Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10-03-23 Requesting Response by The Judicial Council, Chaired by California Chief Justice Ronald George, On Its Own Alleged Fraud S

    Uploaded by

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    31 views2 pages
    Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:16:39 -0700 To: "Carrizosa, Philip" From: joseph zernik Subject: Requesting response by the Judicial Council to Allegations of Fraud in Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine. Cc: "McCormick, Brenda" , "McCormick, Kevin M" , "Attention: Judge David Yaffe and the LA Superior Court C/O John Clarke, Clerk" Philip R. Carrizosa Office of Communications Judicial Council of California - Administrative Office of the Courts 455 Golden Gate Avenue, 5th floor San Francisco CA 94102-3688 Direct 415/865-8044, Fax 415-865-4588 philip.carrizosa@jud.ca.gov Dear Mr Carrizosa: Following your advice, I sent today my request for review of allegations of fraud, obstruction and perversion of justice by Attorney Kevin McCormick, and for initiation of corrective actions, directly to the Chair of the Judicial Council, Chief Justice Ronald George. [1], [2] In the letter I only referred to wrongdoing by Attorney Kevin McCormick. However, based on the totality of the evidence and the records in the case, it was very likely that wrongdoing would also be found on the part of the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate offices in this case. The most plausible explanation for events in the case, based on evidence discovered to this date, is the following: 1. The California Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, and/or its subordinate office(s) retained Attorney McCormick to appear on behalf of Judge Yaffe and the Superior Court in the Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine. 2. The retainer agreement was written in a false and deliberately misleading manner, with false case caption of "Fine v Sheriff of the LA Court", a case designation which did not exist, but with the correct case number. 3. The Council and/or its subordinate office(s) considered itself unaccountable for the conduct of Attorney McCormick in the habeas corpus petition under caption of "Richard I Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County", since it was not the case in which he was retained by the Council to appear pursuant to his retainer. 4. The council still most likely paid to Attorney McCormick for his services, regardless of the fact that he appeared in a case that was of different case caption than the one that was designated in his retainer. 5. Attorney McCormick never had any communication with Judge Yaffe or the Superior Court in this matter. 6. Attorney McCormick was never authorized by Yaffe and the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, as Counsel of Record to appear on their behalf. 7. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), engaged in fraud on the court, false appearances, filing of false records, false declaration, false briefs. 8. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), affected the false imprisonment of Richard Fine. I would be grateful if you could respond on behalf of the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate offices on the allegations of fraud by the Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, relative to its conduct in re: the retainer agreement of Attorney Kevin McCormick, and collusion with Attorney McCormick in affecting the false imprisonment of Richard Fine. This letter is copied to Brenda McCormick, Counsel for the Ventura Superior Court, to Kevin McCormick, to Judge David Yaffe, and to John A Clarke - on behalf of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. Any response by those copied on this letter would be appreciated as well. Truly, Joseph Zernik, PhD http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345 h

    Original Title

    10-03-23 Requesting Response by the Judicial Council, Chaired by California Chief Justice Ronald George, on Its Own Alleged Fraud s

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:16:39 -0700 To: "Carrizosa, Philip" From: joseph zernik Subject: Requesting response by the Judicial Council to Allegations of Fraud in Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine. Cc: "McCormick, Brenda" , "McCormick, Kevin M" , "Attention: Judge David Yaffe and the LA Superior Court C/O John Clarke, Clerk" Philip R. Carrizosa Office of Communications Judicial Council of California - Administrative Office of the Courts 455 Golden Gate Avenue, 5th floor San Francisco CA 94102-3688 Direct 415/865-8044, Fax 415-865-4588 philip.carrizosa@jud.ca.gov Dear Mr Carrizosa: Following your advice, I sent today my request for review of allegations of fraud, obstruction and perversion of justice by Attorney Kevin McCormick, and for initiation of corrective actions, directly to the Chair of the Judicial Council, Chief Justice Ronald George. [1], [2] In the letter I only referred to wrongdoing by Attorney Kevin McCormick. However, based on the totality of the evidence and the records in the case, it was very likely that wrongdoing would also be found on the part of the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate offices in this case. The most plausible explanation for events in the case, based on evidence discovered to this date, is the following: 1. The California Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, and/or its subordinate office(s) retained Attorney McCormick to appear on behalf of Judge Yaffe and the Superior Court in the Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine. 2. The retainer agreement was written in a false and deliberately misleading manner, with false case caption of "Fine v Sheriff of the LA Court", a case designation which did not exist, but with the correct case number. 3. The Council and/or its subordinate office(s) considered itself unaccountable for the conduct of Attorney McCormick in the habeas corpus petition under caption of "Richard I Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County", since it was not the case in which he was retained by the Council to appear pursuant to his retainer. 4. The council still most likely paid to Attorney McCormick for his services, regardless of the fact that he appeared in a case that was of different case caption than the one that was designated in his retainer. 5. Attorney McCormick never had any communication with Judge Yaffe or the Superior Court in this matter. 6. Attorney McCormick was never authorized by Yaffe and the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, as Counsel of Record to appear on their behalf. 7. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), engaged in fraud on the court, false appearances, filing of false records, false declaration, false briefs. 8. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), affected the false imprisonment of Richard Fine. I would be grateful if you could respond on behalf of the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate offices on the allegations of fraud by the Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, relative to its conduct in re: the retainer agreement of Attorney Kevin McCormick, and collusion with Attorney McCormick in affecting the false imprisonment of Richard Fine. This letter is copied to Brenda McCormick, Counsel for the Ventura Superior Court, to Kevin McCormick, to Judge David Yaffe, and to John A Clarke - on behalf of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. Any response by those copied on this letter would be appreciated as well. Truly, Joseph Zernik, PhD http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345 h

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    31 views2 pages

    10-03-23 Requesting Response by The Judicial Council, Chaired by California Chief Justice Ronald George, On Its Own Alleged Fraud S

    Uploaded by

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:16:39 -0700 To: "Carrizosa, Philip" From: joseph zernik Subject: Requesting response by the Judicial Council to Allegations of Fraud in Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine. Cc: "McCormick, Brenda" , "McCormick, Kevin M" , "Attention: Judge David Yaffe and the LA Superior Court C/O John Clarke, Clerk" Philip R. Carrizosa Office of Communications Judicial Council of California - Administrative Office of the Courts 455 Golden Gate Avenue, 5th floor San Francisco CA 94102-3688 Direct 415/865-8044, Fax 415-865-4588 philip.carrizosa@jud.ca.gov Dear Mr Carrizosa: Following your advice, I sent today my request for review of allegations of fraud, obstruction and perversion of justice by Attorney Kevin McCormick, and for initiation of corrective actions, directly to the Chair of the Judicial Council, Chief Justice Ronald George. [1], [2] In the letter I only referred to wrongdoing by Attorney Kevin McCormick. However, based on the totality of the evidence and the records in the case, it was very likely that wrongdoing would also be found on the part of the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate offices in this case. The most plausible explanation for events in the case, based on evidence discovered to this date, is the following: 1. The California Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, and/or its subordinate office(s) retained Attorney McCormick to appear on behalf of Judge Yaffe and the Superior Court in the Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine. 2. The retainer agreement was written in a false and deliberately misleading manner, with false case caption of "Fine v Sheriff of the LA Court", a case designation which did not exist, but with the correct case number. 3. The Council and/or its subordinate office(s) considered itself unaccountable for the conduct of Attorney McCormick in the habeas corpus petition under caption of "Richard I Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County", since it was not the case in which he was retained by the Council to appear pursuant to his retainer. 4. The council still most likely paid to Attorney McCormick for his services, regardless of the fact that he appeared in a case that was of different case caption than the one that was designated in his retainer. 5. Attorney McCormick never had any communication with Judge Yaffe or the Superior Court in this matter. 6. Attorney McCormick was never authorized by Yaffe and the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, as Counsel of Record to appear on their behalf. 7. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), engaged in fraud on the court, false appearances, filing of false records, false declaration, false briefs. 8. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), affected the false imprisonment of Richard Fine. I would be grateful if you could respond on behalf of the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate offices on the allegations of fraud by the Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, relative to its conduct in re: the retainer agreement of Attorney Kevin McCormick, and collusion with Attorney McCormick in affecting the false imprisonment of Richard Fine. This letter is copied to Brenda McCormick, Counsel for the Ventura Superior Court, to Kevin McCormick, to Judge David Yaffe, and to John A Clarke - on behalf of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. Any response by those copied on this letter would be appreciated as well. Truly, Joseph Zernik, PhD http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345 h

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    Dr Z Digitally signed by

    Joseph H Zernik

    Joseph Zernik, PhD DN: cn=Joseph H


    Zernik, o, ou,
    email=jz12345@ear
    PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750; thlink.net, c=US
    Location: La Verne,
    California
    Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net Date: 2010.03.23
    17:32:39 -07'00'

    Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs

    10-03-23 Richard Fine: Requesting Responses by the Califronia Judicial Council, Chaired by
    Chief Justice Ronald George, on Allegations of Fraud by the Judicial Council.

    Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:16:39 -0700


    To: "Carrizosa, Philip" <Philip.Carrizosa@jud.ca.gov>
    From: joseph zernik <jz12345@earthlink.net>
    Subject: Requesting response by the Judicial Council to Allegations of Fraud in Habeas Corpus of
    Richard Fine.
    Cc: "McCormick, Brenda" <Brenda.McCormick@ventura.courts.ca.gov>, "McCormick, Kevin M"
    <kmccormick@bentonorr.com>, "Attention: Judge David Yaffe and the LA Superior Court C/O John
    Clarke, Clerk" <2136217952@metrofax.com>

    Philip R. Carrizosa
    Office of Communications
    Judicial Council of California - Administrative Office of the Courts
    455 Golden Gate Avenue, 5th floor
    San Francisco CA 94102-3688
    Direct 415/865-8044, Fax 415-865-4588
    philip.carrizosa@jud.ca.gov

    Dear Mr Carrizosa:

    Following your advice, I sent today my request for review of allegations of fraud, obstruction and
    perversion of justice by Attorney Kevin McCormick, and for initiation of corrective actions, directly to the
    Chair of the Judicial Council, Chief Justice Ronald George. [1], [2] In the letter I only referred to
    wrongdoing by Attorney Kevin McCormick. However, based on the totality of the evidence and the
    records in the case, it was very likely that wrongdoing would also be found on the part of the Judicial
    Council and/or its subordinate offices in this case.

    The most plausible explanation for events in the case, based on evidence discovered to this date, is the
    following:

    1. The California Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, and/or its subordinate
    office(s) retained Attorney McCormick to appear on behalf of Judge Yaffe and the Superior
    Court in the Habeas Corpus of Richard Fine.

    2. The retainer agreement was written in a false and deliberately misleading manner, with false
    case caption of "Fine v Sheriff of the LA Court", a case designation which did not exist, but with
    the correct case number.

    3. The Council and/or its subordinate office(s) considered itself unaccountable for the conduct of
    Attorney McCormick in the habeas corpus petition under caption of "Richard I Fine v Sheriff of
    Los Angeles County", since it was not the case in which he was retained by the Council to
    appear pursuant to his retainer.

    4. The council still most likely paid to Attorney McCormick for his services, regardless of the fact
    that he appeared in a case that was of different case caption than the one that was designated
    in his retainer.

    5. Attorney McCormick never had any communication with Judge Yaffe or the Superior Court in
    this matter.
    z Page 2/2 March 23, 2010

    6. Attorney McCormick was never authorized by Yaffe and the Superior Court of California,
    County of Los Angeles, as Counsel of Record to appear on their behalf.

    7. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial
    Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), engaged in
    fraud on the court, false appearances, filing of false records, false declaration, false briefs.

    8. Attorney McCormick, acting and paid for his conduct pursuant to retainer by the Judicial
    Council and/or its subordinate office(s) (regardless of an error in case caption), affected the
    false imprisonment of Richard Fine.
    I would be grateful if you could respond on behalf of the Judicial Council and/or its subordinate offices
    on the allegations of fraud by the Judicial Council, chaired by Chief Justice Ronald George, relative to
    its conduct in re: the retainer agreement of Attorney Kevin McCormick, and collusion with Attorney
    McCormick in affecting the false imprisonment of Richard Fine.

    This letter is copied to Brenda McCormick, Counsel for the Ventura Superior Court, to Kevin
    McCormick, to Judge David Yaffe, and to John A Clarke - on behalf of the Superior Court of California,
    County of Los Angeles. Any response by those copied on this letter would be appreciated as well.

    Truly,

    Joseph Zernik, PhD


    http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
    http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs
    http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345
    http://www.examiner.com/x-38742-LA-Business-Headlines-Examiner
    Please sign our petition - Free Richard Fine: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-fine
    Patriotic pics of Beyonce' Knowles, Sharon Stone, and Charlize Theron,
    Coming soon- deep house music!

    LINKS:
    [1] March 23, 2010 Letter to California Chief Justice Ronald George.
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/28821400/10-03-23-Richard-Fine-Request-Chief-Justice-Ronald-George-
    Investigation-Corrective-Actions-in-Conduct-of-Attorney-Kevin-McCormick-on-Behalf-of-the-Ca

    [2] March 23, 2010 Certificate of Mailing


    http://inproperinla.com/10-03-23-certificate-of-mailing-to-ronald-george-s.pdf

    You might also like