Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Crime Indeed Does Pay - Provided Your Are a Judge

Expand Messages
  • JAIL4Judges
    JAILers4Justice Judicial Accountability Initiative Law ______________________________________________________ Los Angeles, CA
    Message 1 of 1 , May 16, 2009

      Judicial  Accountability  Initiative  Law

      Los Angeles, CA                                              May 16, 2009

      A Public Service Announcement to America

      (To be removed from this PSA see instructions below)


      The Battle Lines are Drawn:  J.A.I.L. versus The Foreign Power 

      A Power Foreign to Our Constitution

      Mission Statement      JNJ Library        Federal J.A.I.L.

      FAQs              What?MeWarden?

      Crime Indeed Does Pay –

      Provided You Are a Judge


      I have known Sterling Norris personally for many years, and the two of us have appeared in front of the same television cameras re: judicial corruption. Sterling  used to work as a deputy prosecutor within the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office. He was, in my oppinion, too honest and too principled to be a D.A.  – Ron Branson

      ~   ~   ~

      Friday, May 15, 2009


      FISCAL CRISIS: Illegal Payments Create Law For Judicial Criminal & Liability Immunity: Nominees For U S Supreme Court To Be Impacted?

      Judicial Watch Attorney (Sturgeon vs County of Los Angeles )

      Los Angeles, CA While counties, cities and the entire state are on the brink of financial collapse all California Superior Court Judges are fighting hard, in court and in the State Legislature, to keep the illegal payments made to them by county governments. The Judicial Watch organization successfully challenged those payments made to Judges in L A County, where over the past decade it has been estimated that L.A. Judges have received up to $300 million dollars. A Fourth District Appellate Court decision in October 2008 (Sturgeon vs County of Los Angeles ) held those payments to the Judges were indeed unlawful. This action prompted the Judges to fight back.

      Judges were apparently worried about being prosecuted for criminal acts and liability for taking the unearned money. At the urging of the Los Angeles Superior Court, the California Judicial Council quietly authored a provision that was slipped into the State Budget legislation SBX 211, without public debate or awareness. This provision granted retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution to all California Judges and County officials who received or made those illegal payments of public money. Depending on who you talk to the payments are referred to as "unearned benefits" or "Judicial Benefits".


      Full Disclosure Network ® inteviewed Judicial Watch attorney Sterling Norris in April 2009 as part of an on going "special series" entitled Judicial Benefits and Court Corruption. We asked Norris what motivated the California Judicial Council to change the law giving themselves retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution? His response was:


      "they would not have sponsored the legislation unless they really felt the Judges needed immunity from criminal prosecution and liability".


      Ironically, Richard I. Fine, a former prominent anti-trust attorney is still sitting in the Los Angeles County Central Men's Jail, in isolation, for more than 70 days. He was held in contempt of court, after he attempted to disqualify Superior Court Judge David Yaffe from sitting on a case that involved the County of Los Angeles . According to Fine , Yaffe failed to disclose to the parties in the case (Marina Strand Colony II Homeowners Association vs County of Los Angeles ) that he had been receiving $46,000, on top of his State salary, from the County for years. Yaffe defended the practice of "coercive confinement" in response to a Writ of Habeas Corpus for Immediate Release filed by Fine in the Federal Court on March 29, 2009.


      Sterling Norris of Judicial Watch had these comments regarding unearned payments to Judges and their failure to disclose.

      • "There is no question that the judges should have disclosed they were receiving $46,000 from the County of L.A. , there is no way the judiciary, ethically, could get around it....""
      • "$46,000 each year is not a small amount, many people don't make that much all year and this, from the County, is on top their $200,000 State salary. In California they are the highest paid court judges in the nation".
      • "If (the Judges) are on the up and up, you go get a declaratory judgment (in court) saying, in spite of court consolidation, we are entitled to the money"
      • "We have never seen people excused from liability retroactively"
      • "There is a criminal doctrine of law that if you received money you are not entitled to, and you keep it, that is considered theft"

      Without immunity for criminal acts, a complicating factor associated with the illegal payments to Judges is that a number of Los Angeles Superior Court Judges have been appointed to higher courts during the past two decades . They now sit on the Supreme Court and the Appellate Court. The question is, does the fact they have accepted unearned money from other than their employer disqualify them from higher appointments? In his request for investigation and complaint to the U.S. Department of Justice Richard I. Fine points to both Appellate and Supreme Court Justices who have received illegal payments from the County and who have been granted criminal immunity. The California Constitution (Sec. 17, 19, 20) states that Judges may not receive money from other parties than their employer, the State of California , and the Legislature has the sole responsibility for setting compensation and retirement benefits. On page 4 of the Fine request for investigation he names California Supreme Court Justice Carlos Moreno, who has been mentioned as a possible nominee to the U. S. Supreme Court by President Obama.


      The on-going controversy over the State's fiscal crisis, Judicial benefits and appointments is playing out in yet another court hearing on July 2, 2009 when Appellate Justice Richman will preside in an L A Superior Court to rule on the Judicial Watch motion for injunctive relief, to prohibit the county from making futher illegal payments to the Judges. At that time Sterling Norris will have an opportunity to raise thie issue of Constitutionality of SBX2 11 granting Judges retroactive immuity for liability and criminal acts without public discussion or debate.

      The Judical Watch organization, has been been faced with formidable opposition from County of Los Angeles and their private lawfirm Jones-Day and the Superior Court of Los Angeles who retained Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher who successfully obtained "Intervenor" status in the case. The "unearned benefits" going to the Judges, not the public raises the issue who will pay the big law firms? Will it be the taxpayers or the Judges who personally benefit from the payments? Win or loose it is going to cost a lot of money.


      The Full Disclosure® Host Leslie Dutton contacted Judge Mary Wiss, president of the California Judges Association for an interview for this two-part with Sterling Norris, Judge Wiss referred us to their lobbyist, Mr. Mike Beliote, who declined an interview saying "the Judges have decided not to be interviewed on this subject" The Full Disclosure series is to be released to 40 cable systems and on the Internet in June 2009. This is part three and four of the on-going series. # # # #

      Labels: California Superior Court, Government Accountability, Judicial Benefits, Judicial Watch, Justice Carlos Moreno, L.A. County, Leslie Dutton, Richard I. Fine, SBX2 11, Sterling Norris



      J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law)www.jail4judges.org, has

      been in existence for over 12 years, and is in all 50 states and several foreign countries.

      To manage your email, place the word Subscribe or Unsubscribe

      in 'subject' line and hit reply. Your request will be automatically & instantly

      processed. (Note: Program will not permit re-subscribes once unsubscribed.)


      Our Founding Fathers said, "...with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine

      Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and

      our sacred honor." Dec. of Independence . We are a ministry in great need of

      your financial support. Donate to this vitally important work at;

      "J.A.I.L."  P.O. Box 207 , North Hollywood , CA 91603


      J.A.I.L. is a unique addition to our Constitution heretofore unrealized.

      JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America 's ONLY hope!


      E-Group sign on at http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/jail4judge s/join

      Visit our active flash - http://www.jail4jud ges.org/national _001.htm


      *   *   *

      He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to

      our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to

      their acts of pretended legislation.    - Declaration of Independence
      "..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless

      minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."  - Samuel Adams
      "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is

      striking at the root."   -- Henry David Thoreau                    



    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.