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
11-03-15 Corrupt Computers in the California Courts – Alternative Views of CCMS – the California Case Management System

11-03-15 Corrupt Computers in the California Courts – Alternative Views of CCMS – the California Case Management System

Ratings: (0)|Views: 128|Likes:

More info:

Published by: Human Rights Alert, NGO on Mar 15, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

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

05/12/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
Human Rights Alert 
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
 
Blog:
 Scribd: 
11-03-15 Corrupt Computers in the California Courts – Alternative Views of CCMS – theCalifornia Case Management System
Below:1) Email message by Joseph Zernik: Alternative view of CCMS - the California CaseManagement System.2) Email message by X: They are eating their own...3) LA Times: Clash of the courts: Dissident judges challenge California chief justice'spower
1) Email message: Alternative view of CCMS - the California Case ManagementSystem.
Let me offer an alternative view of CCMS - the California Case Management System: This is a power struggle in a whitecollar network.... Whoever controls the case management system, is on top of the operations... Control, Command,Collect! With Ronald George's departure, resistance to such system is increasing.However, it is not necessarily good news. It only means that the current business model is staying in place, with LosAngeles County, Ventura County, San Bernardino County, Riverside County Superior Courts, etc, each running theirown loosely organized operations... The Clerk of the Court in each case the point man, who is actually on top of it all,but there is no central control from Sacramento. In Los Angeles County, for example, I consider
JOHN A CLARKE
 (Clerk of the Court),
FREDERIC BENNETT
(Court Counsel), and
JACQUELINE CONNOR
(Judge) the key figures ofthe LA-JR, and not Presiding Judge of the Court
CHARLES MCCOY
.I believe that Ronald George, while in leadership positions in the Los Angeles Superior Court around 1985, was thebrains who conceived Sustain. (See expert opinion letter, linked in
[1]
, below) The system was developed and ismaintained to this date by Sustain Technologies, a subsidiary of the Daily Journal (the largest legal newspaper inCalifornia, said to be controlled by the California Bar, an arm of the California courts), and by now is implemented insome 11 states in the US. Sustain is the enabling tool of the routine Fraud in the Los Angeles Superior Court, and thedefining element of the LA-JR (alleged Los Angeles Judiciary Racket) as we know it today.Later, Ronald George moved on to bigger and better things... As Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court andChair of the California Judiciary Council he conceived a unifying CCMS - California Case Management System.Today, the Superior Courts of California operate over 70 different case management systems, independently developedor modified with no public supervision at all in various court houses. The couple that I inspected (Los Angeles andVentura County), are herein again opined as Fraud.Had Ronald George managed to unify the case management systems throughout California under his control, asplanned, it would have been an unprecedented concentration of power.That is the reason that the various courts have been objecting to the CCMS. They prefer to maintain the currentbusiness model - loosely organized operations, typical of white collar crime networks... each with large degree ofindependence and flexibility. They would not like to be under constant monitoring by the Big Brother, even if he is one oftheir own...That is also the reason why there are such difficulties in completing the system. CCMS is most likely a system, similar toSustain in its nature: A system that was not developed as implementation of specifications founded in the California lawand regulations. Instead, it is most likely, like Sustain, a system that is supposed to create the pretense of compliance
 
Page 2/2 March 15, 2011with the law and regulations, while allowing to undermine them.It is not an easy task to define for project managers and programmers the nature of their job under suchcircumstances... It is like telling an engineer to plan something that would look like a drinking water pump, but would beable to intermittently pump water and/or sewage, appearing as drinking water... It is also not an easy task to reachconsensus among the main players on defining such project. Primarily, since none of them would trust the other.Whoever is the one who is directly paying the programmers, would have access to all the back doors and other "specialfeatures".The failure to implement it may also be behind Ronald George's decision to retire. With Ronald George's departure, thelocal courts feel stronger, and are increasing their opposition to implementation of the system. I doubt that the system,as originally conceived, would ever be implemented.Joseph Zernik, PhDHuman Rights Alert (NGO)
LINKS:
[1] 09-04-20 Prof Shamir's Opinion Letter re: Sustain - the Case Management System of the Superior Court of California,County of Los Angeleshttp://www.scribd.com/doc/46069337/  [2] 10-06-14 New Case Management System (CCMS) of the California Courts - Serious Human Rights Concernhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/33073055/ 
2) Email message by X: They are eating their own:
 
Here’s a possible sign that things are getting better for us: THEY (the judges) ARE EATING THEIR OWN!
It is not so much from our efforts, as to their continued dereliction of their own duties and their lack honesty,integrity & accountability. Nature abhors a vacuum and they are eating their own - self destructing.
 
Here are a few of the operative paragraphs from the 3/15/11
LATimes 
article:Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Charles E. Horan rejoiced over last month'sstate auditthat savagedthe Californiacourt system's mismanagement of a costly new computer system."This is the sort of thing we have been complaining about," exulted the Pomona judge. "Do you think perhapsnow people ought to pay attention to what we're saying?"* * *"It has deliberately and recklessly advocated for its own parochial interests while trial court operations havesuffered from furloughs, courthouse closures and layoffs," alliance directors wrote to "fellow judges" in aJanuary letter.* * *
 
"Judges by and large are folks who have a percentage of prima donna in them, running from a little to a greatdeal," said one Northern California judge who, like many judges, would speak about the split within the courtsystem only on condition of anonymity. "There is no question that the concept of centralizing authority bothersa lot of judges in a big way."
 
_______________ WOW! That sounds as though it could have come of J.A.I.L4JUDGES. But no, it out of the mouths of judgesand it is published in the
LATimes.
 
_________________
 
Page 3/3 March 15, 2011
3) LA Times: Clash of the courts: Dissident judges challenge Californiachief justice's power
Clash of the courts: Dissident judges challenge California chief justice's power
Alliance rails against administration, arguing that trial courts should get a say in court policies,spending cuts, media coverage and other issues. Chief justice says the hostile insurrectionists are 'notgiving me a chance.'
By Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times
March 15, 2011, 12:37 a.m.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Charles E. Horan rejoiced over last month'sstate auditthat savagedthe California court system's mismanagement of a costly new computer system."This is the sort of thing we have been complaining about," exulted the Pomona judge. "Do you think perhapsnow people ought to pay attention to what we're saying?"In 2009, Horan helped found a group of judges to challenge the power and authority of the state's judicialleadership. After two years of being marginalized as a fringe clique of black-robed dissidents, the group oflargely anonymous judges is now making friends in Sacramento and gathering strength.The insurrection has sparked new legislation, generated hostility toward the judicial leadership, inundatedjudges' mailboxes with caustic e-mails and threatened to throw the state's new chief justice off-step just as sheassumes the reins of the California judiciary.At issue is whether the court system should continue to be run centrally by the chief justice and his or herappointees, or whether elected judges and the trial courts should call more of the shots, including on howmoney is spent.The Alliance of California Judges pits itself against the Administrative Office of the Courts, the bureaucracy inSan Francisco that runs the judicial branch under the supervision of the Judicial Council, the governing andpolicy-setting body headed and run by the chief justice."It has deliberately and recklessly advocated for its own parochial interests while trial court operations havesuffered from furloughs, courthouse closures and layoffs," alliance directors wrote to "fellow judges" in a Januaryletter.The alliance claims about 350 of the state's 1,700 judges are members, but says many want their names keptsecret because they fear reprisals a perception that the state's chief justice,Tani Cantil-Sakauye,says mystifiesher.Judges who click on a link on the group's website become members, receiving a barrage of e-mails detailingwhat the alliance believes is the arrogance and incompetence of judicial-branch leaders.Many nonmembers said they also receive the e-mails, passed on by others. Some said they agree with thealliance's aims. Others are indifferent or consider the group dangerous.

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)//-->