Ex-Prosecutor Exposes Judicial Conflicts, Forgery and More

Former County Prosecutor Steven J. Ipsen

Former County Prosecutor Steven J. Ipsen

 

Los Angeles, CA.  On February 19, 2013 an Emergency Petition for Writ of Mandamus was filed with the  9th Circuit Court of Appeals by former L A County Prosecutor Steven J. Ipsen  Exhibit 1 to the Writ describes the case.  On March 7, 2013 Chief Judge Alex Kozinski  of the 9th Circuit and the US District Court Central District of California received an additional Emergency Application to Vacate the Court’s Orders in the same case involving the Civil Rights of Prosecutors who had been discriminated and retaliated against by their employer,  Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley, in the case first known as One Unnamed Deputy District Attorney , et al. v County of Los Angeles, DA Steve Cooley, et.al. (CV 09-7931 )

FDN  Video Report Here (5 min)

 

 

Reason To Disqualify Magistrate Judge Jay Gandhi ?

Jay_Gandhi

Magistrate Judge Jay Gandhi

The Writ of Mandate cites from “the Motion to Disqualify Judge Gandhi Dkt. No. 376, pages 2-6 paragraphs 1-7,9 and 15 with respect to Judge Gandhi’s actual adverse financial conflicts of interest and appearance of bias therefrom.  Further documentation is on Pages 15-22, which Magistrate Judge Gandhi’s prior law firm, prior to his nomination as a Magistrate Judge, had as its representative client the District Attorney’s Office of Los Angeles County, district Attorney Cooley and the County of Los Angeles, including discrimination and retaliatory litigation against Deputy District Attorneys similar to Petitioner Ipsen.”

 

 

 

Evidentiary Hearing To Examine Forged Court Docs, Fabrications and Conflicts

bradley_gage

Bradley Gage, Esq.

The eighteen page application to Vacate the Court’s Orders filed on March 7, 2013, by former L A County Prosecutor Steve J. Ipsen, Esq. is seeking “an evidentiary hearing before a neutral U.S. District Court jurist and a Special Master appointed by 9th Circuit Chief Judge Kozinski, to prove the conflicts of interest between Plaintiff Ipsen and his former attorneys, the forgery and fabrication of evidence by Mr. Bradley Gage in concert with the defendants, the alteration of the witness list by attorney Gage in concert with “the defendants”, and the conflicts of interest of Magistrate Judge Gandhi and Judge Dolly Gee, without limitation.”

 

 

Jones Day Law Firm Is Outside Counsel For Defendants

ElwoodLui

Elwood Lui
Jones Day

“The defendants” in this case are the County of Los Angeles and District Attorney Steve Cooley, who are represented by one of the most powerful law firms in the nation, Jones Day, whose senior partner, Elwood Lui (Bar State No. 45538) name appears at the top a seven page (Motion In Limine) to Bar Testimony Of Plaintiff’s Witness involved in the controversy.  Jones Day is a major outside legal contractor with the County of Los Angeles and the Superior Court of California.   Mr. Lui is a former Justice of the California Court of Appeals, Second District. Chairman of the Committee for the appointment of State and Federal Judges appointed by Senator Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, and  he was the personal attorney for the L A County dealing with the case  Sturgeon vs County L.A. regarding the unauthorized  payments of over $350 million to L A judges by the County of L.A..

 

 

Attorney’s Avarahamy’s Declaration Reveals Forgery, Collusion and Conflicts

avrahamyHeadShot

Joseph Avrahamy. Esq.

 

Reply declaration concedes forgery, collusion and conflicts.  An astounding seven-page declaration dated February 19, 2013 filed with the U.S. District Court  by Ipsen’s attorney Joseph Avrahamy described attorney Bradley Gage as a Fiduciary, co-counsel for Mr. Ipsen,  “shortly before trial began Mr. Gage made several attempts to get Mr. Ipsen and me to sign a modified retainer agreement” and he noted that Mr. Gage sent over 100 E-mails to him and his client Steve Ipsen “to get him to reduce the size of his witness list and to eliminate witnesses that were important to his case.”

 

Bradley Gage Declaration (Page 7-16) Connects the Dots To Corruption

According to the Emergency Ex-Application to Vacate Court Orders   “ Mr Bradley Gage further showed in his reply Declaration pages 7-16 (filed February 25, 2013) that the defense counsel (Jones Day) jointly prepared the forged and fabricated stipulations and jointly filed them with the court, knowing in advance that Plaintiff’s counsel, Joseph Avrahamy, did not and would not have personally signed said stipulations and other documents that were forged and fabricated.”

 

WHAT IS THE REMEDY? 

CooleyHeadShot

Steve Cooley
L A District Attorney

Do you believe that 9th Circuit Chief Judge Kozinski should appoint a special master to investigate forgery by high profile attorneys? and/or conspiracy to engage in forgery by attorneys acting in concert with the County of L A and former District Attorney Steve Cooley?     Yes or No?

The State Bar is apparently ignoring the evidence of misconduct by District Attorney Steve Cooley on this case.  Should they step in to use their disciplinary authority to punish or  disbar attorneys who are practicing unprofessional and illegal activity?  Yes or No?

Should the attorneys involved be permitted to hide behind the attorney client privilege when they submit forged documents to the court to obstruct the administration of justice to injure the opposing party Yes or No ?      Please leave your comments below.

 



Categories: Corruption, Court Corruption, FDN, Government, Judicial, Law Enforcement, Political Corruption, Rule of Law
Tagged In: , , , , ,

Get the post permalink.