Monday, April 25, 2011
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
D A Deputy Ipsen Launches Reform Campaign: "Reform First" Stop Felony Releases.....(watch video 8 min)
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Should Judges Be Prosecuted In Order To Reform The California Judicial System? Online Video Segments Here
Segment #1 Why Disqualified Judges Orders Are Null & Void Void Court Orders and judgments result when a Judge does not have jurisdiction to be able to enter the order. In Superior Court Judge David Yaffe's case it was to due to taking $850,000 in payments from the County of Los Angeles, a party to the case. Under CCP Section 473 (d) a motion can be brought at any time to set aside the void judgment or order. So far four other Judges have been disqualified from sitting on Fine's Motion to Null and Void Judge Yaffe's Orders. They are Judges Ann Jones, Robert O'Brien, Elihu Berle, and Carolyn B. Kuhl.
Segment #2 Senate Bill SBX2 11 Cannot Protect the Judges From Criminal Prosecution Three Reasons why SBX211 cannot protect the Judges from criminal prosecution. California Senate Bill SBX 2 11 was passed as emergency legislation as part of the 2009-2010 Budget Bill to give retroactive criminal immunity to the Judges for taking money from county governments:
- Richard fine contends that giving Judges personal criminal immunity is not part of funding or running overnment and therefore should not have been considered in the emergency budget session without public hearing or discussion.
- The Single Subject Rule of the Constitution states that every statute can only have one subject and SBX 211 was enacted to give the Judges money from the county as of July 11, 2008 under the same prior terms and conditions, This is a separate subject so the issue of retroactive criminal immunity for judges cannot stand.
- The issue of Judicial Discipline. The Commission on Judicial Performance has the responsibility of disciplining the Judges. So by stating that the Judges were to be immune from disciplinary action for taking the money, SBX2 11 was in effect trying to amend the Constitution which can only be amended with a vote of the people. He points out that the Federal Law 18USC 1346 which provides for the intangible right to honest services whereby every judge could be prosecuted under this law most recently applied in the 2010 case of Skilling vs The United States.
Segment #3 Lawyers, Judges & Malpractice Insurance To Cover Court Crimes? Richard Fine points out that lawyers have a responsibility to protect their clients. In the instance of County government making payments to the Judges who sit on cases involving the county clients should be protected. Government has failed to monitor Lawyers as well as the Judges who have been raiding the treasury. According to Richard Fine it is up to the people to file motions in Court to null and void the bogus orders made by Judges who sat on cases where the County government is a party to their individual cases.Former Political Prisoner Richard I. Fine
Former U S Prosecutor Richard I. Fine, Ph.D. was an anti-trust attorney with the Department of Justice in Washington D.C. He wrote this 23-page Indictment naming more than a dozen California Judges seeking Federal and State Grand jury investigations of those judges. The document was dated September 3, 2010. Strangely, he was released from jail only two weeks later, on September 17, 2010, after Judge David Yaffe issued two Orders reversing himself.The Order stated "Richard Fine was incarcerated for 18 months to serve as a deterrent to others". Never charged or convicted of a crime, Fine had been held in solitary "coercive confinement" in civil contempt of court after he attempted to remove Yaffe from sitting on the case. Yaffe resigned from office leaving before his term of office expired and following Fine's release.