Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Kill the Umpires

Kill the Umpires

Ratings: (0)|Views: 8|Likes:
Published by Frank Gallagher
Never has there been such an opportunity to end the persistent struggle of humankind
Never has there been such an opportunity to end the persistent struggle of humankind

More info:

Published by: Frank Gallagher on Sep 18, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/18/2010

pdf

text

original

 
Please join the Facebook Cause: FREE THE LA-FIPs (Los AngelesFalsely Imprisoned Persons)http://www.causes.com/causes/222335/aboutINTRODUCTION - MULTI-IDIOMASEnglish 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 inLos Angeles. Less than two weeks later, on March 4, 2009 RichardFine 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 theUnited States courts, from the US District Court, through the USCourt of Appeals, to the Supreme Court of the United States;however, all United States courts involved in the matter deniedRichardDOCUMENTSThe two records below, produced by the Superior Court of California,County of Los Angeles, and by the Los Angeles County Sheriff'sDepartment as the legal foundation for the holding of Richard Fineare alleged as fraud, each on its own. Moreover, the production of contradictory records by the two justice system agencies of LosAngeles County is alleged as additional fraud to top it off.
 
1) View the FALSE AND DELIBERATELY MISLEADING recordsprovided by Sheriff Lee Baca in letter to Los Angeles CountySupervisor, Michael Antonovich, in response to request for access tothe California public records that were the non-existing warrant andbooking records of Richard Fine. For over a year, Sheriff Lee Bacainsists on providing false records - claiming that Richard Fine wasarrested on location and by authority of the "San Pedro MunicipalCourt". No such court has existed for almost a decade:http://inproperinla.com/10-01-08-antonovich-ltr-repeat-mailing-w-attch-env-s.pdf 2) View the FALSE ON ITS FACE March 4, 2009 Judgment and Order of Contempt. Such judgment record is missing any authentication atall. 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 tomake it "effectual for any purpose":http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-marina-v-county-09-03-04-false-fine-judment-record-copy-from-us-dist-ct-habeas-corpus-doc-16-response-by-la-sup-ct-filed-may-1-2009.pdf MISSING DOCUMENTSThe case of Richard Fine documented a pattern of publication of falserecords in online public access systems, and denial of access to or missing true judicial records:1) The Los Angeles Superior Court in
Marina v LACounty 
(BS109420) published a false online "Case Summary", butdenied access to the Register of Actions (California civil docket) inthe 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 (Noticesof Electronic Filing - the authentication records) in the case, and tothe paper record, which was Richard Fine's commencing record - thepetition for a writ of habeas corpus, which was allegedly adulteratedat 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 "PACERdockets", but denied access to the NDAs (Notices of Docket Activity -the authentication records), and also to critical records filed byrespondents in the appeal.5) The US Supreme Court in
Fine v Baca
(09-A827) published afalse online "docket" noting denials on both March 12, 2010 and April23/26, 2010, which were not supported by the Court records in thecase. Any evidence of valid judicial review of the Application wasmissing 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

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->