United States Marshal
Los Angeles, January 2 - Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, filed report with the Harvard "Citizen Media Law Project" of threat by US Marshals against Dr Zernik.
The threat against Dr Zernik followed requests, which were filed with the Clerk of the Court Terry Nafisi and the Chief Judge Audrey Collins, US District Judge, Central District of California, and were also published online, to correct false PACER dockets, pursuant to Code of Conduct of US Judges.
The requests for correction of the PACER dockets pertained to litigations in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-1550) and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914), both of which originated from claims of widespread corruption of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
In the former case, US Judge Virginia Phillips appeared as presiding judge, and in the latter - US Judge John Walter. In both cases US Magistrate Carla Woehrle appeared as well. The evidence showed that neither the judges, nor the magistrate, appeared with a valid Assignment/Referral Order. Absent valid Assignment/Referral Order, judges or magistrates lack authority to adjudicate in a case.
In both cases, judgments were published as "entered" in the online PACER dockets, but later it was found that the judgments were issued with invalid certificates of authentication/attestation by the Clerk of the Court. Absent valid authentication/attestation by the clerk, a judgment is void. However, the online PACER dockets would mislead a reasonable person to conclude that the judgments were valid and effectual.
In both cases, the Clerk of the Court refuses to certify the PACER dockets.
In both cases, no corrective actions have been taken to this date regarding the false and deliberately misleading online PACER dockets.
"Citizen Media Law Project" previously reported a threat by the US Marshals in the California Central District against a blog publisher, who used crude language in protesting the conduct of litigation by US Judge Howard Matz.
The common theme in both threats was the employment of the US Marshals to suppress claims of judicial corruption, and issuance of the threat by US Deputy Darcy Smith on behalf of the US District Court.
Harvard Law School Web Site
I. US MARSHALS THREAT AGAINST BLOG PUBLISHER, REPORTED BY HARVARD LAW SCHOOL:
Marshals v. ahowardmatz.com
NOTE: The information and commentary contained in this database entry are based on court filings and other informational sources that may contain unproven allegations made by the parties. The truthfulness and accuracy of such information is likely to be in dispute.
Posted November 18th, 2010 by Guest
Human Rights Alert Site
II. US MARSHALS THREAT AGAINST DR JOSEPH ZERNIK
A. Background - invalid litigation of cases in the US District Court, Central District of California, and publication of void judgments in the PACER dockets:
Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-1550) - litigation under cause of action of Deprivation of Rights under the Color of Law - where US Judge Virginia Phillips appeared as presiding judge, and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914) - petition for a writ of habeas corpus - where US Judge John Warner appeared as presiding judge, both in the US District Court, Central District of California, are claimed as Fraud on the Court.
In both cases judges appeared with no Assignment Orders, magistrates appeared with no Referral Orders and false and deliberately misleading minutes, orders, and judgments were published as "entered" in the online PACER dockets by unnamed and unauthorized court personnel, with invalid certificates of authentication/attestation by the clerk (NEFs - Notices of Electronic Filing).
The claims and the documentary evidence related to Zernik v Connor et al and Fine v Sheriff are now provided in the Motion to Intervene in Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al (10-56634 and 10-56813) in the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. 
The Motion to Intervene claims that Judge Virginia Phillips engaged in the same conduct also in Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al.
In Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al two opposing judgments were published in the online PACER docket:
The first judgment was issued in 2006 by Judge George Schiavello, who appeared with no Assignment Order. His judgment was listed as "entered" and also listed in the Judgment Index of the court. The judgment was never reversed.
The second judgment was issued In 2010 by Judge Virginia Phillips, who also appeared with no Assignment Order, and her judgment was NOT listed in the Judgment Index of the US District Court.
In Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al the Clerk of the US District Court Court continues to deny access to the NEFs, in apparent violation of First Amendment rights - to access court records to inspect and to copy.
In all three cases of the US District Court, Central District of California, the Clerk of the Court refuses to certify the PACER dockets and the judgments.
Regardless, the uncertified October 2010 Judge Virginia Phillips judgment and is now the foundation for the two appeals in the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit.
B. Threats and retaliation following the filing of requests for corrective actions
1) In Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-1550) and Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914), access to the NEFs was denied for months.
2) In late December 2009, following repeated appearances in the office of the clerk with written requests to access the records, the certificates of authentication/ attestation by the clerk (NEFs - Notices of Electronic Filing) in the two cases were finally discovered. Upon examination, the NEFs in both cases were found uniformly invalid. 
3) In January 2010, notices and requests for investigation and correction of the PACER dockets were filed with Clerk of the Court Terry Nafisi.
4) In late February 2010 a letter was received by Dr Zernik from Lydia Yurtchuk, US Court Staff Attorney, of a purported investigation. 
5) In response to Staff Attorney Yurtchuk, clarification to the letter itself was requested, since it was addressed to an unknown person, unrelated to the matters, instead of being addressed to Dr Joseph Zernik, and with no mention of Counsel Yurchuk's authority in issuing the letter.
6) No clarification has been received from Staff Attorney Yurtchuk to this date.
7) In late March 2010 Dr Zernik therefore filed request with Chamber staff, to the attention of Chief Judge Audrey Collins, to reliably inform her of "unprofessional conduct" in the litigation of the two cases, and to request the initiation of investigation and corrective actions, pursuant to the Code of Conduct of US Judges.
8) In early April 2010 a phone call was received from US Deputy Marshal Darcy Smith asking Dr Joseph Zernik to meet her, referring specifically to the notice filed with Chief Judge Audrey Collins as the subject matter of the meeting.
9) Dr Zernik requested a written request by Deputy Marshal Darcy Smith.
10) On April 7, 2010 a request was then received by email from Deputy Marshal Darcy Smith - for an "interview". The request was signed by Deputy Darcy Smith on behalf of the "District Threat Unit". 
11) Dr Zernik responded by email, explaining that he believed that the US Marshals had no legal authority to conduct "interviews". Dr Zernik asked for explicit explanation of the legal foundation for the invitation. 
11) No response was received.
12) On or about April 24, 2010, Dr Zernik was informed by his neighbor that the previous night unidentified armed federal agents appeared at Dr Zernik's residence and tried to apprehend Dr Zernik. According to the neighbor, the agents also knocked on his door and asked the neighbor about Dr Zernik's whereabouts. The neighbor also explained to Dr Zernik his concern that shooting was going to take place if the agents appeared again.
13) Dr Zernik immediately abandoned his residence and never returned ever since.
14) No known corrective actions have been taken to this date regarding the false and deliberately misleading PACER dockets in Zernik v Connor et al or in Fine v Sheriff.
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. Human Rights Alert focuses on the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of the integrity of the justice system in the United States.
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
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?
* "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)
* "...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit."
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
* "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)
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."
DECEMBER 3, 2011: COMMENTS FROM THE LIVELEAK SITE: