Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10-07-25 Fine V Baca (09-A827) and Taitz V MacDonald (10-A56) - Request For Certification of Dockets by William Suter, Clerk of The Supreme Court of The United States S

    Uploaded by

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    77 views1 page
    William Suter, Clerk of the US Supreme Court Asked to Certify, Provide Copies of Dockets in re: Richard Fine, Orly Taitz Los Angeles, July 25 – Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, filed request with William Suter, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States to certify the online dockets of Applications pertaining to former US prosecutor Richard Fine and Attorney Orly Taitz, and provide copies of the dockets from the Court’s own case management system. [1] Request pertained to Fine v Baca (09-A827) and Taitz v MacDonald (10-A56), applications for stay of executions, submitted to Justices Kennedy and Thomas, respectively. Both applications originated from penalties imposed on counsel who represented clients in causes that were not favored by government. In the former – Richard Fine exposed, publicized, and rebuked the secret taking by all Los Angeles Superior Court judges of “not permitted” payments (“bribes”), which necessitated the signing by the California governor of “retroactive immunities” (“pardons”) for all such judges. Richard Fine was arrested on March 4, 2010, and has been held in solitary confinement ever since. However, no warrant was ever issued in his case, and no judgment/conviction/sentencing was ever entered, as required by California Code to make it “effectual for any purpose”. In the latter – Orly Taitz filed complaint pertaining to native, natural born citizenship of President Barack Obama. Serious sanctions were consequently imposed on her. In both cases, denial of the applications were noted in online Court dockets and in letters by Counsel Danny Bickell. However, in both cases, review of the records [2] [3] raised serious concerns regarding contradictions, defects, and invalidity of both the dockets and the respective letters by Danny Bickell. Moreover, the online public access system of Supreme Court dockets appeared as vague and ambiguous in both design and operation. Human Rights Alert filed in April 2010 report with the United Nations, as part of the first ever, 2010 review by the United Nation of Human rights in the United States, which focused on the role of invalid online public access and case management systems in undermining integrity of the courts. Responses by the US State Department to the United Nations are due by August 2010, and the United Nations review session and report are scheduled for November 2010. Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States. LINKS [1] 10-07-25-Fine-v-Baca-09-A827-and-Taitz-v-MacDonald-10-A56-Request-for-Certification-of-Dockets-by-William-Suter-Clerk-of-the-Supreme-Court-of-t http://www.scribd.com/doc/34835965/ [2] 10-07-25-Fine-v-Baca-09-A827-Supreme-Court-of-the-United-States-Records-in-Application-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/34834530/ [3] 10-07-25-Taitz-v-Macdonald-10-A56-Records-of-the-Supreme-Court-of-the-United-States-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/34835883/

    Original Title

    10-07-25 Fine v Baca (09-A827) and Taitz v MacDonald (10-A56) - Request for Certification of Dockets by William Suter, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States s

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    William Suter, Clerk of the US Supreme Court Asked to Certify, Provide Copies of Dockets in re: Richard Fine, Orly Taitz Los Angeles, July 25 – Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, filed request with William Suter, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States to certify the online dockets of Applications pertaining to former US prosecutor Richard Fine and Attorney Orly Taitz, and provide copies of the dockets from the Court’s own case management system. [1] Request pertained to Fine v Baca (09-A827) and Taitz v MacDonald (10-A56), applications for stay of executions, submitted to Justices Kennedy and Thomas, respectively. Both applications originated from penalties imposed on counsel who represented clients in causes that were not favored by government. In the former – Richard Fine exposed, publicized, and rebuked the secret taking by all Los Angeles Superior Court judges of “not permitted” payments (“bribes”), which necessitated the signing by the California governor of “retroactive immunities” (“pardons”) for all such judges. Richard Fine was arrested on March 4, 2010, and has been held in solitary confinement ever since. However, no warrant was ever issued in his case, and no judgment/conviction/sentencing was ever entered, as required by California Code to make it “effectual for any purpose”. In the latter – Orly Taitz filed complaint pertaining to native, natural born citizenship of President Barack Obama. Serious sanctions were consequently imposed on her. In both cases, denial of the applications were noted in online Court dockets and in letters by Counsel Danny Bickell. However, in both cases, review of the records [2] [3] raised serious concerns regarding contradictions, defects, and invalidity of both the dockets and the respective letters by Danny Bickell. Moreover, the online public access system of Supreme Court dockets appeared as vague and ambiguous in both design and operation. Human Rights Alert filed in April 2010 report with the United Nations, as part of the first ever, 2010 review by the United Nation of Human rights in the United States, which focused on the role of invalid online public access and case management systems in undermining integrity of the courts. Responses by the US State Department to the United Nations are due by August 2010, and the United Nations review session and report are scheduled for November 2010. Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States. LINKS [1] 10-07-25-Fine-v-Baca-09-A827-and-Taitz-v-MacDonald-10-A56-Request-for-Certification-of-Dockets-by-William-Suter-Clerk-of-the-Supreme-Court-of-t http://www.scribd.com/doc/34835965/ [2] 10-07-25-Fine-v-Baca-09-A827-Supreme-Court-of-the-United-States-Records-in-Application-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/34834530/ [3] 10-07-25-Taitz-v-Macdonald-10-A56-Records-of-the-Supreme-Court-of-the-United-States-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/34835883/

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    77 views1 page

    10-07-25 Fine V Baca (09-A827) and Taitz V MacDonald (10-A56) - Request For Certification of Dockets by William Suter, Clerk of The Supreme Court of The United States S

    Uploaded by

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    William Suter, Clerk of the US Supreme Court Asked to Certify, Provide Copies of Dockets in re: Richard Fine, Orly Taitz Los Angeles, July 25 – Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, filed request with William Suter, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States to certify the online dockets of Applications pertaining to former US prosecutor Richard Fine and Attorney Orly Taitz, and provide copies of the dockets from the Court’s own case management system. [1] Request pertained to Fine v Baca (09-A827) and Taitz v MacDonald (10-A56), applications for stay of executions, submitted to Justices Kennedy and Thomas, respectively. Both applications originated from penalties imposed on counsel who represented clients in causes that were not favored by government. In the former – Richard Fine exposed, publicized, and rebuked the secret taking by all Los Angeles Superior Court judges of “not permitted” payments (“bribes”), which necessitated the signing by the California governor of “retroactive immunities” (“pardons”) for all such judges. Richard Fine was arrested on March 4, 2010, and has been held in solitary confinement ever since. However, no warrant was ever issued in his case, and no judgment/conviction/sentencing was ever entered, as required by California Code to make it “effectual for any purpose”. In the latter – Orly Taitz filed complaint pertaining to native, natural born citizenship of President Barack Obama. Serious sanctions were consequently imposed on her. In both cases, denial of the applications were noted in online Court dockets and in letters by Counsel Danny Bickell. However, in both cases, review of the records [2] [3] raised serious concerns regarding contradictions, defects, and invalidity of both the dockets and the respective letters by Danny Bickell. Moreover, the online public access system of Supreme Court dockets appeared as vague and ambiguous in both design and operation. Human Rights Alert filed in April 2010 report with the United Nations, as part of the first ever, 2010 review by the United Nation of Human rights in the United States, which focused on the role of invalid online public access and case management systems in undermining integrity of the courts. Responses by the US State Department to the United Nations are due by August 2010, and the United Nations review session and report are scheduled for November 2010. Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States. LINKS [1] 10-07-25-Fine-v-Baca-09-A827-and-Taitz-v-MacDonald-10-A56-Request-for-Certification-of-Dockets-by-William-Suter-Clerk-of-the-Supreme-Court-of-t http://www.scribd.com/doc/34835965/ [2] 10-07-25-Fine-v-Baca-09-A827-Supreme-Court-of-the-United-States-Records-in-Application-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/34834530/ [3] 10-07-25-Taitz-v-Macdonald-10-A56-Records-of-the-Supreme-Court-of-the-United-States-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/34835883/

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Digitally signed

    by Joseph Zernik
    DN: cn=Joseph
    Zernik, o, ou,
    email=jz12345@e
    Human Rights Alert (NGO) arthlink.net, c=US
    Date: 2010.07.25
    PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 08:18:12 +03'00'
    Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net

    10-07-25 Request for Records, Certifications by SCOTUS Clerk William Suter


    William Suter, Clerk
    Supreme Court of the United States
    1 First Street NE,
    Washington, DC 20543
    By certified mail
    The favor of a response within 10 days is requested.
    Dear Clerk Suter:
    Please accept the requests, detailed below, pertaining to the following cases of the Court:
    1) Fine v Baca (09-A827)
    2) Taitz v MacDonald (10-A56)
    Requests are:
    1) For certification of the dockets, which were published in the online public access system of the Court
    in the two Applications, listed above, as dockets that were constructed pursuant to the law of the
    United States, by authority of the Clerk of the Court, and
    2) For access to Court records, to inspect and to copy, pursuant to First Amendment rights and decision
    of the Court in Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978).
    Access is requested to the following Court records:
    a) Relative to the dockets, which were published in the online public access system, referenced
    above – request is for copies of data that are the User Name and Login Time corresponding to
    each entry in such dockets.
    b) Relative to other dockets, which are likely to exist in a separate, case management system of
    the Court – request is for copies of the dockets of the two cases, referenced above, in such case
    management system, together with User Name and Login Time corresponding to each entry in
    such dockets.
    Please let me know the exact cost of the requested copies and certifications and the acceptable mode of
    payment, so that I may forward payment ASAP.
    Respectfully,
    July 25, 2010 Joseph Zernik, PhD

    By: ______________
    JOSEPH H ZERNIK
    PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
    Phone: 323.515.4583
    Fax: 323.488.9697
    Email <jz12345@earthlink.net>

    You might also like