Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10-03-12 Richard Fine, The Essence of Habeas Corpus, and Alleged Fraud by Kozinski

    Uploaded by

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    21 views1 page
    Los Angeles, March 12 - as further elaboration of his call for the immediate resignation of Alex Kozinski - Chief Judge of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, Dr Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles resident provided additional claims - of fraud by Alex Kozinski and others. Although Dr Zernik was not an attorney, he claimed that Habeas Corpus petitions were not meant as requiring attorneys to file them either. Instead, the Habeas Corpus was created for uneducated, mostly illiterate prisoners in the middle ages. Accordingly, the prisoner was not required to argue much at all. He only had to ask to be brought in person before a judge. In turn, the judge was not required to engage in full appeal of the case. Instead, according to the late William Brennan: "The basic principle of the Great Writ of habeas corpus is that, in a civilized society... if the imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law, the individual is entitled to his immediate release". Fay v Noia (1963): Therefore, Dr Zernik claimed, it was the duty of Magistrate Carla Woehrle, Judge John Warner, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski and others to note that there was no Warrant, no Judgment, no Sentencing, no Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Marina v LA County (BS109420), the case in which Richard Fine was purported to be arrested and jailed, and to release Richard Fine immediately. Dr Zernik stated: "There is no way that a reasonable person, upon review of the records, or lack thereof, would conclude that holding of Richard Fine 'conform[ed] with the fundamental requirements of the law' ". Therein lies the alleged fraud by Alex Kozinski. claimed Dr Zernik. In order to conceal the fundamental facts in the matter, which a brilliant jurist such as he was, he could not miss, he issued an nonsensical order, [1] albeit unsigned and unauthenticated. However, such order, bastardized as it was, was sufficient to create reliance that allowed the continued false hospitalization of Richard Fine.

    Original Title

    10-03-12 Richard Fine, the Essence of Habeas Corpus, and Alleged Fraud by Kozinski

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Los Angeles, March 12 - as further elaboration of his call for the immediate resignation of Alex Kozinski - Chief Judge of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, Dr Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles resident provided additional claims - of fraud by Alex Kozinski and others. Although Dr Zernik was not an attorney, he claimed that Habeas Corpus petitions were not meant as requiring attorneys to file them either. Instead, the Habeas Corpus was created for uneducated, mostly illiterate prisoners in the middle ages. Accordingly, the prisoner was not required to argue much at all. He only had to ask to be brought in person before a judge. In turn, the judge was not required to engage in full appeal of the case. Instead, according to the late William Brennan: "The basic principle of the Great Writ of habeas corpus is that, in a civilized society... if the imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law, the individual is entitled to his immediate release". Fay v Noia (1963): Therefore, Dr Zernik claimed, it was the duty of Magistrate Carla Woehrle, Judge John Warner, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski and others to note that there was no Warrant, no Judgment, no Sentencing, no Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Marina v LA County (BS109420), the case in which Richard Fine was purported to be arrested and jailed, and to release Richard Fine immediately. Dr Zernik stated: "There is no way that a reasonable person, upon review of the records, or lack thereof, would conclude that holding of Richard Fine 'conform[ed] with the fundamental requirements of the law' ". Therein lies the alleged fraud by Alex Kozinski. claimed Dr Zernik. In order to conceal the fundamental facts in the matter, which a brilliant jurist such as he was, he could not miss, he issued an nonsensical order, [1] albeit unsigned and unauthenticated. However, such order, bastardized as it was, was sufficient to create reliance that allowed the continued false hospitalization of Richard Fine.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    21 views1 page

    10-03-12 Richard Fine, The Essence of Habeas Corpus, and Alleged Fraud by Kozinski

    Uploaded by

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    Los Angeles, March 12 - as further elaboration of his call for the immediate resignation of Alex Kozinski - Chief Judge of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, Dr Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles resident provided additional claims - of fraud by Alex Kozinski and others. Although Dr Zernik was not an attorney, he claimed that Habeas Corpus petitions were not meant as requiring attorneys to file them either. Instead, the Habeas Corpus was created for uneducated, mostly illiterate prisoners in the middle ages. Accordingly, the prisoner was not required to argue much at all. He only had to ask to be brought in person before a judge. In turn, the judge was not required to engage in full appeal of the case. Instead, according to the late William Brennan: "The basic principle of the Great Writ of habeas corpus is that, in a civilized society... if the imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law, the individual is entitled to his immediate release". Fay v Noia (1963): Therefore, Dr Zernik claimed, it was the duty of Magistrate Carla Woehrle, Judge John Warner, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski and others to note that there was no Warrant, no Judgment, no Sentencing, no Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Marina v LA County (BS109420), the case in which Richard Fine was purported to be arrested and jailed, and to release Richard Fine immediately. Dr Zernik stated: "There is no way that a reasonable person, upon review of the records, or lack thereof, would conclude that holding of Richard Fine 'conform[ed] with the fundamental requirements of the law' ". Therein lies the alleged fraud by Alex Kozinski. claimed Dr Zernik. In order to conceal the fundamental facts in the matter, which a brilliant jurist such as he was, he could not miss, he issued an nonsensical order, [1] albeit unsigned and unauthenticated. However, such order, bastardized as it was, was sufficient to create reliance that allowed the continued false hospitalization of Richard Fine.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Dr Z

    Joseph Zernik, PhD


    PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750;
    Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
    Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs
    FRIDAY, MARCH 12, 2010
    10-03-12 Richard Fine - the Essence of Habeas Corpus – and Renewed Call for Immediate
    Resignation of Kozinski

    Alex Kozinski - Chief Judge


    US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit

    Los Angeles, March 12 - as further elaboration of his call for the immediate resignation of Alex Kozinski
    - Chief Judge of the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, Dr Joseph Zernik, Los Angeles resident provided
    additional claims - of fraud by Alex Kozinski and others.

    Although Dr Zernik was not an attorney, he claimed that Habeas Corpus petitions were not meant as
    requiring attorneys to file them either. Instead, the Habeas Corpus was created for uneducated, mostly
    illiterate prisoners in the middle ages. Accordingly, the prisoner was not required to argue much at all.
    He only had to ask to be brought in person before a judge.

    In turn, the judge was not required to engage in full appeal of the case. Instead, according to the late
    William Brennan:

    "The basic principle of the Great Writ of habeas corpus is that, in a civilized society... if the
    imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law, the individual is
    entitled to his immediate release".
    Fay v Noia (1963):

    Therefore, Dr Zernik claimed, it was the duty of Magistrate Carla Woehrle, Judge John Warner, Chief
    Judge Alex Kozinski and others to note that there was no Warrant, no Judgment, no Sentencing, no
    Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Marina v LA County (BS109420), the case in which
    Richard Fine was purported to be arrested and jailed, and to release Richard Fine immediately.

    Dr Zernik stated: "There is no way that a reasonable person, upon review of the records, or lack thereof,
    would conclude that holding of Richard Fine 'conform[ed] with the fundamental requirements of the
    law' ".

    Therein lies the alleged fraud by Alex Kozinski. claimed Dr Zernik. In order to conceal the fundamental
    facts in the matter, which a brilliant jurist such as he was, he could not miss, he issued an nonsensical
    order, [1] albeit unsigned and unauthenticated. However, such order, bastardized as it was, was
    sufficient to create reliance that allowed the continued false hospitalization of Richard Fine.

    LINKED:
    [1] June 30, 2009 Order, alleged as fraud, issued by Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, together with Circuit
    Judges Paez and Tallman, on petition by Richard Fine – Fine v Sheriff (09-71692):
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/28261044/09-06-30-Fine-v-Sheriff-09-71692-US-Court-of-Appeals-for-
    the-9th-Circuit-Dkt-04-Order-Denying-Petition-alleged-as-fraud-by-Kozinski-et-al-s

    You might also like