2016-11-13 State of Israel v Rafi Rotem (1074-02-13) in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court:

Urgentfourthrequest(No50)pertainingtoinspectionofalawfullymadeand
enteredProtocoloftheOctober06,2016ReadingtheVerdictHearing//
(50 ):( "1074-02-13)
" "
2016 , 06

BILINGUAL FILING ENGLISH FOLLOWS THE HEBREW

"
1074-02-13

.
:
'
" ,33407-
077-3179186 :

" " 062016 ,
, ,
" "
06:2016 ,
.1 31 ,2016 ,
" " 06,
.2016
.2 , 06 ,2016 ,
, .
.3 , " ,
" / )"(
, ,
.
.4 , ,
" " ".
.5 06 ,2016 , )
13 ,(2016 , , 07,
2016 ) .(1

1/8

 :1 " " 13 ,2016 ,

" " 06,
,2016 07.2016 ,
_____
.6

.7
.8

.9

, , " ",
, , .
, )(
.
06 ,2016 ,
- .
,
" " 06 ,2016 ,
" " , -
06 .2016 , ,

:
( " "
) ,(1966,
( " "
)..(1948
07 ,2016 , " "
) " .(2 " :
" .
" " .
" " " "
06 ."2016 ," "
" ".

:2 " 07,2016 ,

" " 06 :2016 ,
".
________

2/8

 .10 08 ,2016 ,
- .
.11 09 " " ,
" : ) ".6.10.16 .(3

:3 " 09,2016 ,

" " 06 :2016 ,
".8.10.16
________
.12 " " 09,
,2016 " . " :
( ,
" "
06.2016 ,
( ,
.
.13 " , " ,

06.2016 ,
:
.14
-

.
.15
. " "
[1] .
20160711Complaint,filedwiththeUNHumanRightsCouncil,Working
GrouponArbitraryDetention,inRE:RomanZadorovUkrainiancitizen
detainedinIsrael:Attachment9.5JudgeVardaAlshechFabricated
ProtocolsscandalIsraelBarAssociationcomplaintandOmbudsmanofthe
)JudiciaryMay31,2012decision(12/88/TelAvivDistrict
" ,
, : - 9.5
1

3/8

- .16
.
, ,
.
,
)""( ,
,

. ,2016 , 06 " "
!

__________________
2016 , 13 :
-
_____________________________ _____________________________

TelAvivMagistrateCourt
StateofIsraelvRafaelRotem

10740213

Requester:
JosephZernik,PhD
POBox33407,TelAviv
Fax:0773179186
Urgentfourthrequestpertainingtoinspectionofalawfully
madeandenteredProtocoloftheOctober06,2016Reading
theVerdictHearing.
TheRequesterofInspection,JosephZernik,PhD,fileshereinaan
urgentfourthrequest,pertainingtoinspectionofalawfullymade
andenteredProtocoloftheOctober06,2016ReadingtheVerdict
Hearing:
1.OnOctober31,2016,Ifiledmyoriginalrequesttoinspecta
lawfullymadeandenteredProtocoloftheOctober06,2016
ReadingtheVerdictHearing.
2.TheoriginalRequeststatesthattheOctober06,2016Hearing
wasopentothepublicandtheProtocolrecordwasnotlawfully
sealed.
" "
( "12/88) 2012 , 31
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8Aa2xQGbmk5SUZuQlU5eXVIc2M

4/8

3. TheoriginalrequestalsostatesthatonitsfacetheOctober06,
2016Hearingappearedasaninformal,offtherecordhearing
i.e.simulated/shamhearingamethodoffraudbyjudges,
whichiswellknownworldwideforgenerations,andwhichis
commontodayamongIsraelijudges.
4.TheoriginalRequestalsostatesthatincontrastwithProtocol
recordsofprevioushearingsininstantcourtfile,noProtocol
wasenteredintheCaseCalendartabinNetHaMishpat[case
managementsystemoftheCourtjz]fortheOctober06,2016
ReadingtheVerdictHearing.
5.TheOctober06,2016Protocolhasalsonotbeenenteredtothis
date(November13,2016),althoughtheprotocolforthe
subsequenthearingofNovember07,2016hasalreadybeen
entered.(Figure1).

Figure1:CaseCalendartabinNetHaMishpatonNovember13,
2016,stillfailstoshowtheentryofaProtocolfortheOctober06,
2016ReadingofVerdictHearing,butshowstheentryofa
November07,2016Protocol.
_____
6. TheoriginalRequestalsoexplainsthatinthiscase,theconduct
ofaformal,ontherecordReadingofVerdicthearing,andthe
hearingprotocolholdcriticalsignificancesincetheProtocol
functionsinthiscaseasauthenticationoftheVerdictrecord
itself.
7. OnNovember06,2016,Ifiledanurgentrequestforrenderinga
decisionontherequesttoinspectmysecondfilinginthis
matter.

5/8

8. Theurgentrequestexplicitlystatesthatthecurrent
circumstancesoffailuretodulyenteraProtocolforthe
October06,2016ReadingofVerdictHearing,togetherwith
thepublicationofaVerdictrecordofthesamedate,generated
avagueandambiguouslegalstatus,relativetovalidityand
enforceabilityoftheOctober06,2016Verdictrecord.
Creatingsuchconditions,andevenmoresofailingtocorrect
themoncetheCourtwasnoticedwouldnodoubtbedeemeda
seriousviolationofthefundamentalrights:
a)DueProcess,pursuanttotheInternationalCovenantonCivil
andPoliticalRights(1966),and
b)FairPublicHearing,pursuanttotheUniversalDeclarationof
HumanRights(1948).
9.OnNovember07,2016,JudgeDanielBeeriissuedaPostit
DecisiononmyurgentrequestforrenderingDecision(Figure
2).ThePostitDecisionsays:LettheRequesterinspectthe
Verdictrecord.
TheNovember07,2016PostitDecisionfailstoaddressthe
requestatall.Therequestpertainstoalawfullymadeand
enteredProtocoloftheOctober06,2016ReadingofVerdict
Hearing.The"PostitDecision"pertainstothe"Verdict"record
instead.

Figure2:November07,2016PostitDecisionbyJudgeDaniel
Beeriontheurgentrequestforrenderingadecisiononrequestto
inspectlawfullymadeandenteredOctober06,2016Readingthe
VerdictHearingProtocol:LettheRequesterinspecttheVerdict
record.
________
10.OnNovember08,2016,Ifiledarepeaturgentrequestfor
renderingadecisionontherequesttoinspectmythirdflingin
thismatter.
6/8

11.OnNovember09,2016,JudgeDanielBeeriissuedanother
PostitDecision,whichsays:TheessenceoftheVerdictwas
readonOctober06,2016.(Figure3).

Figure3:November09,2016PostitDecisionbyJudgeDaniel
Beeri,onrepeaturgentrequestforrenderingadecisiononthe
requesttoinspectalawfullymadeandenteredProtocolofthe
October06,2016ReadingtheVerdictHearing:Theessenceof
theVerdictwasreadonOctober06,2016.
_____
12.JudgeDanielBeeriNovember09,2016PostitDecisionagain
failstoaddresstherequesttoinspectinanyway,shape,or
form.ThePostitDecision:
a)Againavoidsdirectlyaddressingtheexistence,orlack
thereof,ofalawfullymadeandenteredProtocolofthe
October06,2016ReadingofVerdictHearing.
b)Wasagainunlawfullyhiddenfromthepublic,and
demonstratestheongoingpracticeofmaintenanceofdouble
booksforDecisionsDocketincriminalproceedingsin
instantcourtfile.
13.Moreover,theNovember07,2016documentsthatJudge
DanielBeeriobstinatelyavoidstakingthesimplestcorrective
measuredulyenteringofaProtocolfortheOctober06,2016
"ReadingofVerdict"Hearing.
Summary:
14.Areasonableperson,whowouldreviewthematterwould
undoubtedlyreachtheconclusionthatJudgeDanielBeeriis
engagedincriminal,extrajudicialconductfraudonthebench
inordertopervertcriminalcourtprocessinacaseofthehighest
publicpolicysignificance.

7/8

15.SuchconducthasbecomecommonplaceamongIsraelijudges
inrecentyears.JudgeVardaAlshechsFabricatedProtocols
scandalisthebestknownexample.[2]
16.Conductofsham/simulatedcourthearingisdeemedworldwide
extrajudicialcriminalconduct,whichisnotcoveredbyany
immunity.However,intheStateofIsraelnotasinglejudge,of
themanycaughtinsuchcriminality,hasbeenprosecutedtothis
date.
Therefore,inordertorefutetheconclusionthatJudgeDaniel
Beeriisengagedincriminalityonthebench,theessenceof
whichisfalsification/simulationoftheReadingtheVerdict
Hearingandwithitalsofalsification/simulationofthe
Verdictitself,IhereinagainurgentlyrequestthatJudge
DanielBeerirenderadecisionontherequesttoinspecta
lawfullymadeandenteredProtocoloftheOctober06,2016
ReadingtheVerdictHearing,ifitexistsatall.
ThecriminalityofIsraelijudgesisintolerable!

Date:November13,2016

__________________
JosephZernik,PhD
RequesterofInspection

SeeFootnote1,above.

8/8