Related articles by this Examiner
Dr. Joseph Zernik is again setting the record straight about the false imprisonment of Los Angeles FIP political prisoner Attorney Richard Fine, “the people’s lawyer.” Judge Yaffe’s order to forcibly hospitalize Fine came after the healthy attorney noted that the Judge took illegal money from an interested party in the County of Los Angeles case.
Immediately following his sentencing, an entourage of ten or more Sheriff Deputies and Court personnel who had been standing in waiting, surrounded the slightly built but healthy, grandfatherly, 69-year old gentleman attorney and placed him in handcuffs.
Sarah Randag reports today that one year ago, “a Los Angeles County superior court judge sentenced lawyer Richard Fine to jail indefinitely after he refused to provide personal financial information in an attorney fee dispute,” a statement disputed by human rights defender and independent legal research analyst, Dr. Joseph Zernik who has helped lead the petition for Fine’s freedom. (See: Dupré, Human target: Petition to free Atty R Fine kidnapped-tortured in LA)
Today marks one year that Fine has been confined. The antitrust attorney, Fine is one of LA’s up to 30,000 FIPs, falsely imprisoned persons. Yesterday, LA County Sheriff Lee Baca released hundreds of prisoners before their terms were up, saying that he did so due to budget problems.
The 9th U.S. District Court of Appeal has denied Fine’s petition for release, and the Supreme Court refuses to intervene.
Astonishingly when U.S. lawyers and judges involved in the war crime of torture have not been disabrred, on February 14, the Supreme Court ordered that 70-year old Fine be disbarred.
Columnist Dan Walters writes in the Sacramento Bee, “The State Bar of California indicates that he has been disbarred. Fine has been a longtime critic of Los Angeles County’s practice of giving its judges nearly $50,000 in extra pay over their state salaries, and that it creates a conflict of interest for judges hearing cases involving the county. And, on top of that, Fine says that because of the extent of his criticism, it’s a conflict for any judge to hear a case involving him.” (emphasis added)
“A state appellate court agreed with Fine in 2008, saying the payments violated California’s constitution. But the legislature passed a retroactive authorization of the payments last year,” reports Randag.
Fine has petitioned for his release, but the California Supreme Court refuses to interfere, and the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has denied his petition.
Fine holds the key to his jail cell,” Kevin McCormick, an attorney for the Los Angeles court, said in a brief filed with the federal appellate court. “By simply agreeing to answer the questions and produce documents concerning his assets, that he has a legal obligation to provide, his coercive confinement will end.”
In repsonse to above report, Dr. Joseph Zernik writes today, “Please stand corrected, being the ABA Journal, regarding the facts in the Richard Fine Case:
1) Richard Fine was never sentenced for Contempt, there is no valid court record such as judgment or sentencing in the case – Marina v LA County (BS109420). Neither is there any Assignment Order for the Judge in the case, or Appointment Order for the purported Debtor Examiner, Murray Gross, whose authority Mr Fine therefore justly disputed.
2) Neither was the March 4, 2009 proceeding that was described by media as the “Sentencing Hearing”, ever included in the informal, online, litigation chronology (which comes with a disclaimer).
3) However, the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles continues to deny access to the Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Marina v LA County (BS10940) the case, in ancillary proceedings of which Mr Fine was purportedly arrested, in disregard of First Amendment rights.
4) Neither was there ever a valid warrant for the arrest of Mr Fine.
5) Accordingly, the Sheriff’s Department denied for months access to the Arrest and Booking records, in disregard of California Public Records Act.
6) Even after numerous complaints, the Sheriff’s Department insisted on keeping falsely publishing online that Richard Fine was arrested at and by the non-existent Municipal Court of San Pedro, when media reported that the arrest took place on March 4, 2009, in downtown Central District of the Superior Court Courthouse, in the city of Los Angeles.
7) In response to inquiry by Supervisor Antonovich, the Sheriff’‘s Bureau finally responded that California Public Records Act did not require it to produced records which did not exist.
8) In her scholarly June 12, 2009 Report and Recommendation in Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) – the habeas corpus petition of Richard Fine – US Magistrate Carla Woehrle, never mentioned the word Warrant in a case highlighted by warrantless arrest, neither did it mention the caption of the case of the Superior Court , which purportedly was under reviewed. Moreover, the habeas corpus petition was concluded without the Register of Actions of Marina v LA County ever being produced, therefore, with no foundation at all for any other record in the case.
9) Respondent Sheriff refused to respond on the habeas corpus petition.
10) The Superior Court and Judge David Yaffe joined the case as Intervenors, through false representation by Attorney Kevin McCormick, was failed to file certification of Counsel of Record, failed to ever provide any declaration by his clients, or ever file any record provided by his clients. In short, he was likely employed as false counsel, with ” no communications with client” clause.
11) Accordingly – none of the Minutes, Orders, Judgment in Fine v Sheriff, was ever entered as valid court records – all were served on Richard Fine with no valid NEFs (Notice of Electronic Filing) at all. Neither would Terry Nafisi, Clerk of the Court allow access to inspect and to copy the NEFs in Fine v Sheriff, in disregard of First Amendment rights.
12) The Clerk of the US District Court, Los Angeles, Terry Nafisi, has continuously refused to answer on the question whether the online PACER docket in Fine v Sheriff was an honest, valid, and effectual record of the US District Court. Such docket would not be certified either.
13) Clerk Nafisi would not answer on whether Donna Thomas, who was listed as conducting transactions on the docket of Fine v Sheriff, was at all authorized as a Deputy Clerk of the Court.
14) Likewise, in Fine v Sheriff (09-71692) Mr Fine’s petitions at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, – June 30, 2009 Order denying the petition, issued in the names of Kozinski, Paez and Tallman, was an unsigned order, which was served with no NEF at all.
In short, the case of Attorney Richard Fine is a historic landmark and a textbook case in providing a catalog of the ingenious methods employed by the corrupt justice system to pervert justice.
The writer reported on February 10, 2010:
Dr. Zernik, Ph.D. is questioning Los Angeles Sheriff Department Chief Medical Officer Dr. Clark about claims of the Department’s false hospitalizations of both Fine and Ronald Gottschalk the two attorneys who had filed complaints alleging corruption of LA judges subjecting 98 million Californians to be stripped of their Constitutional and human rights.
Attorneys Richard Fine and Ronald Gottschalk had separately filed complaints alleging LA Superior Court judge corruption. They were both falsely hospitalized with no probable medical cause according to human rights defender Dr. Zernik in his letter to Dr. Clark.
“If Fine was not a prisoner of political conscience a year ago, he certainly has become one,” concludes Dan Walters.
Dr. Zernik concludes stating, “In short, the case of Attorney Richard Fine is a historic landmark and a textbook case in providing a catalog of the ingenious methods employed by the corrupt justice system to pervert justice.”
Deborah Dupré holds a B.S, M.S. and post-graduate Cont.ED diploma from U.S. and Australian universities, She has been a human and civil rights advocate for over 25 years in the U.S., Vanuatu and Australia. Feel free to support her work at www.DeborahDupre.com and by subscribing to Dupré’s reports. She respectfully requests posting the link to this site (rather than entire article) unless republishing permission is granted. (Email info@DeborahDupre.com.) Dupré’s recent book, Operation H1N1: Vaccine Liberty or Death, with a comprehensive history of non-consensual human experimentation in the U.S., is available at DeborahDupre.com.
Learn more: Read Human target: Petition to free Atty R Fine kidnapped-tortured in LA and sign the petition. Urgent action required: Sunday school teacher grandmother Linda Carty is rapidly approaching execution by lethal injection in Texas for being recruited (by DEA) as an informant and then framed, has prompted the UK based charity organization, Reprieve to launch a global Save Linda Carty campaign. Only the U.S. Supreme Court can help bring justice to this case and only the reader and others can prompt the Supreme Court to do the right thing. Please join with just a click.
- Brain washing
- Child abduction
- False arrest
- Justice:Denied magazine reports on miscarriages of justice, including false imprisonments
- Prosser on Torts website