FREE RICHARD FINE // LIBERAR RICHARD FINE
- von: The COD PROJECT and Dr Z
- empfänger: Sheriff Lee Baca, Los Angeles County, California
David Yaffe-Judge;Lee Baca-Sheriff
Please join the Facebook Cause: FREE THE LA-FIPs (Los Angeles Falsely Imprisoned Persons)
http://www.causes.com/causes/222335/about
INTRODUCTION - MULTI-IDIOMAS
English Intro:
Richard Fine - 70 year old, former US prosecutor, had shown that judges in Los Angeles County had taken "not permitted" payments (called by media "bribes"). On February 20, 2009, the Governor of California signed "retroactive immunities" (pardons) for all judges in Los Angeles. Less than two weeks later, on March 4, 2009 Richard Fine was arrested in open court, with no warrant. He is held ever since in solitary confinement in Los Angeles, California. No judgment, conviction, or sentencing was ever entered in his case.
Richard Fine attempted to have his habeas corpus reviewed by the United States courts, from the US District Court, through the US Court of Appeals, to the Supreme Court of the United States; however, all United States courts involved in the matter denied Richard Fine access to valid judicial review; instead, Richard Fine was subjected only to pretense judicial review, while false and deliberately misleading dockets were published online, affecting the pretense that Richard Fine’s case was indeed accorded valid and effectual judicial review and was duly denied.
On September 17, 2010, Richard Fine was released, again with no valid court order as foundation for the conduct of the Sheriff. Instead, it again documented the arbitrary and capricious nature of the imprisonment.
Castellano Intro:
Richard Fine - 70 anos de edad, ex fiscal de EE.UU., ha demostrado que los jueces de condado de Los Angeles habia tomado "no permitidos" pagos (llamado por los medios de comunicacion "sobornos"). El 20 de febrero de 2009, el gobernador de California firmo "inmunidades retroactivos" (perdones) para todos los jueces en Los Angeles. Menos de dos semanas despues, el 04 de marzo 2009 Richard Fine fue detenido en audiencia publica, sin mandato judicial. El se lleva a cabo desde entonces en confinamiento solitario en Los Angeles, California. Ninguna de las sentencias, la condena, o condena, se inscribio nunca en su caso.
Deutsch Intro:
Richard Fine - 70 Jahre alt, ehemaliger US-Staatsanwalt, hatte gezeigt, dass die Richter in Los Angeles County genommen hatte "nicht zulässig" Zahlungen (genannt von den Medien "Bestechungsgelder"). Am 20. Februar 2009 unterzeichnete der Gouverneur von Kalifornien "rückwirkende Immunität" (Verzeihung) für alle Richter in Los Angeles. Weniger als zwei Wochen später, am 4. März 2009 Richard Fine in öffentlicher Sitzung verhaftet, ohne Gewähr.Er ist seitdem in Einzelhaft in Los Angeles, Kalifornien statt. Kein Urteil, Verurteilung oder Verurteilung war immer bei ihm eingegangen.
Francaise Intro
Richard Fine - 70 ans, ancien procureur des États-Unis, a montré, que les juges de comté de Los Angeles avait pris «interdit» les paiements (appelé par les médias "pots de vin").Le 20 Février 2009, le gouverneur de Californie a signé «immunités rétroactives" (amnesties) pour tous les juges à Los Angeles. Moins de deux semaines plus tard, le 4 Mars, 2009 Richard Fine a été arrêté en audience publique, sans mandat. Il est détenu depuis en isolement cellulaire à Los Angeles, en Californie. Aucun jugement, condamnation ou la peine n'a jamais été inscrit dans son cas.
DOCUMENTS
The two records below, produced by the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department as the legal foundation for the holding of Richard Fine are alleged as fraud, each on its own. Moreover, the production of contradictory records by the two justice system agencies of Los Angeles County is alleged as additional fraud to top it off.
1) FALSE AND DELIBERATELY MISLEADING records provided by Sheriff Lee Baca in letter to Los Angeles County Supervisor, Michael Antonovich, in response to request for access to the California public records that were the non-existing warrant and booking records of Richard Fine. For over a year, Sheriff Lee Baca insists on providing false records - claiming that Richard Fine was arrested on location and by authority of the "San Pedro Municipal Court". No such court has existed for almost a decade:
[1] January 8, 2010 Repeat mailing of Supervisor Michael Antonovich response, including attachments that were communications by the Sheriff's Department of the County of Los Angeles.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25555341/
2) FALSE ON ITS FACE March 4, 2009 Judgment and Order of Contempt. Such judgment record is missing any authentication at all. It was stamped on its face "FILED" with the date of March 4, 2009, but signed on its last page by Judge Yaffe and dated March 24, 2009. Such judgment was never entered as required by California Code to make it "effectual for any purpose":
3) False and Deliberately misleading, unsigned, unauthenticated June 30, 2009 Order (Dkt #4), in
4) FALSE AND DELIBERATELY MISLEADING records issued by the court regarding the release of Richard Fine:
10-09-18 Richard Fine Released with no Due Process - Additional Evidence of False Imprisonment
MISSING DOCUMENTS
The case of Richard Fine documented a pattern of publication of false records in online public access systems, and denial of access to or missing true judicial records:
1) The Los Angeles Superior Court – in Marina v LA County (BS109420) published a false online "Case Summary", but denied access to the Register of Actions (California civil docket) in the case management system of the court.
2) The Sheriff of Los Angeles County – in re: Richard I Fine, (Inmate #1824367) published false online arrest and booking records in its "Inmate Information Center", but denied access to the true Los Angeles County Booking Record of Inmate Richard Fine.
3) The US District Court, Los Angeles – in Fine v Baca (2:09-cv-01914) published a false online "PACER docket", which the Clerk of the Court refuses to certify, but denied access to the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filing - the authentication records) in the case, and to the paper record, which was Richard Fine's commencing record - the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which was allegedly adulterated at the US District Court.
4) The US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit – in Fine v Sheriff (09-71692) and Fine v Sheriff (09-56073) published false online "PACER dockets", but denied access to the NDAs (Notices of Docket Activity - the authentication records), and also to critical records filed by respondents in the appeal.
5) The US Supreme Court – in Fine v Baca (09-A827) published a false online "docket" noting denials on both March 12, 2010 and April 23/26, 2010, which were not supported by the Court records in the case. Any evidence of valid judicial review of the Application was missing from the Court file.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35193676/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33772313/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34940014/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34834530/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35014599/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35149271/
COMPLAINTS
Below are links to two complaints filed with the office of US Attorney, Central District of California - for public corruption and deprivation of rights in the case of Richard Fine:
1) View complaint filed with US Attorney Office, alleging public corruption and deprivation of rights by the California Judicial Council and California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George, relative to their conduct in the habeas corpus at the US District Court:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33879469/
2) View the Complaint filed July 8, 2010 against Judge David Yaffe and Sheriff Lee Baca - for Public Corruption and Deprivation of Rights in re: Imprisonment of Richard Fine:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34057033/
3) View the Complaint filed July 1, 2010, against Counsel Danny Bickell, of the US Supreme Court, alleging public corruption and deprivation of rights relative to his conduct in the Application Fine v Baca (09-A827).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33772313/
PETITION
WE ASK SHERIFF LEE BACA TO USE HIS DUE AUTHORITY AND PROPERLY ADDRESS THE LEGAL, CIVIL, AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF AN AMERICAN, INMATE RICHARD FINE (CJ INMATE 1824367). WE PRAY SHERIFF LEE BACA REVIEW THE ARREST AND BOOKING RECORDS, AND IF FOUND NOT CONFORMING WITH THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE LAW - INITIATE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AND IMMEDIATELY RELEASE ATTORNEY RICHARD 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...
Executive Summary:
Instant petition is filed with 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 by the court of Judge David Yaffe 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 Attorney Richard Fine for contempt.
- On March 4, 2009 Judge David Yaffe indeed pronounced such sentence in open court, as evidenced in the Court Reporter's transcript. Through such oral directives, Judge Yaffe misled the Sheriff's Warrant Detail to arrest Attorney Richard Fine at 11:05 am - albeit - with no written, valid, and effectual warrant at all.
- On March 4, 2009, at 11:05 am, the Sheriff's Warrant Detail arrested Richard Fine in open court, at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, City of Los Angeles, albeit - with no warrant at all.
- On March 4, 2009 Judge Yaffe then left the courtroom, and likewise - left the Warrant Detail with no record as an adequate legal foundation for the arrest. Instead, Judge Yaffe proceeded to create a second, contradictory record in the court file. The court file to this date does not reflect any sentencing or jailing at all. In fact, the March 4, 2009 proceeding was entirely omitted from the record!
- On March 4, 2009, at 12:32 pm, the Sheriff's Warrant Detail, having no record as foundation for the arrest and jailing, recorded the arrest and booking of Richard Fine as if they had taken place on location, and pursuant to the authority of the non-existent "San Pedro Municipal Court." Such records were a false and deliberately misleading records, and out of compliance with the law. They had no valid court order or judgment as its foundation. No such court had existed for almost a decade! The false and deliberately misleading booking record is the main subject of instant petition.
- On March 4, 2009, at 4:31 pm, papers were received by the Sheriff's Department through an anonymous fax transmission, unauthenticated, and with no cover sheet, from "Judicial Services". Such papers reflected yet a third, again false and deliberately misleading set of retroactive records for the arrest and booking of Richard Fine. Such records included invalid records: (a) The March 4, 2009 Remand Order and (b) the March 4, 2009 Judgment for contempt.
On such background it was understandable why Sheriff Lee Baca refused to respond to Attorney Richard Fine's habeas corpus petition, and likewise - why Sheriff Lee Baca has refused to allow access to the California public records, which are the arrest and booking record of Richard Fine.
Pleading: We pray Sheriff Lee Baca review the arrest and booking records, and if such records are found failing to conform with the fundamentals of the law - take corrective actions and immediately release Attorney Richard 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.
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States.
Wenn Sie hier unterzeichnen, akzeptieren Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen von Care2
Sie können Ihre E-Mail-Abonnements jederzeit verwalten.
Sie haben Probleme, dies zu unterzeichnen? Informieren Sie uns.