Re: "Design and Operation of the Electronic Record Systems of the US Courts are Linked to Failing Banking Regulation," Data Analytics - in press
- ----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell
To: joseph zernik
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: "Design and Operation of the Electronic Record Systems of the US Courts are Linked to Failing Banking Regulation," Data Analytics - in press
> US law requires that the summons bear the signature of the Clerk of the Court and the Seal of the Court. US law deems failure to have summons issued, bearing both the signature of the Clerk of the Court and the Seal of the Court, a fatal defect, invalidating the litigation. The summons is unsigned, and fails to show the seal of the court.
Excellent, Dr. Zernik!
Please allow us to amplify and elaborate upon your
excellent summary above:
The case law that has accumulated under 28 U.S.C. 1691
is nearly unanimous in holding that a failure to comply
with the clear requirements of 28 U.S.C. 1691
deprives the Court of jurisdiction in personam:
http://www.supremelaw.org/stat/62/28usca1691.1.gif (U.S. Code Annotated)
http://www.supremelaw.org/stat/62/28uscs1691.1.gif (U.S. Code Service)
http://www.supremelaw.org/stat/62/62stat945.gif (in 28 U.S.C. since 6/25/1948)
Furthermore, the Federal statute at 5 U.S.C. 2906
designates the "court" as the legal custodian of all
OPM SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS
required of all court personnel by 5 U.S.C. 3331:
Insofar as employees dba "clerks" and "deputy clerks"
do NOT have legal custody of their own OPM SF-61
APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS, or if they have never
executed those required credentials in the first place,
it is legally impossible for any such Federal court
to comply with 28 U.S.C. 1691 -- because there are
no lawful "clerks" or "deputy clerks" to place their
"authorized signatures" on any court "process".
Cf. "authorized signature" in Black's Law Dictionary.
And, when employees dba "clerks" have failed
to execute OPM SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS,
they are thereby impersonating officers of the
United States (Federal government), and that is
a FELONY violation of 18 U.S.C. 912:
(I didn't make these laws; Congress did!)
Under those circumstances, such a Federal court
is rendered legally impotent because it cannot
issue ANY "process" -- as that term has come to be
defined in standing case law (see above).
For example, the term "process" also contemplates
all Court "orders"; without being able to issue
court "orders" that comply with section 1691,
such a court cannot really do anything:
it can't rule on ANY motions, whether to DENY
or to GRANT any proper motions
e.g. MOTION TO DISMISS, MOTION TO COMPEL etc.
Furthermore, whenever such "sewer service" is transmitted
to litigation parties via U.S. Mail, the fact that it does not
comply with section 1691 means such paperwork
is material evidence of Mail Fraud, and Mail Fraud is a
FELONY violation of 18 U.S.C. 1341:
That's how serious these widespread and
habitual violations of 28 U.S.C. 1691 have become!
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)
All Rights Reserved without PrejudiceOn Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:43 AM, joseph zernik <jz12345@...> wrote:
"Design and Operation of the Electronic Record Systems of the US Courts are Linked to Failing Banking Regulation," Data Analytics - in press
Through fraud and corruption in the US courts, bankers are permitted to loot the People of the United States
SEC Chair Mary Schapiro, US Judge Jed Rakoff, Bank of America President Brian Moynihan
Los Angeles and Jerusalem, July 20 The current report is based on data mining of the information systems of the US courts – PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) and CM/ECF (Case Management/Electronic Court Filing), and a case study of landmark litigation under the current financial crisis: Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation (2009-10). The case originated in the unlawful taking of $5.8 billions by banking executives, and concluded with the executives never returning the funds to the stockholders and no individual being held accountable. The case was covered numerous times by major US and world media.
Data mining of records of the US courts from coast to coast reveals built-in deficiencies in validity and integrity of the PACER and CM/ECF. The case study documents missing and invalid litigation records, leading to the conclusion that the case as a whole amounts to simulated litigation.
A number of corrective measures are outlined, including publicly and legally accountable functional logic verification of PACER and CM/ECF, and correction of the defective signature and authentication procedures now implemented in the systems. Information systems and data mining experts face a unique duty in safeguarding the integrity of the courts, human rights, and civil societies in the digital era.
Keywords- e-Courts; e-Government; United States, Banking Regulation
Figure 4: Summons as Issued by the Clerk of the Court, and as executed:
- The US law requires that the summons be included in the docket. The US District Court failed to docket the summons.
- The US law requires that the summons be a public record. The US District Court refused to permit public access to the summons and other records in this case.
- The US law requires that the summons bear the signature of the Clerk of the Court and the Seal of the Court. The US law deems failure to have summons issues, bearing both the signature of the Clerk of the Court and the Seal of the Court a fatal defect, invalidating the litigation. The summons is unsigned, and fails to show the seal of the court.
Figure 1. Two entries from the online PACER Docket of SEC v BAC (1:09-cv-06829) in the US District Court, Southern District of New York. The January 12, 2010 entry includes a Docket Number and a link to an actual record. The January 19, 2010 entry has no Docket Number designated, and no link to any record. Therefore, no court record exists for the latter entry. Moreover, given the design of the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filing), even had the respective record existed somewhere, it couldn’t possibly have been authenticated, and therefore, would have been an invalid court record. Therefore, the multiple entries in the docket of this case, where no Docket Number and links are provided, should be deemed false and deliberately misleading docket notations.
12-05-24 Zernik, J:Design and Operation of the Electronic Record Systems of the US Courts are Linked to Failing Banking Regulation, Data Analytics - in press
Anonymous recommends flying the flag upside down, a traditional signal of distress...
Boycott the US presidential vote! It only legitimizes the illegitimate...
12-04-15 2012 Presidential election votes will be counted in Spain
11-12-10 Where should Occupy go next? Civil Disobedience in the footsteps of Thoreau and Gandhi!
http :// www.scribd.com/doc/75348301/
12-06-08 Courts and Judges as racketeering enterprises under RICO (the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) - key element in the current financial crisis
Get Up, stand up, stand up for your rights! Get Up, stand up, don't give up the fight!
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
* The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations, regarding the United States, was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.”
* The 2012 submission of Human Rights Alert to the HRC regarding the State of Israel, titled "Integrity or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel," is scheduled for review in early 2013.
Human Rights Alert online
Flag Counter: 140
Total Reads: 868,060
Total Reads: 50,147
Total Item Views: 664,803+304,012
Facebook Friends: 3,206
Take away justice, then, and what are governments but great bandit bands?
Saint Augustine, Civitas Dei (City of God,4.4)
WHAT DID THE EXPERT SAY ABOUT THE CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS?
* "I think it's difficult to find a fraud of this size on the U.S. court system in U.S. history," said Raymond Brescia, a visiting professor at Yale Law School who has written articles analyzing the role of courts in the financial crisis. "I can't think of one where you have literally tens of thousands of fraudulent documents filed in tens of thousands of cases."
Reuters (Jan 22, 2012)
* Foreclosure fraud: The homeowner nightmares continue
CNN (April 7, 2011)
* About 3 million homes have been repossessed since the housing boom ended in 2006… That number could balloon to about 6 million by 2013
Bloomberg (January 2011)
* "...a system in which only the little people have to obey the law, while the rich, and bankers especially, can cheat and defraud without consequences."
Prof Paul Krugman, MIT (2011)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?
* "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit."
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
* "This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted."
Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)
* "Innocent people remain in prison"
* "...the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of..."
LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN CALIFORNIA?
* "...corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California."
United Nations Human Rights Council Staff Report (2010)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE STATE COURTS IN THE UNITED STATES?
* "On July 26, 2010, Laurence Tribe, Senior Counsel for the United States Department of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, delivered an important speech to the Conference of Chief Justices, challenging them to halt the disintegration of our state justice systems before they become indistinguishable from courts of third world nations."
Prof Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law School (2010), per National Defender Leadership Institute (2010)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE CONDITIONS IN THE PRISON IN MONROE COUNTY, TENESSEE?
* "What goes on there is more like gulags of centuries ago."
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES?
* "More than 100 law professors have signed on to a letter released today that proposes congressional hearings and legislation aimed at fashioning "mandatory and enforceable" ethics rules for Supreme Court justices for the first time. The effort, coordinated by the liberal Alliance for Justice, was triggered by "recent media reports," the letter said, apparently referring to stories of meetings and other potential conflicts of interest involving Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas among others."
More than 100 law professors, as reported by the Blog of the Legal Times (February 2011)
WHAT DID CHIEF JUDGE OF THE US COURT OF APPEALS, 5TH CIRCUIT, SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM?
* "The American legal system has been corrupted almost beyond recognition..."
Chief Judge, US Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, Edith Jones, speaking before the Federalist Society of Harvard Law School (February 2003)
WHAT DID THE CHAIR OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM?
* In a speech in Georgetown University, Senator Leahy, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee called for a "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" on the US Department of Justice.
Transcript of Senator Leahy speech (2009)