Digitally signed

by Joseph Zernik
Human Rights Alert DN: cn=Joseph
Zernik, o, ou,
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 email=jz12345@e
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net arthlink.net, c=US
Date: 2010.12.05
Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ 02:03:19 +02'00'
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

10-12-04 Request for investigation, impeachment proceedings where appropriate, in re: US

Judges JED RAKOFF, VIRGINIA PHILLIPS, JOHN WALTER, and US Magistrate
CARLA WOEHRLE
December 4, 2010

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr, Chair

US House Committee on the Judiciary
2426 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Fax: 202-225-0072
The Honorable Patrick Leahy, Chair
US Senate Committee on the Judiciary
433 Russell Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Fax: 202-224-3479
The Honorable Louise McIntosh Slaughter, Chair
US House Committee on Rules
2469 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Fax: 202-225-7822
By certified mail, by fax, and email

Dear Congressman Conyers and Senator Leahy:

Please accept instant notice as a request for initiating investigation and where appropriate - impeachment
proceedings, pursuant to Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution, against the following
three US judges and one US magistrate:
1. JED RAKOFF, US Judge, US District Court, Southern District of New York, relative to his conduct
in SEC v BAC (1-09-cv-06829);
2. VIRGINIA PHILLIPS, US Judge, US District Court, Southern District of New York, relative to his
conduct in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550);
3. JOHN WALTER, US Judge, US District Court, Central District of California, relative to his conduct
in Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914), and
4. CARLA WOEHRLE, US Magistrate, US District Court, Central District of California, relative to his
conduct in Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) and Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550).
The conduct of the above three US judges and the US magistrate under the captions listed above
followed the same pattern: presiding with no valid assignment/referral orders, failing to issue judicial
records, or issuing deliberately invalid judicial records. Such conduct should be deemed as pretense judicial
review and violation of the Oath of Office, including, but not limited to: denial of access to the courts,
deprivation of rights under the color of law, and/or misprision of felonies: therefore - impeachable offences.
z Page 2/8 December 5, 2010

It is further alleged that such conduct could not take place absent collusion by the Clerks of the Courts:
1. RUBY KRAJICK - Clerk of the Court, US District Court, Southern District of New York, and
2. TERRY NAFISI – Clerk of the Court, US District Court, Central District of California.

The cases should be considered of the highest public policy significance, because of the nature of underlying
matters:
1. In SEC v BAC (1-09-cv-06829) and Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) - it is alleged that conduct
of Judge JED RAKOFF, Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS, and Magistrate CARLA WOEHRLE under
these captions was intended to cover-up criminality by BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION (and
COUNTRYWIDE FINANICIAL CORPORATION) and its most senior officers, which SEC,
banking regulators, and law enforcement have refused to address in recent years.
Therefore, their conduct undermined banking regulation.
2. In Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) and Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) – it is alleged that
conduct of Judge JOHN WALTER, Judge VIRGINIA PHILLIPS, and Magistrate CARLA
WOEHRLE under these captions was intended to cover-up widespread corruption of California of the
Los Angeles Superior Court and large-scale false imprisonment by the Los Angeles Superior Court,
which US Department of Justice has refused to address over the past decade.
Therefore, their conduct undermined the Human Rights of all 10 million residents of Los Angeles
County, California.

Furthermore, the conduct of the named judges and the magistrate, reflects structural deficiencies relative to
integrity of the United States courts:
1. Lack of accountability of the Clerks of the Courts for integrity of the electronic court records.
Conditions, which now prevail in the US courts enable the publication of false and deliberately
misleading PACER dockets and false and deliberately misleading minutes, orders, and judgments.
2. Lack of validity and integrity of PACER and CM/ECF as electronic court administration systems.
The systems enable the publication of dockets, minutes, orders, and judgments in a manner that
prevents the public from distinguishing between records, which the US courts themselves deem valid
and effectual and records, which the US courts themselves deem void. The systems were
implemented over the past decade by the Administrative Office of the US Courts with insufficient
public oversight. It is claimed that the systems were central to undermining the integrity of the US
courts.
An additional structural deficiency is directly related to the case of Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914), and to
Habeas Corpus rights in the United States:
3. Lack of validity of the Los Angeles County Booking Records system and the Los Angeles County
Sheriff’s Department’s online Inmate Information Center.
The case of Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) documented how the systems were used to affect alleged
false imprisonment under the pretense of lawfulness.
z Page 3/8 December 5, 2010

Conduct of the named judges, magistrate, and clerks, as well as the structural deficiencies, outlined above, are
further elaborated in the following reports:
1. The Calendars and the Clerks of the US Courts – pending [i ]
2. SEC v Bank of America Corporation – pretense litigation and pretense banking regulation in the
United States – pending [ii ]
3. Case management and online public access systems of the US courts – pending [iii ]
4. Zernik, J: Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, International
Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining, 1:69-83 (2010) [iv ]
5. Zernik, J: Data Mining as a Civic Duty – Online Public Prisoners’ Registration Systems, International
Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining 1: 84-96 (2010) [v ]
It should be noted that the latter two reports were published in an international, peer-reviewed computer
science journal, listing on its Editorial Board scholars from six European nations and Canada.

The same reports also proposed corrective measures by US Congress:

1. Restoring provisions of the Salary Act of 1919 - placing the clerks under the authority of the US
Attorney General.
The Salary Act of 1919 was credited as a key measure in restoring the integrity of the US courts a
century ago. It placed the clerks under authority of the US Attorney General. Conditions in the courts
today indicate that reform is in order – through placing the clerks under authority of the US Attorney
General again. [vi ]
2. Enacting federal rules for the electronic administration of the courts.
Implementation of electronic case management and online public access systems amounted to a sea-
change in court procedures. Regardless, both the courts and the US Congress have so far failed to
establish design and operation of the systems under statute.

Combined, the two above measures by US Congress could address the following issues:
1. Restoring accountability of the clerks for the integrity of electronic court records.
The evidence demonstrates that clerks today hold themselves unaccountable for the validity and
integrity of electronic court records, in particular – online public access systems.
2. Restoring the right to access judicial records – to inspect and to copy.
Combined, PACER and CM/ECF are today used to conceal critical attestation/authentication
records (the NEFs and NDAs), and therefore do not permit the public to distinguish between valid
and effectual court records and such that are deemed by the US courts as void.
3. Establishing valid digital signatures on all applicable court records by judges, clerks, and counsel.
The evidence shows that courts established as acceptable, various methods, which do not meet
minimal requirements for valid digital signatures for judges, clerks, and counsel.
4. Establishing valid procedures for the clerks’ electronic attestation/authentication records.
The evidence shows that the NEFs and NDAs, which were established by the US courts as
electronic clerks’ attestation/authentication records are invalid and void.
z Page 4/8 December 5, 2010

5. Establishing publicly accessible, valid procedures for certification by counsel of his/her

authorization as counsel of record for parties on behalf of whom counsel appears in court.
Certification of counsel’s authority as counsel of record was left vague and ambiguous, permitting
unauthorized appearances in the courts.
6. Validation of electronic administrative systems of the courts.
Validation of such systems must be undertaken prior to their installation, in a manner that is legally
and publicly accountable – e.g. through agencies that are accountable to the legislative branch.
Such validation should be based on certified, functional logic verification [vii ] in all stages of from
development, through implementation, to any modifications and ongoing security. [viii ]
Inherent in the validation of the system is also the requirement that all unpublished Local Rules of
Court, which are today embedded in specification and implementation of the systems, be explicitly
pre-published in natural language for public comment and challenge, as required by the
Rulemaking Enabling Act. [ix ]
It should be noted that similar problems were previously identified in the implementation of
electronic voting machines, and that the US government is yet to adequately address the latter
issue, despite ongoing protests. [x , xi ]
7. Establishing an enhanced level of transparency in the electronic administrative systems of the
courts.
Enhanced transparency is required to permit ongoing effective public monitoring of the systems.

In case additional information would be needed in the course of investigations, beyond that which is
provided in the attached and linked reports, I would be happy to provide any help possible.
Your attention to these matters is kindly requested.
Truly,

Joseph Zernik, PhD

Human Rights Alert (NGO)
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.

http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM 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
http://www.nlada.net/library/article/national_dojspeechto%20chiefjustice07-26-2010_gideonalert
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?
z Page 5/8 December 5, 2010

* "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)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24902306/
* "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit."
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29043589/
* "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)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/274339
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN
CALIFORNIA?
* "...corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38566837/

CC:
1) The Honorable Barney Frank
Chair, House Financial Services Committee
2) The Hon Christopher Dodd, Chair
US Senate Banking Committee
3) The Hon Carl Levin, Chair
US Senate Investigations Committee
4) The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
Senator from California
5) Basel Accords Committee
6) Various National Central Banks
7) United Nations Human Rights Council
Working Group on the 2010 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the United States.

LINKS
i
The Calendars and the Clerks of the US Courts – pending
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/44663008/
ii
SEC v Bank of America Corporation – pretense litigation and pretense banking regulation in the United States – pending
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/44663232/
iii
Case management and online public access systems of the US courts – pending
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/44662501/
iv
Zernik, J: Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, International Journal on Social Media:
Monitoring, Measurement, Mining, 1:69-83 (2010)
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/38328585/H
v
Zernik, J: Data Mining as a Civic Duty – Online Public Prisoners’ Registration Systems, International Journal on Social Media:
Monitoring, Measurement, Mining 1: 84-96 (2010)
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/38328591/H
vi
Zernik, J: Calendars and the Clerks of the US Courts – pending
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/44663008/
vii
Coenen, F: Verification and Validation Issues in Expert and Database Systems: The Expert Systems Perspective, dexa, pp.16,
9th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA'98), (1998)
viii
Codd, EF: The relational model for database management: version 2, ACM Classic Books Series, Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, Inc (1990)
ix
Robling Denning, D E: Cryptography and data security , Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc (1982)
x
Voting Machines Report: Malfunction and Malfeasance, report by Common Cause (undated)
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/36565560/
xi
April 19, 2010 letter by Brennan Center for Justice letter in re: Unprecleared voting machines
Hhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/36565891H

(continued)

ABSTRACTS
z Page 6/8 December 5, 2010

1) The Clerks and the Calendars of the US Courts

Joseph Zernik, PhD *,** ,∗∗∗
Abstract
Previous reports opined large-scale computer fraud in the online public access and case management systems
of the US courts – PACER and CM/ECF. Denial of public access to the attestation/authentication records of
the Clerk of the Court and implementation of new attestation/authentication records (which were invalid as to
form) were found to undermine the accountability of the Clerks for electronic judicial records.
Here, authority of the Clerks for the integrity of electronic court records is further reviewed, demonstrating
that it was largely undermined over the past half-century, in large part through implementation of PACER and
CM/ECF.
Furthermore, a survey of access to electronic court Calendars shows that only 14 of 22 surveyed district courts
provided any public access to the court Calendars, and these courts permitted only limited access at that.
Calendars of the Courts, being public records, are essential for validating cases where a given judge has lawful
jurisdiction through due assignment, and in preventing the conduct of pretense court proceedings.
No access was permitted to the Calendars of three cases, previously opined as Fraud on the Court: SEC v
Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829) – conducted by Judge Jed Rakoff –at the US District Courts,
Southern District of New York; and two cases at the US District Court, Central District of California - Fine v
Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) – conducted by Judge John Walter, and Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) –
conducted by Judge Virginia Phillips..
All three cases involved alleged criminality by both Bank of America Corporation and government officers.
_____
*
Human Rights Alert (NGO), PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750, Tel: 323-515-4583
Fax: 323-488-9697, Hjz12345@earthlink.netH , Hhttp://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_AlertH
**
The author is grateful for help by Legal Director of a Civil Rights organization and Professors of Compute Science for their advice.
∗∗∗
The study presents small part of the evidence of large-scale false imprisonments and financial institutions/housing frauds by judges
of the courts, which was submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council, as part of the first ever 2010 Universal Periodic
Review of Human Right in the United States, and which was consequently incorporated in the Human Rights Council staff report, with
reference to ‘corruption of the courts and the legal profession’.
_____________________________

2) Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation - Pretense Litigation and
Pretense Banking Regulation in the United States
Joseph Zernik, PhD *,**,***
Abstract
Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation – cause of action Securities Fraud
- at the US District Court, New York, proceeded under the newly implemented US courts’ online public
access and case management systems (PACER and CM/ECF). The matter originated from the
government-coerced Bank of America-Merrill Lynch merger. Independent investigation by the State of
New York Attorney General produced evidence of high-level criminal conspiracy in the matter by both
corporate and US senior officers, and the case was extensively covered by media as a hallmark of
banking regulation under the current crisis.
The purported Consent Judgment imposed minor distribution of stockholders’ assets to themselves, with
no accountability for the alleged Fraud by any individual.
z Page 7/8 December 5, 2010

The Clerk, Chambers, Plaintiff, and Defendant were united in denying public access to key records in
the case, including, but not limited to summons, minutes, and all attestation/authentication records
pertaining to judicial records.
Court proceedings were routinely docketed in an invalid manner.
The records show that the case, presided over by Jed Rakoff – a US judge considered an authority in
matters of securities, white-collar crime, and racketeering – was conducted from inception as a pretense
litigation, enabled by PACER and CM/ECF, previously opined as a large-scale computer fraud.
Conduct of the US courts today is contrasted with ‘piercing of corporate veils’ that brought the Robber
Baron Era to an end a century ago. Reform of the US courts is quintessential for effective banking
regulation.
The international community should take notice and engage in correction efforts.
_____
*
Human Rights Alert (NGO), PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750, Tel: 323-515-4583
Fax: 323-488-9697, Hjz12345@earthlink.netH , Hhttp://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_AlertH
**
The author is grateful for help by Legal Director of a Civil Rights organization and Professors of Compute Science for their advice.
∗∗∗
The study presents small part of the evidence of large-scale false imprisonments and financial institutions/housing frauds by judges
of the courts, which was submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council, as part of the first ever 2010 Universal Periodic
Review of Human Right in the United States, and which was consequently incorporated in the Human Rights Council staff report, with
reference to ‘corruption of the courts and the legal profession’.
_____________________________

3) Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the Courts in the United States
Joseph Zernik, PhD *,** ,∗∗∗
Abstract
Integrity and validity of electronic administration systems (PACER and CM/ECF), implemented in the
US courts in recent decades, were analyzed thorough case studies pertaining to Habeas Corpus and the
right for property.
The cases document a pattern of judicial conduct: judges and magistrates presiding with no valid
assignment/referral orders, failing to issue judicial records, or issuing deliberately invalid judicial
records. The practice is described as pretense judicial review.
Electronic administration systems of the US courts are found to be central to such conduct, by leaving
the public unable to discern between valid and void judicial records, by undermining the accountability
of the clerks for integrity of electronic judicial records, and by enabling the denial of public access to
judicial records.
Corrective measures are proposed: a) Restoration of provisions of the Salary Act of 1919, which placed
the clerks under the authority of the US Attorney General, and b) Enactment of federal rules of
electronic administration of the courts, including, but not limited to, requirements for publicly and
legally accountable validation (i.e., certified and functional logic verification) of the systems.
Similar concerns may arise in any nation where the courts are in transition to electronic administration.
Conditions that prevail at the US courts today have undermined Habeas Corpus and the Bill of Rights,
recognized as central to the joint inheritance of the English-speaking world to freedom and the rights of man.
_____
*
Human Rights Alert (NGO), PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750, Tel: 323-515-4583
Fax: 323-488-9697, Hjz12345@earthlink.netH , Hhttp://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_AlertH
**
The author is grateful for help by Legal Director of a Civil Rights organization by Professors of Computer Science for their advice, and
language editing by a British graduate student.
z Page 8/8 December 5, 2010

∗∗∗
The report presents small part of the evidence, which was submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council, as part of the
first ever 2010 Universal Periodic Review of Human Right in the United States, and which was consequently incorporated in the
Human Rights Council staff report, with reference to ‘corruption of the courts and the legal profession’ in California.

_____________________________

4) Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts

Joseph Zernik, PhD
Abstract
The US federal courts have completed a decade-long project of networking coast to coast. Data mining was
conducted through the online public access system to examine validity and integrity of records and of the
system as a whole. Many records were not verified at all. Moreover, records were universally missing their
authentication counterparts, required by law to render them valid and effectual. The authentication
counterparts – previously public records – were now excluded from public access. Records, which were today
posted online in the public access system, included both valid and invalid, void records. However, the public
was unable to discern the difference. The system as a whole was deemed invalid. Case management systems
of the courts must be subjected to certified, functional logic verification. Mandated system transparency
should permit ongoing data mining, and the computing/informatics community should lead the way in
monitoring integrity of the courts in the digital era.
_____________________________

5) Data Mining as a Civic Duty – Online Public Prisoners Registration Systems

Joseph Zernik, PhD
Prisoners registration systems in the United States are government-controlled networks, holding public
records that are critical for the safeguard liberty. The current report investigated validity, verification, and
security concerns pertaining to the Los Angeles, California, online Inmate Information Center. Hundreds of
entries were sampled and about half of the entries were found invalid. In particular cases, access to the arrest
and booking records – public records by California law - was requested. Access was denied. Neither were
invalid records corrected upon request. Therefore, it was concluded that invalid records posted online were not
the outcome of inadvertent errors. Similar deficiencies were found in the prisoners registration system of
Marin County, California. Solutions are proposed, based on structured programming and certified, functional
logic verification, which must be mandated in such systems. Data mining will remain a civic duty – in the US
and worldwide - to safeguard human rights in the digital era.
_____________________________