09-10-20 One should recall that the jailing of Richard Fine stemmed from a real estate related litigation at the Los Angeles Superior Court

SEEKING ADDITIONAL MEMBERS FOR A GROUP OF SCAM-VICTIMS OF THE LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT

One factor, often ignored, of central significance, is that the case that originated the jailing of Atty Richard Fine, was real-estate related - Marina v LA County (BC109420)

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:24:52 -0700
To: "Stop Crimes"
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Re: Urgent! - Housing Scams and US Attorneys Firing Scandal (100 Evidences of Real Estate Escrow Scam)

Sir/Madam:

If sounds familiar. If you are writing regarding events at the Superior Court of California , County of Los Angeles, please contact me directly.

I was/am in a similar position, two banks, escrow company, title company, were involved.

a) USC CREDIT UNION
b) UNION BANK
c) UNITED TITLE
d) MARA ESCROW - a subsidiary of - OLD REPUBLIC TITLE INSURANCE HOLDING CO
e) PACIFIC MORTGAGE CONSULTANTS - in their multiplicity of DBAs.
f) COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (CFC) - alleged racketeering with Sandor Samuels as the central figure.
g) BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION (BAC)- alleged racketeering, again - with Sandor Samuels as the central figure.

Sandor Samuels - Associate General Counsel - Bank of America Corporation

Alleged central racketeering figure in Southern California

The central Pillar of the Bet Tzedek Trio

Atty SANDOR SAMUELS , Atty DAVID PASTERNAK , Judge TERRY FRIEDMAN

Communications with my banks were kept secret from me, and were based on no legal records AT ALL.
I talked with the Escrow Officer, and then she backed out, refused to cooperate with the court scam. Then the court purported to issue an Indemnity Agreement for future criminalities to the escrow company, as part of efforts to coerce escrow to collude.

You are not likely to be able to secure any Equal Protection. However, please try to document the events in as much details as possible. Also, please insist on issuing Crime Reports by local police, even if they do not investigate any of the crimes. and try to document their refusal in as many ways as possible...

We are trying to put together a group of 10 who faced similar alleged abuse by the LA Superior Court and Local, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, and then go abroad to an International Human Rights Court, We are not far from that target. In particular we are interested in Real Estate related cases.

Admission conditions for this elite group:
1) Full documentation of the legal actions - including Registers of Actions (Docket) and a complete set of Minute Orders and Written Orders, Judgments, Ruling, Writs.
2) Deceleration under penalty of perjury - best if prepared with attorney.
3) Detailed Narrative.
4) Photos would be nice too.

Please follow additional notes at: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/

Joseph Zernik

___________________________________________________

At 04:15 PM 10/20/2009, you wrote:

On 10/15/2009, our bank placed a hold on our account. We requested a copy of the legal documents from the bank but were told to get it from the Sheriff's office.
Sheriff's Office told us they do not have a copy of 1) Writ of Execution, 2) Notice of Levy. In fact, they do not even have a file opened. This is inconsistent with CCP 699.080 (b) which states:

"CCP 699.080 (b) - Before levying under the writ of execution, the registered process server shall deposit a copy of the writ with the levying officer and pay the fee provided by Section 26721 of the Government Code."

When we checked the court records, the original Writ of Execution does not have the seal of the State of California, does not have any signature of the clerk and does not even have a Court File Stamp on it.

Please contact FBI and our Attorney General Eric holder and Jerry Brown to investigate this case. Neither the Bank nor the Sheriff can give us the following basic info:
1) Who is the levying officer? (Do you see his/her signature?)
2) What is the levying officer file number?
3) What is his/her badge number?
4) Who authorized the levy? (Do you see his/her signature?)
5) Who is the clerk? (Do you see his/her signature?)
6) Who is the registered process server? (Do you see his/her signature?)
7) Do you see the Court file stamp on the documents?
8) Do you see the Seal of the State of California?
9) What is the Straw Seller's physical address?

The writ issued on 10/13/2009 by the lower court is improper and invalid for the following reasons:
1) Straw Seller's bogus out-of-state judgment was procured by fraud. It is VOID and cannot be enforced.
2) There is an oral argument hearing on 11/13/2009 for our Appeal case. Since there is an appeal pending for this case and there is no final money judgment, NO levy should be placed per CCP 699.080(a)(8) and CCP 700.190(a).
3) The lower court Judge #4 has a history of conducting secret hearings and issuing secret orders while this case is on appeal.
4) According to online Court records, the lower court conducted an Ex-Parte hearing on 10/13/2009 and issued a writ of execution while this case is on Appeal. This Ex-Parte hearing was conducted without a 24 hour notice. Note: 10/12/2009 is not a court day because it is a court holiday (Columbus Day).
"CRC 3.1203(a) requires notice to all parties no later than 10:00 a.m. the court day before the ex parte appearance"
5) In addition, Straw Seller's Ex Parte Motion was never served on us. The court records show that the Certificate of Mailing for the Ex Parte Motion was not signed and has no mailing address of the sender.
Since the registered process server did not comply with CCP699.080, the levy is ineffective and the levying officer is not required to perform any duties under the writ and must issue a release for any property sought to be levied upon, according to CCP699.080(e).
We need your help to contact appropriate authority to straighten out this mess. Hopefully your help will restore the public trust in our judicial system. Also, please contact our Congress to continue the investigation of US Attorneys Firing Scandal to protect the public from housing scams.

Thank you!

09-10-20 Justice William J Brennan

William J Brennan (April 25, 1906 – July 24, 1997)

Judicial philosophy (From Wikipedia)

Brennan strongly believed in the bill of rights, arguing early on in his career that it should be applied to the states in addition to the federal government.^[9] He often took positions in favor of individual rights against the state, often favoring criminal defendants, minorities, the poor, and other underrepresented groups. Furthermore, he generally shied away from the absolutist positions of Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas, being very amenable to compromise. He was willing to compromise to win a majority of Justices.^[10] Brennan's conservative detractors charged that he was a purveyor of judicial activism, accusing him of deciding outcomes before coming up with a legal rationale for them.^[11] At his retirement, Brennan said the case he thought was most important was Goldberg v. Kelly, which ruled that a local, state or federal government could not terminate welfare payments to a person without a prior individual evidentiary hearing.^[12]

In the 1980s, as the Reagan administration and the Rehnquist Court threatened to "roll back" the decisions of the Warren Court, Brennan became more vocal about his jurisprudential views. In a 1985 speech at Georgetown University, Brennan criticized Attorney General Edwin Meese's call for a "jurisprudence of original intention" as "arrogance cloaked as humility" and advocated reading the U.S. Constitution to protect rights of "human dignity."

Brennan was also less interested in stare decisis or the avoidance of "absolutist" positions where the death penalty was concerned. Brennan and Thurgood Marshall concluded in Furman v. Georgia that the death penalty was, in all circumstances, unconstitutional, and never accepted the legitimacy of Gregg v. Georgia, which ruled that the death penalty was constitutional four years later. Thereafter, Brennan or Marshall took turns, joined by the other, in issuing a dissent in every denial of certiorari in a capital case, and from every decision in a case which the court did take which failed to vacate a sentence of death.^[13]

Brennan also authored a dissent from the denial of certiorari in Glass v. Louisiana. In Glass, the Court chose not to hear a case that challenged the constitutionality of the use of the electric chair as a form of execution.

Brennan wrote^[14]:

Th[e] evidence suggests that death by electrical current is extremely violent and inflicts pain and indignities far beyond the "mere extinguishment of life." Witnesses routinely report that, when the switch is thrown, the condemned prisoner "cringes," "leaps," and "fights the straps with amazing strength." "The hands turn red, then white, and the cords of the neck stand out like steel bands." The prisoner's limbs, fingers, toes, and face are severely contorted. The force of the electrical current is so powerful that the prisoner's eyeballs sometimes pop out and "rest on [his] cheeks." The prisoner often defecates, urinates, and vomits blood and drool.

Brennan concluded that electrocution is "nothing less than the contemporary technological equivalent of burning people at the stake."

Quotations by Brennan

• "I cannot accept the notion that lawyers are one of the punishments a person receives merely for being accused of a crime." Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 764 (1983) (dissenting).

____________________________________________________________

Fay v Noia, 372 US 391 (1963)

• "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" Pp. 372 U. S. 399-402.

09-10-20 Kitchen Monologue #2

THE KITCHEN STUDIOS PROUDLY PRESENT

Kitchen Monologue #2

TO INSPECT & TO COPY

March 4, 2009 Records, if any exist, of:

Arrest 11:05 am - Judge David Yaffe's Court

Booking 12:23 pm - San Pedro?

Previous Episodes:

The story last ended with Richard Fine, after exposing and denouncing "not permitted" payments to judges, in solitary confinement in Twin Towers Jail for over half a year. Public sentiments are captured in the petition. Yet, the Kitchen Team is tirelessly exposing the various levels of false records that the jailing was built upon.

Current Episode:

The Kitchen's investigators concluded that Richard Fine most likely was subjected to arbitrary arrest, with no records to substantiate it at all... Therefore, the Kitchen faxed a request and is trying to coordinate time with the office of Sheriff Lee Baca to inspect and to copy the March 4, 2009 records... if any exist... and also - resolve the San Pedro Mystery...

09-10-20 WE NEED YOUR SIGNATURE ON THE PETITION...

Join the bold ones, who dared to sign - Cheri Woods, Orly Taitz, Richard Menna...

Anonymous signatures are happily accepted too... Anon. Colorado, Anon. Kansas...

FREE FINE

Petition powered by ThePetitionSite.com

09-10-19 Atty McCormick kindly requested to withrdraw his May 1, 2009 paper.

Attorney Kevin McCormick

BENTON, ORR, DUVAL & BUCKINGHAM

Ventura, California

Attorney, but NOT Attorney of Record

for

Judge David Yaffe

Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

October 19, 2009

Attorneys Kevin M McCormick, Terrence J. Bonham, Bruce Alan Finck, Thomas E. Olson, Carol A.

Woo, Donald R. Wood, Ron Colton, Carlos Cabral

PBENTON ORR DUVAL & BUCKINGHAM

39 North California Street, Ventura , CA 93002-1178

Tel: 805-648-5111, Fax: 805-648-7218

By email and by fax to all named attorneys of the law firm.

Ventura County Bar Association

Tel: 805-650-7599, Fax: 805-650-8059

By fax.

Timely response is kindly requested by Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 5:00 pm.

RE: Fine v Sheriff Department of Los Angeles County (2:09-Cv-01914) - Please immediately

withdraw paper you filed May 1, 2009, including false on its face Judgment record, with no

evidence for your authority to do so.

TO ATTORNEYS KEVIN M MCCORMICK, TERRENCE J. BONHAM, BRUCE ALAN FINCK,

THOMAS E. OLSON, CAROL A. WOO, DONALD R. WOOD, RON COLTON, CARLOS

CABRAL, AND THE LAW-FIRM OF BENTON ORR DUVAL & BUCKINGHAM:

Please take notice, request is herein made, that you immediately withdraw paper filed May 1,

2009 in: Fine v Sheriff Department of Los Angeles County (2:09-Cv-01914) under the name of

Benton, Orr, Duval & Buckingham, which included false on its face Judgment record, but with

no evidence for your authority to do so. Such conduct was the direct cause of ongoing false jailing

of Atty Richard Fine.

...

...

You are kindly requested:

.

Please withdraw paper you filed May 1, 2009, including false on its face Judgment

record, with no evidence for your authority to do so. Please provide a reasonable

explanation for your wrongful conduct, which resulted in ongoing false jailing of Atty

Richard Fine.

.

Response is kindly requested by Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 5:00 pm.

This message was copied to the Ventura County Bar Association.

.

Dated October 19, 2009

La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California . Joseph H Zernik

. . . . . . . . . . . By: __/s/Joseph H Zernik_____

. . . . . .. . . . . . JOSEPH H ZERNIK

. . . . . . . . . . . In Pro Se

09-10-18 The power of peaceful, loving people... networking...

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:27:15 -0700
To: [ ]
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Thanks for signing, wish we had more signatures by tomorrow lunch time...

Hi [ ]:

Thanks again for signing the petition, I wish we had more signatures by tomorrow.

When we get Richard Fine out of Twin Towers, it would be a turning point. Because it would not be accomplished through any court of law, or investigative committee commissioned by government, but through the sheer power of the people, through computers, e-mail, and networking, no lesser than the power of the people of the Spirit of 1776, who inspired the people of 1789 who stormed the Bastille! However, we are non-confrontational, peaceful, and loving, in the true California tradition of the 1960's...

Joe Zernik

Spirit of 1776 Bastille, Paris John & Yoko Twin Towers, Los Angeles

09-10-18 Online Petition launched, and Sheriff Baca's office informed that we may ask to exercise our Common Law rights - to inspect and to copy...

Fax was sent to the office of Sheriff Lee Baca, and staff was also noticed and informed by phone:

_______________________________________________________________________

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:24:08 -0700
To: "Sheriff Lee Baca"<13232676600@efaxsend.com>
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Please sign an online petition addressed to Sheriff Lee Baca - FREE RICHARD FINE.

October 18, 2009

Dear Sheriff Baca:

I got overwhelming support for previous email notes in this matter, and therefore started the online petition on Sunday, October 18, 2009. I realize we may not get that many signatures by Monday, but it would surely give you some indication where public sentiment stands on this matter.

Regardless, I never asked you to make your decisions based on public sentiment, but rather, based on your due authority and proper address of the rights of the inmate.

I may call your office Monday or Tuesday, to ask their advice regarding ways to amicably practice the Common Law right to access public records, to inspect and to copy the full arrest, booking, and permanent housing assignment, as well as log of inmates as used in the daily counts. Such right is founded on U.S. Supreme Court decision in Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978). I am informing you of this request in advance, so that office staff would not caught unprepared, hoping that your office staff would be instructed how to handle this request pursuant to your guidance in comliance with the law.

We hope to be able to thank you Monday for your actions in this matter.

Joseph Zernik

Enclosed: Text of the Online Petition @ <http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine >.

_________________________

Dear Friend:

Thanks for the overwhelming support!
I signed the petition FREE RICHARD FINE ,<http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine >. I'm asking you to sign this petition to help us reach our goal of 1,000 signatures. I care deeply about this cause, and I hope you will support our efforts.

Please do it now, we asked Sheriff Lee Baca to free Richard Fine this Monday!

[Images of the judgment, posted here yesterday, were deleted from this posting - jhz]

FALSE ON ITS FACE - the March 4, 2009 Judgment that purported to form the foundation for the arrest, booking and holding of Richard Fine in solitary confinement since March 4, 2009.
_______________________________________________________________________
The Supermarket Lemma...
1) CAN YOU GO TO THE SUPERMARKET, GIVE THEM A BLANK CHECK ON MARCH 4, 2009 AND TELL THEM:
"I'LL COME BACK ON THE 24th TO SIGN IT?"
NO WAY.
2) CAN YOU GO TO THE SUPER GIVE THEM A CHECK ON MARCH 4, 2009, WHICH IS SIGNED AND DATED MARCH 24, 2009?
NO WAY
__________________________________________________________________________________

Thanks,

Joe Zernik

Please let Richard Fine go...

Kitchen Monologue #1

We thank all those who responded with support... it was overwhelming this time...

We again appeal to Sheriff Lee Baca to rely on his own authority and let Richard Fine go. There is no way that a reasonable person would review the chronology and the papers - just on their faces, and would conclude that the jailing of Richard File conformed with the fundamentals of the law.

There is a group of doctors in Texas who share some stories of unusual justice over there, but the question was raised what their specialized professional problem haD to do with the case of Richard Fine. Below is the response:

____________________________________________________________

Dear Med Professionals,

Let me try to explain... I just wrote the passage below to a lady who had a colorful past, and has as a result some good connections and may be able to go on TV on Geraldo, or something like that, and she is really committed and tries her best to help:

_______________________________________________________________

HI [ redacted ]

IS THERE ANYWAY THAT YOU COULD GET YOURSELF ON TV, BRING SOME COLOR INTO A BORING PROGRAM

THREE MINUTES WOULD BE ENOUGH IN THE NEXT 48 HOURS...

YOU DONT HAVE TO BE A LAWYER. BUT YOU HAVE TO BE OUTRAGEOUS...

IT IS AS SIMPLE AS 1, 2, 3
1) YOU NEED TO HOLD IN ONE HAND THE JUDGMENT AND SAY:

THIS IS THE MARCH 4, 2009 JUDGMENT THAT JUDGE YAFFE AND THE SUPERIOR COURT FILED IN U.S. COURT AND CLAIMED WAS THE LEGAL BASIS FOR JAILING RICHARD FINE ON MARCH 4, 2009 AT THE COURT OF JUDGE DAVID YAFFE. IT IS ALSO THE BASIS FOR HOLDING HIM IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT EVER SINCE...

At the link is the judgment you can print it out, and take it with you....
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-marina-v-county-09-03-04-false-fine-judment-record-copy-from-us-dist-ct-habeas-corpus-doc-16-response-by-la-sup-ct-filed-may-1-2009.pdf

2) THEN YOU HAVE TO SHOW THE STAMP ON PAGE 1:

HERE, ON THE FRONT PAGE, THE STAMP SAID FILED MARCH 4, 2009...
AND HERE ON THE LAST PAGE IT SAID JUDGE DAVID YAFFE SIGNED IT ON MARCH 24. 2009...

3) THEN YOU STATE THE SELF-EVIDENT:

THIS JUDGMENT WAS FALSE ON ITS FACE.. THIS WAS NOT A TRUE EFFECTUAL JUDGMENT. BECAUSE YOU DID NOT HAVE TO BE A LAWYER, AND YOU DIDN'T EVEN HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PAPER SAID, BY JUST LOOKING ON THE FACE OF THE PAPER YOU COULD SEE THAT IT WAS FALSE.

A. The supermarket lemma...

1) CAN YOU GO TO THE SUPERMARKET, GIVE THEM A BLANK CHECK ON MARCH 4, 2009 AND TELL THEM: "I WILL COME BACK ON THE 24th TO SIGN IT?" NO WAY.

2) CAN YOU GO TO THE SUPER GIVE THEM A CHECK ON MARCH 4, 2009, WHICH IS SIGNED AND DATED MARCH 24, 2009? NO WAY

B. There is no way that the paper could come to be, consistent with honest conduct...

So, come to think of it...

1) If Judge David Yaffe signed it on March 4, 2009, and endorsed it March 24, 2009, while verbally he instructed the Warrant Detail to arrest Richard Fine on March 4, 2009... I am not a lawyer, but i think it should go for review....

2) If Judge David Yaffe left it blank, while instructing the arrest of Richard Fine, and then came back on March 24 and signed it... That may be even worse I believe, but again - it should be referred for professional review...

3) In short, I could not figure out a way that the Honorable David Yaffe could sign this paper with the date of March 24, 2009 and would be deemed honest conduct... Any way you look at it, it was as crooked as he is and/or may be.

C. The most disturbing part of the whole sequence of events...

So, come to think of it...

This paper was reviewed by Judge David Yaffe and Deputy Clerk Connie Hudson, under the authority of John A Clark, Clerk of the Court at the Los Angeles Superior Court, and Clerk Terry Nafisi and Magistrate Carla Woehrle, and Judge John Walter, at the U.S. District Court, Los Angeles, and at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th District - by Clerk Molly C. Dwyer, and Circuit Justices Richard Paez and Richard Tallman, and on top - a brilliant jurist and champion of civil rights - Chief Justice of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals - Alex Kozinski...

So what does it mean?

That the justice system of the U.S.A. is @#$%^&* [HERE YOU HAVE TO EXPRESS YOURSELF IN ANY WAY YOU DEEM FIT...] So, come to think of it...

________________________________________________

Then to top it off - the Judgment was missing the end part - the Proof of Service, defect, which made it invalid in and of itself.

IF IN 3 MINUTES YOU COULD DELIVER THE MATERIAL ABOVE, ABOUT MARCH 4 and MARCH 24, THAT IS ENOUGH!!!

I THINK YOU COULD GET FINE OFF JAIL BY MONDAY.... AS LONG AS EVERYBODY WOULD BE TALKING ON MONDAY ABOUT MARCH 4 and MARCH 24, PAYMENT BY CHECK AT THE SUPER, THE BRILLIANT JURIST ALEX KOZINSKi, AND THE OUTRAGEOUS DRESS...

Joe Zernik

_______________________________________________________________

I think it is obvious what the relationship is... between the problems of medical professionals in Texas and the jailing of Atty Fine -- the dress...

Joe Zernik

_________________________________________________________________________

Later...

Separately, more fundamentally, the case reflects a 9th Circuit (as a geographical term) mentality prevalent among attorneys and judges. The Los Angeles Superior Court employed Atty Kevin McKormick, and it was not at all clear, what the nature of that employment was. For example -

WAS HE A COUNSEL OF RECORD?

And Atty Kevin McCormick felt at liberty to file an insufficient pleading as a Response to the Richard Fine's Habeas Corpus petition, with no declaration by Judge David Yaffe - the competent witness of facts, and evidence with no foundation - not even a docket of the originating caption was filed, and a set of records that was of dubious authenticity.

All in all it reflected the legal frame of mind of such attorneys and judges - that the Adversarial System grants you the license to steal and to lie, and to falsely imprison, as long as the opponent does not competently object.

I do not believe that the late Justice Brennan, for example, held that view of the justice system. Particularly, in the case of Habeas Corpus. According to Justice Brennan's view - the Prisoner was never expected to be a legal scholar. All he/she were required to do -- was to challenge the validity of their holding, and request to be brought before a judge in their bodily person.

Thereafter, it was the Judge's responsibility - not to conduct a full appeal - but to confirm that the holding of the Prisoner conformed with the fundamentals of the law - that all the basics were in place, and valid and effectual...

We hope that the papers that were filed by Atty Kevin McCormick on behalf of the LA Superior Court do not reflect the competence in the law of Atty Kevin McCormick, Judge David Yaffe, or the LA Superior Court. Instead, what they reflect, is the degree to which these parties are faithful to the law... It also reflected their experience and conviction, which turned out to be true, that such legal practices would be acceptable to Magistrate Carla Woehrle and Judge John Walter, and so forth...

In short - a layperson would put it this way - They knew that they could lie in order to affect the indefinite false imprisonment of Richard Fine - and get away with it... Most lay persons like me, would not know what to call it in legal terms, but would often refer to it in the imprecise common parlance as sleazy...

Joe Zernik

October 16, 2009 - We would ilke to have RICHARD FINE RELEASED BY MONDAY...

Richard Fine . . . . . .Twin Tower Jail, Los Angeles

Please call or fax Sheriff Lee Baca and ask him simply:

Please let Richard Fine go...

Sheriff Lee Baca

Tel: (323) 526-5000

Fax: (323) 267-6600

Please call/fax this weekend, and please ask some

friends to do the same.

_______________________________________

Dear friend:

I wonder if you had a chance to review the appeal I wrote to Sheriff LEE BACA. It was attached and

linked.

http://inproperinla.com/09-10-13-appeal-to-sheriff-lee-baca-s.pdf

The set of documents in the fraud against Atty RICHARD FINE, as alleged by me, which keeps him

imprisoned, is simple... At the bottom line these are series of court records, each would look perfectly

valid to a naive reviewer, but in fact, each and every one of the them is fraud on its face. Most of them -

simply through mismatch of dates and signatures, or proof of service. For example, the judgment that

purportedly keeps RICHARD FINE in jail:

1) It is stamped March 4, 2009 "FILED" on its face, and it is signed March 24, 2009 on its final

page by Judge DAVID YAFFE. You cannot have a document filed in court before it was signed !!!

2) It came with no proof of service at all!

http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-marina-v-county-09-03-04-false-fine-judment-record-copy-from-us-dist-ct-habeas-corpus-doc-

16-response-by-la-sup-ct-filed-may-1-2009.pdf

.

Based on such judgment record the man is jailed since March 4, 2009, in solitary confinement, and for

the first couple of months he was not allowed access to pen and paper, no visitors, etc.

I believe that Sheriff LEE BACA is an honest man. I hope that it comes across in my appeal. On the

other hand, I believe that he was deceived by Judge DAVID YAFFE, I don't make any secret about that

opinion.

However, the end result is that now I believe that Sheriff LEE BACA is holding Atty RICHARD FINE

without the required legal foundations. At the same time, I believe that Sheriff LEE BACA holds the key

to a solution in this case - by releasing RICHARD FINE on his own authority. The courts have messed

up this case so badly, and they have no way of getting themselves out of it anytime soon. Therefore -

the sooner that Sheriff BACA lets Atty FINE go, the better it would be for the Sheriff and for everybody

else.

On the down side - the Sheriff also runs a risk: A Judge like DAVID YAFFE has full immunity - no matter

how crooked he is and/or may be. That is not the case with the Sheriff, and if he holds FINE much longer, he runs

the risk of eventually being the scapegoat in some investigation committee of the type we have seen

around here, especially that he cannot claim ignorance anymore, I have verified that his office received

my appeal.

On the up side - if Sheriff BACA releases RICHARD FINE, on his own authority, the Sheriff would

become a hero... It would be a landmark in the history of this county. You should realize that the case of

RICHARD FINE is growing into some kind of urban myth...He is already mentioned in WIKIPEDIA and

multiple web sites made him into the battle cry - and the affair is not over yet... It would also establish lawenforcement- like police and sheriff, which typically got all the blame (e.g. - the Rampart) - as the anchor of some decency in the justice system in LA.

If you find time to review the appeal papers and find it true and correct. on the facts, please fax or phone

Sheriff Lee Baca. The appeal includes links to the relevant legal papers that were involved... and more...

Again, I am asking that you act only on your conviction, and only if you review the papers and see that I

am true and correct on the facts in the matter.

Thanks, and have a good weekend...

Joseph Zernik

Los Angeles County, California

We own the "C" in Corruption

09-10-14 Request for Input from Harvard/Stanford Law Professor

Dear Prof [ ]:

Thank you for acknowledging receipt of my message regarding Richard Fine yesterday. He has been

falsely jailed since March 4th, 2009. However the victims of the Rampart Scandal, estimated at more

than 10,000, have been falsely imprisoned for about 10 years after an official 200-investigators, 2-year

probe determined that they were falsely convicted and falsely sentenced by the judges of the LA

Superior Court.

Therefore, I would be interested in your input on theoretical questions ...

THEORETICAL QUESTIONS IN LAW

1) What is your opinion as a legal scholar of a Superior Court that for 25 years has been hiding the

DOCKETS (REGISTERS OF ACTIONS) of ALL files from the public, including parties during

litigations - BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL... Does it comply with Public Trial rights? Does it

comply with Human Rights pursuant to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ratified

International Law?

2) What is your opinion as a legal scholar of a Superior Court that for the past 25 years has been

hiding its BOOK OF JUDGMENTS?

3) What is your opinion as a legal scholar of a Superior Court that for the past 25 years has been

hiding its CALENDAR OF THE COURTS?

4) What is your opinion as a legal scholar of a Superior Court that has implemented an

AUTOMATIC "WAIVER" OF SERVICE AND NOTICE?

5) What is your opinion as a legal scholar of a Superior Court that has kept FALSELY

IMPRISONED OVER 10,000 PEOPLE, ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY BLACK AND HISPANIC, A

FULL DECADE AFTER THEY WERE PROVEN TO BE INNOCENT?

6) As a theoretical hypothesis, if all the above statements were true relative to the largest Superior

Court in the U.S., serving some 10 million people, how would you GRADE THE HUMAN RIGHTS

RECORD OF THE U.S.A.?

7) `As a theoretical hypothetical question, if all the above ere true, how would you GRADE THE

JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE U.S. today relative to other "First World Nations" or "Western

Democracies", or any other reference group that you may choose to define?

8) As a theoretical hypothetical question, if all the above ere true, how would you GRADE THE

JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE U.S. today, relative to the prescriptions of the U.S. Constitution?

9) In the existing U.S. government system, which U.S. AGENCY HOLDS PRIMARY DUTY to

address such problems?

10) Do you believe that LAW FACULTY HOLD MORAL AND/OR ETHICAL OBLIGATIONS

to speak out under such circumstances?

Attorney Richard Fine Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)

MEDIEVAL COURTS - IN THE DIGITAL ERA

Richard Fine (CJ Inmate 1824367) Appeal to Los Angeles Sheriff Baca to review whether his arrest, booking, and jailing conformed with the fundamentals

FYI was faxed to Sheriff Baca today, receipt confirmed by his office.

Joe Zernik
________________________________________________________________
Joseph H Zernik, DMD, PhD
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750; Fax: 801.998.0917; E-Mail: jz12345@earthlink.net
.
09-10-12 An appeal to Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca to use his due authority
and properly address the legal, civil and human rights of an American, inmate
Richard Fine (1824367), and with it - mark a new beginning for the Los Angeles
County justice system
.
Sheriff Lee Baca
4700 Ramona Blvd
Monterey Park, CA 91754-2169
Tel: (323) 526-5000
Fax: (323) 267-6600
.
Timely response requested by Monday, October 19, 2009

Dear Sheriff Baca:
.
My name is JOSEPH ZERNIK, and I am of the people of the United States, and of the people of
Los Angeles County, California. I am not a lawyer, not even by a long shot. Therefore,
please accept this letter as the writing of layperson, applying only commonsense... I recently
took the time to review the proceedings and the records related to the ongoing jailing of
RICHARD FINE, (CJ inmate #1824367). Here, I am appealing to you as a resident of Los
Angeles County, with inherent interest in integrity of the justice system, and also as one who
believes that he has evidence of inadvertent false jailing at the Sheriffs CJ facility.

Executive Summary:
This appeal is filed with the Los Angeles County Sheriff LEE BACA, to use his due authority and properly address the legal, civil and human rights of an American, inmate RICHARD FINE (1824367).

.
Reconstructed Chronology:

Prior to the March 4, 2009 proceeding a request was forwarded to the Sheriff Department to have the Warrant Detail present in the proceeding, with the understanding that the proceeding would end with the sentencing and jailing of Atty Fine for contempt. Indeed, Judge DAVID YAFFE pronounced such sentence in open court, as evidenced in court reporters transcript the first record of the proceeding. Through such oral directives, Judge Yaffe mislead the Sheriffs Warrant Detail to arrest Atty Fine at 11:05 am. However, Judge Yaffe then left them with no record as an adequate legal foundation for such action. Instead, Judge Yaffe proceeded to create a second, contradictory record in court file which did not reflect any sentencing or jailing at all. In fact the March 4, 2009 proceeding was entirely eliminated from the record! The consequent Sheriffs Warrant Detail record of booking in San Pedro at 12:32 pm was likely insufficient, and is the main subject of this appeal. By 4:31 pm, papers were received by the Sheriffs Department through an anonymous fax transmission from Judicial Services. Such papers reflected yet a third, again misleading record for the litigation, including invalid records: The March 4, 2009 Remand Order and the March 4, 2009 Judgment for contempt. On such background it was understandable why Sheriff Baca refused to respond to Atty Richard Fines habeas corpus petition. The LA Superior Court and Judge Yaffe eventually responded, through papers filed on May 1, 2009 by Atty KEVIN MCCORMICK. Such Response failed to include a declaration under penalty of perjury by Judge Yaffe the competent fact witness, it also failed to produce the quintessential litigation records the Register of Actions (docket), and any evidence of entry of judgment. It relied upon records from the Sheriff Department and the Court Reporters transcript records which absent, at variance, and/or contradictory of the records in court file. Key records were filed as evidence with no authentication. Finally, there is no reason to believe that Judge Yaffe ever saw such pleading before or after it was filed on his behalf in court. It is inconceivable for the court to engage in such litigation practices to affect false imprisonment of an individual. Request was therefore filed directly with Judge Yaffe, to confirm that such records were filed with his knowledge and on his behalf. However, it remained unanswered.

.

Cells at Twin Tower Jail

Pleading:

We pray Sheriff Lee Baca review the arrest, booking, and permanent housing assignment records, and if any is found inadvertently insufficient -take corrective actions and immediately release Atty Fine. With it, the Sheriff may mark a new beginning for the Los Angeles County justice system, with dignity of the legal, civil, and human rights of all.

___________________________________________
The full appeal can be viewed at http://inproperinla.com/09-10-13-appeal-to-sheriff-lee-baca-s.pdf or at blog with easy links to reference records. This appeal, like previous letters in the matter, was widely distributed to law school faculty, U.S. Congress, and international Human Rights organizations.
____________________________________________

I appeal to you because I believe that you have the duty and the authority to review the
procedures executed in arrest, booking, and jailing of Richard Fine, and also the authority to
take appropriate action as you may deem fit, following such review. Beyond that, I appeal to
you because I read your online statement and your biography, and I believe that you have a
clear vision of your position within the government system of Los Angeles County, and what
you stand for as a man. You advocated that vision in your welcome message on the Sheriffs
web page:1

.
Finally, I appeal to you because you may be able to implement a solution for an intractable
situation, which I believe is a disgrace for our courts and our government.
.

09-10-11 Request for Judge David Yaffe - Please confirm the validity of papers filed under your name, but withouth your signature....

The records indicate that the arrest, on March 4, 2009, and the jailing, ever since, were conducted with no legal foundation, and that Att Richard I Fine is in fact being held "off the record" and "off the count" of persons held at the Twin Tower Jail. For the whole period of his jailing, Att Richard Fine was never held in the jail facility itself, where a formal count is conducted 3 times a day... Instead, he has been kept in isolation, in what is reported to be part of the jail hospital.

Twin Tower Jail - facade

The jailing is widely seen as retribution against Att Richard Fine, who was vocal and central in the efforts to expose and advertise the fact that ALL ~450 judges of LA County Superior Court secretly took for over a decade payments of about $45,000 per judge, per year, that were ruled by court "not permitted" and which were called by media "bribes".

FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice continue in their refusal to investigate evidence of widespread corruption in LA County, directly tied to the financial crisis and the LA County based - Countrywide Financial Corporation. Large body of credible evidence is available in re: conduct amounting to what would be deemed by court Racketeering by SANDOR SAMUELS - former Chief Legal Counsel, Countrywide, today - Associate General Counsel - Bank of America Corporation. Such alleged racketeering was and is directly related to the LA Superior Court and its judges.

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 21:41:15 -0700 To: [redacted]

From: joseph zernik

Subject: Fine v Sheriff Dept of Los Angeles County (2:09-cv-01914) - Request for confirmation of the validity and effect of papers filed on behalf of Judge David Yaffe and the LA Superior Court in Response/Answer to the petition.

The Honorable David Yaffe

Superior Court of California

For the County of Los Angeles

By email to: [redacted]

By email to: [redacted]

By fax to: [redacted]

Time is of the essence! Timely response requested no later than October 13, 2009, 5:00pm

Dear Judge Yaffe:

,

My name is Joseph Zernik, and I am of the people of the United States, and of the people of Los Angeles County, California. In past months I have made numerous requests to Clerk of the Court, John A Clarke, to inspect and to copy court records, which are public records by law, pursuant to Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc, (1978). Clerk John A Clarke refused to allow access to such records, without exception, and with no reason at all. Of particular relevance to this letter was the refusal to allow access to records pertaining to Marina v LA County (BS109420) and the jailing of Att Richard I Fine, since March 4, 2009, in the Twin Tower Jail.

.

Review of the records, overall, strongly suggests that the arrest and the jailing were conducted with no legal foundation, and that Att Richard I Fine is in fact being held "off the record" and "off the count" of persons jailed in the Twin Tower Jail.

.

Twin-Tower Jail - cell rowes

I was repeatedly denied access to the Registers of Actions in Sustain, to the Index of All Cases in Sustain, and to the Book of Judgments in Sustain (if any exists). Moreover, none of these records was filed by attorneys for the LA Superior Court and for Judge David Yaffe in their Response/Answer to Richard Fine's Habeas Corpus Petition at the U.S District Court, Los Angeles, Fine v Sheriff Dept of Los Angeles County (2:09-cv-01914) ("the Petition"). Furthermore, key records that were filed - originated not from the court file, but from elsewhere, were not certified by the clerk, and were not authenticated in any reasonable manner.

Twin Tower Jail - entrance

.

Therefore, under such unusual circumstances, I consider it only appropriate, for the furtherance of justice, that you would respond in person, directly, and clarify the matter. Surely you never intended to have a person jailed in violation of the law. Therefore, this notice also serves to ensure that you are reliably informed of such matter, and hoping that you initiate corrective actions as you deem fit:

.

1) Under the Petition you were listed as a party: ...Att Kevin McCormick was listed as your counsel:...

Please confirm that Att Kevin McCormick appeared in the Petition as your Counsel of Record and was authorized you to file papers in your name in court under the caption of the Petition.

.

2) On May 1, 2009, under the Petition, Att Kevin McCormick filed paper titled Answer, and/or Response (Dkt #15), copy of which can be viewed at the link below: ...

Please confirm that the May 1, 2009 Answer/Response (Dkt #15) was indeed filed with your authorization in your name.

...

6) With the Declaration (Dckt #16) Att McCormick filed records that pertained to litigation of Marina v LA County (BS109420), however, there is no evidence that such papers were ever part of court file, they were not certified by the clerk, and no Register of Actions was filed, which would have documented that such records were indeed part of the court file:

.

a) Exhibit A: March 4, 2009 Judgment and Order or Contempt in re: Richard I Fine (Dkt #16-2), copy of which can be viewed in the link below Please confirm that the record in (Dkt #16-2) - March 4, 2009 Judgment and Order of Contempt in re: Richard I Fine, was indeed a judgment that was served, noticed, and entered, in the manner that a judgment must be entered pursuant to the California law in order to make the judgment effectual.

.

Twin Tower jail - aerial view

b) Exhibit A: March 4, 2009 Remand Order (Dct #16-2), copy of which can be viewed in the link below. Please confirm that the record in (Dkt #16-2) - March 4, 2009 Remand Order, was indeed a Remand Order that was served, noticed, and entered, in the manner that a such order must be entered pursuant to the California law in order to make the order effectual.

.

c) Exhibit B: March 27, 2008 - Order Striking Notice of Disqualification (Dkt #16-3) Please confirm that the record in (Dkt #16-3) - March 27, 2008 Order Striking Notice of Disqualification, was indeed an Order that was served, noticed, and entered, in the manner that a such order must be entered pursuant to the California law in order to make the order effectual.

.

d) Exhibit D: March 4, 2009- Court Reporter's Transcript. Please confirm that the proceedings of March 4, 2009, recorded in teh Transcript, and judicial actions of that proceeding were indeed registered in the Register of Actions under the caption of Marina v LA County (BS109420), as an event that was completed, and as judicial actions, in a manner that would make them registered as a valid and effectual event and valid and effectual judicial actions in the Register of Actions in Sustain.

.

7) Please confirm that the Register of Actions of the caption of Marina v LA County (BS109420), is indeed a Register of Actions that records a valid and effectual caption that is a matter that is litigated under the Superior Court of California, and that you presided and preside in such caption as a duly assigned judge of the Superior Court of California for the County of Los Angeles.

.

8) Please confirm that the holding of Att Richard I Fine by the Los Angeles Sheriff Department conforms with the fundamentals of the law.

.

Time is of the essence! Timely response requested no later than October 13, 2009, 5:00pm

Respectfully,

Dated: October 11, 2009

La Verne, Los Angeles County, California

_____/S/ Joseph Zernik______

Joseph H Zernik

PO Box 526,

La Verne,California 91750

Fax: 801 998-0917

E-Mail: jz12345@earthlink.net

The full letter can be viewed at:

http://inproperinla.com/09-10-11-letter-judge-yaffe-confirm-papers-filed-under-his-name.pdf