12-05-05 Martin Luther King’s Dream, Assassination, and the Occupy Movement

Martin Luther King’s Dream has emerged as a powerful unifying theme for the Occupy Movement, particularly during this past May 1st General Strike, and especially in Los Angeles.One must wonder, how many of the marchers knew, given the scant media coverage, that in 1999, the King family finally won a civil trial, implicating the US government in the assassination of Dr King, Jr. [1] The US government continues to refuse to criminally prosecute the perpetrators.
LINKS:
[1] 12-01-16 Dr King’s family civil trial verdict – US Government assassinated Martin
http://www.scribd.com/doc/92324167/
Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

12-05-01 May 1st OccuParty, Los Angeles, California

The pics below are from different locations throughout Los Angeles.
jz
[]  

[]  

[]  

[] 

[]   

[]  

[]  

[]  

[]  

[]

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

12-03-08 American Gulag

Private purchasing of prisons locks in occupancy rates

By Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY

Updated 3/8/2012 12:37 PM

WASHINGTON – At a time when states are struggling to reduce bloated prison populations and tight budgets, a private prison management company is offering to buy prisons in exchange for various considerations, including a controversial guarantee that the governments maintain a 90% occupancy rate for at least 20 years.

Federal Bureau of Prisons director Harley Lappin speaks during a news conference at the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Ill., in 2009.Federal Bureau of Prisons director Harley Lappin speaks during a news conference at the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Ill., in 2009.

The $250 million proposal, circulated by the Nashville-based Corrections Corporation of America to prison officials in 48 states, has been blasted by some state officials who suggest such a program could pressure criminal justice officials to seek harsher sentences to maintain the contractually required occupancy rates.

“You don’t want a prison system operating with the goal of maximizing profits,” says Texas state Sen. John Whitmire, a Houston Democrat and advocate for reducing prison populations through less costly diversion programs. “The only thing worse is that this seeks to take advantage of some states’ troubled financial position.”

READ MORE: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-01/buying-prisons-require-high-occupancy/53402894/1

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

12-04-29 Israeli settlements on Palestinian land: Simulated decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel

Israeli media expressed surprise at the government’s intention to disobey a “final” Supreme Court decision, purportedly entered a year ago, which required the demolition by May 1, 2012, of a settlement, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.  However, the evidence shows that for a full decade, since the implementation of a new electronic record system in the Supreme Court, there are no “final” , entered decisions of the Supreme Court.  All decisions are ‘subject to changes’, and the Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court refuses to certify any of the Court’s decisions.

[] [] Beit El’s Ulpana neighborhood. 
Supreme Court of the State of Israel. Prior to 2002, all electronic records were certified by the late Chief Clerk, “True copy of the original”. Today, all records are noted as ‘subject to changes’. The Beit El’s Ulpana, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.

View as PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/91726045/
Jerusalem, April 29 – recent reports by Israeli media expressed surprise at the government’s decision to disobey a “final” decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, purportedly entered a year ago.  The decision required the demolition of Beit El’s Ulpana, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.  Today, Haaretz editorial rebukes the conduct of the Israeli government, which undermines “Israel’s rule of law.” 

In a letter to the editor of Haaretz daily, Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO) notes that such reports and opinions are founded in error: No “final” decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel on the matter has ever been entered.

The letter explains that for the past decade there have been no “final” decisions of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel:

  • Prior to the March 2002 all electronic records of the decisions of the Supreme Court were certified by the late Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court SHMARYAHU COHEN.
  • Since March 2002 all decisions of the Supreme Court are ‘subject to changes’, as clearly noted in the body of each and every decision.
  • The Administration of Courts refuses to respond on Freedom of Information request, regarding the legal foundation for such profound change in the decisions of the Supreme Court after March 2002.
  • The Regulations of the Courts – Office of the Clerk (2004) appear to assign the authority for the certification of decisions of the courts to the respective Chief Clerks.  However, the same Regulations authorize the Director of the Administration of Courts to modify the regulations, as necessary, in the process of implementing the electronic record systems of the courts.  The Administration of Courts refuses to disclose the modifications, implemented pursuant to this clause.
  • The Administration of Courts refused to identify the person, who holds the ultimate administrative authority over the electronic records of the Supreme Court.
  • The Administration of Courts refuses to produce the appointment record of Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ, who is today represented as the Chief Clerk.of the Supreme Court.
  • Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ herself, also refuses to respond on a similar request, to produce her appointment record as Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court.
  • Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ refuses to provide honest Chief Clerk’s certification of decisions of the Supreme Court. In response to repeated requests, she eventually provided certifications of certain decisions of the Supreme Court, which were the subject a recent criminal fraud complaint, filed with the Israel Police, which issued a certificate of the filing of the complaint.

“It is the Supreme Court itself that undermined the rule of law in the State of Israel,” concludes Dr Zernik. “In March 2002, a simulated justice system was established in the State of Israel by the Supreme Court itself.”

Human Rights Alert’s submission for the 2012 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in Israel by the United Nations is narrowly focused on “Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic records of the State of Israel.”

The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.”
LINKS:
[1] 
12-04-29 Refusal of the Israeli government to obey a “final” decision of the Supreme Court in re: demolition of unlawful settlement on Palestinian land – Haaretz reports
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91723881/
[2] 12-04-29 Letter to the Editor of Haaretz: No “final decision” of the Israeli Supreme Court regarding removal of outposts, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91725091/[3] 12-04-25 Draft Human Right Alert’s 2012 State of Israel UPR Submission: Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic records of the courts of the State of Israel (REVISED)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/82927700/[4] 12-04-16 PRESS RELEASE: Criminal Fraud Complaint (158921/2012) Against SARAH LIFSCHITZ, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, Filed Today With Israel Police
http://www.scribd.com/doc/89681591/[5] 12-04-25 Log of Freedom of Information requests, related to the electronic records of the courts of the State of Israel, and refusal of the Administration of Courts and the Ministry of Justice to respond.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91197575/
[6] 04-11-25 Takanot Batey Hamishpat – Mazkirut (2004) // Regulations of the Courts – Offices of the Clerks (2004) (Heb + Eng)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/48770720/[7] “Simulated litigation”, “simulated decisions”, “simulated service”, “simulated justice system” here refer to conduct defined as felonies in the Texas Criminal Code as follows:
Texas Penal Code §32.48. SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS. 
(a) A person commits an offense if the person recklessly causes to be delivered to another any document that simulates a summons, complaint, judgment, or other court process with the intent to:
        (1)  induce payment of a claim from another person;  or                      
        (2)  cause another to:                                                       
            (A)  submit to the putative authority of the document;  or                
            (B)  take any action or refrain from taking any action in response to the document, in compliance with the document, or on the basis of the document.
(b)  Proof that the document was mailed to any person with the intent that it be forwarded to the intended recipient is a sufficient showing that the document was delivered.
_____________________________

Joseph Zernik, PhD

Human Rights Alert (NGO)

[]  
The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.” 
Human Rights Alert online[]  Flag Counter: 137http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ 
http://inproperinla.wordpress.com/
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Total Reads: 807,060 Followers: 1,44http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alerthttp://www.scribd.com/SeyagLizhuyotHaadam Total Reads: 35,547http://twitter.com/inproperinla
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345 Total Item Views: 664,803+156,012 
http://www.examiner.com/x-38742-LA-Business-Headlines-Examinerhttp://www.facebook.com/joseph.zernik Facebook Friends: 1,611_____________________________
Take away justice, then, and what are governments but great bandit bands?Saint Augustine, Civitas Dei (City of God,4.4)
_____________________________

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

12-05-01 RESPONSE AND REPLY, RE: Israeli settlements on Palestinian land: Simulated decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel

REPLY
Dear BH:

High visibility cases, such as in the press release below are used as a means to document the scope of the corruption of governments, and to educate the public of the nature of the justice systems in the respective nations.

What is the diagnosis?

  • Any nation, including, but no limited to the United States and Israel (which foolishly mimicked the conduct of the US courts, with help from US corporations), where the judges have adopted the custom of publishing simulated electronic decisions and conducting simulated litigation, is effectively under a tyranny of the courts.
  • In both the United States and Israel, such developments were directly linked to the implementation of fraudulent electronic record systems in the courts by the courts themselves, with no public oversight.
  • No court should be permitted to implement its own electronic record system, since such systems effectively amount to new regulations of the courts (a point that is more clearly documented in the case of the Israeli courts, below).
  • Eventually, banks will take over such nations, since by their nature, judges and attorneys like the beautiful eyes of the bankers.

What are the proposed remedies?

  • Examination and repair of the fraudulent electronic record systems of the courts, under accountability to the legislature of the respective nations.
  • Establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, since in such nations the judiciary and the legal profession as a class undermined the rule of law and violated their oaths of loyalty to the laws of the respective nations.

The diagnosis is not palatable, and the remedies are painful.  Most writers here offer cosmetics, where emergency surgery is necessary to rescue nations under tyranny.

Why should any US citizen or any citizen of another nation care about the conduct of the courts of the State of Israel?

  • It may be easier to see through and accept the fraud in the conduct of the courts and the legal profession, relative to the electronic record systems of the courts, when it does not pertain to the courts of your own nation… 

Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
_____________________________

RESPONSE
At 12:36 AM 4/30/2012, you wrote:

Apparently you don’t remember Andrew Jackson’s exploits in Florida.
 …
 …
As to your writings, I appreciate your effort to make them seem scholarly, but when you talk law and politics you have a moral duty to lead the way to righteousness…

EXPRESS AN OPINION.  Put it up front.  Do you promote the Israeli settlements on Palestinian lands or not? Why?  On what basis?  Do you agree with the Supreme Court?  Why?  Why does their opinion matter to anybody, and why should it?  Explain why you hold your opinion.   Justify it somehow. S P E L L it out.

BH

_____________________________
ORIGINAL PRESS RELEASE

From:

joseph zernik [ mailto:jz12345@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 11:09 AM
To: joseph zernik
Subject: Israeli settlements on Palestinian land: Simulated decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel

Press ReleaseIsraeli settlements on Palestinian land: Simulated decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel
Israeli media expressed surprise at the government’s intention to disobey a “final” Supreme Court decision, purportedly entered a year ago, which required the demolition by May 1, 2012, of a settlement, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.  However, the evidence shows that for a full decade, since the implementation of a new electronic record system in the Supreme Court, there are no “final”, entered decisions of the Supreme Court.  All decisions are ‘subject to changes’, and the Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court refuses to certify any of the Court’s decisions. In March 2002, a simulated justice system was established in the State of Israel by the Supreme Court itself. [] [] Beit El’s Ulpana neighborhood. 

Supreme Court of the State of Israel. Prior to 2002, all electronic records were certified by the late Chief Clerk, “True copy of the original”. Today, all records are noted as ‘subject to changes’. The Beit El’s Ulpana, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.

View as PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/91726045/ 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

12-04-29 Israeli settlements on Palestinian land: Simulated decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel

Israeli media expressed surprise at the government’s intention to disobey a “final” Supreme Court decision, purportedly entered a year ago, which required the demolition by May 1, 2012, of a settlement, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.  However, the evidence shows that for a full decade, since the implementation of a new electronic record system in the Supreme Court, there are no “final” , entered decisions of the Supreme Court.  All decisions are ‘subject to changes’, and the Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court refuses to certify any of the Court’s decisions.

[] [] Beit El’s Ulpana neighborhood. 
Supreme Court of the State of Israel. Prior to 2002, all electronic records were certified by the late Chief Clerk, “True copy of the original”. Today, all records are noted as ‘subject to changes’. The Beit El’s Ulpana, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.

View as PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/91726045/
Jerusalem, April 29 – recent reports by Israeli media expressed surprise at the government’s decision to disobey a “final” decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, purportedly entered a year ago.  The decision required the demolition of Beit El’s Ulpana, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.  Today, Haaretz editorial rebukes the conduct of the Israeli government, which undermines “Israel’s rule of law.” 

In a letter to the editor of Haaretz daily, Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO) notes that such reports and opinions are founded in error: No “final” decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel on the matter has ever been entered.

The letter explains that for the past decade there have been no “final” decisions of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel:

  • Prior to the March 2002 all electronic records of the decisions of the Supreme Court were certified by the late Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court SHMARYAHU COHEN.
  • Since March 2002 all decisions of the Supreme Court are ‘subject to changes’, as clearly noted in the body of each and every decision.
  • The Administration of Courts refuses to respond on Freedom of Information request, regarding the legal foundation for such profound change in the decisions of the Supreme Court after March 2002.
  • The Regulations of the Courts – Office of the Clerk (2004) appear to assign the authority for the certification of decisions of the courts to the respective Chief Clerks.  However, the same Regulations authorize the Director of the Administration of Courts to modify the regulations, as necessary, in the process of implementing the electronic record systems of the courts.  The Administration of Courts refuses to disclose the modifications, implemented pursuant to this clause.
  • The Administration of Courts refused to identify the person, who holds the ultimate administrative authority over the electronic records of the Supreme Court.
  • The Administration of Courts refuses to produce the appointment record of Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ, who is today represented as the Chief Clerk.of the Supreme Court.
  • Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ herself, also refuses to respond on a similar request, to produce her appointment record as Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court.
  • Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ refuses to provide honest Chief Clerk’s certification of decisions of the Supreme Court. In response to repeated requests, she eventually provided certifications of certain decisions of the Supreme Court, which were the subject a recent criminal fraud complaint, filed with the Israel Police, which issued a certificate of the filing of the complaint.

“It is the Supreme Court itself that undermined the rule of law in the State of Israel,” concludes Dr Zernik. “In March 2002, a simulated justice system was established in the State of Israel by the Supreme Court itself.”

Human Rights Alert’s submission for the 2012 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in Israel by the United Nations is narrowly focused on “Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic records of the State of Israel.”

The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.”
LINKS:
[1] 
12-04-29 Refusal of the Israeli government to obey a “final” decision of the Supreme Court in re: demolition of unlawful settlement on Palestinian land – Haaretz reports
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91723881/
[2] 12-04-29 Letter to the Editor of Haaretz: No “final decision” of the Israeli Supreme Court regarding removal of outposts, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91725091/[3] 12-04-25 Draft Human Right Alert’s 2012 State of Israel UPR Submission: Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic records of the courts of the State of Israel (REVISED)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/82927700/[4] 12-04-16 PRESS RELEASE: Criminal Fraud Complaint (158921/2012) Against SARAH LIFSCHITZ, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, Filed Today With Israel Police
http://www.scribd.com/doc/89681591/[5] 12-04-25 Log of Freedom of Information requests, related to the electronic records of the courts of the State of Israel, and refusal of the Administration of Courts and the Ministry of Justice to respond.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91197575/
[6] 04-11-25 Takanot Batey Hamishpat – Mazkirut (2004) // Regulations of the Courts – Offices of the Clerks (2004) (Heb + Eng)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/48770720/[7] “Simulated litigation”, “simulated decisions”, “simulated service”, “simulated justice system” here refer to conduct defined as felonies in the Texas Criminal Code as follows:
Texas Penal Code §32.48. SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS. 
(a) A person commits an offense if the person recklessly causes to be delivered to another any document that simulates a summons, complaint, judgment, or other court process with the intent to:
        (1)  induce payment of a claim from another person;  or                      
        (2)  cause another to:                                                       
            (A)  submit to the putative authority of the document;  or                
            (B)  take any action or refrain from taking any action in response to the document, in compliance with the document, or on the basis of the document.
(b)  Proof that the document was mailed to any person with the intent that it be forwarded to the intended recipient is a sufficient showing that the document was delivered.
_____________________________

Joseph Zernik, PhD

Human Rights Alert (NGO)

[]  
The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.” 
Human Rights Alert online[]  Flag Counter: 137http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ 
http://inproperinla.wordpress.com/
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Total Reads: 807,060 Followers: 1,44http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alerthttp://www.scribd.com/SeyagLizhuyotHaadam Total Reads: 35,547http://twitter.com/inproperinla
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345 Total Item Views: 664,803+156,012 
http://www.examiner.com/x-38742-LA-Business-Headlines-Examinerhttp://www.facebook.com/joseph.zernik Facebook Friends: 1,611_____________________________
Take away justice, then, and what are governments but great bandit bands?Saint Augustine, Civitas Dei (City of God,4.4)
_____________________________

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

12-04-29 Israeli settlements on Palestinian land: Simulated decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel

Israeli media expressed surprise at the government’s intention to disobey a “final” Supreme Court decision, purportedly entered a year ago, which required the demolition by May 1, 2012, of a settlement, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.  However, the evidence shows that for a full decade, since the implementation of a new electronic record system in the Supreme Court, there are no “final” , entered decisions of the Supreme Court.  All decisions are ‘subject to changes’, and the Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court refuses to certify any of the Court’s decisions.

[] [] Beit El’s Ulpana neighborhood. 
Supreme Court of the State of Israel. Prior to 2002, all electronic records were certified by the late Chief Clerk, “True copy of the original”. Today, all records are noted as ‘subject to changes’. The Beit El’s Ulpana, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.

View as PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/91726045/
Jerusalem, April 29 – recent reports by Israeli media expressed surprise at the government’s decision to disobey a “final” decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, purportedly entered a year ago.  The decision required the demolition of Beit El’s Ulpana, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land.  Today, Haaretz editorial rebukes the conduct of the Israeli government, which undermines “Israel’s rule of law.” 

In a letter to the editor of Haaretz daily, Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO) notes that such reports and opinions are founded in error: No “final” decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel on the matter has ever been entered.

The letter explains that for the past decade there have been no “final” decisions of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel:

  • Prior to the March 2002 all electronic records of the decisions of the Supreme Court were certified by the late Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court SHMARYAHU COHEN.
  • Since March 2002 all decisions of the Supreme Court are ‘subject to changes’, as clearly noted in the body of each and every decision.
  • The Administration of Courts refuses to respond on Freedom of Information request, regarding the legal foundation for such profound change in the decisions of the Supreme Court after March 2002.
  • The Regulations of the Courts – Office of the Clerk (2004) appear to assign the authority for the certification of decisions of the courts to the respective Chief Clerks.  However, the same Regulations authorize the Director of the Administration of Courts to modify the regulations, as necessary, in the process of implementing the electronic record systems of the courts.  The Administration of Courts refuses to disclose the modifications, implemented pursuant to this clause.
  • The Administration of Courts refused to identify the person, who holds the ultimate administrative authority over the electronic records of the Supreme Court.
  • The Administration of Courts refuses to produce the appointment record of Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ, who is today represented as the Chief Clerk.of the Supreme Court.
  • Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ herself, also refuses to respond on a similar request, to produce her appointment record as Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court.
  • Ms SARAH LIFSCHITZ refuses to provide honest Chief Clerk’s certification of decisions of the Supreme Court. In response to repeated requests, she eventually provided certifications of certain decisions of the Supreme Court, which were the subject a recent criminal fraud complaint, filed with the Israel Police, which issued a certificate of the filing of the complaint.

“It is the Supreme Court itself that undermined the rule of law in the State of Israel,” concludes Dr Zernik. “In March 2002, a simulated justice system was established in the State of Israel by the Supreme Court itself.”

Human Rights Alert’s submission for the 2012 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in Israel by the United Nations is narrowly focused on “Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic records of the State of Israel.”

The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.”
LINKS:
[1] 
12-04-29 Refusal of the Israeli government to obey a “final” decision of the Supreme Court in re: demolition of unlawful settlement on Palestinian land – Haaretz reports
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91723881/
[2] 12-04-29 Letter to the Editor of Haaretz: No “final decision” of the Israeli Supreme Court regarding removal of outposts, unlawfully constructed on Palestinian land
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91725091/[3] 12-04-25 Draft Human Right Alert’s 2012 State of Israel UPR Submission: Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic records of the courts of the State of Israel (REVISED)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/82927700/[4] 12-04-16 PRESS RELEASE: Criminal Fraud Complaint (158921/2012) Against SARAH LIFSCHITZ, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, Filed Today With Israel Police
http://www.scribd.com/doc/89681591/[5] 12-04-25 Log of Freedom of Information requests, related to the electronic records of the courts of the State of Israel, and refusal of the Administration of Courts and the Ministry of Justice to respond.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91197575/
[6] 04-11-25 Takanot Batey Hamishpat – Mazkirut (2004) // Regulations of the Courts – Offices of the Clerks (2004) (Heb + Eng)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/48770720/[7] “Simulated litigation”, “simulated decisions”, “simulated service”, “simulated justice system” here refer to conduct defined as felonies in the Texas Criminal Code as follows:
Texas Penal Code §32.48. SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS. 
(a) A person commits an offense if the person recklessly causes to be delivered to another any document that simulates a summons, complaint, judgment, or other court process with the intent to:
        (1)  induce payment of a claim from another person;  or                      
        (2)  cause another to:                                                       
            (A)  submit to the putative authority of the document;  or                
            (B)  take any action or refrain from taking any action in response to the document, in compliance with the document, or on the basis of the document.
(b)  Proof that the document was mailed to any person with the intent that it be forwarded to the intended recipient is a sufficient showing that the document was delivered.
_____________________________

Joseph Zernik, PhD

Human Rights Alert (NGO)

[]  
The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.” 
Human Rights Alert online[]  Flag Counter: 137http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ 
http://inproperinla.wordpress.com/
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Total Reads: 807,060 Followers: 1,44http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alerthttp://www.scribd.com/SeyagLizhuyotHaadam Total Reads: 35,547http://twitter.com/inproperinla
http://www.liveleak.com/user/jz12345 Total Item Views: 664,803+156,012 
http://www.examiner.com/x-38742-LA-Business-Headlines-Examinerhttp://www.facebook.com/joseph.zernik Facebook Friends: 1,611_____________________________
Take away justice, then, and what are governments but great bandit bands?Saint Augustine, Civitas Dei (City of God,4.4)
_____________________________

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment