Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit Regarding Documentary Movie Narrated By Ed Asner Blocked By Court Politics? #VB112

May 1, 20125 Comments

JUDICIAL WATCH FIGHTS FOR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS

Los Angeles, CA  Full Disclosure Network® presents this 3 minute video trailer of a documentary movie entitled“The Cost of Courage” based on a three-year television interview series covering California Court Corruption and the 18 month long solitary “coercive confinement” of 70 year old former U.S. Prosecutor Richard I. Fine. The trailer features clips from the movie with actor Ed Asner who is the narrator, Richard Fine, Rabbi Chaim Mentz along with Mary Ellen and Tory Fine.


Loading video...

Court Case Prevents Completion of Movie
The Superior Court ban on access to Los Angeles Stanley Mosk courthouse, Department 86 courtroom even “when empty” has prevented Full Disclosure from completing the final scenes of the movie. The request made was to use the “empty” court room to video record an account of what happened there when Richard Fine was taken into custody by the Sheriff and to the Men’s Central Jail on March 4, 2009.Judicial Watch Fights For First Amendment RightsThe public interest legal organization Judicial Watch, Inc. filed a Federal lawsuit on behalf of Full Disclosure Network® Producer Leslie Dutton and the American Association of Women, a non-profit, educational organization sponsoring a documentary movie entitled “The Cost of Courage”. Named as defendants are Presiding Judge Lee Smalley Edmon, Department 86 Judge Ann I Jones and Superior Court Legal Counsel Brett Bianco, who all denied access to the empty court room in Department 86 at a time when it was not being used.

5 comments to “Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit Regarding Documentary Movie Narrated By Ed Asner Blocked By Court Politics? #VB112”

  1. joebanana | July 16, 2012 | Permalink Reply

    Wow, I like the new look. Wasn’t Dr. Fine “booked” in “San Pedro Municipal” court? The one that doesn’t have “booking” facilities? Or is even an actual court since Calif. went to supreme courts?

    • Kevin | December 5, 2012 | Permalink Reply

      Fine was not “persecuted” for exposing the corruption; Fine was a rep for “Marina Shores” who was a defendant. Fine failed to submit an answer to a complaint in proper time; THe rules allow that if the attorney admits he was at fault for failing to answer a complaint or other motion, and he pays all the damages resulting from such negligence, then the Court will vacate the “default judgment.” Fine agreed; when Fine found out the damages were approx. $50,000.00 he told the court to shove it…so they held him for contempt of court. His spending time in jail contempt was not for the exposure; judicial watch is promoting a false story, very twisted.

  2. Pete Martin | August 26, 2012 | Permalink Reply

    The rule of law is being attacked from all sides. Judges of all people should be aware of this. If we no not have justice in our society, then we have not social order. Sadly only anarchy will follow.

  3. Social sites | September 17, 2012 | Permalink Reply

    Hmm it seems like your website ate my first
    comment (it was super long) so I guess I’ll just sum it up what I wrote and say, I’m thoroughly enjoying your blog.

    I as well am an aspiring blog blogger but I’m still new to the whole thing. Do you have any helpful hints for beginner blog writers? I’d really appreciate it.

  4. us politics news | March 3, 2013 | Permalink Reply

    Wonderful beat ! I would like to apprentice even as you amend your website, how could i subscribe for a weblog website? The account helped me a appropriate deal. I have been a little bit familiar of this your broadcast offered bright transparent concept

Leave a Reply

s2Member®