2231 S Court, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.

net Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

Human Rights Alert

11-10-26 Voting Machines litigation in the US Court in New York – vague and ambiguous court records suggest conduct of simulated litigation
In Schulz et al v State of New York et al, the plaintiffs argued that their constitutional rights were violated by the use of electronic voting machines that are not open, verifiable, and transparent. At the conclusion of the 4-year litigation, US Judge Kahn found that the court had no subject matter jurisdiction. However, the litigation was commenced with invalid summons issued by the clerk of the court, numerous papers were filed by defendants as “Letter Motions”, resulting in “Order[s] on Letter Motion[s]”, no minutes were entered in the entire litigation, and the July 2011 Judgment is signed by neither a judge nor a deputy clerk and is not listed in the Judgment Index of the court. The case may be unique in showing the offices of the 50 state attorney generals colluding in the conduct of simulated litigation in the US court in New York.

Los Angeles, October 26 – Some of the US top computer and civil rights experts have repeatedly objected to electronic voting machines, as currently implemented, for being insecure and prone to voting fraud. [i ] The case of Schulz et al v State of NY et al (07-cv-00943) alleged that electronic voting machines that were not open, verifiable and transparent violate their voting rights. The case, which was dismissed on July 7, 2011, purportedly for “lack of subject matter jurisdiction”, was commenced in 2007 by plaintiffs from all 50 states against the election of commissions of all states. In 2008, US Judge Kahn dismissed the complaints against all states but New York, concluding, “each of the Plaintiffs’ standing is limited so as to only have standing against the Individual Defendants in the Plaintiff’s own state.” In the July 2011, Judge Kahn also dismissed the remaining complaint by the New York plaintiffs against the New York defendants “for lack of subject matter jurisdiction”, stating that “Plaintiffs have failed to establish a cognizable injury in this case, the Court finds that they lack standing to bring this case.” [ii ] However, review of the litigation record raises serious concerns that the case as a whole was conducted by the court and defendants’ attorneys as simulated litigation: [iii ]
• • • •

The litigation was commenced with invalid summons, bearing no seal of the court, [iv ] and a civil cover sheet that failed to adequately list the plaintiffs and defendants. [v ] Numerous papers were filed by the defendants in an invalid manner, as “Letter Motion[s]”, or “Letter Brief[s]”, and resulted in “Order[s] on Letter Motion[s]”; No minutes were entered in the entire litigation, invalid notes were listed in the docket instead, with no corresponding minute records; The July 2011 “Judgment” was signed by neither the judge, nor by an authorized deputy-clerk, and is not listed in the Judgment Index of the court, either.

Like the electronic voting machines, the electronic record systems of the US courts (PACER and CM/ECF) have been repeatedly shown to be insecure and prone to fraud. [vi ]

Page 2/2

October 26, 2011

Moreover, according to Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO), there is no way for the public to verify the validity of any of the records displayed in the online record systems. Ever since the implementation of the electronic record systems in the courts, the US courts have been hiding the clerk’s electronic authentication records (NEFs – Notices of Electronic Filing) from the public, in apparent violation of First Amendment rights. [vii ] In recent years evidence has been amassed of fraud in the US courts from coast to coast through the practice of simulated litigation, enabled by the electronic record systems of the US courts. “It’s a common charade. Any case in the US courts, involving banks or civil rights, is a suspect,” says Dr Zernik. [viii ] The fundamental problem is the same in the electronic voting machines and the electronic record systems in the courts. Paper systems, which were not infallible, but have evolved over centuries as open, verifiable and transparent, were replaced by obscure, unverified and nontransparent electronic systems. “The tools are out there for creating open, verified and transparent systems for both the electronic voting machines and the electronic record systems of the courts,” says Dr Zernik, “However, the US government has chosen to implement systems that fail to meet basic integrity standards in these two critical areas. Moreover, in both cases, the US government persists in its refusal to fix these systems, even in the face of indisputable evidence of large-scale fraud on the People.” LINKS
[1] 10-08-28 Common Cause: Voting Machines Report - Malfunction and Malfeasance http://www.scribd.com/doc/36565560/ [2] 10-04-19 Brennan Center for Justice Notice in Re: Unprecleared Voting Machines - violation of the voting act http://www.scribd.com/doc/36565891/ [3] 05-00-00 Validating Voting Machine Software http://www.scribd.com/doc/36630297/ [4] 05-05-19 MIT-Caltech: Auditing Technology for Electronic Voting http://www.scribd.com/doc/36629558/ [5] 10-10-06 US Electronic Voting Machines - Made to Defraud - Wired Magazine http://www.scribd.com/doc/47833408/ ii July 7, 2011 Memorandum-Decision and Order (Dkt #383); in 11-10-26 Schulz et al v State of NY et al (07-cv-00943) in the US Court, Northern District of New York – compiled litigation records http://www.scribd.com/doc/70431433/ iii Simulated Litigation here refers to cases, where the evidence shows conduct defined in the Texas Criminal Code as follows: Texas Penal Code §32.48. SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person recklessly causes to be delivered to another any document that simulates a summons, complaint, judgment, or other court process with the intent to: (1) induce payment of a claim from another person; or (2) cause another to: (A) submit to the putative authority of the document; or (B) take any action or refrain from taking any action in response to the document, in compliance with the document, or on the basis of the document. (b) Proof that the document was mailed to any person with the intent that it be forwarded to the intended recipient is a sufficient showing that the document was delivered. The practice is widespread in both the state and US courts at all levels. iv 8 USC 1691 says: "All writs and process issuing from a court of the United States shall be under the seal of the court and signed by the clerk thereof." v October 10, 2007 Summons and Civil Cover Sheet; in 11-10-26 Schulz et al v State of NY et al (07-cv-00943) in the US Court, Northern District of New York – compiled litigation records http://www.scribd.com/doc/70431433/ vi [1] Zernik, J: Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, International Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining, 1:69-83 (2010) http://www.scribd.com/doc/38328585/ [2] 11-08-01 Zernik, J: Fraud and corruption in the US courts is tightly linked to failing banking regulation and the financial crisis, 16th World Criminology Congress presentation http://www.scribd.com/doc/61351562/ [3] 11-07-06 Request filed by Windsor and Zernik with US Attorney General Eric Holder for Review of Integrity of Public Access and Case Management Systems of the US Courts http://www.scribd.com/doc/59480718/ [4] 10-10-11 Linzer, D. “In GITMO Opinion, Two Versions of Reality,” The National Law Journal, October 11, 2010 http://www.scribd.com/doc/53954229/ vii 11-05-20 NEF (Notice of Electronic Filing) in the US Courts Electronic Filing System (CM/ECF) http://www.scribd.com/doc/55862403/ viii [1] 11-01-10 Request No 1 for investigation/impeachment proceedings, in re: US Judge JED RAKOFF and Clerk RUBY KRAJICK, US District Court, Southern District of New York, Conduct of Securities and Exchange Committee v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829) http://www.scribd.com/doc/46616530/

Page 3/3

October 26, 2011

[2] 10-12-19 RE: Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829) - Addendum to Request No 1 for Investigation-impeachment of Judge Rakoff and Clerk Krajick http://www.scribd.com/doc/45644678/ [3] 11-02-05 Request No 2 for Impeachment of Judge JED RAKOFF Clerk RUBY KRAJICK, US District Court, Southern District of New York, in Re Conduct of Lindner v Amex (1:10-cv-02228) s http://www.scribd.com/doc/48244479/ [5] 10-12-07 Request for Investigation and if Appropriate - Impeachment Proceedings - against TERRY NAFISI - Clerk of the Court, US District Court, Central District of California s http://www.scribd.com/doc/44818903/ [6] 11-01-25 Request for Impeachment of US Supreme Court Clerk WILLIAM SUTER http://www.scribd.com/doc/47539382/ [7] 10-04-07 Sieverding et al v. United States Government (1:09-cv-00562) in the US District Court, Washington DC – in re: Arrest and Imprisonment by Federal Agencies - Alleged Impeachable Misconduct by US Judge John D Bates http://www.scribd.com/doc/45272251/ [8] 10-12-30 Lewis et al v Gleason et al (1:10-cv-01850) in the US District Court, Colorado – Opinion Regarding PACER Docket and Court Records in a Civil Rights Matter http://www.scribd.com/doc/46087140/ [9] 11-05-30 PRESS RELEASE: Judge Richard Leon, US District Court, DC – master of the “Leave to file denied” http://www.scribd.com/doc/56612919/ [10] 11-06-20 Requests for Investigation and Impeachment of Judge John Walter, Magistrate Carla Woehrle, Clerk Terry Nafisi, and others in the US District Court, Central District of California, in re: Fine v State Bar (2:10-cv-00048) http://www.scribd.com/doc/58273437/ [11] 11-07-02 Request for Impeachments US Judge O’Tool, Clerk Thornton, Both of the US District Court, Massachusetts http://www.scribd.com/doc/59188048/ [12] 10-12-06 Log Cabin Republicans v USA (2:04-cv-08425) at the US District Court, Central District of California: Don’t Ask Don’t Tell – Evidence of Another Pretense Litigation by Judge Virginia Phillips http://www.scribd.com/doc/44771304/ [13] 11-07-02 Request for Impeachments US Judge O’Tool, Clerk Thornton, Both of the US District Court, Massachusetts s http://www.scribd.com/doc/59188048/ ____

Joseph Zernik, PhD Human Rights Alert (NGO)

The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California. _______

Flag Counter: 126
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ http://inproperinla.wordpress.com/ http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/

Total Reads: 619,060 Followers: 1,105
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert http://twitter.com/inproperinla http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345

Total Item Views: 566,338

_____________________________ WHAT DID THE EXPERT SAY ABOUT THE CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS? * Foreclosure fraud: The homeowner nightmares continue CNN (April 7, 2011) * About 3 million homes have been repossessed since the housing boom ended in 2006 That number could balloon to about 6 million by 2013 Bloomberg (January 2011)

Page 4/4

October 26, 2011

* "...a system in which only the little people have to obey the law, while the rich, and bankers especially, can cheat and defraud without consequences."

Prof Paul Krugman, MIT (2011) _____________________________ WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA? * "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit." Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)

* "This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted." Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)

* "Innocent people remain in prison" * "...the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of..." LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)

_____________________________ WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN CALIFORNIA? * "...corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California." United Nations Human Rights Council Staff Report (2010)

_____________________________ WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE STATE COURTS IN THE UNITED STATES? * "On July 26, 2010, Laurence Tribe, Senior Counsel for the United States Department of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, delivered an important speech to the Conference of Chief Justices, challenging them to halt the disintegration of our state justice systems before they become indistinguishable from courts of third world nations." Prof Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law School (2010), per National Defender Leadership Institute (2010)

_____________________________ WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES? * "More than 100 law professors have signed on to a letter released today that proposes congressional hearings and legislation aimed at fashioning "mandatory and enforceable" ethics rules for Supreme Court justices for the first time. The effort, coordinated by the liberal Alliance for Justice, was triggered by "recent media reports," the letter said, apparently referring to stories of meetings and other potential conflicts of interest involving Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas among others." More than 100 law professors, as reported by the Blog of the Legal Times (February 2011)

_____________________________ WHAT DID CHIEF JUDGE OF THE US COURT OF APPEALS, 5TH CIRCUIT, SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM? * "The American legal system has been corrupted almost beyond recognition..." Chief Judge, US Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, Edith Jones, speaking before the Federalist Society of Harvard Law School (February 2003)

_____________________________ WHAT DID THE CHAIR OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM? * In a speech in Georgetown University, Senator Leahy, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee called for a "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" on the US Department of Justice. Transcript of Senator Leahy speech (2009)


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful