Los Angeles, CA The Full Disclosure Network® is presenting an 8-minute video update covering former U. S. Prosecutor Richard I. Fine, Ph.D. who was disbarred and jailed for 18 months in solitary coercive confinement after attempting to disqualify Judge David P. Yaffe, a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge for taking $860,000 illegally from L.A. County. Before releasing Dr. Fine from the L.A. County jail on September 17, 2010, on the eve of Kol Nidre, the day before Yom Kippur, Judge Yaffe unexpectedly announced his own resignation from office. Yet the battle to resolve the questions surrounding Dr. Fine's incarceration still remain, as does the controversy over the massive luxury apartment complex on L A. County owned land in Marina del Rey.
State Bar Review “Opinion” and Notice of Disciplinary Charges Lack Evidence
The State Bar acknowledged they
did not submit any evidence to support its charges against Dr. Fine (see
Review Department Opinion, footnote on page 24). The State Bar Court had alleged that Richard Fine’s cases raised the issue of certain judges taking illegal payments from the County of Los Angeles while being a litigant in the case (see
Notice of Disciplinary Charges, #15-18). According to Dr. Fine’s
First Amended Complaint Case No. CV-10-0048 his complaints against California Judges were protected under the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution and the litigation privilege.
Ninth Circuit Deputy Clerk Issues Order To Show Cause: Judge Signature Missing
A Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Deputy Clerk named
Cyntharee K. Powells issued an
Order To Show Cause (OSC) on 8-3-11 that was not signed by a Judge and solicited responses to Richard Fine's motion to regain his license. She wrote
"the questions on which the decision in the appeal depends may
be so insubstantial as to not justify further proceedings."
And, Deputy Clerk Powell requested the parties to respond. Here is the
Richard Fine response dated 8-24-11 to the Order to Show Cause (OSC) raising major Constitutional questions. Attorneys for the
State Bar responded on
August 30, 2011. In Richard
Fine’s Response to that filing he notes the State Bar at page 6, lines 9-11 shows the entire State Bar proceeding was a fraud as he had never been charged with bringing frivolous cases against judges based upon the illegal payments to the judges.
State Bar Attempts to Block Fine’s Challenge To Judicial Criminal Immunity (SBX2-11)
The State Bar’s response to the Deputy Clerk's OSC argued that Dr. Fine should not have to challenge the issue of
SBX2-11 which was passed by the California Legislature in 2009. SBX2-11 granted retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution for
all California judges (not just the ones challenged by Dr. Fine) This little known legislation was sponsored by the California Judicial Council. The Judicial Council was under Court Order to prepare a comprehensive 2009 report that found 90 percent of all California Judges were receiving illegal payments from the Counties. Dr. Fine filed this
Judicial Notice on SBX2-11 with the Court on 8-24-11 calling the Court’s attention to the California Commission on Judicial Performance unanimous opposition the Constitutionality of
SBX2-11. He requested the California Attorney General’s opinion on the illegal judicial payments and retroactive criminal immunity to judges. In the 2008
Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, decision, the judicial payments from the County of Los Angeles were found to be illegal. Over $350 million was illegally paid to Los Angeles County judges alone, according to Judicial Watch, the public interest legal organization representing Sturgeon the plaintiff.
State Bar a Vehicle For Corruption?
Professor Emeritus
Daniel Gottlieb, Ph.D. who reviewed hours of audio tapes from the State Disbarment proceedings against Dr. Fine, appears in the Full Disclosure video. Dr. Gottlieb offers his observation that the State Bar President at the time was Sheldon Sloan who was representing developers who were opposing Richard Fine in Court and the disbarment proceeding that appeared to be retaliation prompted by Sloan’s clients developers
Jerry and Pat Epstein in the Marina Strand Colony II Homeowners Assn. v. County of Los Angeles case. Dr. Gottlieb provide his opinion on the relationship between State Bar, the Developers, the Judges and the County.
Opposing Attorneys Headed the California State Bar.
Now that Richard Fine has been released from jail, the issues to be resolved are focused on the L A County government’s illegal payments to the judges, the approval of a controversial developments and the developers and County’s attorneys who were successive Presidents of the California State Bar Association at the time of disbarment of Richard I. Fine. Additionally a questionable $125 million HUD Loan Guarantee for the project whose HUD application has raised questions and has been criticized for being in conflict with the "affordable housing" mission of HUD.
White House Connection
As noted in subsequent interviews, Richard Fine points to
Jeffery Bleich who was the successor State Bar President and who presided while disbarment proceedings against Dr. Fine were concluding. Bleich was a partner with Munger, Tolles and Olson, who was under contract with the County of Los Angeles. The firm was hired to negotiate the Marina del Rey leases for the developers
Jerry and Pat Epstein and others on L .A. County-owned property. All of these entities were parties named by Dr. Fine in Court documents. Bleich was appointed to the position of Special White House Counsel to the President just after Richard Fine was sent to jail—held for eighteen months in solitary coercive confinement—in March of 2009.
Related Video & Links:
Comments to date: 39. This is page 1 of 4.
Susan Safstrom Bemidji, MN
Posted: 03:33 am [PST] on February 13 2012
There is NO accountability for judges or attorneys. We are completely at the mercy [of which there is none] of corrupt public officials, and their retaliation. I am going thru this now, have been for 5 yrs., and am continuing to be threatened, along with any attorneys and ACLU that I have tried to get help from.
Hamer California
Posted: 11:11 am [PST] on January 19 2012
http://www.cjp.ca.gov/res/docs/public_admon/Wagoner_DO_9-13-11.pdf
Judge James Wagoner openly fixed the felony of David Randal, a complaint was filed against the Judge with the Counsel on Judicial Performance in 2007. He was admonished in "2009 by a couple, Pat and Donna Hamer" for obstruction of justice claims for fixing and manipulating the trial of David Randal, see cjp outcome http://www.cjp.ca.gov/res/docs/public_admon/Wagoner_DO_9-13-11.pdf , see "2009 complaint by couple."
Also see Elected Sheriff Jeff Neves "stepped down from office," during this time of open corruption allegations.
Also see Board of Supervisor Helen Baumann, removed from the Sacrament Legislator bid in 2008 for fabricating false arrest reports scam to influence peddle the Sacramento Republican Party who questioned her about the “Randall” case CASE NO.: 2:08-CV-02269-KJM-EFB.
David Randall was in jail on a $230,000.00 bail, and 4 docket numbers existed for trials. 2 trials were unrelated to his deranged gun assault on 7 kids and the car accident victims, one being an accused. Him and his wife go ad hominem accusing their victims of sex crimes that do not exist. They filed 4 unsuccessful suits for restraining orders. 2 of them, they laid bizarre allegations, claiming they are both under “psychiatric care” and submitted a “medical billing” for “manic depressive psychosis” and “personality disorders.”
See Macias v. Ihde. Officials who behave like this in the Randal case and the “cause of murder.” Estate of Macias v. Ihde, 219 F.3d 1018, 1028-29 (9th Cir. 2000):
The Appellants contend that the district court "fundamentally misconstrued" the constitutional deprivation at issue in this case. They maintain that the alleged constitutional deprivation occurred when the defendants failed to provide Mrs. Macias with equal police protection in the months leading up to her death. Their brief states: 35 Estate of Macias v. Ihde, 219 F.3d 1018, 1028-29 (9th Cir. 2000):
The Appellants contend that the district court "fundamentally misconstrued" the constitutional deprivation at issue in this case. They maintain that the alleged constitutional deprivation occurred when the defendants failed to provide Mrs. Macias with equal police protection in the months leading up to her death. Their brief states: 35
Richard I Fine case is relevant to this abuse of power. David Randall is stalker, officially charged with stalking by police, where there the investigation was suppressed to cover up police negligence. The above relevant cases involving the punishment of Judge Wagoner in 2009, and his subsequent punishment of “illegally jailing” and causing the torture of breaking of bones against individuals who protest and publically expose negligence.
Here, a “David Randall,” if the same, openly continues to stalk in violation of 646.9 of the California penal code. This is bizarre and this type of behavior commonly ends in the murder of those stalked. Any concerned citizen aware of this type of stalking in retaliation of exercising the petition clause under the first amendment should contact the FBI http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/corruption
The initial allegations were dismissed, identically to the way Macias was dismissed, by use of fallacy of logic, called “fundamentally misconstruing” the constitutional basis to a non-actionable allegation that was not alleged as the “substantial motivating factor.” We argued a retaliation claim, and the defense failed to respond, a fatal error under FRCP Rule 8(b)(6) where failing to respond to the claim admits the claim as fact. Yet it takes a corrupt Magistrate, such as Edmund F. Brennan to fail to respond to objections, willfully and address them. This is shown in the record. Edmund F. Brennan, actually quoted non existing facts citing them to references and documents that did not exist as a basis for a district court judge to “adopt” frauduelent deceptive” “Magistrate Findings and Recommendations” in violation of 28 USC 636. I don’t think that the Ninth Circuit is interested in protecting potential mentally ill gun advocates who frequently get arrested for 245(a) assault with deadly weapons or vandalism, or are they?
On appeal, the county settled the case losing 26k dollars as a result, in our favor. Any more abuse or retaliatory frivolous state or private action will brought to the 9th Circuit Appellate court with a writ of mandamus, a constitutional right under the crime victims bill of rights under federal law. From there, the federal court through injunction can by pass state court good ole boy acquiescence to corruption and cause the appropriate law enforcement to follow proper procedure, by demanding a “rational basis” to support inaction by law enforcement.
Carl Brodner Florida
Posted: 11:17 am [PST] on January 19 2012
P.S. The budget cuts here for our therapy treatments here at the Mental Health facility have taken their toll. While I am no longer being treated, I have been assured of long term care at taxpayer expense. Thank goodness I have access to the Internet so I can keep in touch with the outside world. I am now using code for my messages as you will note qrseluh hgRXQNcyxp was sent from my computer IP address.
Carl
qrseluh hgRXQNcyxp
Posted: 08:09 am [PST] on December 16 2011
753s2p , [url=http://lcoaorqohduy.com/]lcoaorqohduy[/url], [link=http://wugwqpxbunhf.com/]wugwqpxbunhf[/link], http://turtfkeapatk.com/
bkomhddmyz sfIbQpQicYWhebsj
Posted: 01:50 am [PST] on December 15 2011
UEOt9y zbgeyajzhkjw
ikomswn mtOdTcamo
Posted: 08:04 am [PST] on December 14 2011
w7RHjs , [url=http://vhepyyupukbp.com/]vhepyyupukbp[/url], [link=http://pcguaovfjsfk.com/]pcguaovfjsfk[/link], http://ytifocjjkebf.com/
nvjhzgdafwh UJAKwtStvOYTBtEmd
Posted: 10:51 am [PST] on December 13 2011
D05GV8 bocqjiusckwi
Honeysuckle DzgHbcAdAXOjP
Posted: 06:38 am [PST] on December 13 2011
Way to use the internet to help people solve prbolems!
David Randall California
Posted: 09:44 am [PST] on November 22 2011
Pat Hamer does get one thing right in that poorly written community college essay he calls a comment. It does "sound very paranoid and irrational to make such claims!" Because he is "off his rocker!" In my opinion the only one out for profit here is Pat Hamer.
This guy has been wasting the tax payers money by filing privilous and vexatious law suits against public officials and private citizens for years now. He has failed at every level of our judicial system thus far starting with County Code Enforcement all the way to the 9th District... He only stops flapping his lips when the when he realizes that he may be held responcible and judically ordered to reimburse the government for all unnecessary expenses incurred do to the unmerited, unfounded and malicious lawsuits filed by Patricl Michael Hamer and his wife Donna Lee Hamer not to mention the lawsuit that may be headed their way from the private citizens they have been harassing.
Pat Hamer Absolute Immunity victim
Posted: 09:47 am [PST] on October 26 2011
I should mention, thought the feds defrauded is, in the "cover-up" against us, Judge James Wagoner was admonished by the CJP.ca.gov see http://www.cjp.ca.gov/res/docs/public_admon/Wagoner_DO_9-13-11.pdf
I am the 2009 case, but he did it again to Penny Arnold, and he's still on the bench.
The point is, Penny Arnold and Myself have had a judge punished, and no civil right group such as this will give this case credence. It is the successful efforts that are hid by media, such as this that has a motive of ego or lack of understanding on how to use momentum to get the work done. I suspect that this site may also be now just a egomania or marketing for profit site. Momentum is a basic law that uses inertia to propel energy in order that energy is not wasted.
Until groups like this grab hold of inertia, our plight is wasted energy.