Digitally signed

by Joseph Zernik
Human Rights Alert DN: cn=Joseph
Zernik, o, ou,
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 email=jz12345@e
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net arthlink.net, c=US
Date: 2010.07.08
Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ 17:35:28 +03'00'
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

10-07-07 In re: Richard Fine - Complaint against Judge David Yaffe, Los Angeles Superior Court, and Los
Angeles Sheriff Lee Baca and others – for Public Corruption and Deprivation of Rights.

Andre Birotte Jr., US Attorney, Central District of California.

221 N Figueroa St, Los Angeles, CA 90012
By certified mail, by fax: 213-894-6269, 213-894-0141

TO US ATTORNEY, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA: Please accept instant Citizen’s

Complaint against David Yaffe - Judge, Charles McCoy – Presiding Judge, John A Clarke - Clerk, and
Frederic Bennett – Counsel, all of the Superior Court of California, and against Lee Baca – Sheriff of Los
Angeles County – for public corruption and deprivation of rights under the color of law in re: False
imprisonment of Richard Fine.
Executive Summary
Complaint was filed July 8, 2010, with the US Attorney Office, Central District of California, against DAVID YAFFE –
Judge, CHARLES MCCOY – Presiding Judge, JOHN A CLARKE – Clerk, and FREDERIC BENNETT – Counsel, of the
Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and LEE BACA – Sheriff of Los Angeles County, for public
corruption and deprivation of rights under the color of law in the matter of Richard Fine.
The complaint alleged that the named accused conspired to hold Richard Fine (#1824367) in solitary confinement at the
Central Men’s Jail since March 4, 2009, with no legal foundation at all for the imprisonment.
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 Richard Fine’s case.
Instead, the complaint alleged that the accused engaged since March 2009 in the production and publication of
fraudulent records, including, but not limited to records filed in the habeas corpus of Richard Fine – Fine v Sheriff (2:09-
cv-01914) at the US District Court, Los Angeles and records produced by the Sheriff in response to inquiry by Los
Angeles Supervisor Michael Antonovich.
The complaint further claimed that inherent to the conduct of the accused was failure of the Superior Court of California,
County of Los Angeles for over a quarter century, to publish honest Local Rules of Court pertaining to the entry of
judgment - in violation of due process rights, and refusal of the Court to allow access to court records, which were the
Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Marina v LA County (BS109420), the case where Richard Fine was
purported to have been arrested and imprisoned – in violation of First Amendment rights.
Moreover, the complaint detailed refusal of Presiding Judge McCoy and Clerk Clarke to initiate corrective actions relative
to the alleged false imprisonment of Richard Fine, to correct false and deliberately misleading Local Rules of Court
repeatedly published by the Court pertaining to the entry of judgments in Los Angeles County, to publish valid and
effectual Local Rules of Court, and to allow access to the Register of Actions in Marina v LA County (BS109420).
Instead, in 2009-10 Court Counsel Frederic Bennett sent a series of false and deliberately misleading letters to
complainant Dr Zernik, with no authority at all, pertaining to Local Rules of Court and denial of access to court records.
Combined, the complaint alleged that the four accused conspired to falsely imprison Richard Fine, under the color of law,
as retaliation, harassment and intimidation of a victim, witness and informant.
The complaint further alleged that the conduct of the Court relative to the ongoing publication of fraudulent Local Rules of
Court, refusal to disclose and publish honest Local Rules of Court, and denial of access to court records amounted to
severe violation of the Constitutional, Civil, and Human Rights of all residents of Los Angeles County.
The complaint requested the US Attorney, Central District of California, provide equal protection for Richard Fine and all
10 million residents of Los Angeles County, and investigate and prosecute, if appropriate, the accused to the full extent
of the law.

Page 2/7 July 8, 2010

1. Complainants
Joseph Zernik, PhD, resident of Los Angeles County, California
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
Mailing Address: PO Box 526, La Verne, California 91750
Tel: 323-515-4583
Fax: (preferred) 323-488-9697
Email: (preferred) jz12345@earthlink.net

2. Accused:
a) DAVID YAFFE - Judge,
b) CHARLES MCCOY – Presiding Judge,
c) JOHN A CLARKE - Clerk,
d) FREDERIC BENNETT – Counsel
Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
Address: Stanley Mosk Courthouse, 110 North Grand Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90012
e) LEE BACA – Sheriff of Los Angeles County
Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department
Address: 4700 Ramona Blvd, Monterey Park, CA 91754
Work: 323-526-5000
Fax: 323-267-6600
Email: shb@lasd.org , webemail@lasd.org

3. Complainants are NOT Attorneys

Complainants are not attorneys, and are not represented by attorney in any of the matters described in
instant complaint either. For such reason, in most case, no section of the code was cited. The US
Attorney is requested to apply the correct sections of the code. In case errors were made, where sections
of the code were mentioned, the US Attorney is requested to disregard such errors, and instead, consider
the facts themselves and apply the correct sections of the code, as he deems fit.

4. General Claims:
It is alleged that conduct of the accused amounted to:
a) Public Corruption
b) Fraud,
c) Wire/fax Fraud,
d) Honest Services Fraud,
e) Extortion,
f) Conspiracy,
g) Obstruction of Justice,
h) Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant,
i) Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant,
j) Mail Fraud,

5. Related Records:
Please accept as integral part of instant complaint additional records, linked below. In particular, the Appendix
to Motion to Intervene filed with the US Supreme Court in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) includes many of the
records, which are the pertinent evidence in the matters described below.
a) April 20, 2010 Motion to Intervene and related papers in Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) at the US Supreme
Court

Page 3/7 July 8, 2010

i) 10-04-20 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) Face pages of five filings by Dr Joseph Zernik with stamps
showing receipt by the US Supreme Court s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30304657/
ii) 10-04-20 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) 1 Amended Motion to Intervene s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30161573/10-04-18-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-A827-1-Amended-Motion-to-
Intervene-s
iii) 10-04-20 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) 2 Amended Request for Lenience by Pro Se Filer
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30161636/
iv) 10-04-20 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) 3 Amended Request for Corrections in US Supreme Court
Records
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30162109/
v) 10-04-20 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) 4 Amended Request for Incorporation by Reference
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30162144/
vi) 10-04-20 Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) 5 Amended Appendices
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34050423/
b) 10-07-04 Human Rights Alert Complaint against the California Judicial Council Chaired by California
Chief Justice Ronald George and Attorney Kevin McCormick for Public Corruption and Deprivation of
Rights.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33879469/
c) 10-06-28 Human Rights Alert Complaint filed with US Attorney Office Los Angeles Re Large Scale False
Imprisonments in Los Angeles County
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33647477/
d) 10-06-21 Dr Zernik s Complaint Filed with Us Attorney Office Los Angeles against Mr David Pasternak
for Public Corruption Deprivation of Civil Rights
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33354641/

6. General
a) California Code of Civil Procedure requires that the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles,
maintain Judgment Books, regardless of the media such books are maintained in: paper, microfilm, digital
media, tapes, etc.
b) California Code of Civil Procedures further states that judgment that was not entered in a Judgment Book
was “not effectual for any purpose”.
c) Letter by Court Counsel Frederic Bennett claimed, albeit – with no authority at all - that since 1974 the
Superior Court of California, County of Los Angles did not maintain paper Judgment Books, and instead
maintained a microfilm Judgment Book.
d) The California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles continues to this day to publish Local Rules of
Court stating the Judgment Books are maintained at the Public Departments of the Office of the Clerk in
each District of the Court.
e) Deputy Clerks and Supervisors of the Office of the Clerk repeatedly claimed that NO Judgment Books
were maintained in the Public Departments of the Office of the Clerk.
f) Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke refused to disclose the true and
valid Local Rules of Court pertaining to Books of Judgments and entry of judgments at the Court, and
continue to publish false and deliberately misleading Local Rules of Court, stating that Books of
Judgments are maintained at the Public Departments of the Office of the Clerk of each District of the
Court.
g) The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles maintains Registers of Actions (California civil
dockets) pursuant to California Government Code as part of its case management system – Sustain.
h) Letters by Court Counsel Frederic Bennett made various false and deliberately misleading, self-
contradictory claims in this matter. For example, in one letter the Counsel falsely claimed that the Court
published the Registers of Actions online. In another letter, the counsel falsely claimed that “at the
moment” the California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, did NOT maintain Registers of Actions
at all.

Page 4/7 July 8, 2010

i) Clerk of the Court John A Clarke continues to this date to deny access to the Register of Actions in
Marina v LA County (BS109420), the case where Richard Fine was purportedly arrested and imprisoned,
in violation of First Amendment rights.
j) Presiding Judge Charles McCoy refused to initiate corrective actions relative to the denial of access to
court records by the Clerk of the Court.

7. Brief Chronology Alleged False Imprisonment of Richard Fine:

a) It is alleged that upon investigation and discovery it would be documented that prior to the March 4,
2009 proceeding, a request was forwarded by the court of Judge David Yaffe to the Sheriff’s
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.
b) On March 4, 2009 Judge David Yaffe indeed pronounced such sentence in open court, as evidenced
in the Court Reporter's transcript.
c) On March 4, 2009, through such oral directives, Judge Yaffe misled the Sheriff's Warrant Detail to
arrest Attorney Richard Fine at 11:05 am, at the Superior Court of California, County of Los
Angeles, City of Los Angeles, 11 North Hill Street, - albeit - with no written, valid, and effectual
warrant, judgment, conviction, or sentencing at all.
d) On March 4, 2009 Judge Yaffe then left the courtroom, and left the Warrant Detail with no record as
an adequate and valid legal foundation for the arrest and the imprisonment.
e) Instead, Judge Yaffe proceeded to create a second, contradictory record in the court file. The court
file to this date does not reflect any valid and effectual judgment, conviction, or sentencing at all.
f) In fact, the March 4, 2009 proceeding was entirely omitted from the online Case Summary (not a
formal court record).
g) The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, continues to deny access to the Register of
Actions in Marina v LA County (BS109420). However, it is alleged that upon investigation and
discover it would be found that Judge Yaffe likewise never including a valid March 4, 2009
sentencing hearing in the Register of Actions.
h) On March 4, 2009, at 12:32 pm, the Sheriff's Warrant Detail falsely recorded the arrest and booking
of Richard Fine as if they had taken place on location, and pursuant to the authority of the "San
Pedro Municipal Court." The Sheriff held and holds no valid court order or judgment as the
foundation. No San Pedro Municipal court had existed at the city of San Pedro for almost a decade.
i) On March 4, 2009, at 4:31 pm, papers were received by the Sheriff's Department through an
unauthenticated fax transmission, with no cover sheet at all, from "Judicial Services" – the Sheriff’s
Unit at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
j) Such papers reflected yet a third, again false and deliberately misleading set of records for the arrest
and booking of Richard Fine. Such records included invalid, false records: (i) False on its face,
March 4, 2009 Remand Order, and (ii) False on its face, unauthenticated, and unentered the March 4,
2009 Judgment for contempt issued by Judge Yaffe.
k) On March 20, 2009, Richard Fine filed a habeas corpus petition Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) at the
US District Court, Los Angeles, where Sheriff Lee Baca was named Responder.
l) Sheriff Lee Baca refused to answer the habeas corpus petition. Indeed there was and there is no legal
foundation for the arrest and imprisonment of Richard Fine, and the Sheriff Lee Baca could not
honestly respond on the petition.
m) On May 1, 2009, Attorney Kevin McCormick started false appearances in the habeas corpus petition
on behalf of Judge David Yaffe and the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, with
no authority at all, as detailed in a complaint separately filed with the US Attorney Office against
Attorney Kevin McCormick and others.
n) In such false appearances, Attorney McCormick filed in court the false on its face March 4 Remand
Order and the false on its face March 4 Judgment, and falsely represented such records as valid court
records, which provided the legal foundation for the arrest and imprisonment of Richard Fine.

Page 5/7 July 8, 2010

o) It is further alleged that such records were produced and filed by Attorney McCormick in collusion
with Sheriff Lee Baca.
p) In January 2010, Sheriff Lee Baca responded on inquiry for the arrest and booking records of
Richard Fine by Supervisor Antonovich. In his response Sheriff Lee Baca produced false and
deliberately misleading records, falsely stating that Richard Fine was arrested and booked on
location and by authority of the “San Pedro Municipal Court.”
q) In 2009-2010, complainant Dr Zernik repeatedly noticed the accused: Judge David Yaffe, Presiding Judge
Charles McCoy, Clerk John Clarke, and Sheriff Lee Baca of the false records, which they had issued and
had repeatedly produced, and asked that they initiate corrective actions.
r) There is no evidence that any of the accused ever initiated any corrective actions at all. Richard Fine
remains imprisoned to this date.

Therefore, a reasonable person, upon review of the facts as a whole would conclude that Richard Fine was
and is falsely imprisoned through conspiracy of the named accused for public corruption and deprivation of
rights under the color of law.

8. Additional Evidence and Records:

For the sake of brevity, only a small part of the evidence was described and linked in instant complaint.
Please do not hesitate to contact Dr Zernik for additional evidence in this matter. Additional records,
which are pertinent to the case, can also be found under court file of Marina v LA County (SC087400) at
the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv01914) at the US
District Court, Los Angeles.

9. Court Opinions and Judgments Regarding the arrest and imprisonment of Richard Fine.
The arrest and imprisonment of Richard Fine were never subject of any valid court order or judgment:
a) In Marina v LA County (BS109420) – Ancillary proceedings on contempt under Petition for Injunction at
the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles - as detailed in instant complaint no warrant, no
judgment, no conviction and no sentencing were ever entered in the case for the arrest or imprisonment of
Richard Fine.
b) In Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01913) – Habeas corpus petition at the US District Court, Central District of
California – as detailed in the Motion to Intervene, linked above, no order or judgment was ever entered in
the case in compliance with General Order 08-02 of the US District Court, Central District of California.
c) In Fine v Sheriff (09-071692) – Petition at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit – as detailed in the Motion
to Intervene, no valid order was ever entered by the Court in this matter.
d) In Fine v Sheriff (09-056073) – Appeal at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit – as detailed in the Motion
to Intervene, no valid order or mandate was ever entered by the Court in this matter.
e) In Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) – Application filed with Associate Justice Kennedy at the US Supreme Court
– as detailed in the Motion to Intervene – no denial was ever entered by Associate Justice Kennedy on the
Application.
f) In Fine v Sheriff (09-A827) – Application filed with Associate Justice Ruth Ginsburg at the US Supreme
Court – the US Supreme Court refused to review the Application.

10. Conduct of the accused in Marina v LA County (BS109420) relative to the Imprisonment of Richard
Fine is Not Unique at all
It is alleged that the fraud based on refusal to publish honest Local Rules of Court pertaining to the entry of
judgment, and the concomitant denial of access to the Registers of Actions (California civil dockets), is the
foundation for numerous cases of fraud on the people by the accused and the Superior Court of California,
County of Los Angeles, as detailed in Related Records, linked above.

Page 6/7 July 8, 2010

11. Public Policy Significance

Instant complaint documented the manner in which retaliation was executed by Judges and the Sheriff against
Richard Fine – former US prosecutor who exposed, publicized, and rebuked widespread corruption of the
justice system in Los Angeles County, California.

Instant complaint also documented the routine practice at the Superior Court of California, County of Los
Angeles, of conducting proceedings, which the Court itself never deems “on the record”, a fact that the public
cannot decipher due to denial of access to the Registers of Actions of the Court.

Instant complaint likewise documented the routine practice at the Superior Court of California, County of Los
Angeles, of issuing judgments – which the Court itself never deems as entered, valid, and effectual for any
purpose. Regardless, as documented in instant complaint, the Court affects the enforcement of such invalid,
ineffectual judgments out of compliance with the law. Such conduct is alleged as the essence of widespread
corruption at the Court.

12. National and International Awareness

As part of the first ever review by the United Nations (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States, report was
filed by Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Dr Joseph Zernik and Human Rights Alert (NGO) i alleging
widespread corruption of the justice system in Los Angeles County, California. The report further
documented the refusal of senior officers of the US government to abide by its duties and responsibilities
pursuant to ratified international law – in failure to accord equal protection to the 10 million residents of Los
Angeles County.

As part of the UPR process, US, UK, Germany, and France based blogs were created,ii where almost 17,000
readers from some 85 nations were recorded so far. A Scribd site was created for Human Rights Alert in
January 2010, which has recorded over 70,000 reads, with over 500 reads a day in recent months.iii

Additional news sites, where press releases are routinely issued by Dr Zernik and Human Rights Alert, have
recorded thousands of additional readers. iv Furthermore, an archive was established online, v documenting
the alleged racketeering by Bank of America Corporation and others. The archive, not a user’s friendly site by
any stretch of imagination, has attracted thousands of visits per month from nations worldwide, totaling of
close to 90,000 visits in 2010 alone. vi

Manuscript was filed for peer review by high level international conferences in computer science, detailing
the alleged fraud in records of the Sheriff of Los Angeles County, as documented in instant complaint, and the
resulting alleged large-scale false imprisonments in Los Angeles County, California. vii

13. Remedies Requested

Request is herein filed with the office of US Attorney, Central District of California, by Joseph Zernik, PhD,
and Human Rights Alert (NGO) for the following remedies:
a) Equal protection under US and ratified international law of Richard Fine and all 10 million residents
of Los Angeles County against conduct of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles,
as documented in instant complaint.
b) Investigation and prosecution of allegations of public corruption by the named accused, and
prosecution, if applicable, of alleged criminal conduct to the full extent of the law.

Respectfully,
Dated: July 8, 2010
Joseph Zernik, PhD

Page 7/7 July 8, 2010

By: ______________
JOSEPH H ZERNIK
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
Phone: 323.515.4583
Fax: 323.488.9697
Email <jz12345@earthlink.net>

CC:
1) UPR Office of the United Nations:
UPRsubmissions@ohchr.org
2) UPR Office of the US State Department:
upr_info@state.gov
4) The Honorable Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California
5) United States Congress – Judiciary Committees

i
Human Rights Alert (NGO) report to the UN for the 2010 UPR:
a) Press Release:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/
b) Submission:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/
c) Appendix:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/
ii
Blog associated with Human Rights Alert (NGO)
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://josephzernik.blog.co.uk/
http://menchenrechte-los-angeles.blogspot.com/
iii
Scribd site of Human Rights Alert (NGO)
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
iv
News sites where Human Rights Alert posts routine releases:
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345
http://www.examiner.com/x-38742-LA-Business-Headlines-Examiner
http://pressroom.prlog.org/Human_Rights_Alert/
v
Online archive documenting corruption by Bank of America and other financial institutions:
http://inproperinla.com/
vi
Intense interest by the Russian Republic in corruption of US courts and banking regulation:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33910548/
vii
Manuscript filed for peer review reviewing the alleged fraud in records of the Sheriff of Los Angeles
County and large-scale false imprisonments in Los Angeles County, California.
10-06-23 zernik Paper1 Data Mining as a Civic Duty Online Prisoner s Registration Systems s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33520723/