Thursday, June 4, 2009

LA Law - Neither False Judgments nor False Convictions Shall Be Reversed!

Rampart-FIPs - Where Are the Missing Minors?

All of us who live in LA, and in California in general, may have got a bit numb, and the U.S. Dept of Justice under the previous administration failed to send anybody here the wake up call, the coffee, the donuts, whatever it takes...

A judge who is reliably informed of “unprofessional conduct” by other judges or lawyers must initiate corrective action, pursuant to both State and U.S. codes of judicial ethics.

Standards of justice elsewhere in the U.S.
February 2009 - two Pennsylvania judges were arrested in relationship to false convictions of
March 2009 - the Pennsylvania Courts, of their own volition, within a month or less, set up panels to review and overturn the false convictions of such judges. The Pennsylvania judges did not engage in an extraordinary, heroic actions, they simply obeyed the law.

Standards of justice in Los Angeles County, California
1998-2000 - a 2-year, 200-investigator probe uncovered human rights abuses that were described as the worst abuses by police in the history of the U.S. However, at the end of the investigation, LAPD forgot to issue a report... to this date hardly any of the Rampart FIPs (falsey imprisoned persons) estimated at anywhere between 8,000-30,000 have been released, and hardly any of the perpetrators (estimated at 70-80) have been prosecuted...
June 2001 - U.S. government and City of LA, LAPD enter a Consent Decree. Some judges and prosecutors had obviously been involved in “unprofessional conduct” relative to minors, since the case that resulted in the Consent Decree (June 2001) in the aftermath of the Rampart Scandal, U.S. v City of LA et al (2:2000cv11769), was framed around the mistreatment of minors, not adults. The cause of action was 42 USC § 14141 which prohibits "a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers or by officials or employees of any governmental agency with responsibility for the administration of juvenile justice or the incarceration of juveniles that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States."
Newspapers reported that LA could be subject to penalties in the billions, and
also criminal liability for the mayor, city council, police chief, police commission, etc. Counsel for the City of LA and LAPD apparently concurred, since City of LA, the Mayor, LAPD, Police Commission, opted to yield and enter the Consent Decree.
September 2008 and beyond - where are the records of any overturned convictions of minors?
Can't find them, neither before the appointment of the Overseer per the Consent Decree, nor after... called and wrote the Consent Decree Bureau – no response. A decade has passed, and no corrective action was taken by the LA Superior Court!

Writs of Error Coram Nobis and Implied Rights to Honest Services - Att Ricahrd I Fine on Full Disclosure Network

Some nuggets...

Here are two quotes from a transcript of an interview of Att Richard I Fine with Leslie Dutton of Full Disclosure Network:

[T]hey violated ... what is called the implied or intangible right to honest services, and that's 18 United States Code, Section 1346, because ... when a judge takes money from an individual or even a government and then does not disclose it, he violates that particular code section.

-- Attorney Richard I. Fine

Every case in which one of these judges has ruled against you, as an individual, or you had a problem with the County, can now actually be overturned, because of the fact that they've legislated this immunity and they've given them the immunity for this bad act or for this illegal act. We have what is known as a writ of coram nobis*. And the writ of coram nobis says that if there's a new fact that has come in to show that what's happened with the case, you can now come in and say, "Look, I want my case overruled and I want my case redone." So that is a side effect of this legislation. For every person that had a case that went bad under one of these judges, come in on the writ of quorum nobis and ask to have the case re-heard. That's one of the things that can take place.

RICHARD FINE: That is a case that involved the County. Now, to give you an idea of how wide that can be, that can deal with eminent domain, that could deal with any kind of a homeowner case, that could deal with child custody cases. If a county was involved in any type of a custody case or any type of a case with children or children's services, and the County paid the Children's Services Department or if the County gets involved with support payments, or if the County gets involved in a divorce case and suddenly the County's brought in as part of the child custody with respect to an evaluation or something and the judge is following that, you can get that case overturned because the judge could be biased in looking at what the County did in deciding the custody situation. So you have all of these cases that can go in and get overturned at this particular point in time.

-- Attorney Richard I. Fine

* More often cited as "writ of error coram nobis" (error in our presence).

May 5, 2009; Full Disclosure Network'
March 3, 2009 interview of attorney Richard I. Fine by Leslie Dutton of Full Disclosure Network, posted March 8, 2009
Video "Coercive Confinement; Judicial Benefits and Court Corruption," Full Disclosure Network, May 5, 2009

Additional notes and commentary:

Adapted and reprinted for a non-profit educational purpose.