10-09-14 From Lasters' Discussion RE: Digital Signatures and PACER & CM/ECF

From: jz
Sent: Sep 14, 2010 7:04 PM
To: lawsters
Subject: Electronic Transactions and Digital Signatures

Dear Bob:

Before getting lost in the technical details of digital signatures, here is a short overview.

There is no doubt that digital technology could have secured court and financial records much better than paper records.  The problem is that both banks and the courts, left on their own, with insufficient public scrutiny, abused the transition from the paper era to the digital era, to undermine the integrity of their records.

Following is Just one example - authentication of court records by the Clerk of the Court:

• A signature, be it "wet" or digital, is a symbol affixed with the intent to take responsibility.

• A digital signature, to be valid and effectual, has to be personal, confidential, encrypted, and certified by an independent certification system.
• Authentication of Court Minutes, Court Orders, and Court Judgments by the Clerk of the Court, was required to make them valid and effectual for any purpose.

In designing and implementing PACER and CM/ECF, all "wet" signatures and stamps of the Clerks of the United States courts were eliminated.  Instead, the courts implemented the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings - at the District Courts), and the NDAs (Notices of Docket Activity) at the US Courts of Appeals.

However, review and comparison of the new authentication forms (NEFs, NDAs) to the old, paper based forms of authentication by the clerks, shows most clearly the deliberate invalidity of PACER & CM/ECF on at least the following levels:

1) The paper forms were titled Certificate, or Certification.  The new forms are titled NEFs or NDAs, which in fact are vacuous names, with no relevant significant meaning relative to their purported function.

2) The paper based forms typically opened with a certification statement, similar to the following: 'I, the undersigned, hereby certify...".  The NEFs and NDAs include no certification statement at all.

3) The paper based forms invoked the authority of the clerk of the court in the signature box.  The NEFs and NDAs never invoke the authority of the Clerk of the Court. 

4) The paper based forms identified the person issuing the certification by name, and by authority, as Deputy Clerk of the Court.  The NEFs and NDAs have nothing of that.  Moreover, in a number of cases, it has been documented that the NEFs and NDAs were issued by unautorized persons.

5) The  paper based forms included a stamp and a hand signature of the  the Deputy Clerk, as a sign of intent to take personal responsibility.  The NEFs and NDA replaced the "wet" signature with a "Checksum" string, which they now call "Document Stamp".  However, the Checksum alphanumeric string, encrypted as it is, is not a digital signature, and has no meaning as a "symbol affixed with the intent to take responsibility".

6) Whereas  the paper based certifications by the clerks were integral part of the public records of the court, now the United States courts deny public access to the NEFs and NDAs, by concealing them in CM/ECF, and excluding them from PACER.

In short: The best legal minds in the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, under supervision of the United States judiciary toiled for over a decade at a cost of several billion dollars, and managed to create a convoluted system that entirely circumvented the accountability of the Clerk of the Court for integrity of court records, and undermines the First Amendment right to access court records - to inspect and to copy.  Accordingly, today, the Clerks of the US Courts refuse to certify the PACER dockets, indicating their refusal to take any personal responsibility for their content.

Needless to say, the position of the Clerk of the Court and the "ministerial arm of the court", which was never protected by judicial immunity, were specifically established to safeguard the integrity of the English speaking  courts against judicial corruption.

Otherwise put: In the design and operation of PACER and CM/ECF, the judicial arm of the court severed the ministerial arm of the court, which was supposed to keep the judges in check and prevent their corruption.  With it, PACER dockets, as published online by the courts today, are claimed to be in violation of Federal Rules of Civil Procedures and Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures, relative to duties of the Clerks of the Courts in constructing court dockets.

It is further alleged, that there could not possibly be a United States judge in his/her wits, who is not aware of the facts listed above.  Therefore, it was proposed that a Truth and Reconciliation Commission was required.  The United States judiciary, as a class failed to comply with the law relative to Code of Conduct of United States Judges, and alert the public against such fraud in the PACER & CM/ECF.

Joseph Zernik
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Hurt
Sent: Sep 14, 2010 6:28 PM
To: lawsters
Subject: RE: Electronic Transactions and Digital Signatures

The security certificate causes an associated signed document to become encrypted so nobody can change it, particularly if you use Adobe Acrobat Pro or Reader.

Bob Hurt – http://bobhurt.com – 727 669 5511 2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 USA

 

From: lawsters@googlegroups.com [mailto:lawsters@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Larry Becraft
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 8:26 PM
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Electronic Transactions and Digital Signatures

Presently, I find electronic filing lots better than paper. With paper, you had to review it for printing, print it, sign, make copies and mail:  a lot of work if lots of paper. Lots is eliminated with electronic filing;  I simply review for appearance, then e-mail and everybody is served.  NO need for copies and lots quicker.

But, I can envision huge problems in the future because electronic files can be changed. Presently with history recorded in paper, and collected in libraries, it is impossible to change history, law, events, etc. But when everybody is dependent on something posted electronically, history, laws and events can be changed. Electronically, history, laws and events can be changed. Who knows: in the future, the War of Northern Aggression may vanish, the Revolution may disappear, etc. So may decisions in cases, old laws, and those protecting our rights. In the wrong hands, the world may be changed.

Larry

Bob Hurt wrote:

Let’s discuss

Electronic Transactions and Digital Signatures.

Most all states have enacted laws (see below) that allow you to create electronic transactions and sign documents digitally.  In order to sign digitally, you must have a personal security certificate.  The certificate consists of a long number that functions as an encryption key (like a password).  The issuing authority creates the certificate key based on your name and email address.

You may purchase a personal certificate or create your own.  You may buy a certificate from Verisign, Microsoft, Thawte, Comodo, and numerous other companies.  Or you may obtain PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) or GPG (a public domain equivalent) and use the software to create your own certificate.

Microsoft Office, OpenOffice.org, and Adobe Acrobat (Reader and Pro) allow you to sign a document electronically with your personal security certificate.  Governments throughout the USA accept digitally or electronically signed documents as valid documents to use in court.  However, because so few people actually use them, you sometimes have to badger “authorities” (public servants) to accept them.  For example, Court rules require pleadings in paper form with physical ink signatures on them.  Federal courts have an Electronic Filing System, but they allow onloy attorneys to use it for filing documents electronically.  No easy way exists to force a court clerk to accept your electronic filing, so you need to apply political pressure to get legislators to make constitutional changes that force courts into the computer age.

My advice to you:

Read the attached Uniform Electronic Transactions Act.  Most states have adopted it.

Get your own personal security certificate.  See the suggestions below for free options.

Use the certificate as appropriate to sign documents digitally and encrypt your sensitive email. 

Start coercing everyone to accept your digitally signed documents as “Proven authentic.”

Pound on the courts through political process to enable everyone to file documents with the court electronically and to make all court documents available free on the internet.

Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (see attached)

http://www.law.upenn.edu/bll/archives/ulc/fnact99/1990s/ueta99.htm

Free Comodo personal security certificate

http://www.comodo.com/home/email-security/free-email-certificate.php

Free CAcert personal security certificate

https://www.cacert.org/

Note:  as a notary public, I can notarize your documents digitally/electronically.  See this Florida statute:

117.021 Electronic notarization.

(1) Any document requiring notarization may be notarized electronically. The provisions of ss.117.01, 117.03, 117.04, 117.05(1)-(11), (13), and (14), 117.105, and 117.107 apply to all notarizations under this section.

(2) In performing an electronic notarial act, a notary public shall use an electronic signature that is:

(a) Unique to the notary public;

(b) Capable of independent verification;

(c) Retained under the notary public’s sole control; and

(d) Attached to or logically associated with the electronic document in a manner that any subsequent alteration to the electronic document displays evidence of the alteration.

(3) When a signature is required to be accompanied by a notary public seal, the requirement is satisfied when the electronic signature of the notary public contains all of the following seal information:

(a) The full name of the notary public exactly as provided on the notary public’s application for commission;

(b) The words “Notary Public State of Florida”;

(c) The date of expiration of the commission of the notary public; and

(d) The notary public’s commission number.

(4) Failure of a notary public to comply with any of the requirements of this section may constitute grounds for suspension of the notary public’s commission by the Executive Office of the Governor.

(5) The Department of State may adopt rules to ensure the security, reliability, and uniformity of signatures and seals authorized in this section.

10-09-12 De Gaulle would have hated the Saville inquiry

De Gaulle would have hated the Saville inquiry

The French leader glossed over his nation’s shortcomings. But sometimes cold examination of the truth is needed

Ben Macintyre

Charles de Gaulle would have been baffled and outraged by the Saville inquiry. Not by its findings, but that any country would go to such lengths to explore a painful and complicated chapter from the past.
This week a handful of surviving members of the French Resistance will come to London to commemorate the 70th anniversary of de Gaulle’s famous radio address from London, in which he told the French people: “The flame of French Resistance must not and will not be extinguished.”
The great French leader changed history in more ways than one: after the war, he assiduously nurtured the fable of national self-liberation, ignoring the realities of French collaboration: the myth of French Resistance should not and would not be extinguished.
De Gaulle and Lord Saville of Newdigate represent diametrically opposed attitudes to history: one sought to soften and simplify the past, the other has worked to expose the truth, however ugly.
The Saville inquiry into the fatal shooting of 13 protesters by British troops in Londonderry on “Bloody Sunday” in January 1972, has been stupefyingly expensive (£191 million) and painfully protracted (12 years). It is scandalous that a single senior counsel was paid £4.5 million, almost half the original estimated budget. The final report weighs in at a staggering 45lb and 5,000 pages, making it the most unpickupable publication of the year.
But there can be no doubting the nobility of the inquiry’s purpose, the thoroughness of Lord Saville’s methods and his determination to dig as deeply as possible. Some 2,500 people were interviewed, amassing 30 million words of evidence. Lord Widgery’s 1972 tribunal was accused of applying a thin layer of whitewash — no one could say that of Lord Saville.
De Gaulle, by contrast, allowed his country’s traumatic wartime history to be distorted by the demands of politics, leaving France with what one writer has called a “poisoned memory”.
The Resistance included individuals of supreme heroism and patriotism. That they were few in number only underlines their extraordinary bravery. “I love France,” declared the captured fighter Boris Vildé, shortly before he was shot by the Germans. “For the true France to be reborn one day, sacrifices will need to be made.”
But Vildé spoke for a minority. Most French people acquiesced under Nazi occupation and some enthusiastically collaborated. The Resistance was hopelessly fragmented, made up of myriad groups with competing aims. The partisans, undisciplined, disunited and capable of hideous brutality, were seen as dangerous bandits by many ordinary Frenchmen and women, who feared (rightly) that they would provoke German reprisals.
When Albert Speer, Hitler’s architect, was asked to assess the impact of the French Resistance, he responded: “What French Resistance?” He had a point. The Resistance was a moral and national necessity, but a military irrelevance. The sabotage and assassinations carried out by the underground had little impact on the course of the war.
De Gaulle persuaded Eisenhower to say that the Resistance had been worth an “extra six divisions”. Both knew it wasn’t true.
None of this should detract from the significance of de Gaulle’s rallying call on June 18, 1940. The BBC did not consider the speech important enough to record, but it would be seen by many as the moment when France began to recover her honour.
Four years later, de Gaulle hailed the liberation of Paris as a French-only victory, conveniently forgetting the roles of Britain and America. “Paris outraged, Paris broken, Paris martyred, but Paris liberated! Liberated by herself, liberated by her people, with the help of the whole of France, that is to say of fighting France, the true France, eternal France.”
De Gaulle needed the French people to believe that French Resistance had won the day. The plaques he erected around Paris commemorating individual acts of heroism were not statements of historical fact, but unifying exhortations.
A new breed of French historians has begun to tackle the myths and denials of the period, but for the earlier generation, the wilful suppression of memory became a habit. For decades, a history that was messy and uncomfortable was rendered one-dimensional and uplifting — Resistance was all but universal, the collaborators merely criminal aberrations. The role of Vichy in the Final Solution was similarly obscured. “The French nation was never involved in that matter;” declared François Mitterrand, who himself worked for the Vichy Government, although he later claimed to have spied for the Free French.
In The Sorrow and the Pity, the 1969 documentary by Marcel Ophüls exposing the reality of wartime collaboration, Anthony Eden astutely observed that a country that has not suffered the horror of occupation should not pass judgment on one that has. I have often wondered whether Britain, under Nazi occupation, would have behaved any differently from the French. Probably not, but the long, detailed, painful investigation into Bloody Sunday suggests that we have at last learnt the benefits of confronting the darkest moments in our history, and the danger of hoping that, if ignored for long enough, they will simply go away.
The top brass was never enthusiastic for another inquiry into Bloody Sunday. Some dismissed it as just a sop to Sinn Féin, offered by Tony Blair at a critical moment in the peace process. Lord Saville’s insistence that each killing and wounding be examined individually added hugely to the length and expense of the process.
Yet the inquiry has fulfilled the essential function of clearing the air, for Bloody Sunday cast a toxic cloud over Northern Irish politics, in much the same way that the unacknowledged truth about French collaboration was allowed to taint postwar French history.
The Saville Report was never going to offer universal satisfaction, but that, too, is a measure of success. The purpose of historical inquiry is not to provide easy answers, or revenge, or even closure for the families of the bereaved. This inquiry set out to discover, once and for all, what happened; to set the record straight, and so to take the venom out of Northern Ireland’s poisoned memory.
For 38 years, the symbolism of Bloody Sunday helped to fuel a vicious conflict. That war is now over, and with publication of the Saville Report, its most notorious single event should be peacefully consigned to the past.

10-09-12 ACLU is Dismissed - Torture Flights will Continue... // Se cierra la ACLU - Tortura vuelo continuará ...

The ACLU Is Dismissed

Obama wins one for the Presidency on the state-secrets privilege.

Another week, another legal vindication for the Bush, er, the Obama Administration's war on terror. On Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals cited the executive branch's state-secrecy privilege to dismiss an ACLU attempt to challenge the legality of sending terror suspects from the U.S. to other countries. Our friends on the left are now going nuts about "torture flights," but we'll take this decision as evidence that this Administration has its grown-up moments.

The case involves flight-logistics company Jeppesen DataPlan Inc., a Boeing subsidiary the ACLU accuses of being involved in arranging flights to move five terrorist suspects to ...

10-09-12 Justice Louis Brandeis on Criminal Conduct by Government // El juez Louis Brandeis en la Conducta Criminal por el Gobierno.

 Justice Louis Brandeis (in office: 1916-1939)

"In a government of laws," said Mr. Justice Brandeis, "existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy."
Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 , at 469, 471

10-09-12 Welcome Czech Republic - Newest Visitor! // Bienvenido República Checa - Lo nuevo visitante!

Última nuevo visitante
República Checa

Last New Visitor

Czech Republic
Visited September 12, 2010

10-09-12 Welcome Qatar - Newest Flag! Bienvenido Qatar - Nuevos Bandera!

Newest Country - Nuevos País

Qatar
Last Visited September 12, 2010

10-09-09 Harvard Law Dean Martha Minow, Board of Advisors of Harvard Civil Rights Civil Liberties Law Review Asked for Acknowledgement of Receipt of Paper Submitted to the Journal.

Martha Minow, Dean
Harvard Law School

Los Angeles, September 9 – In letter [1] to Harvard Law School Dean Martha Minow, Professors Lani Guinier, Randal Kennedy, and Deborah Ramirez – members of the Board of Advisors of Harvard Civil Rights Civil Liberties Law Review - Human Rights Alert (NGO) repeated its request that the journal acknowledge receipt of a paper, authored by Joseph Zernik, PhD, recently submitted to the journal, titled: Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the Courts – An Urgent Call of Legislative Action.

Previous requests for acknowledgement of receipt by the journal itself remained unanswered. [2]

The letter also included the Abstract of the paper, which documented and opined large-scale fraud in design and operation of PACER and CM/ECF – the online public access s and case management systems of the US district courts and courts of appeals.

The paper documented a series of cases, where such systems enabled the holding of prisoners under pretense of lawfulness, the conduct of pretense court proceedings, and the issuance of pretense court minutes, orders, and judgments, as part of pretense of judicial review. The public at large, and the harmed parties in particular, could not discern such facts in the online public access systems as designed and operated by the courts.

The paper further outlined a series of necessary corrective legislative actions - first and foremost - comprehensive review and the establishment of publicly and legally accountable validation of all case management and online public access systems at the courts, jails, and prisons and with it – restoration of the clerks’ accountability for integrity of dockets and counsel appearances. The paper also noted that a Truth and Reconciliation Commission was also likely to be required. Such actions were opined as likely to restore access to the courts and the rule of law, and with it - the safeguard of Human Rights in the digital era.

The letter [1] also included the Author’s Biography. The biography was short on formal computer science training, and showed no evidence of legal education at all.  However, the biography showed that Dr Zernik analyzed and opined fraud in a number of government and corporate large database systems over the past decade, and that his opinions were supported in part or in full by top experts in the relevant fields.

Dr Zernik previously opined dishonest manipulation of the online public access system of the California Commission on Teacher’s Credentialing, coordinated with destruction of electronic pupil educational records at the Special Education Department of the Beverly Hills, California, Unified School District.  A lengthy double-investigation by the California Department of Education finally concluded: “The School District is out of compliance and in violation of the law”.

In early 2007, large-scale financial institution fraud was opined by Dr Zernik, enabled by EDGE - the underwriting monitoring system of Countrywide Financial Corporations, and related liabilities to the US Taxpayer at hundreds of billions of dollars were projected.  Such opinions, filed then with FBI, were materialized a year later with the collapse of the Corporation, resulting in considerable losses to the US Treasury.  Fraud opined by Dr Zernik regarding a number of individual underwriting records of Countrywide Financial Corporation was supported by opinions of renowned US fraud expert and litigation support consultant Robert Meister, who operates throughout the United States.

Dr Zernik also previously opined fraud in Sustain – the case management system of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  Two manuscripts authored by Dr Zernik were reviewed by Prof Eli Shamir, Department of Computer Science, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, whose contributions to computer science from its earlier stages included the development of fundamental tools in language analysis.  Prof Shamir issued a qualified opinion that “credible evidence” was produced of possible “fraud” by court staff was enabled by the system, and called upon US-based computer science experts to investigate the system. 

Additionally, fraud was opined by Dr Zernik in conduct of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, relative to pretense Receiverships employed by the Court for taking the properties of individuals or corporations with no legal foundation.  In Dr Zernik’s opined that such conduct was enabled and facilitated in operations of Sustain combined with the online public access system of the Court.  Dr Zernik’s opinion in this regard was fully supported by opinion of FBI veteran, fraud expert James Wedick, who had been decorated by US Congress, FBI Director, and US Attorney General for his achievements in law enforcement.  Mr Wedick opined “fraud being committed” and “investigation should be immediately instituted”. [italics in the original –jz]

Further fraud was opined by Dr Zernik in operations of the Los Angeles County, California, online Inmate Information Center, which permitted indefinite false imprisonments in Los Angeles County, California, jails.  A scholarly paper, analyzing and opining the fraud in the system, titled “Data Mining as a Civic Duty – Online Public Prisoners’ Registration Systems” was recently published by the peer-reviewed, new computer science/informatics journal - International Journal of Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining.  The editorial board of the Journal lists computer scientists, including Dr Alexander Troussov, whose current interests include the employment of graph theory and other mathematics and informatics tools in large-scale data mining combined with implementation of expert systems on complex, comprehensive systems of interconnected objects, images, persons, events, and related knowledge bases.  Combined, the Editorial Board of the Journal lists scholars from six European nations and Canada.

Fraud was opined by Dr Zernik in PACER & CM/ECF, in another paper, peer-reviewed and published in the same Journal, titled “Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts”.

It should be noted that in contrast with the array of high-reputation experts, who supported Dr Zernik’s analysis and opinions, the Harvard Civil Rights Civil Liberties Law Review is managed and edited by law school students alone. 

Dr Zernik expressed his disappointment by the fact that leading law journals in the United States refused to acknowledge receipt of a paper by a qualified author for due review, “I would leave it for the academic community to opine whether such conduct is, or is not, consistent with basic standards of academic integrity and management of academic journals.”

Human Rights Alert (NGO) [4] is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States.

LINKS:

[1] 10-09-09 Harvard Dean Minow, Board of Advisors of Harvard Civil Rights Civil Liberties Law Review Asked for Acknowledgement of Receipt of Paper Submitted to the Journal.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/37189960/

[2] 10-09-08 Harvard, Yale Law Journals Refuse to Review Paper Documenting Corruption of the US Justice System

http://www.scribd.com/doc/37077401/

10-09-08 Harvard, Yale Law Journals Refuse to Review Paper Documenting Corruption of the US Justice System

Harvard, Yale Law Journals Refuse to Review Paper Documenting Corruption of the US Justice System

Los Angeles, September 8 - following the publication in a computer science journal of papers, [1] which focused on analyzing invalidity of the case management and online public access systems of the courts in the US, particularly – PACER & CM/ECF, another paper, [2] was submitted by Joseph Zernik, PhD, and Human Rights Alert (NGO) for review by top-tier US law journals, showing the harmful effects of the operation of such systems in the US. Harvard and Yale based law journals, to which the paper was submitted, refused so far to acknowledge receipt of the paper for peer-review. The paper included a series of individual case studies, and analyzed from the legal perspective.  It documented what was opined as serious Human Rights violations by the courts, through the issuance of abusive, yet invalid and void orders and judgments.  A reasonable person would conclude that such orders and judgments were in violation of the law.  However, the judges probably falsely felt they were not engaged in corruption - since such orders and judgments were invalid and void on their faces – unsigned by a judge or unauthenticated by a clerk.  Albeit, the public at large, and the harmed parties in particular could not discern these facts. The paper also proposed key legislative measures that were required for correction of such conditions at the US courts, first and foremost - subjecting all such systems to legally and publicly accountable validation (logic verification) through legislative action.  The paper also suggested that once full access to the electronic records of the courts was restored, and such systems were examined in detail, there would be a need to establish in the US a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, since the number of judges involved in such conduct was so large, that it would not be possible to prosecute them all.
The paper was submitted to six top-tier legal papers in the areas of Human Rights and Law and Technology - the most relevant fields, based at Harvard and Yale Universities:

Harvard Civil Rights Civil Liberties Law Review, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Harvard International Law Journal, Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal, and Yale Law and Technology Journal. In each case submission was conducted both through the online submission systems [3] and through direct email.  In five of the cases, the journal editors refused to acknowledge receipt of the papers. In the sixth case, an email was received informing the author that the journal was "currently closed for submissions". When asked when the journal would be "open for submissions" - no response was provided. None of the journals claimed that the paper was irrelevant relative to their respective stated areas of coverage, or that the paper was subjected to any kind of review and was rejected.  

Conduct of the Harvard, Yale law journals should raise concerns regarding the state of Free Speech and Academic Freedom in the US.

Human Rights Alert (NGO) [4] is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system.

LINKS/ATTACHMENTS

[1] Papers recently published:

a)      Joseph Zernik, Data Mining as a Civic Duty – Online Public Prisoners’ Registration Systems, Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining 1: 84-96 (2010) 

http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-1-prisons-pending-publication-s.pdf 

b)      Joseph Zernik, Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining, 1:69-83 (2010) 

http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-2-courts-pending-publication-s.pdf 

[2] Paper submitted for review by Harvard, Yale law journals:

Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the Courts – An Urgent Call of Legislative Action
Joseph Zernik, PhD, Human Rights Alert (NGO)
Abstract 
Digital voting machines were previously shown to be vulnerable to malfunction and malfeasance. Papers, recently published in computer science journal, likewise, outlined the invalidity of digital case management and online public access systems that govern the courts, jails, and prisons in the United States, and documented large-scale abuse of such systems. Invalid case management and online public access systems were claimed as key to deterioration of integrity of the justice system, which was previously opined in official, expert, and media reports.  Such systems enabled the holding of prisoners under pretense of lawfulness, the conduct of pretense court proceedings, and the issuance of pretense court records, as part of pretense of judicial review.  A series of case studies documented that the respective orders or judgments were either unsigned or unauthenticated in the digital case management systems, albeit, the public at large, and the harmed parties in particular, could not discern such facts in the online public access systems as designed and operated by the courts.  Moreover, a “chain reaction” effect was documented, where the US courts, up to the Supreme Court of the United States engaged in pretense review of cases originating from lower courts.  Corrective legislative actions were outlined, which were urgently needed - first and foremost - comprehensive review and the establishment of publicly and legally accountable validation of all case management and online public access systems at the courts, jails, and prisons and with it – restoration of the clerks’ accountability for integrity of dockets and counsel appearances.  Full enforcement of the law was called for regarding counsel, when engaged in conduct that was opined as fraud intended to pervert justice.  Truth and Reconciliation Commission was also likely to be required.  Such actions were likely to restore access to the courts and the rule of law, and to safeguard Human Rights in the digital era. 
Key Words
Liberty, Access to the Courts, Human Rights, Rule of Law, Fraud, United States Courts, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, California, Digital Signatures, Relational Databases, Functional Logic Verification, Case Management Systems, Online Public Access Systems, Court Dockets, Prisoners’ Registration
[3] ExpressO online submission system:

http://works.bepress.com/joseph_zernik/

[4] Human Rights Alert (NGO) web sites:

http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/

http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

http://inproperinla.com/

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine/

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/calling-upon-the-un-human-rights-council-to-issue-an-honest-and-effectual-2010-report-on-the-us/

10-09-07 EU Banks Are Still Wobbly

EU Banks Are Still Wobbly

By Mike Whitney

September 07, 2010 "Information Clearing House" -- The EU banking system is in big trouble. That's why European Central Bank (ECB) head Jean-Claude Trichet continues to purchase government bonds and provide "unlimited funds" for underwater banks. It's an effort to prevent a financial system meltdown that could plunge the eurozone back into recession.

This is from Bloomberg News: "Banks led stocks lower (on Tuesday) on concern they’ll require more capital to compensate for holdings of bonds in Europe’s weakest economies. Germany’s banking association said yesterday that the nation’s lenders need to raise $135 billion....“Banks still face problems in regards to their capital ratios,” said Michael Koehler, head of strategy at Landesbank Baden-Wuerttemberg in Mainz, Germany. “Investors will keep worrying about a possible double dip in the next few weeks.” ("Stocks, U.S. Futures Fall, Bonds Rally on Europe Debt Concern", Stephen Kirkland, Bloomberg)

EU banks and other financial institutions presently hold nearly 1 trillion euros of public and private debt from Greece, Spain and Portugal. (although estimates vary) All three countries are in deep distress and face sharp downgrades on their sovereign debt. The potential losses put large parts of the EU banking system at risk. Trichet knows this, which is why he continues to support the teetering system with "unlimited funds". Trichet's emergency assistance has nothing to do with restoring "the monetary-policy transmission mechanism", as he says. That's deliberately misleading. The ECB's actions are a straightforward bailout of the banks and bondholders.

From Bloomberg again:

"Even after a 750 billion euro ($960 billion) bailout for the weaker economies in the euro zone, investors are skittish about sovereign debt -- and about the banks that hold the region’s government bonds.

A default by Greece could trigger the collapse of banks with large sovereign-bond holdings, says Konrad Becker, a financial analyst at Merck Finck & Co. in Munich. “A default by one EU country would lead to an evaporation of trust in banks,” he says. “If investors aren’t willing to invest in banks anymore, then many banks will go bust in months, not years.” ("Europe's Banks Stressed By Sovereign Debts Regulators Ducked", Bloomberg)

The ECB provides billions of euros per week to maintain the illusion that the market is wrong about the true value of the sovereign bonds. But the market is not wrong, the ECB is wrong. The value of Greek bonds (for example) has dropped precipitously. They are worth less, which means the banks need to take a haircut and write down the losses. More liquidity merely hides the problem.

This is from Reuters:

"Despite the open-arms approach, outstanding ECB lending has fallen more than a third since the start of July to 592 billion euros.... Liquidity remains abundant though. Over 120 billion euros was deposited back at the ECB overnight, the latest figures show."

So, overnight deposits are increasing because the wholesale funding market is on the fritz, while--at the same time--the ECB has had to lend more than half a trillion euros to stabilize the wobbly and under-capitalized banking system. This is progress?

Interbank lending has been falling, but bond yields in the distressed countries continue to rise. That means there's more trouble ahead. It also means Trichet's plan is not working. Time for another bailout.

Trichet has kept the ECB's benchmark lending rate at rock bottom (1%) for 17 months, depriving savers of desperately needed interest income. The policy is designed to increase the yield-curve so the banks can make more money. The low interest rates are not passed on to workers or households (who still pay 18% on their credit cards), but to banks that borrow money at nearly-zero rates. It's another cash giveaway. The policy curtails spending and depresses demand. When savers slash spending, GDP shrinks, and the economy goes into recession. The real economy is being savaged to help the banks pull themselves out of the red.

Trichet has recently joined the Austerians in calling for more belt tightening. Here's a quote:

"With hindsight, we see how unfortunate was the oversimplified message of fiscal stimulus given to all industrial economies under the motto: “stimulate”, “activate”, “spend”! … there is little doubt that the need to implement a credible medium-term fiscal consolidation strategy is valid for all countries now."

Sure, austerity for workers and welfare for the banks. If Trichet is really worried about fiscal deterioration, he should stop diverting capital into broken financial institutions. He should force the banks to seek funding in the markets and stop allowing them to use the ECB as a crutch. That's how the system is supposed to work.

This is from Calculated Risk:

"Was there much sovereign stress in the European bank stress tests?

No...The haircuts are applied to the trading book portfolios only, as no default assumption was considered, which would be required to apply haircuts to the held to maturity sovereign debt in the banking book.” (Calculated Risk)

The stress tests were a fraud. The sovereign debt (bonds) have already slipped in value, but the losses remain concealed behind a wall of ECB liquidity. This is a very nontransparent and corrupt system. Trichet needs to be replaced with someone who is more forthcoming and committed to restoring public confidence.

10-09-07 Sentencing Terrorism Suspects to Death -- Without Trial

Sentencing Terrorism Suspects to Death -- Without Trial

By Anthony D. Romero and Vincent Warren

September 07, 2010 "Washington Post" - - September 3, 2010 -- Since 2001, the United States has been carrying out "targeted killings" in connection with what the Bush administration called the "war on terror" and the Obama administration calls the "war against al-Qaeda." While many of these killings have been carried out on battlefields in Afghanistan or Iraq, our government has increasingly been employing lethal force in places far removed from any zone of armed conflict, effectively carrying out executions without trial or conviction. Some of the individuals on the government's kill lists are U.S. citizens.

On Monday, our organizations filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of targeted killings that take place outside zones of armed conflict. We did not do this lightly. But we simply cannot accept the proposition that the government should have unchecked authority to carry out extrajudicial killings, including of U.S. citizens, far from any actual battlefield. Nor can we accept the contention that the entire world is a battlefield. In protecting this country from the threat of terrorism, the government cannot jettison the rights that Americans have fought for more than two centuries to safeguard.

In zones of armed conflict, targeted killing can be a lawful tactic. But outside the context of armed conflict, targeted killing is legal only as a last resort and in the face of a truly imminent threat to life -- and then only because the immediacy of the threat makes judicial process infeasible. Outside these narrow circumstances, targeted killing amounts to the imposition of a death sentence without charge, trial or conviction. Notably, Anwar al-Aulaqi, the cleric whose rights are at issue in the lawsuit we filed on Monday, has not been charged with a crime, but he has reportedly been the target of almost a dozen missile strikes in Yemen. While the government might argue that targeted killings in Pakistan along the border regions of Afghanistan are connected to the armed conflict there, it can hardly make that argument with regard to Yemen, which is far removed from any armed conflict.

The danger of dispensing with due process is obvious. Without it, we cannot be assured that the people the government kills are individuals who presented a threat to the country. Indeed, over the past decade, our government has repeatedly labeled men terrorists only to find out later -- or to be told by a federal judge -- that the evidence was overstated, wrong or nonexistent. If we invest the government with unchecked authority to impose death sentences on people who have never been convicted of or even charged with a crime, it is inevitable that innocent people will be executed.

The conduct of our government heavily influences the practices of other countries. The United States would in all likelihood not endorse the authority it claims for targeted killings if it were asserted by other countries. Americans would surely be appalled if another country claimed the right to send a drone after a declared enemy in Wyoming.

The government has the tools it needs to address the threat posed by suspected terrorists, including Americans, who find refuge in other countries. It can indict suspected terrorists and seek their extradition. It can seize their assets. It can share intelligence with other countries so that they can charge and try suspected terrorists. It can provide financial and technical support to other countries' law enforcement and intelligence services. In a truly extraordinary case, the government may have no choice but to use lethal force to address a threat that is both grave and imminent. But if we are to preserve anything resembling the rule of law, the government's authority to use lethal force against its own citizens must be limited to such grave and imminent threats.

The Obama administration's program of targeted killings appears to be far broader than the law permits. The administration has refused to disclose crucial information -- such as the standard under which individuals are added to kill lists, the circumstances in which individuals may be targeted outside the context of armed conflict, and the number of Americans on the lists. According to news reports, names are added to kill lists after a secret bureaucratic process, and at least some names have been on the lists for months. Whatever else may be said about this approach, it is plainly not limited to individuals who present an imminent threat.

Many Americans rightly reacted with alarm when the Bush administration claimed worldwide authority to detain suspected terrorists -- including U.S. citizens -- without charge or trial. We should react with similar if not stronger alarm to the Obama administration's claim of worldwide authority to kill suspected terrorists without charge or trial. A wrongly imprisoned suspect may eventually be set free. But there is no recourse from a missile.

Anthony D. Romero is executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. Vincent Warren is executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

10-09-04 Papers published in peer-reviewed computer science journal documenting fraud in US justice system computers

Los Angeles, September 4 - Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, had two papers published in a peer-reviewed computer science journal, one documenting invalidity and fraud in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Inmate Information System, and the other documenting invalidity and fraud in the US Courts’ case management and online public access systems, PACER & CM/ECF:
1) Zernik, Joseph: Data Mining as a Civic Duty – Online Public Prisoners’ Registration Systems, Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining 1: 84-96 (2010) [1]
2) Zernik, Joseph: Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, and Mining, 1:69-83 (2010) [2]


Human Rights Alert (NGO) is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system.

LINKS:
[1] http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-1-prisons-pending-publication-s.pdf
[2] http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-2-courts-pending-publication-s.pdf

10-08-30 Fraud Opined in Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the US Courts

Patrick Leahy - Chair, US Senate Judiciary Committee

Fraud Opined in Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the US Courts 

An Urgent Call of Legislative Action
Los Angeles, August 30 - Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, submitted paper for peer-review and consideration for publication in top-tier law journals, opining large-scale fraud in case management and online public access systems of the courts in the United States. Digital voting machines were previously shown to be vulnerable to malfunction and malfeasance.  Likewise, the current study outlined conditions of digital case management and online public access systems that govern the courts, jails, and prisons in the United States and documented large-scale abuse of such systems. 

Material deficiencies were identified in all systems, which were examined. Such systems enabled the holding of prisoners under pretense of lawfulness, the conduct of pretense court proceedings, and the issuance of invalid court records as part of pretense of judicial review. Invalid case management and online public access systems were described, which enable collusion between judges and large financial institutions in pretense court proceedings, which undermined any prospect of effective banking regulation in the United States. 

Moreover, a "chain reaction" effect was documented, where the US courts, up to the Supreme Court of the United States, engaged in pretense review of cases originating from pretense actions of the California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles. 

Corrective actions were outlined, which were urgently needed - comprehensive review and the establishment of publicly and legally accountable validation of all case management and online public access systems at the courts, jails, and prisons. 

The paper further called for restoration of public access to judicial records, which were now concealed in case management systems of the courts, in apparent violation of First Amendment rights. The paper further claimed that only upon restoration of public access to such records, the full scope of judicial misconduct in the United States would be exposed.  Therefore, the paper also called for the establishment of Truth and Reconciliation Commission - for review of conduct of the judiciary in the United States.  Patrick Leahy, Chair of the Senate's Judiciary Committee previously proposed the establishment of such commission for review of conduct of the US Department of Justice.

The paper opined that such actions were likely to affect restoration of effective banking regulation, access to the courts, the rule of law, and the safeguard of Human Rights in the digital era. 

Two pervious papers, peer-reviewed and pending publication by international computer science journals opined fraud in the Los Angels County, California, Sheriff's Department "Inmate Information Center" - the online public access system - which enabled unlawful imprisonments, [1] and in PACER & CM/ECF - case management and public access system of the US District Court, Central District of California - which enabled the conduct of pretense court actions. [2]

Expert opinion previously issued by an international Computer Science expert, based on manuscripts authored by Dr Zernik, which analyzed Sustain - the case management system of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, stated "credible evidence" of "fraud" and called for review of the system by US-based Computer Science experts. [3]Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States.
Key Words
Liberty, Access to the Courts, Human Rights, Rule of Law, Fraud, United States Courts, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, Digital Signatures, Relational Databases, Functional Logic Verification, Case Management Systems, Online Public Access Systems, Prisoners' Registration
LINKS
[1] A peer-reviewed paper, opining fraud in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department "Inmate Information Center":
Data Mining as a Civic Duty - Online Public Prisoners Registration Systems - pending publication, SONET2010
http://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-1-prisons-pending-publication-s.pdf
[2] A peer-reviewed paper, opining fraud in PACER & CM/ECF at the US District Court, Central District of California:
Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courtshttp://inproperinla.com/10-08-18-sonet2010-zernik-2-courts-pending-publication-s.pdf 
[3] Qualified opinion of Prof Eli Shamir, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, regarding fraud in Sustain - case management system of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30454036/