Human Rights Alert (NGO

Joseph Zernik, PhD
PO Box 33407, Tel Aviv, Israel
2014-09-13 Human Right Alert (NGO): UPR Sumi!!i"n - Unite# State! - 22n# !e!!i"n
$arge-!%ale &rau# in '( !)!tem! "& the US %"urt! - Unann"un%e# regime %hange*
A++en#i,# $ile% &on&'rren(l) *i(h (he s'+,ission, in&l'%es expan%e% (ex(, -'ll size -i"'res, an% &ross!re-eren&es in (he
+o%) o- (he (ex( (o (he re&or%s, as evi%en&e. The Appen%ix is also pos(e% online a(#
A. Human Rights Alert (NGO)
The 2010 Human Rights Alert ["HRA"] submission for the UPR of the United States was inor!orated into the
Professional Staff Re!ort with the note "orru!tion of the ourts and the legal !rofession and disrimination b"
law enforement in #alifornia"$ The 201% HRA submission for the UPR of the State of &srael was inor!orated
b" referene into the HR# Professional Staff Re!ort with the note 'la( of integrit" in the eletroni reord
s"stems of the Su!reme #ourt) the distrit ourts and the detainees* ourts in &srael$+ &t is li(el" that the HRA
re!orts are the first,e-er Human Rights re!orts that are foused on &T s"stem anal"sis and data mining$
B. Allegations
.ide segments of the !eo!le of the United States toda" hold that the US #onstitution was -oided$ The
im!lementation of in-alid fraudulent &T s"stems in the US ourts was a (e" e-ent in establishing urrent
onditions$ The fraud inherent in the &T s"stems of the US ourts is not the t"!ial s!oradi orru!tion) whih
an be found in an" /ustie s"stem at an" time to some degree or another$ &t is orru!tion) whih was entrall"
im!lemented throughout the ourt s"stem$
1. Specific allegations
1$ The &T s"stems of the US ourts enable the routine ondut of simulated 0sham1fa(e2) abusi-e litigation and
the !ubliation of simulated /udiial reords) abusing the rights for 3ibert" and !ro!ert"4 suh ondut is
!artiularl" notieable toda" in ases originating in orru!tion of go-ernment offiers or finanial institutions4
2$ Under suh irumstanes) the rule of law and the US #onstitution are effeti-el" -oided) and aess to the
ourts is effeti-el" denied4
%) Suh onditions should be onsidered unannouned regime hange4
5$ Suh onditions amount to -iolation of an" artile of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) where
integrit" of the ourts and the /ustie s"stem is a !rere6uisite4
7$ #orru!tion of the US ourts and the legal !rofession is a entral ause of the urrent soio,eonomi risis in
the United States and be"ond$
2. Simulated records simulated litigation
Through the im!lementation and em!lo"ment of in-alid &T s"stems in the US ourts) the US ourts toda" issue
and !ublish /udiial and lerial reords that are in-alid and -oid on their faes$ &n suh simulated) in-alid
reords) US /udges abuse the #i-il) #onstitutional) and Human Rights$ .ith it) the ourts indue and1or e8tort
om!liane with suh in-alid) simulated /udiial reords$
a) Definitions: "Simulated Litigation", "Simulated Court Record", "Fraud upon the court" - "Simulated
3itigation1Reords" , !ursuant to the Te8as Penal #ode 9%2$5:4 ";raud u!on the #ourt" , !ursuant to Bulloch v.
United States) <=% ;$2d 1117) 1121 010th #ir$ 1>:72$
b) Judges are not coered b! immunit! in simulated litigation - the ondut of simulated litigation and the
issuane of simulated /udiial reords are e8tra,/udiial ondut$
>',an 9i"h( Aler( ?85O@# AP9 B'+,ission ! Ani(e% B(a(es ! //n% session# $arge-!%ale &rau# in '( !)!tem! "& the US %"urt!
- Unann"un%e# regime %hange* 1/5
Digitally signed
by Joseph
Zernik, PhD
Date: 2014.09.13
23:49:15 +03'00'
c) Simulated litigation should be deemed rac"eteering, or state-corporate organi#ed crime - !ursuant to the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organiations !ct 0US# 91>=12$ Suh ondut should also be re-iewed
under the terms of the United "ations Convention against #ransnational Organied Crime 020002$ &n
riminolog") suh onditions are onsidered "State,or!orate ?rgani@ed #rime"$
d) $utomated "%nde& of Judicial Corruption" - the simulated reords in the &T s"stems of the US ourts
!ro-ide a uni6ue database for data mining) and enable automated stud" of orru!tion of the /udiiar"$
!. "#idence
1. $% s&stem anal&sis
a) 'he s!stems (ere deeloped and implemented (ith no la(ful authorit! The new &T s"stems re!resent a
sea,hange in ourt !roedures$ US #ongress wasn*t li(el" to onsent to enat suh !roedures) and the
/udiiar" ated with no lawful authorit"$ ;ull doumentation of lawful s!eifiation) de-elo!ment management)
and -alidation) ertified b" !ersons of ade6uate authorit") under aountabilit" to the legislature must be
re6uired$ Pursuant to the fundamental !rini!le of Publiit" of the 3aw) suh &T s"stems must be as trans!arent
to the !ubli as !ossible$ The ommon theme in &T s"stems of the US ourts is learA Bah and e-er" US ourt
im!lemented and o!erates its loal -ariation of the &T s"stems) based on the ommon PA#BR and #C1B#;
!latforms) in a manner that enables it to generate and !ublish online abusi-e /udiial and lerial reords) as
well as ase do(ets) whih are not deemed -alid and effetual) !ursuant to the US law) or b" the res!eti-e
ourts) but would a!!ear as -alid and effetual reords to the unwitting !arties and the !ubli at large$
b) 'he identit! of the serers, on (hich the records are published and from (hich the! are do(nloaded is
c) %nalid implementation of electronic signatures Toda") all reords of the US distrit and a!!eals ourts are
eletroni reords$ Howe-er) there no -alid) -isible eletroni signatures are to be found on an" suh reords$
The ourts use -arious forms of in-alid signaturesA Sanned images of hand,signatures) initials) 1s1) t"!ed
names) or no signature at all$ The notion that a national !ro/et of suh so!e failed to im!lement -alid)
!ublil" -isible eletroni signatures annot be reasonabl" deemed an o-ersight) or human error$
d) %nalid implementation of authentication and serice instruments and procedures *+,F-+D$)
$ro, le-(# a) 8;$ *i(h C;le&(roni& Do&',en( B(a,psC ?re% -ra,es@, ABDD DA;D. ) 8;$, ,issin" (he C;le&(roni&
Do&',en( B(a,pC, Dk( E60, Mandate of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, as %o&ke(e% in Fine v Sheriff - >a+eas
Dorp's, ABDD DADD ?se&(ion D3a@. %) T*o PAD;9 %o&ke( en(ries in SEC v BAC ! +ankin" re"'la(ion 'n%er (he -inan&ial
&risis, ABDD 8FBD. Jan'ar) 2/, /020 en(r) ?Dk( E73, Or%er@ is linke% (o an a&('al re&or%. Jan'ar) 20, /020 en(r) ?Dk(
Enone, Gin'(es@ is no( linke% (o an) re&or%, an% (here-ore, s'&h C%o&ke( (ex( onl)C no(a(ion &o'l%nH( possi+l) +e
a'(hen(i&a(e% +) an 8;$. The Jan'ar) 20, /020 (elephone hearin" an% i(s ,in'(es sho'l% +e %ee,e% si,'la(e% &o'r(
hearin" an% si,'la(e% ,in'(es, like ,an) o(hers si,ilar en(ries in (he sa,e &o'r( &ase. ?se&(ion D/h@ #) Do&ke( en(r) in
In RE: Ronald ottschal!, ABDD DADD, COr%er o- Dis+ar,en( ...%ele(e% -or (he -ollo*in" reason# 9epor(e% (ha( (he 8;$
*as "enera(e%.C This 'niI'e (ex( provi%e a--ir,a(ion +) Dhie- J'%"e o- (he AB Dis(ri&( Do'r( (ha( a re&or% *i(h no vali%
8;$ is a voi% j'%i&ial re&or%.
Although ne-er lawfull" established) the US ourts im!lemented the DB;1DEA as authentiation instruments
in #C1B#; in the distrit and a!!eals ourts) res!eti-el"$ The DB;1DEA substitutes the #ertifiate of Ser-ie
and Dotie of Bntr" of Fudgment b" the #ler( of the #ourt$ The DB;1DEA is in-alid on its fae as an
authentiation instrument$ &t fails to state the name and authorit" of an indi-idual) who issued it) fails to inlude
the ertifiation statement "& the undersigned hereb" ertif"$$$") bears no -alid signature) not sent and deli-ered
as a an aom!an"ing reord to the atual ourt reord) onl" a h"!erlin( is !ro-ided$ ;urthermore) the !ubli
and pro se filers are denied aess the DB;1DEA$ A!!endi8 & !ro-ides detailed doumentation of numerous
>',an 9i"h( Aler( ?85O@# AP9 B'+,ission ! Ani(e% B(a(es ! //n% session# $arge-!%ale &rau# in '( !)!tem! "& the US %"urt!
- Unann"un%e# regime %hange* 2/5
ases) where -oid reords with in-alid DB;1DEA are !ublished in PA#BR do(ets$ B8tensi-e researh failed to
diso-er a single "Dotie of Bntr" of Fudgment") a (e" Eue Proess reord) !resribed b" US law) sine the
im!lementation of PA#BR and #C1B#;$ .ith it) the ourts of a!!eals ondut with no authorit" at all
simulated a!!eals) ta(en from unertified /udgments of the distrit ourts$
f) %nalid implementation of authorities and permissions Under #C1B#;) unauthori@ed ourt em!lo"ees as
well at attorne"s) routinel" enter reords and do(et notations b"!assing the authorit" of the #ler( of the #ourt$
g) Discrimination in access to the courts Pratiall" in all US distrit ourts) whih were e8amined) onl"
attorne"s are !ermitted aess to #C1B#;$ Therefore) pro se filers and the !ubli at large are denied aess to
DB;s1DEAs and annot distinguish between -alid and -oid ourt reords in the PA#BR do(ets$ Ser-ie on
attorne"s is b" email) on !ro se filers , b" !a!er mail$
h) $ppearance of attorne!s, (ho are not authori#ed as Counsel of Record Cemorandum ?!inion of US
Fudge Feff Gohm in the Case of Borro$er %arsle& 0setion #2e2 douments that a!!earane of unauthori@ed
attorne"s with "no ommuniations with lients lause") has beome a routine fraud method of #ountr"wide
;inanial #or!oration in ourts aross the United States$ Similar fraud was !er!etrated b" attorne"s for
#alifornia /udges in 'ine v Sheriff and (ernik v Connor et al) USE# #A#E 0setions #2a) #2f) res!eti-el"2$
h) .niersal failure to doc"et summonses) The issuane of -alid summonses) their e8eution) and their
do(eting) !resribed b" law) is ritial for ommening -alid litigation and safeguard of integrit" of the ourts$
Re-iew of the US ourts from oast to oast shows uni-ersal) ine8!liable failure to do(et summonses in the
PA#BR do(ets$ &n !arallel) in numerous ases in-alid summonses ha-e been diso-ered) inluding high
!ubli !oli" signifiant ases) suh as S*C v Bank of !merica Corporation) USE# DHSE , (e" litigation
under the finanial risis 0setion #2h2$
i) $dulterated and missing of court records &n -arious ases) (e" reords are deleted from the PA#BR do(ets
of the US ourts$ #ommening reord 0Petition2 in 'ine v Sheriff USE# #A#E was adulterated$ Eeision in
the Habeas #or!us !etition of Iuantanamo Ga" detainee was adulterated$ Fudgment reord in Citiens United is
missing$ Cissing and adulterated ourt reords a ardinal sign of /udiial orru!tion$
$ro, le-(# a) B',,ons in SEC v Ban! of A"erica Corporation, ABDD 8FBD. The s',,ons *as no( %o&ke(e%, +'( *as
%is&overe% (hro'"h a $ree%o, o- In-or,a(ion reI'es(. The s',,ons is 'nsi"ne%, an% -ails (o +ear (he seal o- (he &o'r(. I(
%o&',en(s &oll'sion o- B;D, Bank o- A,eri&a an% AB &o'r( in (he &on%'&( si,'la(e% li(i"a(ion in a hi"h visi+ili() &ase,
rela(e% (o +ankin" s'pervision. +@ $alse J'%",en( re&or% in Citi#ens United v FEC, BDOTAB. I( is a no(i&e -ro, (he
BDOTAB &lerk re"ar%in" a((orne)s -ees. The J'%",en( re&or% is ,issin".
/) 0$C,R and C1-,CF - inter-court sure! &ne8!liable differenes among the US distrit ourts$
") %' s!stem of the .S Supreme Court The S#?TUS &T s"stems 0name un(nown2 undermine the foundation
of the Rule of 3awA The s"stems enable the !ubliation of do(ets) /ournals) deisions) and /udgments b"
S#?TUS !ersonnel of un(nown authorit"$ The data) found in the Fournals) Eo(ets) and Eeisions in
inherentl" inonsistent and ontraditor"$
2. !ase studies a-p
A series of simulated ases) or ases of other t"!es of remar(able fraud and abuse in the US distrit ourt) US
a!!eals ourts) S#?TUS) !artiularl" ases of unlawful de!ri-ation of 3ibert" and ases related to fraud b"
finanial institutions under the urrent finanial risis$
>',an 9i"h( Aler( ?85O@# AP9 B'+,ission ! Ani(e% B(a(es ! //n% session# $arge-!%ale &rau# in '( !)!tem! "& the US %"urt!
- Unann"un%e# regime %hange* 3/5
$ro, le-(# $M% Capital v Repu&lic of Ar'entina, US(C $)S( ?se&(ion D/k@# a) PAD;9 %o&ke( en(ries, Dk( E2!6 ! (he
s',,ons *as no( %o&ke(e%. ) 8o(i&e o- Dase Assi"n,en( (o J'%"e 5riesa, Dk( E6 is 'nsi"ne%. As in all PAD;9 &ases,
p'+li& a&&ess (o (he 8;$s ! a'(hen(i&a(ion re&or%s ! is %enie%. The &ase, *hi&h ,a) &a'se (he &ollapse o- (he
Ar"en(inian e&ono,) is opine% -ra'% o- ,e%ieval s()le an% propor(ions.
'. National authorities ci#il societ& organi(ations e)perts media
All fail to !erform their dutiesA
1. Office of Attorne& General *S 'epartment of +ustice and ,B$-
2. Regulation-
/. *S !ongress-
0. %he 1udiciar&-
2. %he legal profession-
3. ")perts-
4. !i#il societ& organi(ations-
5. 6edia.
". !ompliance 7ith rele#ant *S la7
1. Ha8eas !orpus Through the ondut of simulated re-iew) Habeas #or!us was in fat sus!ended$
2. ,irst Amendment to the *S !onstitution9 the right to file papers in court Sus!ended$
/. ,irst Amendment to the *S !onstitution9 to right to inspect and to cop& court records Sus!ended$
0. Rules "na8ling Act Jiolated through the im!lementation of fraudulent &T s"stems in the US ourts$
2. ,ederal Rules of !i#il :rocedure 9duties of the cler. Jiolated through the im!lementation of fraudulent
&T s"stems in the US ourts$
3. Authentication and certification of 1udicial records legal process under the signature of the cler. and
the Seal of the !ourt Joided in the fraudulent &T s"stems of the US ourts$
4. "lectronic Signatures in Glo8al and National !ommerce Act (2;;;) and "9Go#ernment Act (2;;2) Do
-alid eletroni signatures an be found in eletroni ourt reords$
,. !ompliance 7ith rele#ant treaties and con#entions
1. Basel Accords on Super#ision ;ailure to establish effeti-e ban(ing su!er-ision$
2. Hague Apostille %reat& (1<31) &gnored) as a result of the failure to authentiate ourt reords$
/. *nited Nations !on#ention against %ransnational Organi(ed !rime &gnored) through deriminali@ation
of mone" laundering) and other riminalit" in the ban(ing s"stem) !ersons) firearms smuggling b" US
G. Retaliation against anti91udicial corruption acti#ists
-r"m le&t: a@ An(i!j'%i&ial &orr'p(ion a&(ivis(, +lo""er 9o"er Bh'ler, a-(er +ein" +ea(en an% -alsel) i,prisone% in Ala+a,a,
/023. +@ An(i!j'%i&ial &orr'p(ion a&(ivis(, -or,er AB prose&'(or 9i&har% $ine, %'rin" his /000!20 -alse i,prison,en( in
>',an 9i"h( Aler( ?85O@# AP9 B'+,ission ! Ani(e% B(a(es ! //n% session# $arge-!%ale &rau# in '( !)!tem! "& the US %"urt!
- Unann"un%e# regime %hange* 4/5
soli(ar) &on-ine,en(, Jos An"eles, Dali-ornia. &@ Davi% B&hie%, an(i!j'%i&ial &orr'p(ion a&(ivis(, *as jaile% -or 30 %a)s -or
silen(l) o+servin" (he &o'r(. %@ Dr Joseph Zernik, a'(hor o- ins(an( s'+,ission, shor(l) +e-ore es&apin" (he AB in April
/020, so'"h( +) AB Garshals CThrea( Ani(C, in &onj'n&(ion *i(h s'+,i((in" (he /020 AP9 repor(. 9e(alia(ion +) (he AB
an% Israeli "overn,en(s &on(in'e% in /023, reI'irin" (*i&e reI'es(in" (he pro(e&(ion o- (he $e%eral 5er,an "overn,en(.
1. General Anti,/udiial orru!tion ati-ists are targeted for !artiularl" harsh retaliation$
2. Retaliation against 'r +oseph =erni. 9 author of instant su8mission Retaliation in the US) under the false
laim of "Threat" to the US ourts) and retaliation in &srael though ta(ing of ban( de!osits) following the
diso-er") arhi-ing) and dissemination of e-idene of /udiial fraud in the US and in &srael as !art of the 2010
and 201% UPR re!orts) res!eti-el"$
H. Historical perspecti#e 9 Ro88er Baron Re#i#al "ra.
#urrent onditions in the US resemble in numerous as!ets onditions) whih !re-ailed a entur" ago and
whih led to the Ireat Ee!ression$
$. !onclusions
1$ Through the im!lementation and o!eration of in-alid) fraudulent &T s"stems) the US ourts toda" routinel"
ondut of simulated litigation) abuse the libert" and !ro!ert" of indi-iduals) and !lae the ban(s abo-e the law$
Suh ondut amounts to ?rgani@ed State,or!orate #rime$
2$ Suh ondut amounts to serious -iolation of fundamental Human Rights of the !eo!le of the United States$
%$ Suh ondut is also entral to the urrent soio,eonomi risis) failing ban(ing regulation) and the
';orelosure #risis+) whih resulted in -ast inrease in !o-ert" and homelessness in the United States and
undermined the US middle,lass$
5$ The -alidit" of an" legal and /udiial reords) originating in the United States) and the -alidit" of an"
litigation in the US ourts should be onsidered dubious$
7$ The international ommunit" should reassess the nature of the urrent regime in the United States) and an"
laim that its foreign !oli" is dri-en b" Human Rights interests$
=$ Bfforts to restore the US #onstitution and the rule of law in the US are li(el" be !rotrated and meet star(
resistane b" !owerful US seurit") legal) and finanial interest grou!s$ Do orreti-e !roess is li(el" to
ommene) unless onditions further deteriorate) leading to wides!read i-il unrest$
+. Recommendations
1$ The large,sale fraud in the US ourts) whih in fat im!liates eah and e-er" US sitting /udge) would li(el"
re6uire an a!!roah similar to a Truth and Reoniliation #ommission) and1or a Seond #onstitutional
2$ Eue to the entral role of the Administrati-e ?ffie of the US #ourts in im!lementing the fraudulent &T
s"stems of the US ourts) the ?ffie should be restrutured or losed$
%$ Ceasures) similar to those ta(en a entur" ago under similar irumstanes through the Salar& !ct 01>1>2)
whih !laed the ler(s of the US ourts under the diret authorit" of the Attorne" Ieneral) should be
5$ US legal and om!uting e8!erts should be engaged in an initiati-e to restore the integrit" of the &T s"stems
of the US ourts) under aountabilit" to the US #ongress) with the goal of ma(ing suh s"stem as trans!arent
as !ossible to the !ubli at large$
7$ &n nations) where the se!aration of branhes of go-ernment is established b" law) the ourts must not be
!ermitted to de-elo! and im!lement the ourts* &T s"stems$
=$ Human Rights and internet ati-ists must (ee! a wathful e"e on the -alidit" and integrit" of &T s"stems of
the ourts and !risons
Se!tember 1%) 2015
Fose!h Kerni() PhE)
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
>',an 9i"h( Aler( ?85O@# AP9 B'+,ission ! Ani(e% B(a(es ! //n% session# $arge-!%ale &rau# in '( !)!tem! "& the US %"urt!
- Unann"un%e# regime %hange* 5/5