10-11-30 Welcome India - Last New Visitor! // Bienvenido la India - Visitante Mas Reciente!

          

Last New Visitor India Visited November 30, 2010

10-11-30 More on the Los Angeles Rampart scandal (1998-2000) and the Rampart FIPs (1990s - present) // Más sobre el escándalo de Rampart en Los Angeles (1998-2000) y el PFE de Rampart (1990 - presente)

From the OAK discussion board.
1. Comment by Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles, CA 9 hours ago 

 

TIKKUN's Rabbi MICHAEL LERNER, is asked re: The Los Angeles Jewish Community and the Rampart FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons)

See the full posting under: http://www.scribd.com/doc/44354776/
The question posed to Rabbi Michael Lerner:

Should the Los Angeles Jewish community consider it part of its duties and responsibilities to initiate actions for the release of the Los Angeles Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) - mostly black and latinos - victims of conduct of the Los Angeles, California courts?

Posing questions to leading rabbis of the day has been a traditional form of Jewish discourse, going back some 1,500 years. 

2. Comment by Dr. A. D. Jackson 8 hours ago I recall the Rampart scandal in L. A. resulting in a some cops getting convicted and over 100 convictions obtained by perjury, falsifying evidence etc. being overturned. The traditional hesitancy of the prosecution to free the innocent, like in using D N A to exhonerate, is the doctrine of finality of judgments and no doubt embarassment.
Andrew

3. Comment by Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles, CA 53 minutes ago  
Jacqueline Connor
Judge, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
 
Rafael Perez
Former undercover narcotics officers, LAPD
CENTRAL FIGURES OF THE RAMPART SCANDAL
Dr Jackson:
Again, please check the facts... for your convenience, references were provided in a previous messages. Regardless, you prefer to 'recall' the facts, and grossly misrepresent them.
a) The case of the Rampart FIPs does not involve 100 false convictions through perjury. In fact, the number of the Rampart FIPs was estimated by various groups at 8,000-30,000.
b) The case of the Rampart FIPs does not involve only 'convictions obtained by perjury'. Confessions were extracted through torture, victims in some cases were documented to have been permanently maimed, and others were killed.
Finally, I find objectionable your attempt to find a legal 'doctrine' to justify such conduct. The applicable doctrine is Void not Voidable Judgments. Such judgments are far from final, they are null and void, always were, and always will be.
Finally, the case of 'Kids for Cash' in Luzerne County, PA (2008 to the present), shows that even in the US such facts are recognized. Immediately upon discovery of corruption of the courts in Luzerne County, PA, the PA state court system established a review panel, and initiated efforts to review each and every case of imprisonment by the corrupt courts, leading to the release of thousands of juveniles.
The question, which looms heavy over the Rampart scandal and the Rampart FIPs is the refusal of local, state, and federal agencies to comply with the law and initiate release of the victims... The reasons for such conduct were separately reviewed.
My proposed explanation:
Federal agencies were left incapable of enforcing the law in Los Angeles County, California, after such agencies, led by the CIA, engaged for over a decade (mid 1980s to mid 1990s) in large-scale drug trafficking to LA, as part of the Iran-Contra affair (link was previously provided to a 1997 official US DOJ IG report, so please do not rely on your recollections in the matter),
In running such operation for over a decade, federal agencies had to rely on cooperation by local law enforcement and the courts. Therefore, when confronted with the largest case of corruption of the justice system in the history of the United States, they opted to permit the corrupt local justice system to investigate, prosecute, and adjudge itself, with predictable results - no enforcement of the law at all.
It should be emphasized that the Rampart scandal at its base was centered on the very same type of alleged criminality - control of wholesale drug markets by law enforcement in collusion with the courts.
Joseph Zernik
LINKS
All links were provided in previous postings. 
4. Comment by Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles, CA 

 

Jacqueline Connor

Judge, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

 

Rafael Perez

Former undercover narcotics officers, LAPD

CENTRAL FIGURES OF THE RAMPART SCANDAL

Hi Dr Jackson:

Let me complete the fact corrections for your short piece below.

Your recollection of 'the Rampart scandal in L. A. resulting in a some cops getting convicted' was the contrary to the truth in the matter.

A. THE FIRST RAMPART TRIAL (2000)

In the First Rampart Trial, four of the principles in the ring of undercover narcotics officers were subjected to pretense prosecution.

Judge Jacqueline Connor, who had been The Central Figure in the false convictions, and who had been reputed as close friend of the Defendants, appeared as 'Presiding Judge'.

The absurdity of the situation was noted by newspapers already then:

1) Two years earlier, Jacqueline Connor provided Rafael Perez with a glowing recommendation letter for his promotion, based explicitly on his excellent testimonies in her courtroom. Later he recanted all these testimonies as perjury.

2) A few months before the opening of the trial, and after Perez signed a plea bargain, Connor appeared in an LAPD public function, where his family was present, and from the podium warned him against cooperation with the investigation, and also warned him against ever again appearing in her courtroom.

3) Had it been a true prosecution, Connor would have been required to preside over prosecution, which would have been largely based on elaborating on her own conduct...

Naturally, had Judge Jacqueline Connor been assigned to preside in the First Rampart Trial in compliance with the law, she should have immediately recused.

Various sources say that she appeared as Presiding Judge to protect herself, that there was a lot at stake for her personally in the case.

B. EVENTS THE FOLLOWED:

1) Early on Connor ruled to exclude most of the prosecution's evidence.

2) Through various manipulations, Perez - the main witness - was indeed prevented from appearing in Connor's courtroom and taking the stand.

3) Already then media speculated that the jury would not be able to convict the Defendants under such conditions.

4) Regardless, in October 2000 the jury convicted 3 of the 4 Defendants.

5) On Friday night, December 22, 2000, from home, Judge Jacqueline Connor issued a ruling, which was later described by media as 'unprecedented'. She voided the jury convictions and ordered the release of the three convicted cops, claiming that she had made fatal errors in jury instructions. (So much for the finality of judgments...).

Moreover, in her ruling she appeared to ridicule those who try 'to fix the Rampart'.

6) Later, the three cops, who had been convicted by jury, were paid $15 millions in damages - for being subjected to the prosecution...

C. OUTCOMES

1) The victims remain falsely imprisoned to this date, with a few notable exceptions.

2) Judge Jacqueline Connor continues to preside in both the criminal and civil courts in Los Angeles.

3) Regardless of his plea bargain with California prosecutors, Rafael Perez was subjected to the 'federal option' and served several years in federal prison.  The case follows what became a pattern in recent years across the United States - imprisonment of whisleblowers...

4) The perps were enriched.

____

So much for recollections. We would all be better served by sticking to the facts.

Joseph Zernik, PhD

Human Rights Alert (NGO)

______

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.
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alerthttp://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ 
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345  
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES?
*  "On July 26, 2010, Laurence Tribe, Senior Counsel for the United States Department of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, delivered an important speech to the Conference of Chief Justices, challenging them to halt the disintegration of our state justice systems before they become indistinguishable from courts of third world nations."Prof Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law School (2010), per National Defender Leadership Institute
http://www.nlada.net/library/article/national_dojspeechto%20chiefjustice07-26-2010_gideonalert
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?*     "Innocent people remain in prison"*     "...the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of..."LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24902306/
*   "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit." Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29043589/
*   "This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted."     Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/274339
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN CALIFORNIA?*   "...corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California." http://www.scribd.com/doc/38566837/

10-11-30 10-11-30 Welcome Switzerland - Last New Visitor // Bienvenido Suiza - Visitante Mas Reciente!

             

Last New Visitor Switzerland Visited November 29, 2010

10-11-29 Alleged Corruption of US Supreme Court Dockets // La presunta corrupción de los EE.UU. Expedientes de la Corte Suprema

 

To: lawsters@googlegroups.comFrom: joseph zernik Subject: Re:Windsor v Maid of the Mist Corporation, et al. (10-411) -
  crooked courts and "order entered"Cc: bill@billwindsor.com

Hi Bob:

Same old, same old...

Bill Windsor writes: "An order was entered today by The Supreme Court ..." and as documentation of that fact he links us to the online docket of SCOTUS in Windsor v Maid of the Mist Corporation, et al (10-411).  [1]
In all US courts that were asked, the clerks refused to certify the online dockets.

Does Bill Windsor have in his possession an order, certified by a Justice of SCOTUS, and authenticated by an authorized Clerk of SCOTUS, to convince us that "an order was entered"?
As previously shown, [2] SCOTUS today practices that same very scam, used in other US courts, where dockets are published online, noting various rulings, orders, decisions, judgments, while in fact, there is no valid judicial record to provide the foundation for such online dockets... 

Mr Windsor, please show us the goods,...

The proposed solutions is two fold:

1) Placing the clerks of the US courts under sole authority of the US Attorney General, not the US Judges, and

2) Enactment of federal rules of electronic court records, to restore accountability of the clerks for electronic (including online) records, which today they deem themselves unaccountable for.
Joseph Zernik

LINKS:
[1]  Windsor v Maid of the Mist Corporation, et al (10-411) - Docket
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-411.htm
[2] 10-11-25 William Suter – Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States – Evidence of Public Corruption
http://www.scribd.com/doc/44034212/

At 07:45 PM 11/29/2010, Bob wrote:

Here’s a case in point.  Bill  Windsor complains that the SCOTUS will not protect him from crookedness of lower  courts.  It made him so mad he created a web site protesting it.

Imagine the mess if Windsor, Ken Smith, and everyone else screwed by crooked courts would work together to stop the crookedness.  They might actually succeed. But operating singly, they will only lose, one at a time.

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

From: William M. Windsor [ mailto:williamwindsor@bellsouth.net] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 11:56 AM
To: bill@lawlessamerica.com
Subject: Supreme Court says Judicial Corruption and Constitutional Violations are not worthy of their Consideration

An order was entered today by The Supreme Court on William M. Windsor’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari (appeal) of one of the most horrendous of the orders by the corrupt judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.  The Petition was denied.  See:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-411.htm

This may tell us how The Supreme Court will rule on judicial corruption and the ability for federal judges to void parts of the Constitution and Bill of Rights because essentially the same questions were asked as in my petitions for writs of mandamus:

“There is no legal or factual basis whatsoever for the decisions of the lower courts in this matter.  These rulings were issued for corrupt reasons.  Many of the judges in the Northern District of Georgia and the Eleventh Circuit are corrupt and violate laws and rules, as they have done in this case.  The Supreme Court must recognize this Petition as one of the most serious matters ever presented to this Court.

“The key questions are:

 

1.     Whether federal courts must be stopped from operating corruptly and ignoring all laws, rules, and facts.

2.     Whether the Supreme Court is prepared to declare the Constitution and its amendments null and void.”

The differences are that The Supreme Court doesn’t have any obligation to deal with a petition for writ of certiorari, but they do have to deal with petitions for writs of mandamus.  In 2009, only 1.1 of 100 petitions for writs of certiorari were granted cert, which means they approved them for further consideration.  However, the reason for granting certiorari is allegedly when a case may set an important precedent.  With this decision, they had an opportunity to deal with the corruption, and didn’t….

I would have been surprised if they had granted this, but this is very discouraging.  I would think that if honest judges were told that the federal judges in Atlanta are corrupt and are violating the Constitution, they would act.  We’ll see what happens on the vital petitions for writs of mandamus, but I now suspect they will essentially void big hunks of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

What in the world are we going to do if they rule this way on the petitions for writs of mandamus?  We will know that our Supreme Court justices are corrupt, too.

I will continue to update the home page of www.lawlessamerica.com with the latest developments.

Please pass this news along.  One of our only hopes is if we can reach enough people through email because the mainstream media is afraid of the judges.

William M. Windsorbill@billwindsor.com
Office: 770-578-1094

10-11-29 TIKKUN's Rabbi MICHAEL LERNER, is asked re: The Los Angeles Jewish Community and the Rampart FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) // El rabino Michael Lerner, se preguntó sobre la comunidad judía de Los Ángeles y el PFE de Rampart (Personas Falsamente Encarceladas)

Rabbi Michael Lerner, Editor - Tikkun Magazine (to heal, repair, and transform the world)


Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
RE: TIKKUN's Rabbi MICHAEL LERNER, is asked re: The Los Angeles Jewish Community and the Rampart FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons)
Dear Rabbi Lerner:

Thanks again for your response on the previous question, affirming the ethical duties of Bet Tzedek (The House of Justice) and the Los Angeles Jewish Federation in an unrelated matter.

Here is an question regarding a fundamental issue, which I believe that you could and should address:

1) Should the Los Angeles Jewish community consider it part of its duties and responsibilities to initiate actions for the release of the Los Angeles Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) - mostly black and latinos - victims of conduct of the Los Angeles, California courts?
The Los Angeles Jewish community is vastly over-represented among judges and attorneys in Los Angeles, and the ongoing imprisonment of the Rampart-FIPs is contrary to Jewish values and the historic commitment of the Jewish community to Civil Rights in the United States.

The basic facts in the matter were established over a decade ago during the Rampart scandal investigation (1998-2000) and through a series of investigative committee reports that followed: [1]

• The number of the Rampart-FIPs is unknown, but was estimated at many thousands [2].
• The Rampart-FIPs are mostly black and latinos.
• Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the University of California, Irvine Law School, a renowned Jewish constitutional scholar found the matter sufficiently important that he initiated his own independent investigation of the matter and published his report, stating: "This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted." (2001) [3]
• Prof David Burcham, then Dean of Loyola Los Angeles Law School wrote: "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit."
• The Rampart-FIPs were falsely convicted and sentenced to long prison terms through framing of evidence, through extraction of confessions under torture, and through fraud on the courts. 
• Regardless, local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies have refused to release the victims to this date.  
• The case was described as the largest court corruption scandal in the history of the US. 
• The Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006) documented that release of the Rampart FIPs is opposed by judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court under claims that it would lead to 'collapse of the justice system' [4] - an argument that defies logic and any sense of decency.

I hope that you would find time to respond on this question, helping to repair a Human Rights disgrace of historic proportions taking place under our watch, here in California.

Happy Hanukkah to you and your family!

Truly,

Joseph Zernik, PhDHuman Rights Alert (NGO)
WHAT DID THE LAPD BLUE RIBBON REVIEW PANEL REPORT (2006) SAY ABOUT THE RAMPART-FIPs? [4]
*     Innocent people remain in prison.
*     ...the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24902306/

WHAT DID PROF ERWIN CHEMERINSKY, DEAN, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LAW SCHOOL, SAY ABOUT THE RAMPART-FIPs? [2]
*   This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.    
Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/274339

WHAT DID PROF DAVID BURCHAM, DEAN, LOYOLA LAW SCHOOL, LA SAY ABOUT THE RAMPART FIPs? [3]
*   ...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit.
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29043589/

WHAT DID THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN CALIFORNIA? [5]
*   ...corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38566837/
WHAT DID THE LATE WILLIAM BRENNAN JR SAY ABOUT HABEAS CORPUS?
*   The basic principle of the Great Writ of habeas corpus is that, in a civilized society... if the imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law, the individual is entitled to his immediate release.
Fay v Noia (1963)
LINKS:
[1] 09-12-17 Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) - Review
http :// www.scribd.com/doc/24729660/
[2] Rampart False Imprisonments - PBS Frontline (2001), in: Frontline series: LAPD Blues
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24901612/
[3] Chemerinsky, E: The Rampart Scandal and the Criminal Justice System in Los Angeles County, Guild Practitioner 57:121 (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27433920/
[4] Burcham, DW and Fisk, CL: Policing the Justice System, in: Symposium, The Rampart Scandal: Policing the Criminal Justice System, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 34:537 (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29043589/
[5] United Nations Human Rights Council Staff Report, as part of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States (2010)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38566837/
 
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.

http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alerthttp://inproperinla.com/
_______________________________________

10-11-28 Wikileaks - The Source - Hanley Manning // Wikileaks - La Fuente - Hanely Manning

Pfc. Bradley Manning is reported as the source in leaking of diplomatic cables and other classified documents to WikiLeaks.
Soldado Bradley Manning se reporta como la fuente de filtración de los cables diplomáticos y otros documentos clasificados a Wikileaks.
“President Obama supports responsible, accountable, and open government at home and around the world, but this reckless and dangerous action runs counter to that goal,” the statement said. “By releasing stolen and classified documents, WikiLeaks has put at risk not only the cause of human rights but also the lives and work of these individuals.”


"El presidente Obama apoya el gobierno responsable, consecuente y abierta en el país y en todo el mundo, pero esta acción imprudente y peligroso va en contra de ese objetivo", dijo el comunicado. "Por la liberación de documentos robados y clasificados, Wikileaks ha puesto en riesgo no sólo la causa de los derechos humanos, sino también la vida y el trabajo de estas personas."
Human Rights Highlights:
¶ Bargaining to empty the Guantánamo Bay prison: When American diplomats pressed other countries to resettle detainees, they became reluctant players in a State Department version of “Let’s Make a Deal.” Slovenia was told to take a prisoner if it wanted to meet with President Obama, while the island nation of Kiribati was offered incentives worth millions of dollars to take in Chinese Muslim detainees, cables from diplomats recounted. The Americans, meanwhile, suggested that accepting more prisoners would be “a low-cost way for Belgium to attain prominence in Europe.”

¶ Clashes with Europe over human rights: American officials sharply warned Germany in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for Central Intelligence Agency officers involved in a bungled operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was mistakenly kidnapped and held for months in Afghanistan. A senior American diplomat told a German official “that our intention was not to threaten Germany, but rather to urge that the German government weigh carefully at every step of the way the implications for relations with the U.S.”
¶ Saudi King: US Should Plant Chips in Gitmo Detainees.

By Full US Embassy Cable

The King, proposed implanting detainees with an electronic chip containing information about them and allowing their movements to be tracked with Bluetooth. This was done with horses and falcons, the King said.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26928.htm