual filing at the US District Court, Vermont.  Given that the NEF is an electronic record, I would be grateful if you forward it by email to .
 
2)      Your February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones Objection [1] failed to state the correct caption of the case at hand.
The Court listed the first Defendant in the case as Rutland City Police Department. [2]  You entirely failed to list such Defendant, and therefore, the case caption of your paper was inadequate or invalid. 
 
Therefore, I request that you please serve me a corrected paper, alternatively a reasonable explanation for the erroneous case caption used by you.
 
3)      Your February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones Objection [1] failed to include an adequate signature box for the Counsel.
Therefore, I would be grateful if you could forward me an explicit statement that you were and are Counsel of Record for Defendant Corsones in the caption of Scott Huminski, Plaintiff v. Rutland City Police Department, Rutland County Sheriff's Department, Town of Rutland, Unnamed Members of the Rutland County Sheriff's Department, Unnamed Rutland Police Officer, State of Vermont, Nancy Corsones, Karen Predom, Vermont State Police, Unnamed Vermont State Police Officer, Rutland District Court, R.J. Elrick, S. Schutt, Robert Emerick, M. Patricia  Zimmerman, Bennington County Sheriff's Department, Gary Forrest, City of Rutland, Rutland County, Defendants. (1:99-CV-160) at the United States District Court For The District Of Vermont.
 
4)      The Courts February 12, 2010 Memo and Order [2] was likewise served with no authentication at all.
The Court served its Memo and Order with no authentication at all.  Given that I was and am denied access to the NEFs in  CM/ECF, there was and is no way that I could discern whether the paper served on me by the Court required full faith and credit.
Therefore, I would be grateful for your help in forwarding to me by email the NEF which you surely received by email from CM/ECF on the February 12, 2010 Judge Murthas Memo and Order.
Your help in these matters would be greatly appreciated.  No doubt you realize that such simple technical matters are critical for the furtherance of justice and for the safeguard of the Human Rights of all who reside in the United States in view of the manner in which the US courts are today administered through PACER and CM/ECF.
Truly,
___/s/_______
Joseph Zernik, PhD
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750;
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
CC:
David L. Cleary
dlc@clearyshahi.com
Pietro J. Lynn
plynn@IYlmlawvt.com
mking@lynnlawvt.com
Mark J. Patane
mpatane@atg.state.vt.us
angelav@atg.state.vt.us
cgoldstein@atg.state.vt.us  
rhooker@atg.state.vt.us
Heather E. Thomas
hthomas@lynnlawvt.com 
aspears@lynlawvt.com
Scott Huminski
s_huminski@live.com
 
LINKS:
[1] February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones Objection
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305312/10-02-12-Huminski-v-Rutland-Sheriff-s-Department-et-al-at-the-US-District-Court-Vermont-False-Memo-and-Order-served-with-no-NEF-at-all-s
 
[2] February 12, 2010 Judge Murtahs Memo and Order
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305312/10-02-12-Huminski-v-Rutland-Sheriff-s-Department-et-al-at-the-US-District-Court-Vermont-False-Memo-and-Order-served-with-no-NEF-at-all-s
 
[3] April 19, 2010 Human Rights Alert submission for the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations:
a) Press Release:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/10-04-19-Human-Rights-Alert-Filed-UPR-Report-with-the-United-Nations
b) Submission:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/10-04-18-Human-Rights-Alert-Final-Submission-to-the-United-Nations-for-the-2010-Universal-Periodic-Review-of-the-US-s
c) Appendix:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/10-04-19-Human-Rights-Alert-Final-Appendix-for-Submission-to-the-United-Nations-for-the-2010-UPR-of-the-United-States-s
d) UPR Tool Kit by the Urban Justice Center:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29867561/10-04-13-UPR-Tool-Kit-Urban-Justice-Center-USA-provided-by-UN-office-of-High-Commissioner-for-Human-Rights