Figures 2 | A few days before the October 9, 2024, court hearing, I was informed by a reliable source that Judge Esperanza Alon (Left) and Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia (Center) were best friends... Dror's counsel, Attorney Rachel Ben Ari (Right), was a member of the Israeli Judicial Selection Committee when Hila Gurevitz Ovadia's appointment was under consideration.
Figures 3 | In recent years, the Israeli Judicial Selection Committee was at the center of the worst corruption scandal of the justice system in Israel's history - "Sex for Judicial Appointment." A female candidate, Eti Craif (Left), was appointed to a judicial position; during the consideration of her appointment, she had sex with at least one member - Effi Naveh, possibly two members of the 9-member committee.-----------
Note: When I use "simulated court record," "simulated litigation," etc., I refer to Texas Penal Code § 32.48 “Simulating Legal Process," which appears in the Penal Code's chapter on Frauds. It is a criminal offense unique to the justice system, and its perpetrators are often several Officers of the Court acting in collusion—a judge, a clerk, an attorney, or two.
In some courts (e.g., the Jerusalem Family Court—Figure 4), several judges, clerks, and attorneys may routinely perpetrate simulated legal processes over many years. Under such circumstances, one should consider it organized crime in the justice system.
The worst cases of simulated litigation in the Israeli courts, which I have documented, were:
1) The 2016 case of Joelle Ben Simone lasted for several years. It was perpetrated by a group of judges in the Jerusalem Family Court. Joelle was captured by the Jerusalem Family Court and abused by the judges, e.g., a restraining order prohibiting her from meeting her elderly mother. When she conducted a one-woman sit-down protest in front of the office of the Minister of Justice, a senior member of the Ministry of Justice managed to have Joelle forcibly hospitalized for a psychiatric exam.
When I helped Joelle inspect of her court files, the Office of the Clerk immediately told us that ALL the decisions in her 22 files were merely invalid "Drafts". It was the same shtick that Judge Esperanza Alon perpetrated in Haifa in 2013 and that the Ombudsman of the Judiciary denounced in 2012 in the Judge Varda Alshech Scandal.
Figures 4 | (Top) A 2016 simulated Decision record by Jerusalem Family Court Judge Menachem HaCohen. It shows the digital watermark "Draft", which indicates that it is an invalid court record. Nevertheless, it was printed and served on Joelle Ben Simone as a valid and effectual court record. It is the same shtick as the Haifa Family Court Judge Esperanza Alon April 4, 2013 "Not Signed Yet" Protocol. (Bottom) Joelle Ben Simon and some of the judges, who were involved in the affair: Judge Menahem Hacohen, Judge (ret) Nili Maymon, Judge Shlomo Elbaz - Jerusalem Family Court.
-----------
2) The missing 2010 Roman Zadorov murder conviction record: It took years of persistently bugging the Nazareth District Court and filing a couple of processes in the Israeli Supreme Court before the full picture emerged. The purported Judgment was rendered a few months after Net HaMishpat had been implemented, transforming the court from administering records and files on paper, with "wet" hand signatures, to electronic record and electronic file administration, with electronic signatures.
A review of the evidence indicates that initially, the judges produced the invalid record in the old system, by then out of service. Later, they produced a fake, simulated record in Net HaMishpat, with only 2 out of 3 "graphic signatures." It was never entered in the Decisions Docket or the Judgments Docket. The arrest warrant, required by law after sentencing, was never issued either. Roman Zadorov was falsely imprisoned for over a decade.
Figures 5 | Two versions of the 2010 Roman Zadorov simulated murder conviction records by the Nazareth District Court 3-judge panel, including former judge Yitzhak Cohen, later convicted for sex crimes, and still tenured Judge Esther Hellman. (Left) The record that is maintained in the Nazareth District Court, and (Right) the record that was discovered in the Supreme Court appeal file.
-----------
3) The missing conviction record of former Israel Bar Association Chair Effi Naveh.
Figures 6 | (Left) Effi Naveh, former Chair of the Israel Bar, the central figure in the Sex for Judicial Appointment Scandal, and Judge Einat Ron, who faked his conviction in a simulated trial. (Right) In Net HaMishpat court file, instead of the conviction record, a pop-up message was installed - "Record is Not Available Now". Judge Einat Ron refused to fix it. Eventually, in an appeal to the Center District Court, the Administration of Court was ordered to fix the file. Judge Einat Ron had passed away in the meanwhile, and the fix was a simulated record itself...
-----------
Figures 7 | One of the worst cases of mass simulated litigation was the Rampart Scandal (~1998-2005) of the Los Angeles Superior Court, Los Angeles District Attorney Office, and the LAPD. The victims were 1000s of minority males, many of them minors, who were falsely arrested and interrogated, falsely indicted, falsely convicted, and falsely sentenced to long prison terms. It was claimed to be the worst recorded court corruption scandal in the history of the United States. In that context, the US Federal District Court in Los Angeles ruled that it was permitted to file a tort complaint against the LAPD under the RICO (Organized Crime) Act. I happened to know a couple of the leading figures in the affair:
Left: Erwin Chemerinsky was law dean at USC, he took a sabbatical and wrote his own independent report of the scandal, concluding that the judges should be held accountable: “This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states… and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.” Naturally, none of the corrupt judges was held accountable, and Chemerinsky was chased out of town... Today, he is the Dean of Berkeley Law School. From Chemerinsky, I learned the concept of simulated litigation. He believed that it was the most common, simple form of judicial corruption.
Center: Judge Jacqueline Connor was the best known among the "Rampart Judges," a group of judges who colluded with the LAPD in running fake criminal trials. I successfully disqualified Judge Jacqueline Connor for a cause. At the time, it was considered an act of courage. Grown men were scared of her.
(Right) Rafael Pérez was an LAPD Narcotics Officer and a close friend of Judge Connor. She gave him a recommendation letter for his promotion, based on his professional appearances in her courtroom. Eventually, it turned out that they were all false appearances. His arrest and his confession started the Rampart Scandal, and the friendship with Jacqueline Connor, who was afraid that he would spill the beans, went sour. In one of the most bizarre cases of simulated litigation, Judge Connor vindicated the corrupt LAPD officers. Not Rafael Pérez, who broke the Code of Silence... He ended up with a 5-year sentence in federal prison...
Hardly any of the victims of the Rampart Scandal were released. The judges refused to cooperate with any attempt to review the court files, claiming that if the victims were to be released, "the Los Angeles justice system would collapse."
-----------
Who is the victim of the fraud in the simulated Zernik family court case in Haifa?
One may argue that our late mother is the primary victim of the fraud in this case. Indeed, all court papers are titled In RE: The estate of the late Rivka Shami Zernik z"l. Israeli Judge Sh. Shohat is often quoted as saying, 'The true litigant in such cases (wills, estates) is the deceased, the present but absent litigant, whose will and interests are the only ones, which the court is commanded to uphold.'
Indeed, this litigation marks the end of almost 15 years that the two of you, together with our late father, were busy undermining our mother's will and her expressed interest - equal division of the community property among her three sons.
However, the offense of Fraud requires proof of the victim's reliance upon a false representation by the perpetrator. Based on my understanding of our mother, in particular her last, hand-written letter to me, I would argue that she had little trust in our late father in such matters.
Then again, one may argue that the primary victim of the fraud in this case is me. Indeed, the intent of almost 15 years that my two dear brothers, together with our late father, were busy conniving to deprive me of my fair share in our parents' 1999 joint and mutual will. However, I surely never relied on any representation by our late father...
That is why the US federal courts refer to the same offense as "Fraud Upon the Court." The Court, as a legal person, is the victim of the fraud, perpetrated by its officers, upon whom the Court relies to honestly conduct its business.
Let's start at the beginning of last Wednesday's October 9, 2024 hearing in Haifa
The two of you were missing. I was wondering if your absence had been coordinated with the court through ex parte communication since I found no record filed in that regard...
Your counsels, Attorney Yoav "Straight as a Ruler" Salomon (for Uri) and Rachel Ben Ari (for Dror) entered the courtroom first, together, and took their seats next to each other on the judge's right-hand side. It was the Sea reserved for Plaintiff or Petitioner, whereas Uri is designated Plaintiff, Dror is purportedly the Defendant, and his counsel was supposed to sit on the same side as I sat... Then again, Dror's counsel explained a while ago that the party designations were arbitrary. Uri and Dror's counsels conceived the litigation as a joint initiative, and finally decided that Uri would be designated "Plaintiff", while Dror would be designated "Defendant 2." That, of course, is a sign of a simulated, fake litigation. I believe that the true motive for such fake party designations was to hide the fact that they were acting in collusion against me to undermine the Estate Distribution Agreement that we had signed in August 2023. Initially, they hoped that they would be able to convince me through my then counsel, Attorney Yair Shiber, that the move is for my benefit as well.
Uri, in particular, was working hard at it. He described his counsel, Attorney Yoav Salomon as "straight as a ruler", "part of the family", "representing not only Uri, but all three brothers".
Israeli law has few rules regarding an attorney vis conduct toward an unrepresented party. One of the only prohibitions is against telling the opposing, unrepresented party that the attorney represents that party's interests as well.
Uri also referred to any questioning of Attorney Yoav Salomon's initiative to be appointed Estate Manager: as "jumping of the paranoid gene".
Erroneous party designations help generate the desired ambiguous, dualistic valid/invalid type records. For example, recently, Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia designated me in court decisions as "Plaintiff," while my two dearest brothers, Uri and Dror, are now "Defendants."
I'd say it is out of touch with reality to suggest that Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia fails to pay attention to such details... It is much more likely that the mix-up was and is intentional.
Of note - neither of my brothers' attorneys has filed a request to correct such errors.
Party names and designations were also mixed up in the Judge Esperanza Alon April 4, 2013 "Not Signed Yet" Protocol. When I filed a request to correct the false data, Judge Esperanza Alon denied the request, ruling that my problem was a lack of understanding of "the mysteries of civil court procedure."
Figures 8 | The October 9, 2024 Judge Gurevitz Ovadia Judgment appears in a Protocol record that, like the opening complaint record, is marked by beauty in brevity. It appears as a sophisticated exercise in generating the desired ambiguous, dualistic valid/invalid type of record.
Page 1:
Protocol
Decision
As part of a "Pilot" conducted by the Administration of Courts, and pursuant to Article 68A of the Courts Act, 1984, the Court orders that the hearing be documented using a recording. The recording will be available for the parties and transcripts may be obtained free of charge.
Page 2:
Judgment
The parties' agreements, detailed in the Protocol, combined with clarifications, were given the status of a Judgment. The Office of the Clerk shall close the instant court file.
Decision
Agreements by the parties were given the status of Decision.
The Estate Managers shall draft within 14 days a formal warrant [for their appointment - JZ] for my signature so that it can be presented to third parties, together with the deposit required from Estate Managers by law. The warrant shall be phrased through agreement between the Estate Managers and Attorney Eleanor Leibovitch [my counsel, since terminated - JZ]. In case no agreement is reached, the Estate Managers shall file their version, together with Attorney Leibovitch's response.
As for other agreements, given that the attorneys have two hats, one of counsel and one of Estate Managers, within the same deadline [14 days—JZ], the Estate Managers shall file the consent of the parties to the agreements in the court hearing today.
___
The idea of holding the judgment hearing with inadequate documentation was ingenious
Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia showed originality and creativity in perverting the hearing. She declared the hearing part of a "Pilot" in which the hearing would be documented through voice recording instead of the routine protocol. She failed to explain that there would be no real standard written Protocol for such a hearing, and she failed to obtain informed consent, or any consent, by the parties to such a "Pilot" being conducted in their case.
It also appears that Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia has no intent to obtain transcripts of the voice recording and edit them into standard Protocol. As noted in an Administration of Courts 2023 publication, summarizing the outcome of the "Pilot", the recording is not easily useful in its raw form, and editing is required.
Judge Gurevitz Ovadia tagged the recordings "Protocol-1," "Protocol-2," and "Protocol-3," but I would argue that the raw recordings are "Draft Protocol," not even a court record, similar to the status of a raw court transcriptionist protocol word processor file.
I argue that the judge's editing and signing of the recordings is a mandatory step in converting them into court records—namely, a Protocol.
It also appears that having no real written protocol and leaving the voice recording in its raw form would make filing an appeal more difficult. Typically, certified "True Copy of the Original" records are required for filing the appeal. It remains unclear how the raw voice recording would be certified.
After reviewing a transcript of the recording, it remains unclear to me, to what degree there is a specific document here that would qualify as a judgment.
The other problems that I can see with this Judgment are related to its lack of specificity and finality. A judgment is expected to conclude the legal discourse with a definitive decision. In this case, the judgment is more of an outline for future negotiations and agreements, and any determination made in it was rendered tentative, subject to further agreements and approvals.
And finally - the entire legal foundation for this litigation was the purported need and desire to implement the Estate Distribution Agreement, signed by the parties on August 28, 2023, and approved by the Court on December 13, 2023. The Estate Distribution Agreement is never mentioned in the "Judgment." It is and not by error. Attorneys Ben Ari and Salomon objected to any reference to the Agreement and the requirement that they conduct their business as Estate Managers according to the Agreement.
It appears that after filing a court action claiming that it was intended to expedite the implementation of the Estate Distribution Agreement, they now seek to have a free hand to do whatever they please with the estate funds.
-------
In opening the hearing, Attorney Yoav Salomon objected to my attorney appearing without a valid Certificate of Counsel since she was not properly listed in Attorney Leibowitch's Certificate of Counsel. This was bizarre since Attorney Yoav Salomon himself appeared with no adequate Certificate of Counsel. Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia appeared to permit him such deliberate violations of Civil Court Procedure, all purportedly to enhance justice...
Otherwise, for the first time in about half a year, Attorneys Ben Ari and "Straight as a Ruler" Salomon were willing to disclose what progress they had made over the year since the Agreement was signed. Attorney Ben Ari explained that basically nothing was accomplished: "Everything was stuck."
Another issue that became clear was that Attorneys Salomon and Ben Ari were no longer considering themselves bound by the Estate Distribution Agreement relative to their fees. Attorney Ben Ari explained that they were going to do "a lot of things" (for the Estate) and their fees could no be determined yet...
The June 5, 2024, Petition record commencing action by Uri Zernik v Joseph Zernik and Dror Zernik
Figures 9 | The June 5, 2024 Petition by Uri Zernik to appoint his counsel attorney Yoav Salomon and his brother Dror's counsel attorney Rachel Ben Ari Estate Managers. I immediately responded by stating that the Petition amounted to a declaration to all who enter the courthouse of an intent to conduct simulated litigation.
--------
The June 5, 2024, Petition was very brief - except for the headings with party and counsel information, it's about half a page.
Even more striking than the October 9 Judgment, the Petition is blatantly invalid and should have been rejected from filing by the Office of the Clerk: It was filed with no affidavit, with incorrect, misleading Certificates of Counsel, with no adequate factual narrative to establish a cause of action, with no significant legal arguments, and no summons.
According to Civil Court Procedure, commencing documents and opening a new file are carefully reviewed by the Legal Clerk, who may reject the filing of nonconforming records or permit their filing subject to amendments of the record by a specific deadline. Either way, the court file would contain some documentation of the Legal Clerk's review and approval.
This court file lacks documentation of the Legal Clerk's review. Judge Hila Gurevitz Ovadia blocked any attempt to request an answer to the question: Who approved the filing of the faulty Petition record?
The document's core states that the execution of the August 28, 2023, Estate Distribution Agreement was delayed due to "disputes or misunderstandings" - with no further detail.
It further states that such delays caused damages but fails to provide any detail or estimate of such damages.
Attorney Yoav Salomon refused to correct any of the petition's faults, and it became clear that he was positive that Judge Gurevitz Ovadia would not dismiss the petition without prejudice, as is the standard ruling in such cases.
Neither Attorney Yoav Salomon nor Attorney Rachel Ben Ari is a Family Law attorney. Therefore, I suggest that it was not Attorney Yoav Salomon who was the brilliant brain behind filing such a blatantly faulty and fraudulent Petition. I know that it sounds conspiratorial, but I would suggest that Attorney Amos Sadika could serve as sort of a consultant for Attorneys Yoav Salomon and Rachel Ben Ari on the subject of perverting court processes and Civil Court Procedure and a go-between Attorney Yoav Salomon and Judge Gurevitz Ovadia.
Notable events in the litigation
1. Filing the petition - "inappropriate conduct" by Attorney Yair Shiber, and termination of my representation
Around April-May 2024, when it became apparent that Attorney Yoav Salomon was going to file a petition to be appointed Estate Manager, my counsel, Attorney Yair Shiber, a reputable, successful Family Law practitioner, stopped performing and severed all communications with me and with Attorneys Salomon and Ben Ari. There was simply no explanation for it. In retrospect, and given a similar later experience with Attorney Leibovitch and my multiple experiences in similar circumstances in California, I suggest that someone whispered in Attorney Shiber's ear that the Petition was going to be perverted.
On the other hand, Attorney Shiber knew that it was hopeless to resist.
And although he didn't want to be part of it, there was pressure on his to collude.
On June 2-5, 2024, Attorney Salomon emailed Attorney Shiber, asking him to provide my consent to the Petition. Attorney Shiber failed to respond, so on June 5, Attorney Salomon filed the Petition without my consent.
On Thursday, June 6, 2024, at 16:00, Attorney Shiber called me by phone out of the blue after a long period of no communication. He asked for my position regarding the "Draft Petition". He was misleading me by not disclosing that the Petition had already been filed and he had received service of it. I answered that I had no position, since I hadn't seen the record yet. He then promised to email me the "Draft Petition" and reply later.
2. June 18, 2024 "Response" by Attorney Salomon to notice of terminating Attorney Shiber
3. June 24, 2024 "Response" by Attorney Ben Ari "granted" by Judge Gurevitz Ovadia
4. Response on the Petition - preliminary requests to dismiss
5. Response to compromise offer
6. Decision on Request to Dismiss for failing to file summons
7. Missing Request Numbers
8. Blocking communications with the Office of the Clerk
9, Preventing inspection in AP 2010
%20Nave.jpg)
.png)
