As part of the first ever, 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States, the Human Rights Council issued a staff report referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession” in California. [1]
Correspondence with a California attorney, documents how it works in practice in everyday life at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
The attorney in fact tacitly admitted that he would participate in court proceedings, where he would not ascertain that the judge holds an Assignment Order, that he would not ascertain that the judge does not "waive" the Due Process right for Notice and Service, and that he would not ascertain that any appealable order and judgment is entered in the manner required by California Code to make it "effectual for any purpose".
In short: He would represent a client and collect legal fees in cases that are pretense court proceedings, and would not disclose it to his clients.
_________

At 09:05 PM 10/26/2010, California Attorney wrote:
Still no word from you on judge [redacted] dpt [redacted]. If you know of nothing, just let me know. I do not know if you are receiving the emails and choosing not respond, or simply not answering. thanks

Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 4:02 PM by Joseph Zernik
[redacted]
Stanley Mosk Courthouse Dept [redacted]
[redacted] [added – severl of them are pretense receiverships]
I start most of my work off records alone. I found only eight (8) cases where [redacted] was involved, and only partial records at best.
However, there is no doubt that [redacted] is a corrupt judge, on multiple accounts.
It looks like [redacted] and Attorney KEVIN SINGER do the dog and pony show like Judge JOHN SEGAL and Attorney DAVID PASTERNAK. [added – in pretense receiverships]
Thanks for bringing [redacted] name to my attention.
JZ

At 03:01 AM 10/27/2010, Joseph Zernik wrote:
What does that mean 8 cases [redacted] was involved in??

Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:10 PM by Joseph Zernik
I managed to find records and reports only of 8 captions. Involved in - in some of these cases multiple judges juggled the case, apparently with no assignment orders, a typical pattern in group racketeering at the court, and [redacted] was only one of a group.

At 02:24 AM 10/27/2010, California Attorney wrote:
Yes, my case was related to another case, judge [redacted] ordered it related and transferred to probate court. [redacted] refused to cooperate and refuses to move the case over.

Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 1:19 PM by Joseph Zernik
Although I never used these words, my report to the United Nations was summed up by the legal staff of the Human Rights Council as "corruption of the courts and the legal profession".
· Would you inform your client when a judge is presiding with no Assignment Order?
· Would you inform your client when a judge "waives" the right for notice and service?
· Would you inform your client when all Minutes in the court file fail to be signed by the Clerk of the Court or Deputy Clerk?
· Would you inform your client when Judgment or Appealable Order is not entered, yet the court enforces it in violation of the law?
I simply cannot see how any attorney can practice in Los Angeles County, California, unless he/she is either incompetent or corrupt.
JZ

At 11:37 PM 11/2/2010, California attorney wrote:
Well, I do not believe I am either one of your choices

Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 23:54:49 +0200, California Attorney wrote:
· Would you inform your client that a judge in his/her case is presiding with no Assignment Order?
· Would you inform your client when the judge "waives" notice and service?
· Would you inform your client that none of the Minutes in the court file are duly signed by a Deputy Clerk, and therefore are void?
· Would you inform your client that his/her judgment was never entered?
It is a tough job for an attorney to walk between the drops...

Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 15:05:16 –0700, California Attorney wrote:
Is this happening all the time? Sorry I have not been reading each of your emails. If a judgment is not entered, I would have that corrected, and have, but as for the other three, I have never seen it, but I also have not been looking at it Im sure as closely as you. but I guess your point is that all attorneys should be. I have never been involved in a case where I thought that has happened or where my client thought something was fishy, expect for the time I helped you, and the new case I have in front of [redacted], of which you have not been providing me with much good ammunition. Trying to get rid of [redacted] for the things you told me I believe will be a waste of time and money. Maybe I am wrong, but cannot take the chance. [redacted] does not even give up the case when she is ordered to by [redacted].

Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 15:33:48 –0700, California Attorney wrote:
That is why we have you and the good organizations fighting the cause. If you are correct, like I said a long time ago, you, the public, the press will need to bring it into the open and cause change. I am a little fish swimming in a very big ocean and cannot spend the time or resources to get to the bottom of what you say is happening. However, on a case by case basis, if things arise, I will check further. FYI, when I submit a judgment and get it back executed by the court, that is what I use. If that is wrong because of the court failing to enter it, well I will look into that from now on to try and get the court to enter it in a way that you are citing, though I am not sure that is necessary given the practice and custom among attorneys, however unfortunate you say it may be due to the illegality. So it seems I am back to square one with my problem judge. Thank you for trying to help me.

Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 7:23 PM by Joseph Zernik:
You must be naive at best:
· Pursuant to the US Constitution, Art. IV s. I, and Act of Congress of May 26, 1790, for judicial records to be of "full faith and credit", the judgment must be attested by a clerk, beyond its "execution" (certification) by a Judge.
· Furthermore, pursuant to Cal Government Code, 69844.7 the court is required to maintain a “Judgment Book”.
· California Code of Civil Procedure, section 664.5 requires that such judgment or appealable order be entered in the judgment book, to make such judgment "effectual for any purpose".
If I understood you correctly, you accept judgment as valid and effectual based on certification by a judge alone - therefore, you may be advising your clients to obey or accept as judgments of "full faith and credit", and "valid and effectual" judicial records, which are in fact void, not voidable.

Exposing the corruption "by organizations' is not likely to make any difference.
For example - existence of secret corporations, controlled by the LASC judges, and inexplicable fund movements in and out of such corporations, was exposed already a decade ago by the Washington DC "Insight Magazine". No action was taken by FBI, IRS, or US DOJ, and such corporations continue to operate to this date. In complaint to US DOJ, I provided additional credible evidence of high-level financial management fraud at the LASC. US DOJ refuses to take action.
Corruption of the judiciary and the legal profession in LASC and the United States is now rampant, and neither the Executive, nor the Legislative Branches have the power to address it.

To wit:
· Already in 2007 I filed complaints regarding racketeering in the Los Angeles Courts.
· In 2008 I filed similar complaints with FBI Director and US Attorney General with voluminous credible evidence.
· Both refused to respond.
· In 2009, Senator Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Diane Watson filed Congressional Inquiries on my behalf of FBI Director and US Attorney General - why they would not address the complaints of racketeering in the Los Angeles courts.
· Assistant Director of FBI - KENNETH KAISER, and Director of US Department of Justice responded to US Congress. I deemed their responses fraud on the US Congress.
· In 2010 I filed complaint with GLENN FINE - US DOJ IG - for fraud by the above two gentlemen on US Congress.
· US DOJ IG refused to respond.
· Senator Feinstein then filed another Congressional Inquiry, this time on US DOJ IG - Why he would not respond on complaint of fraud by FBI Assistant Director and US DOJ Director on US Congress.
· Response was due within 30 days. To this date US DOJ IG is refusing to respond. Of note, the online Mission Statement of US DOJ IG includes "restoration of the credibility of the US DOJ", and already in 2008 Patrick Leahy, Chair of the US Senate Judiciary Committee, called for a "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" regarding conduct of the US DOJ.

My manuscript, now under review by a top-tier international law journal, documented the same type of conduct all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States. In short, what we are witnessing today is the US controlled not only by the traditional "Military Industrial Complex", but above and beyond it - the Judiciary Banking Complex.
Although never stated in these terms, that was the essence of my report to the United Nations, which led the legal staff to sum it as "corruption of the courts and the legal profession". In fact, the US and state judiciary, in collusion with the legal profession, brought the US into a Robber Baron Revival Era. The outcome is historically predictable - we are back in a Greater Depression.
[redacted]
· You still have not addressed the issue of how you ascertain that LASC judges presiding in cases of your clients indeed hold Assignment Orders.
· You likewise have not addressed the issue of your conduct when LASC judges engage in the standard practice of "waiving notice" of minutes of the court, depriving your clients of their fundamental civil rights.
· You likewise have not addressed the standard practice of including in court filed Minutes, which were never signed by the Deputy Clerk, and therefore are void, not voidable.
In short: the LASC routinely issues pretense judicial records, construct pretense court files, and thereby conducts pretense litigations.

At 07:27 AM 11/3/2010, California Attorney wrote:
Joseph,
I read through to In Short and if you , the FBI and the senators and the UN cannot fix this, how the hell can I make a dent? This reminds of when I was helping you and became overwhelmed by the magnitude of what you alleged. As for your questions, I do not have answers without researching it, but I do know that even if you are right, there is little, little old me can or will do to make a change other than stop practicing law and starve my wife, six kids and myself. You continue to carry the torch and G-d willing the truth will see the light of day. These things cannot last forever. Until then, I will continue my quest to figure out if my judge is bias on enough grounds to get rid of her. If I am wrong, I guess I can return to your points and try to discredit the whole court in order to have [redacted] thrown out. I wish you the best for yourself and the large picture.
Wed, 03 Nov 2010 12:03:56 +0200, Joseph Zernik wrote:
I asked you only about clerical specifics, which I consider the essentials that a competent attorney must ascertain while representing a client in court.
I was not talking about "bias". "Bias" is much more difficult to ascertain.
· I was asking about your duty to ascertain whether the judge, before whom you claim to represent your client, has any authority at all, or is just engaging in pretense judicial conduct.
· I was asking about your duty to ascertain that minutes are duly issued and signed by an authorized Deputy Clerk during judicial proceedings, and are duly served and noticed, pursuant to Due Process rights.
· I was asking about your duty to ascertain that Appealable Orders and Judgments are certified by a judge and attested by a clerk, and entered pursuant to California Code, to make them valid and "effectual for any purpose".
In my opinion, any attorney, who does not ascertain these essentials in representation of his client, is colluding with corruption of the LASC and betraying his client - permitting his client to become victim of abuse by the corrupt courts.
In my opinion, an attorney, who finds out that his client is being abused through the conduct of pretense judicial proceedings, and is too timid to disclose the true facts to his client at minimum, must immediately resign from representation. Collecting legal fees, while representing a client in pretense judicial proceedings is corrupt.
My conclusion from your response is that you have no intention of doing either, but continue to represent such clients in pretense judicial proceedings.
Now you understand why the UN legal staff to my surprise concluded, based on my report, corruption of both the courts and the legal profession, although I never used these terms.

LINKS
[1] 10-04-19 Human Rights Alert (NG0) submission to the United Nations Human Rights Council for the 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States as incorporated into the UPR staff report:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38566837/

If you review the list of filings in the cases that are provided on my IndyMedia report, the corruption is obvious, but no law enforcement agency will stop them.