Sharon Johnson - July 6, 2012
Ron Branson - July 15, 2012
The Commission on Judicial Performance, (created under another title in 1960), has an atrocious record of covering for California judges. I have dealt with the CJP on several occasions within the past thirty years, and have only received the common "form" letter of cover-up following the general format, At our May 2012 meeting of the Commission on Judicial Performance, it was determined that your complaint against a California judge did not constitute a matter of with this commission deemed cognizable for judicial discipline. Thank you for writing to the California Commission on Judicial Performance. Signed xxxx and stamped both inside and out of the letter in large red letters, "CONFIDENTIAL"
In April of 1995 I wrote the below California Initiative, and copyrighted it in the Library of Congress. In 1996 the California Legislative Analyst wrote up a very good analyst of this measure, of which I could hardly improve upon.
Judicial Accountability Initiative Law (J.A.I.L.)
(California Initiative - Ver. 2-7-07)
Preamble. We, the People of California, find that the doctrine of judicial immunity has been greatly abused; that when judges abuse their power, the People are obliged - it is their duty - to correct that injury, for the benefit of themselves and their posterity. In order to ensure judicial accountability and domestic tranquility, we hereby amend our Constitution by adding the following provisions as Sec. 32 to Article I, which shall be known as "The J.A.I.L. Amendment."
1. Definitions. To avoid absurd results, words shall be given their plain, ordinary and literal meanings; and where appropriate, the singular shall include the plural and vice-versa. For purposes of this Amendment, the following terms shall mean:
Judge: A judicial officer hearing and adjudicating legal actions and proceedings within the judicial branch of government (to include arbitrator, mediator, or a private judge, any of whom is assigned by a court to hear involuntary proceedings). This definition shall not be construed to mean trial juror, prosecutor, or any administrative official
Susan Harman - July 15, 2012
One would think that having been convicted of war crimes would count as egregious behavior, but Jay Bybee still sits on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In May he was tried and convicted by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal. He needs to be referred for impeachment or simply removed.
anonymous - July 16, 2012
please, call me 949-683-5411, I have important information for you
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. - August 28, 2012
If you found the statistics on California judges to reveal the unequal protection from the law reserved for them, you will find the statistics on federal judges to be outrageous. For instance:
On 30sep11, there were 2,131 judges –including justices and magistrates– in office13; however, in the 223 years since the Judiciary’s creation in 1789 the number of federal judges impeached and removed is eight14.
The Judiciary has allowed its chief circuit judges to dismiss systematically and without investigation 99.82% of the complaints filed against their peers in the 1oct96-30sep08 12-year period.19
In that period, its judicial councils –the circuits’23a all-judge disciplinary bodies– denied up to 100% of the petitions to review those dismissals, as did the 2nd Circuit’s council, of which Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sotomayor was a member20. She too unequally protected her peers from the law regardless of the nature and gravity of the complaints against them, exempting them from any discipline without even investigating the complaints.
See the above blue-text references to the official statistics of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/2012_E/DrRCordero_jud_unaccountability_reporting.pdf.
What these statistics reveal is that federal judges’ wrongdoing has become the institutionalized modus operandi of the Federal Judiciary. A case in point is described at id. >xxxiii.
My proposal to expose their wrongdoing by taking advantage of the presidential campaing is set forth at id. >i and xxv.
joebanana - September 1, 2012
Not being of the legal profession myself, but through observation and some research it is blatantly obvious that the US judicial system is nothing less than an organized crime syndicate. A "good ol boy's club" if you will. The glaring criminality in our courts is repulsive, and the lack of "honor", and integrity has become more apparent over the past few years, as judges clearly disregard the law, cannons, and human decency.
One example: The occupant of the White House is a fraud, wait, before you dismiss me as crazy, consider this. He has three alias's, he posted a forged COLB, actually two. He is using a stolen SSN. His selective services registration is forged, he has admitted to being born in Kenya, and all of his past records are sealed. This is from an official Sheriff's criminal investigation. He's produced absolutely no legitimate documentation as to his true identity. This is a national security breach of epic proportions. Case after case of identity fraud has been dismissed by numerous judges on questionable grounds. The court system in the USA is a joke.
Minister Johnson - August 2, 2013
The next housing shock
FEDERAL COURT JUDGE & WELLS FARGO BANK COMPLICITE IN FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT COVER UP.
5, JULY 2013 WRITER
On May 11, 2010, Lamont Johnson a Sacramento, California picky pay loan victim filed an action against Wachovia Bank FSB and its agents in the Northern District of California. Facing foreclosures and evictions by Wells Fargo Bank Johnson with little cash attempted to become a part of a pending Class Action case filed in the Northern District before Judge Jeremy Fogel (Mandrigues v. World Savings Bank, Inc., et al.) Upon Filing his case, Johnson immediately served Wells Fargo banks, Unlawful Detainer Attorney, Fred Kaiser. Wells Fargo Attorney Kaiser ignored the complaint. Johnson’s case was subsequently transferred from the Northern District to the Eastern District of Sacramento on October 21, 2010 Case NO. 2:10-cv-02839, Johnson vs. Wachovia Bank FSB et al. Johnson initially filed his case Pro Se and later hired Attorney Roxanne Mosley. Mosley represented Johnson for a short period of time eventually abandoning Johnson’s case.
On or about August 31, 2011 Johnsons case came before newly appointed Eastern District Court Judge Carolyn Delaney. October 6, 2011 Delaney filed an Order to Show Cause. On October 21, 2011 Johnson filed a Substitution of Attorney and a response to the Delaney Order to show Cause. Just entering the case, Johnson had been requesting from Delaney time to restructure and update his claim because there were defects in his First amended complaint and so much more violations that had occurred since Johnson’s original filing. Delaney denied Johnson that opportunity and on April 11, 2012, Document Query 46, Delaney ordered Johnson to Serve on Defendants Wells Fargo Bank Johnsons defective complaint drafted by Johnson’s previous Attorney Mosley. Defendants Wells Fargo Bank after being served immediately filed a Motion to dismiss. Delaney thereafter decided on her own and in violation of her oath, her duty and the law, set Johnsons case on a course to intentionally dismiss his case.
As Johnson filed his opposition to Defendant Wells Fargo Banks, Motion to dismiss, Johnson attached his proposed Second amended complaints to his answers, despite Delaney’s attempt to stop him from repairing his claims. Johnson added claims of Quiet Title, Racketeering under Rico, Mail Fraud, Wire Fraud, Conspiracy to foreclose using false and fraudulent document and affricatives. Johnson attached documented evidence showing that Wells Fargo Bank employees robo-signed and used forged and false documents to foreclose. Some of Johnsons attached evidence show that documents were notarized but not even signed. Johnson even attached documents that were back dated. To top it off, Johnson showed that defendants made a material alteration on his Deed of Trust for his Yorktown Property. It was changed from its original form and filed with the wrong address. Johnson’s Yorktown property Deed of Trust clearly illegally had an unreferenced attachment to it in an attempt to repair the defect in the legal description. The attachment was done after Johnson signed the contract. What was most difficult for Johnson to deal with was that he was disabled and going through a major depression and stress at the time and seeking counseling. Johnson always informed Delaney in his documents to be patient with him because he was going through this and it will take him more time to complete his Second Amended complaint. Delaney ignored Johnson’s documents.
On September 12, 2012 Delaney moved forward with defendant Wells Fargo’s Motion to dismiss trail. Transcripts show that District Court Judge Delaney conducted the trial to look procedural, but it was a sham trial. Despite all the evidence of fraud , and serious causes of actions Johnson claimed, Delaney intentionally and in violation of her oath and Duty suppressed all Johnson’s arguments, case law, arguments and evidence and refused at the hearing to allow any allegations of fraud to be put on record. Delaney asked both Johnson and Defendants Wells Fargo one main question. What is your legal theory? Delaney thereafter dismissed Johnson’s unfinished second amended complaint on the spot.
The mistake that District Court Judge Delaney made was that she drafted, filed and mailed fraudulent Findings and Recommendations conclusion order #65 that dismissed Johnson’s case by intentionally misrepresenting Johnson’s legal theory and by suppressing Johnson’s legal arguments and Fraud evidence that were attached to his complaint. Delaney intentionally drafted her order to construe around case law and evidence Johnson presented as if they did not exist. District Court Judge Delaney knew of Defendant Wells Fargo Banks fraudulent activities. They were common knowledge. Delaney’s employer along with 49 other States Attorney Generals, were part of a nationwide Class Action which identified the same fraudulent conduct by these same defendants. Delaney intentionally suppressed Johnson’s evidence because she did not want a Pro Se Plaintiff (Johnson) to win his case. District Court Judge Delaney knew that if she acknowledged verbally or in writing the fraud that she would be required to leave Defendants Wells Fargo Bank right where they stand without a defense. Delaney refused to allow this to happen as duty required her to do. In fact, in Johnson’s current appeal, he claims that the District Court altered the trial transcripts when it found out he was going to appeal the decision. All allegations are on the online Pacer cite. The Courts suppression of the banks fraud is clear. Johnson’s appeal outlines the Courts legal violations. Johnson is currently awaiting the appeals Court ruling in the ninth Circuit in Sacramento, California. Johnson believes that the appeals Court will help the District Court Judge cover up her fraudulent conduct. Watch for yourself. This will make Johnson a victim again and never hold the banks liable. In California, no person has won a Quiet Title Claim in our Eastern District Court. This can only be intentionally done and created by the District Courts own agenda policy because it is not by law. Johnson filed documents in the Appeal Courts that show that The District Court Judge was acting unlawfully. Johnson showed that the Judge regularly dismisses Pro Se Plaintiffs cases whom showed the Court Fraudulent documents. The Courts are trying to stop the flood of cases being filed by violating the Constitutional right to a trial of the Plaintiffs even when it sees the fraudulent documents.
Mary Jane Pederson - September 23, 2013
I have gone through a nightmare with the Riverside Superior Court. I filed for an Appeal in April 2013, finally received the court transcripts this September and they have been blatantly altered to protect the judges involved in my case. I am not naive anymore.
We welcome your comments!