Friday, April 23, 2010

Rally Protesting California Judicial Corruption A Satisfying Success; Dr. Fine, However, Still In Search Of An Honest Judge

 As reported by Troy Anderson for the Los Angeles Daily News:
"Chanting 'This is America, not Russia,' about 75 people gathered Tuesday morning outside the downtown Stanley Mosk Courthouse to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to free former taxpayer advocate attorney Richard I. Fine from jail."

"In Washington, D.C., about 50 people staged a similar protest on the steps of the high court, which is scheduled to meet Friday to decide whether Fine should be released."

Full Disclosure Network's Leslie Dutton caught all the action on video and filed an in-depth report:
Supporters of jailed anti-trust attorney Richard I. Fine launched the first of several planned protests across the nation today in front of the Superior Court building. Fine has been held in solitary "coercive confinement" in the Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail at the order of State Superior Court Judge David Yaffe, who had accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal payments from the County of Los Angeles. Fine has been held for over a year, without charges being filed, without conviction, without bail, hearing date or release date.

Larry John, filed "torture" complaint with UN Human Rights Commission
on behalf of "political prisoner" Dr. Richard I. Fine
At the request of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, the Supreme Court Justices will have Fine's application for "Stay of Execution" submitted before them on Friday, April 23, 2010 and announce their decision on Monday, April 26th, as to their decision whether to deny his application, act immediately to release him, or to take up matter for a full court review. There is long standing Supreme Court precedent:  IN RE FARR (1974) that held no person shall be held more than five days in "coercive confinement" for civil contempt of court. In the case of William T. Farr, an L. A. Times and Herald Examiner reporter refused to divulge his sources, under Judicial order, on moral grounds. Richard Fine contends that Judge Yaffe's order was illegal as he refused to recuse himself from the case where he had accepted illegal payments from a party to the case (County of Los Angeles).

Janette Isaacs, L.A. event organizer

U.S. Supreme Court Sicced on Corrupt California Judges by Richard I. Fine's "Petition for Writ of Certiorari"

Richard I. Fine's "Petition for Writ of Certiorari" was accepted by the Clerk of the US Supreme Court for docketing:
Background Summary:
"Judges for the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, who are state-elected, began receiving substantial monies, mischaracterized as 'judicial benefits”', from LA County in the late 1980s.  LA County began winning virtually all lawsuits filed against it when the same were decided by judges and not juries.  The payments were found to be unconstitutional in October 2008.  The California Legislature subsequently passed Senate Bill SBx2-11, which retroactively granted immunity from criminal prosecution for the estimated ten million felonies committed, while purportedly authorizing the payments. 

"Meanwhile, a homeowners association had sued LA County and others concerning an environmental impact report and Supervisors' illegal votes approving same.  The judge, refusing to recuse himself despite having received almost $100,000 from a defendant in the case, ultimately ruled in defendants’ favor.  Appellate judges then knowingly misconstrued the facts and protected the trial judge.

Question Presented for Review:

"Whether the trial court judge should have recused himself in the case of Marina Strand Colony II Homeowners Association v. County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Superior Court case No. BS109420, in which the judge received illegal payments from the County of Los Angeles, a party to the case; and whether he should also have recused himself in the ancillary contempt proceeding in which he 'judged his own actions.'”
Despite the fact that Fine's Petition was received on March 23rd, Respondent Sheriff Leroy D. Baca has been granted until May 17th to file his response (see Docket), if any.

Still, the bottom line is simply this:  There is NO honest answer other than "yes" to the Question Presented, and the legal fiction of SBx2-11's immunity doesn't change that inasmuch as recusal is not one of the issues it covers, the Ninth Circuit's pretense to the contrary notwithstanding.

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Richard Fine Interviewed

View Full Disclosure Network's video of Leslie Dutton's in-person interview of Dr. Richard I Fine conducted at Men's Central Jail of Los Angeles County.  Full Disclosure finally obtained the interview after Judicial Watch filed a Federal complaint against Sheriff Leroy D. Baca, who'd refused access to Dr. Fine for over a year.  Baca claimed Judge David Yaffe ordered this arrangement, but caved in to the interview demand in the face of Full Disclosure's lawsuit.)

Next, view Part 1 of the three-part video of Richard Fine interview of April 16, 2010 on  (Two-part video of interview of Full Disclosure Network's Leslie Dutton at the same link, along with the following two segments of the Fine interview.)

Also view Full Disclosure Network's library of videos regarding its investigation of judicial corruption throughout California.

EXCITING UPDATE:  Website visitor traffic reports for Monday, April 19th, show that the expose' of judicial corruption and the airing of Dr. Fine's plight have FINALLY gone viral.  Mid-day website traffic averaged around 1,000 new visitors PER HOUR. 

In giddy celebration, a call was placed to, and a message left with, the office of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger with this news, his being the final signature on Senate Bill SBX2-11 which pardoned all the felons last February.  We'd like his opinion on gubernatorial candidate Attorney General Jerry Brown's attempts to cover up the payment scheme conspiracy, but we're not holding our breath we'll ever get an answer to that question.

REMINDER:  This battle costs money!!  (ONE complete Supreme Court filing cost over $3,000 to produce a product in compliance with the rules.)  Please consider making a donation of any amount, large or small.  Even the smallest contributors will someday be able to proudly report that they actually helped save our county.  Perhaps you'd like to tell your own future generations that you did the same?  Dr. Fine has sacrificed practically everything ... FOR US.  Pay it forward and consider sharing a few dollars to help protect and defend the Constitution ... and the America of tomorrow.

To make a donation, go to the official "Free Richard Fine" website and scroll down to the middle of the page for the PayPal Donate Button, or for instructions on how to mail a check.

All donors will eventually receive a personal "thank you" from Dr. Fine, but we have to get him out of jail and put the judges on the run first.

See you at a rally!

Thursday, April 15, 2010

"Free Richard Fine" Rally Set for Tuesday at LA County Courthouse & US Supreme Court Steps

Sick and tired of corrupt judges and even-worse governmental fraud perpetuated by government employees against We the People?

Posted at:
by Ron Kaye   
Wednesday, 14 April 2010 06:52

Jailed more than 13 months ago without charge or bail, Richard Fine finally gets his day in court April 23 when the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court consider whether he should be freed from coercive detention for refusing to comply with Superior Court Judge David Yaffe's order to disclose his personal financial information.

Supporters of Fine, an anti-tax crusader who exposed illegal payments to Superior Court judges, are holding a rally for Fine next Tuesday at the County Courthouse at 111 N. Hill St., downtown.

Peruse the above link for more information.

Friends, Family, Fellow Activists, Advocates and Community Supporters are welcome.

This is a peaceful rally/protest where we will be exercising our First Amendment rights to free speech.

No weapons, bullhorns or any other devices which may disturb the peace.

Lacking motivation?  Together let us recall just this small part of the story:

Developer Jerry B. Epstein and entities under his control made political campaign contributions to LA County Supervisors Michael D. Antonovich and others not long before the Board of Supervisors was to vote on an environmental impact report affecting two of Epstein's multi-million-dollar development projects in Marina del Rey (a suburb of Los Angeles).

Those Supervisors who received money from Epstein blatantly broke the law when voting to approve Epstein's development projects.  (This was made worse by the fact that no benefit to LA County taxpayers was shown, essentially giving away all the income earned by the taxpayers' public property over the life of Epstein's decades-long sweetheart leases of prime real estate.)

Neighbors of the dreaded development behemoths, members of a homeowners' association, hired Richard I. Fine, well-known for his wins as a taxpayer's advocate attorney, to object to the illegal vote on the environmental report.  The case was brought before LA Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe, whose ruling completely ignored the vote, not to mention the other egregious issues alleged.

The Supervisors' vote was unarguably illegal, yet Yaffe ignored the entire issue in his ruling approving the continuation of the development projects.

What possible motive could Yaffe have had for making such a ridiculously unbelievable decision?  Can there be any other reason but the $46,000 he received from the same Supervisors yet failed to report that same year?

Know this:  Judges are "state" employees, and the California Constitution plainly states that the judges may only be paid by the State (for several reasons).  LA County Supervisors have been deliberately violating that provision of the Constitution for over twenty years now, and every judge in LA County has been receiving the same bribes that Yaffe has (also at considerable cost to We the Taxpayers). 

Did we say "bribes"?  Yes, we certainly did.  Unless a reader submits a better (printable) suggestion in the Comments, below, we'll stick with that term to describe the relationship between judges who are illegally paid and Supervisors (in the form of "LA County") hardly ever lose a lawsuit filed against them when the judge is able to keep the decision from the hands of a jury.  (The County's own Litigation Cost Management Reports exposed this outrageous fact, and County lawyers have even been rumored to have bragged about their win rate in appellate briefs.)

How's that for "integrity of the court"?!  Sounds more like "bribery", "obstruction of justice", "misappropriation of funds", "pure arrogance" and other such things to us.

Decent Los Angeleans will hopefully turn out in droves at the Rally to Free Richard Fine (most likely best attended between 9:00 a.m. and 11:30 a.m., we hear) next Tuesday, April 20th on the steps of Yaffe's own courthouse.  Media inquiries have begun arriving, a positive omen to Fine's support team who've struggled along with Dr. Fine lo these many months (though to nowhere near the drastic cost that Yaffe and his cabal of crooked cohorts have extracted from Dr. Fine, by any means).

Final note:  Yaffe ordered Dr. Fine to pay sanctions to LA County of $47,000.  Dr. Fine has now been behind bars, in a single cell, and accompanied by two specially-detailed armed guards anytime he's able to leave the cell, for over thirteen months now in a battle over his exposure of the Ten Million Felonies committed by California judges and Supervisors.

How much has it cost to house Dr. Fine all this time?  (Another cost borne, by the way, by ... wait for it ... WE THE TAXPAYERS!)

Sheesh!  We know they think little of our intellect, and they've even managed to get lower level media (the Los Angeles Times comes to mind) to not report in any meaningful fashion about the brink of collapse their cover-up shenanigans have brought us to, but they still haven't picked up on the fact that their credibility is far past "shot" and well into the realm of gossipy entertainment. 

Behind-the-scenes bettors are wagering on who will be the first sacrificial lamb, and when he/she will be forced to go.  Our bet is that it will be David P. Yaffe, the man who single-handedly brought the most dishonor on the court when he was forced to admit under oath that, but for one small exception, he'd always ruled in LA County's favor when it was a defendant in his courtroom.  And given Yaffe's delightful personality, it would be hard to identify a more-deserving candidate.  (But we could argue all day over who'll be second, third, fourth ... .)

Until anon, fellow decent Americans; we'll get there.

Heartwrenching Plea by Richard Fine's Daughter to US Supreme Court Concerning Her Father's Freedom and Her Country's Future

Sayeth Victoria Fine:

"Please remember, that as you review my father’s case on April 23, you are considering the ... fate of a father, a husband, a friend and a deeply concerned citizen, [one] who has dedicated his life to upholding the decisions you make in your court."

The preceding portion of her plea to the Supreme Court may be viewed on Facebook.

Irony alert:  Victoria alludes to an important point, which is that if the Court refuses to release Dr. Fine, it will have effectively thumbed its collective nose at its own precedent which, prior to this conference, left no doubt that exemplary integrity is the only acceptable behavior any judge may exhibit and still hold his seat.

Being confronted with what to do with 2,100 corrupt judges will surely be a grave moment for the Supremes next Friday, but there will be no future case by which the Court might restore its own integrity if it cannot find the courage NOW to enforce the basic human tenets that "right" does indeed trump "might", and that no innocent man should ever be forced to spend a single minute behind bars ... most especially for political reasons.  It's humiliating, and it occurs only when small men are scared.

And let's not forget that California's citizens deserve to be protected from the theft of their monies and to have their Constitutional right to due process restored.  There's no such thing while crooked judges populate the courtrooms.

Although the facts in the case are convoluted, the solutions are simple.  We will learn soon enough whether the Supreme Court Justices also consider themselves above honoring their sacred oaths.  Meanwhile, we sincerely hope they grant Victoria Fine's heartfelt plea.

Monday, April 12, 2010

Supreme Court to Consider Richard Fine's Petition for Release

Okay, to catch up on recent events:

In late December 2009, Dr. Richard I. Fine filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court to be released from jail pending the outcome of the appeal process.  It was summarily denied by Justice Kennedy.  Or at least that seems to have been the case.  In actuality, Deputy Clerk Danny Bickell (Google him!) sent a letter advising that the petition had been denied, and there is no Order in the Court's file, signed or otherwise, addressing the true legal outcome.

Regardless, Dr. Fine then requested that the clerk transfer the file to Justice Ginsburg for consideration.  The clerk did so, according to the docket, on March 30th.  On April 7th, the docket was updated to include the notification that the case had been "distributed for conference of April 23, 2010."

On April 23rd, therefore, the nine ultimate guardians of American's right to due process, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, will consider whether corrupt California judges and county supervisors will finally be brought to heel.  Will the justices be able to rein in any inclination to protect their embarrassing and felonious brethren?  Will they be able to look past the arrogance of the unindicted judges who cavalierly assume the justices will compromise their own principles and legacies just to keep some crooks in robes out of jail?  They knowingly stole taxpayers' hard-earned dollars and granted themselves retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution and civil liability when they were finally caught.  Yet who goes to jail?  The one person, obviously, who refuses ... on principle ... to violate his sworn oath or kowtow to the faux muckety-mucks who've somehow fooled themselves into believing they are superior to their employers, We the People.  Luckily, November is just around the corner.

Here's hoping and praying the honorable justices will show all Americans what "integrity of the court" truly means. We'll know soon after April 23rd whether or not they appreciate the gravity of their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution.

The extermination of our basic right to due process, and to criticize judges who appear to have committed numerous high felonies over twenty years, MUST be addressed NOW.  The alternative future is truly too horrible to contemplate.  One thing is certain:  Historians will record this monstrous corruption scheme that, given the involved ten million or so felonies, surely at least qualifies for a Guiness record or something.  They will also debate at length the actions taken by the various entities and individuals Dr. Fine turned to.  Generations of descendants will bear the awful stigmas throughout their lives if their ancestors today fumble a momentous decision and sanction the very evil behavior that is, in large part, a perfect example of what ails America these days. 

We pray for the survival of Lady Justice.  So does Lady Liberty, who is equally horrified at the present state of affairs.

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Forecast: Sunshine & Rainbows? Not So Much.

Californians just can't seem to catch a break.

Thanks to the massive judicial corruption scandal finally being picked up by the press, the story is now being regularly monitored and reported by numerous Wall Street media outlets, among them Forbes, The Street and Fox Business News (not to mention several overseas publications), according to website traffic reports and follow-up.

Unfortunately, although the attention on the guilty bodes well for our future in general, the near-term most likely will be filled with catastrophic consequences to the State of California as investors of all stripes elect to take their business elsewhere, searching for climes of judicial integrity.  As the institutional dominoes collapse, smart investors will take their tens of billions of dollars and tens of thousands of jobs elsewhere, the insatiable greed of California's "elite" finally reducing the Golden State to a pile of rubble worse than a 10.0 earthquake would leave behind.

How worried are those decent Americans trying to raise children in this environment?