09-12-29 Productive visit to the US District Court, Los Angeles, repeal of the First Amendment, and review of economic indicators...

 

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ US District Court - LA _ _MacArthur Park
 
LA: Cathedral _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __Hollywood __ _ __ _

Dear All:

I spent the day in downtown Los Angeles and Hollywood.  A visit to the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, one of my favorite hangouts, was as pleasant as ever.  The place was blessed with ample (albeit pricey) parking, walking distance to the courts.  The addition of numerous white, cafe' style umbrellas and folding chairs in the large plaza, definitely made that outdoor open space look much more inviting. It now looked like a fun place to spend a lazy morning or afternoon.  I considered that large open space one of the only public spaces in LA (albeit - in fact it was not a public space - it was surrounded by a high wall, fortress like). The other space was possibly MacArthur Park - albeit the latter was tainted by the 2007 May Day Melee (I believe that was the official name) of LAPD on paraders, picnickers, and TV crews. When I came back to the car it was already dark, and the cathedral with its alabaster windows looked magnificent at night.

At the US District Court I met John, Deputy Clerk.  He figured out right away that my questions "were well above his head". (Credit for the quote was given to Steven Goldman - Chief of White Collar Crime at LA FBI. He originally made the statement in late 2007 or early 2008 - relative to my allegations of widespread corruption of the Los Angeles Superior Court judges.)  Therefore, regardless of John's good intentions, I had to wait for Dawn Bullock, Records Supervisor, with whom I had been corresponding for the past half year or so, to get done with a meeting, which apparently was underway in the afternoon.  Once Ms Bullock arrived, she did her best to help as well.

Where things stand:
a) My requests to access four different paper court files (listed below) records, even my own case, were denied.  John initially claimed that the paper filings were destroyed immediately upon scanning.  When I suggested that it could not possibly be the case, he tracked back.  Nevertheless - I was denied access to any paper court file records.
b) My requests to access electronic court file records in CM/ECF - specifically - the NEFs of the same four court files, were likewise denied - even in my own case - with no explanation at all.
c) My requests to access records which documented the shredding of the claimed to be shredded paper court files, were likewise denied  - with no explanation at all.
d) My requests to access (to copy) paper printouts of NEFs in the same four cases, were likewise denied, with the exception of printouts of the NEFs in my own case, which I did obtain from Ms Bullock, and for which I was grateful.

Ms Bullock and I had a long technical discussion in re: NEFs, and access to NEFs:

• Ms Bullock stated that she had had to research the questions raised in our correspondence, and more so would have to research the questions raised today, since nobody had asked these question before.
• She stated that the foundation for the operation of CM/ECF at the California Central District was in the General Order 08-02. 
• From memory, I told her that such order was unusual among the General Orders - since it had no name of a judge who authored it, let alone a signature, and likewise, had no attestation by a clerk.  She checked it up, apparently found my memory to be still functional, and then told me that she would get back to me on the issue.
• She likewise stated that the denial of access to NEFs, except in one's own case, was founded in General Order 08-02.  I challenged her from memory on that issue as well.  I stated from memory that NEFs were mentioned only in paragraph "N", but nothing there referred to access, only to the NEF's power as certifying court records, and also as attestation by clerk of the court - in fact - authentication of service and entry of parties' papers, and court orders and judgments.  Again - Ms Bullock said that she would research the matter.
• I also raised the question regarding the display of general orders of the court online. It was always the same exact 50 general orders that were available on display for public viewing, when in fact, it was obvious that the total number of general orders of the court was much larger.  Ms Bullock was not clear on that issue, but promised me to provide a printout of the index of standing orders covering the period from 2001-2009.  She stated that such period was likely to cover all general orders pertaining to electronic filing at the California Central District.
• I also asked about the rules pertaining to issuing or not issuing of a valid NEF for a given record filed at court.  The response was that an NEF was automatically issued any time a clerk scanned a record into PACER.   I challenged that notion. It would have to be researched as well.
• Given that Terry Nafisi - Clerk of the Court, was on vacation till the beginning of the year, I was told that I would likely get a written response on my questions within a couple of weeks after that date.
• Although productivity could be seem by others as miserably low - if measured as the fraction of records which I successfully accessed vs those I requested access to, I considered today's visit to the court a milestone.  It was the first time I got access to my own NEFs (albeit - as printouts only access to electronic records was still denied) since March 2008!

The four cases which were the subject of my requests were, in chronological order:

1. US v City of LA et al (2:00-cv-11769) - the case that represented the federal response to the Rampart scandal (1998-2000) - the largest case of corruption of the justice system in the history of the US.  The case purportedly yielded the Consent Decree, which purportedly was the legal foundation for the operation of the Consent Decree Bureau from 2001 to 2009, and with it - the Office of Overseer for Civil Rights in LA.
2. Zernik v Connor (2:08-cv-01550) - where I sued some 10 judges of the LA Superior Court, David Pasternak, Countrywide's Sandor Samuels and Angelo Mozilo for what was claimed to amount to racketeering.
3. Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) - the habeas corpus petition of Richard Fine
4. In re: Fine (2:09-mc-00129) - disciplinary proceedings pertaining to disbarment of Richard Fine

In other words - all four cases pertained to alleged widespread corruption of judges of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, as reflected in cases of the US District Court, Los Angeles.

In conclusion:

1. It was a day of remarkable progress in exercising First Amendment rights. 
2. Some additional information was still promised to be provided in January 2010.
3. It was safe to say that First Amendment rights - of access to court records - to inspect and to copy - were largely curtailed in the past decade by the US judges, unilaterally, and with no authority at all. Moreover, such judicial activism took place with no notice to the American people. Such repeal of First Amendment rights was coordinated by the Administrative Office of the US Courts, in conjunction with installation of CM/ECF.

Bottom Line:
In the past year and a half I have been advocating instituting a "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" for Los Angeles County, to deal with widespread corruption of the judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court.  By the end of the day, it became clear that there was a need for such commission also at the national level - to deal with what took place at the US Courts in the past decade in conjunction with installation of CM/ECF.  I still believed that Richard Fine was the only credible candidate to head such commission, at the national level as well.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
Patriotic pics of sharon stone, beyonce knowles, and charlize theron,
To be added soon- deep house music!

P.S.
a) Since I spent the day downtown LA and in Hollywood, I engaged in my habitual surveying of shop-owners in re: the economy. I reserve my right to doubt US government data for at least 3 decades back - specifically - since the Reagan administration, where a major hacking took place of the central bureau of statistics, consistent with Reagan's stated policy "Facts are stupid things".
The number of closed store fronts was surprisingly high, particularly for a Christmas season.  The consensus was - situation in retail was bad, and it had been flat for the past three years, with no reason to believe any change was coming anytime soon.  I attribute the increase in closed store fronts not to any worsening of the economic conditions, but simply to decision by such business owners that it did not make sense to go on keeping the business open under ongoing conditions.
b) I had a major shopping success - found real nice warm slippers - you really need them, even in LA, when you get older! Not a case of frivolous consumption at all... It even possibly gave a small boost for the US economy! 

09-12-29 Thanks to Supervisor Antonovich, and request for additional inquiries on Sheriff Lee Baca

   

Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:55:54 -0800
To: "Michael D. Antonovich"
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Thanks, and request for additional inquiries on Sheriff Lee Baca

December 29, 2009

Michael D Antonovich, Supervisor
County of Los Angeles

Thanks, and request for additional inquiries on Sheriff Lee Baca

Please see attached.

Respectfully,

Joseph Zernik 

Linked Record:
http://inproperinla.com/09-12-29-req-sup-antonovich-addnl-inquiries-on-sheriff-s.pdf

09-12-28 Filed paper for review by comptuer science/legal scholars - in re PACER and CM/ECF

 

Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) of the United States Courts

Computerized infrastructure, a massive project, newly concluded at the United States courts established dual docketing/access systems – PACER & CM/ECF, separate and unequal digital litigation environments, where parties are arbitrarily segregated. It enabled widespread schemes to deprive persons of liberty and property, and undermined the integrity of banking institutions and financial markets. Examples are provided, which demonstrate the urgent need for publicly accountable validation (certified functional logic verification) of case management systems (CMSs) at the courts. 

Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) (Figure 1) is part of the system established by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts [1] through the dual docketing and access systems of PACER [2] & CM/ECF.[3] [4] NEFs provide the authentication of the service [5] of an electronically-filed papers by parties, and also – the authentication of service of the electronically-filed orders and judgments of the courts. However, NEFs are electronically provided only upon attorneys, who have been permitted by the court to participate in electronic filing in CM/ECF in a given case. Therefore, for permitted parties, the NEF replaced the traditional certificate of service or proof of service. Likewise, the graphic hand-signatures in traditional certificates of service (Figure 2) were replaced in NEFs by digital signatures, which visibly appear as RSA [6] encrypted alphanumeric strings (Figure 1). Therefore, an NEF bearing a valid RSA-encryption is today the critical instrument, which provides the authentication of court papers - as such that should be given "full faith and credit".[7] However, access to this critical instrument is restricted only to those permitted   access to CM/ECF, the NEFs were omitted from PACER – the public access system. In practice – such set up amounted to redaction from all publicly accessible United States courts papers any evidence of authentication. This and other features of the dual systems do not lend themselves to any plausible explanation that is consistent with honest conduct, consistent with due process of the law in United States courts.  It is further claimed that conditions, which were thus established, amounted to two separate and unequal digital litigation environments, where parties were arbitrarily segregated, with no authority at all.  Such segregation created the computerized infrastructure, which was routinely used by US courts to deprive persons of liberty and property (Figures 3,4), to undermine the integrity of the US banking system and financial institutions (Figures 5, 6).[8]

 

09-12-28 Texas is getting dangerously close - but they are still into kid's stuff - where LA County was a decade or two ago...

Idea on using seized items tops them all

By LISA FALKENBERG Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle

Oct. 8, 2009, 12:10AM

Share

 Print

Share

Del.icio.us

Digg

Twitter

Facebook

StumbleUpon

The allegations of highway piracy leveled against Shelby County District Attorney Lynda Russell last year were outrageous enough.

Now, it seems, the alleged pirate wants to use some of the loot to defend herself against the lawsuit accusing her of stealing it in the first place.

Russell and several other officials in the Deep East Texas county are accused of using the state's asset forfeiture law to pillage everything from cash to Blackberrys to jewelry from dozens of out-of-town motorists, many of them black, in a moneymaking scam run under the guise of drug-fighting.

Like a well-oiled speed trap, the confiscations were apparently so commonplace that the plaintiffs' attorney reportedly discovered pre-notarized, pre-signed police affidavits complete with blanks for an officer to fill in the items being collected.

Officials in the map dot of Tenaha seized property from at least 140 motorists between 2006 and 2008, according to the 2008 civil lawsuit, but had filed criminal charges against fewer than half.

Tenaha officials have defended the practice. Russell didn't return my call for comment. Her private attorney, Tom Henson, maintains his client did nothing wrong and, with regards to the racial profiling allegations, wasn't among the officers choosing who to stop.

But both the local county commission and the state have refused to defend Russell in the lawsuit. The county argues Russell is a state employee and should be represented by the attorney general.

“I think it's a frivolous lawsuit,” said newly appointed Shelby County Judge Rick Campbell, but he added, “I think that the commissioners are concerned about ‘what if it goes bad,' and ‘what if it bankrupts this county.' ”

Request denied

Meanwhile, the attorney general's office wrote Russell in November that “under the circumstances of this case, we are not able to extend representation to you.” The letter provided no details, and a spokesman wouldn't elaborate.

So, in August, Russell inquired with the attorney general about her options.

In the brief, Russell's assistant district attorney Kenneth Florence argues that either the county or the state should be required to defend her, but, if they don't, he asks if her use of asset forfeiture monies could be construed as an “official purpose” since the lawsuit arose out of acts she took while “fulfilling the scope of her duties.”

The audacity of the question is breathtaking. Russell's attorney fees in a civil lawsuit have nothing to do with crime-fighting, for which the Legislature intended such funds to be used.

The opposite purpose?

And, considering the severity of the allegations Russell — that she personally coerced innocent people into handing over their valuables or else face felony charges such as money laundering — the idea of defending her alleged actions with forfeiture money would seem to represent the very antithesis of the crime-fighting purpose.

(It's even more disturbing than a certain former DA's habit of using forfeiture funds for things like margarita machines and gifts for political buddies.)

The American Civil Liberties Union last week filed a brief opposing the request, and argued that the government — either the county or the state — should pony up to “account for the misconduct of officials who operate in its name.”

David Guillory, a Nacogdoches attorney who represents eight plaintiffs in the lawsuit seeking class-action status, said the money in Shelby County's forfeiture fund belongs to the people it was stolen from: his clients.

“Imagine someone breaking into your home and doing a bunch of damage and they get prosecuted for it,” he said. “Then they go hire Racehorse Haynes and use your wedding ring that they pawned to defend themselves.”

Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, whose bill to tighten the law regarding how forfeiture funds can be seized and used failed last session, called Russell's request “nuts.”

“I'm not sure she's dealing with a full deck of cards,” Whitmire said. “Her practice was deplorable, illegal, unjust and abusive. For her now to think she can use ill-gotten gains to defend herself, it's horrible.”

An unclaimed idea

Yet, there's some dispute about who came up with the idea to use forfeiture funds for Russell's defense. Florence, the ADA who wrote the AG request, said county commissioners asked him to include it. But the county judge said commissioners had nothing to do with it.

And he doubts it will fly with the AG: “Using common sense,” he said, “I would think not.”

lisa.falkenberg@chron.com

Linked site:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/falkenberg/6657701.html

09-12-27 Punitive psychiatry in the Soviet Union and in the US

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

психушка (slang)

Russian term
Translit	psikhushka
English	psychiatric hospital

In the Soviet Union, psychiatry was used for punitive purposes. Psychiatric hospitals were often used by the authorities as prisons in order to isolate political prisoners from the rest of society, discredit their ideas, and break them physically and mentally; as such they were considered a form of torture.^[1]

Psikhushka (Russian: психушка) is a Russian colloquialism for psychiatric hospital. It has been occasionally used in English since the dissident movement in the Soviet Union became known in the West.

History

Psikhushkas had been already used since the end of the 1940s (see Alexander Esenin-Volpin) and during the Khrushchev Thaw period in the 1960s. One of the first psikhushkas was the Psychiatric Prison Hospital in the city of Kazan. It was transferred to NKVD control in 1939 under the order of Lavrentiy Beria. ^[2] On April 29, 1969 the head of KGB, Yuri Andropov, submitted to the Central Committee of CPSU a plan for creating a network of psikhushkas.^[3]

The official Soviet psychiatry allegedly abused the diagnosis of sluggishly progressing schizophrenia (вялотекущая шизофрения), a special form of the illness that supposedly affects only the person's social behavior, with no trace of other traits: "most frequently, ideas about astruggle for truth and justice are formed by personalities with a paranoid structure," according to the Moscow Serbsky Institute professors (a quote ^[4] from Vladimir Bukovsky's archives). Some of them had high rank in the MVD, such as the infamous Danil Luntz, who was characterized by Viktor Nekipelov as "no better than the criminal doctors who performed inhuman experiments on the prisoners in Naziconcentration camps" ^[4].

The sane individuals who were diagnosed as mentally ill were sent either to regular psychiatric hospitals or, those deemed particularly dangerous, to special ones, run directly by the MVD. The treatment included various forms of restraint, electric shocks, electromagnetic torture^{[clarification needed]}, radiation torture^{[clarification needed]}, entrapment, servitude, a range of drugs (such as narcotics, tranquilizers, andinsulin) that cause long lasting side effects, and sometimes involved beatings. Nekipelov describes inhuman uses of medical procedures such as lumbar punctures.

At least 365 sane people were treated for "politically defined madness" in the Soviet Union, and there were surely hundreds more ^[4].

_____________________

Current practice in the US

In recent years the custom has been increasingly used in the United States, or at least - the evidence showed it was used in Los Angeles County. Two recent inmates in the Los Angeles Central Men's jail were attorneys who filed complaints against corrupt California judges in United States courts. One - Richard Isaac Fine is held for 10 month (as of December 2009) under false hospitalization with no warrant at all.^[15]. The other - Ronald Gottschalk was help from about October 8, 2009 to November 6, 2009 in a psychiatric ward. ^[16]. In parallel, the Los Angeles County California Sheriff Department has refused to allow access to arrest and booking papers of the two inmates, as required by California Public Records Act ^[17].

In his case as well- there was no warrant at all. Although no statistics are available regarding the practice, anecdotal evidence from Los Angeles County and elsewhere suggested that it was much more common than the public may believe. The practice is doubly effective, since after such forced psychiatric hospitalization, and diagnosis by prison staff that the prisoner is mentally unstable, any future damaging evidence he/she would present would be undermined.

Linked Records:
15. ^ See: Booking No.: 1824367 Last Name: FINE First Name: RICHARD Middle Name: I at: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Departmenthttp://app4.lasd.org/iic/ajis_search.cf
16 ^ See: Booking No.: 2088144 Last Name: GOTTSCHALK First Name: RONALD Middle Name: NORTON at: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Departmenthttp://app4.lasd.org/iic/ajis_search.cfm
17 ^ http://inproperinla.com/09-12-23-req-supervisor-antonowitch-inquiry-on-sheriff-baca-letter-s.pdf

09-12-27 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Isaac Fine

  
Richard Fine_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _Montclair Plaza

Review of the back and forth in re: Deleting any mention of Richard Isaac Fine from Wikipedia was instructive.  It demonstrated clearly that there were two parallel realities. It also brought into focus what the differences between them were. The five main points that were repeatedly removed, no matter what:
1) Richard Fine started his legal career as a US prosecutor in the anti-trust division of the US Department of Justice, and was assigned in that job to investigate matters in Los Angeles. Richard Fine later founded the anti-trust office of the City of Los Angeles, serving the city in that capacity.
2)  Richard Fine was disbarred on a charge of Moral Turpitude - albeit in an unprecedented creative liberal construction, Moral Turpitude encompassed filing complaints against California state judges for corruption.
3) Retroactive Immunities/Pardons were enacted in February 2009 - to all Los Angeles judges - as the outcome of the exposure by Richard Fine of payments to such judges, which were "not permitted".
4) No warrant was ever issued for the arrest of Richard Fine - although he has been confined for ten months by now.
5) Richard Fine was denied access to pen and paper - therefore he could neither write nor sign either his habeas corpus or his petition to the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit.
___________
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Isaac Fine [1]

The original reason claimed for deletion - "local story". Later, "lacking notability" was added.  A quick link for the difference between the current and a previous version I entered was provided below [2] Below are some of my comments:

• OPPOSE DELETE - keep wikipedia in touch with reality...

I was the one who initiated the article, albeit it was edited, modified, added to etc by others. I challenge the move to delete on the following grounds:

1) The man reversed or prevented single handed over a billion dollars in false taxation on Californians. Not a feat that could be claimed by many.

2) Starting 2001, the man single handed exposed, advertised and denounced the secret payments to all ~450 judges and ~120 commissioners in Los Angeles that required pardons for civil and criminal liabilities for all judges and commissioners. This is the most populous county in the US,with more than 10 million residents, and the largest superior court in the US. In such county, and such court - all judges were in fact declared pardoned criminals. The story this far already was worthy of inclusion in wikipedia - it was unprecedented in US history.

3) Less than two weeks after the signing of the pardons on February 20, 2009, the man was arrested with no warrant, while appearing in court, and he has been held with no conviction and no sentencing ever since, under the guise of false hospitalization, with no medical justification. That too, I hope, was not common, albeit, I have not data regarding the prevalence of human rights abuses of this sort in the US. It is exactly the kind of data that were often deleted from wikipedia and other published sources. (see below)

It would be regrettable if wikipedia decided to delete this article, but would also be a repeat of my experience in an attempt to mention extreme Human Rights abuses that took place under Katrina in the article on Human Rights in the US. A one sentence mention, in a multi page article, which referenced articles in the Nation and a UN official report, was repeatedly attacked and deleted, to the point that I found it worthless to insist on its inclusion. The human rights abuses that were referenced there were most likely the worst in the US in the past decade. Prisoners were left to drown in their cells, the guards left them locked when the water was rising, and abandoned the prison. You could not find the story ever mentioned in the English version wikipedia, with pages and pages on human rights virtues of the US. If the trend goes on, you were likely to find the English Wikipedia supporting education of young Americans in a bubble that is out of touch with reality as perceived by the rest of mankind. Deletion of the Richard Fine story, would confirm a picture of wikipedia trying to portray the US as clean and good as mom and apple pie. It just ain't the reality, folks.

I hope you share a vision of wikipedia as a place where people, especially young people can go and find true data on significant subjects. Not only celebrity stories and trivia pursuit. We have sufficient other sources for that.

The story was referenced in brief under biography of Carlos R. Moreno,in wikipedia, as the reason that undermined his credibility as US Supreme Court candidate. Surely it was no "local story."

Finally - I invite anybody to google the web for Richard Fine and see the level of interest around the country in the story. However, many of the sites can be confusing in providing partial information, and not allowing to grasp the full story. There was need for one place where people could get a short, reliable information on the story as a whole -that was exactly the function of a good encyclopedia.

Suggested action - I hope that the article would not be deleted, it would be a sign of politization, in the worst sense of the word, of wikipedia. I would be grateful for any constructive suggestions. I could make efforts to beef the article up with more references, albeit, it already had many more references, but some were deleted by others.

I request that the issue be forwarded for moderation using whatever procedures were available in Wikipedia.

InproperinLA (talk) 09:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Delete:
  

I find it difficult to accept the comment above at face value. "the single event" has lasted more than a decade. It involved the urgent need to issue pardons to ALL judges of the largest superior court in the US, in fact - declaring them pardoned criminals. It is unprecedented in US history. Calling is lacking in notability is just not credible criticism.
It goes more along the lines of deleting from the English wikipedia uncomfortable facts about the U.S. - example - the Katrina Human Rights atrocities mentioned above. I guess it was also, local, single event, was never reported in US media in any significant way, therefore - was lacking in notability... Only difference - in the Katrina story, the victims were dead, the living persons criticism could not be used.
It would be really unfortunate if one could find these stories in the non-English wikipedia, but not in the English version.
InproperinLA (talk) 00:54, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose delete
  

I guess by wiki standards I was the creator or progenitor, however, many others changed, edited, added and deleted, to the point that I could not call it my own child. Also, in view of the comments above, and with generous and gracious help from PMJ, the article was now transformed into a new trim and slim figure, regardless of holidays overeating!
A major mop up job on the references, in view of comments above, and again - PMJ's helpful hints - is still planned for this long holiday weekend.
Therefore - I suggest that anybody interested in the discussion above take a look at the article again
In case deletion is still on the agenda - I request moderation following whatever procedures are available in wikipedia.
InproperinLA (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Delete
  

After reading and writing, i browsed a bit the list of proposed deletions in this site, and found here at #82 Montclair plaza - a shopping mall that I happen to know and love. However, I never considered it notable enough to be an entry in an encyclopedia. I was not sure what the final editors' consensus was regarding my favorite shopping experience, but finding it here surely gave me an entirely new perspective on the nature of wikipedia. In view of possible, or likely notability of Montclair Plaza, I would repeat my request: In case deletion is still on the agenda - I request moderation following whatever procedures are available in wikipedia.
InproperinLA (talk) 21:17, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

• Keep in the version linked below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Isaac_Fine&oldid=334124004

Quick link for review of the difference between the current and above versions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Isaac_Fine&action=historysubmit&diff=334218213&oldid=334124059

Regarding striking out and such - I thought this was not going by popularity vote, so what the striking out for? The "Keep" title is to indicate the content of the opinion, not meant as a vote.

As to opinion: I suggest that Richard Fine be declared a shopping mall, which would be as close to to the true fact in this matter as the current exposition in wikipedia. As a shopping mall he would also be automatically notable. 19:50, 27 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added byInproperinLA (talk • contribs)

Linked Records:

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Richard_Isaac_Fine

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Isaac_Fine&action=historysubmit&diff=334218213&oldid=334124059