It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ex-lawyer jailed 14 months, but not charged with a crime

page: 2
54
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



This is a truly interesting and very disturbing story of a 70 year old man being held now for 14 months in solitary confinement on a Contempt of Court Charge in Los Angeles California.


He has been charged with a crime, contempt of court. And until he opens up his sources his staying in jail.

Its really not that hard to figure out.




posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



This is a truly interesting and very disturbing story of a 70 year old man being held now for 14 months in solitary confinement on a Contempt of Court Charge in Los Angeles California.


He has been charged with a crime, contempt of court. And until he opens up his sources his staying in jail.

Its really not that hard to figure out.





Shouldn't there be a trial by peers ?

This man has common law rights which affords him to have a fair trial by his peers .

Judges are overstepping the boundaries of their oath and it happens all the time .

There is no LAW which says it is OK to jail a human without trial .

There is however a statue of some sort which has the power of law behind it to charge a person .

A distinction exists between a law and a statue . Let's not deny this fact .

It is not the letter of the law that should get priority here , it is the spirit of the law that should get the priority imho .


peace


[edit on 24-5-2010 by 23432]

[edit on 24-5-2010 by 23432]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Why isn;t it up to the client to produce the financial statements? It seems the lawyer should never be forced to divulge information about his client due to counsel privelege.
It's great this got on CNN, cases such as his need to see the light of day and for people nationwide to get t#cked off!



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



This is a truly interesting and very disturbing story of a 70 year old man being held now for 14 months in solitary confinement on a Contempt of Court Charge in Los Angeles California.


He has been charged with a crime, contempt of court. And until he opens up his sources his staying in jail.

Its really not that hard to figure out.




Actually it is disturbing because they are his clients financial records, so the reality is if the court were interested in just the finacial records they could approach his client directly in a seperate suit.

They could supbeona financial institutions directly. They could appoint a reciever to collect funds from the client, etc., ect.

So in reality this is not the best course to serve justice that the County is taking.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Why isn;t it up to the client to produce the financial statements? It seems the lawyer should never be forced to divulge information about his client due to counsel privelege.


Good question, this reminds me of Journalists who have been held in contempt for not revealing their sources, they would have a hard time getting information if the source knew it could be revealed, also who would trust a lawyer for the very same reasons, there is confidentiality agreement between them.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
He has been charged with a crime, contempt of court. And until he opens up his sources his staying in jail.

Its really not that hard to figure out.


I understand that's what the court's argument is. However, whatever happened to client-attorney privalege? The client should be the one in jail for contempt, not the attorney!



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by hawkiye
His heart is in the right place but to bad his attorney indoctrination has worked against him. he is in jail by his own consent to give jurisdiction to the court and make himself a ward of the court by contracting with said court. Not to mention they see him as a traitor so I am sure they are even breaking thier own laws to keep him confined.


You have that right my friend, he clearly has contracted into the system in a way that prevents him from being able to exercize his own sovereignty even after being stripped of his Esquire Title.

Clearly they are making an example of him for the other Officers of the Court so they think twice about representing their clients to the honest best of their ability.


He could rescind all signatures renounce his bar affiliation etc. Right now they see him as a "disbarred attorney" not a man on the soil. Kind of like having a suspended driver license. Until you give notice that you are not a corporate fiction the will continue to treat you as one and not be liable for thier actions. I doubt he understands this though due to his attorney indoctrination or he would have done it already.

When the judges says you are in contempt of court; Damn right I have nothing but contempt for the court and the judges and all the fictional characters they hide behind to oppress the men and women.

[edit on 24-5-2010 by hawkiye]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Very well said my friend, it is a rather contemptable lot of unsavory villians that run and profit off of the out of control justice system.

Thanks for reminding us just what a vile thing it is.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
His contempt charge stems from refusal to turn over financial documents of a client in a case where the plaintiff lost with Fine representing them, and was ordered to then pay the opposing side’s attorney fees and court costs.


His defense is he is committing a totally unrelated crime to protest what he thinks is bad government policy.
Refusing to obey a Judges Order is a Crime by the way.

How does withholding those documents have anything to do with what a Judge is paid? This guy is not to bright for an attorney


70 years old. Perhaps he is suffering from dementia? Otherwise he is just a jerk.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aquarius1

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Why isn;t it up to the client to produce the financial statements? It seems the lawyer should never be forced to divulge information about his client due to counsel privelege.


Good question, this reminds me of Journalists who have been held in contempt for not revealing their sources, they would have a hard time getting information if the source knew it could be revealed, also who would trust a lawyer for the very same reasons, there is confidentiality agreement between them.


Not apples and oranges but apples and elephants.

He is refusing to turn over a clients financials as ordered by a Judge when he LOST a suit. He has to pay the winning parties fees and costs. There is no confidentiality issue here.

Back on topic-
Instead of nonsense, why don't people just say, I hate Judges and whether this guy is just an incompetent jerk or not, I'm going to side with him; even if I throw the truth out the door to do it.

[edit on 5/24/2010 by Blaine91555]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


No it's not a crime, if the Judge has no authority to render such an order.

Nor should anyone of us not in the military want to live in a society where an official's abitrary decisions become so compelling.

The truth is that people at the end of their lives will often stand up and do the things they were too intimidated to do at the beginning and middle of their lives.

I admire the man's conviction.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:11 PM
link   
It seems he’s being held for contempt of court, and as long as he stays as such he should be jailed.
As soon as he cooperates with the judgment handed down I’m sure he will be released.
Bigger kid basically has little kid in a headlock, as soon as lil guy says UNCLE! He gets released and big guy walks away.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


Nothing like the might makes right mentality huh?

State has absolute right over the citizens...



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


I agree. But what can you or I do about it?
It seems the lawyer should give up the goods and try to change the law.
Or maybe if his case gets enough press it will rocket his case into the MSM.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:27 PM
link   
God it is so sad to see what a nation of ignorant sniveling cowards we have become... Who is this man harming where is the inured party? Yeah the bully judge tells you to jump and we ask how high... Sigh!



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


Well this was a predominantly displayed CNN.Com piece this morning, center upper box highlighted with picture.

So he is getting some main stream news media attention.

Los Angeles Judges have been known to backtrack or alter rulings based on good or bad publicity.

So there is a chance there will be some movement on the case.

Time will tell, one thing for certain is the Fine shows not signs of backing down. I think he has to much invested in the way of time to do so at this point.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by 23432
 


I think the term Disobedience of a court order results in Where it is necessary to act quickly the judge (even the trial judge) may act to sentence for contempt. Source

He was ordered to reviel sources, and HE did not comply. He refuses to follow the courts orders still, the reason why he is still in contempt and behind bars.

Now let it be known I don't necessarly agree with this standing, but its the legal basis for the decision from what I can see.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by theability
 


The more laws the less justice.

The Court is not interested in serving justice in this case, it's interested in serving its own vanity.

We have the highest per capita prison population in the world, even while the sales brochures tout the nation as being the most free on earth!

We have great marketing but a crappy justice system.

Thanks for posting.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



We have great marketing but a crappy justice system.


Can I ask question?

Do we really have a justice system?



[edit on 24-5-2010 by theability]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Looks like this guy has quite an impressive record fighting corruption in California. Seems to me that he is a political prisoner. The one's who are holding him are the ones he is up against. That alone seems like a conflict of interest, yet the Supreme Court won't hear it. I guess it's a mistake these days to assume you have any rights; and, for a champion of the people, this just takes the cake. Of course, he could release the Client's records, but those records were divulged in confidence. This guy is exhibiting more professionalism as an attorney than those judges, who are on the payroll of the County.



From the early 1990s until his illegal disbarment and March 4, 2009 jailing, Fine challenged and corrected state corruption, returning about “$350 million to California taxpayers which state, county and municipal governments (unlawfully took from) ’special funds’ and ‘trust funds’ in a series of taxpayer cases filed in federal” and state courts, specifically:
– $6 million returned to the Tidelands Trust Fund (TTF) in Malibu Video, et al. v. Wilson, et al.;
– in other cases against California cities and ports, another $350 million prevented from being unlawfully spent from TTF;
– the class action Lido v. State of California returned funds not paid to small and minority businesses during California’s budget crises;
– in Shinkle, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, Fine got the city to change its “sewer service charges” calculation method, saving residents “tens of millions of dollars” annually;
– in Amjadi and LACAOEHS v. LA Board of Supervisors, et al., LA County had to establish a special environmental inspection fee fund from wrongfully deposited funds in its General Fund; also freeze its environmental inspections fees until an initial $11 million deposit was spent, as well as deposit about $40 million annually into a “special fund” for environmental inspection fees; and
– many other legal victories against corrupt state officials saving California taxpayers about “$1 billion,” illegally “enrich(ing) developers, and blatantly trampl(ing) the people’s rights;” Fine calls it “a true story….wrapped up in one man’s personal nightmare.”
Overall, he stopped “Twenty-Six Years of California’s Annual Budget Crisis,” and was the first lawyer to “Challenge, In Court, The Unconstitutional Payments Given By Los Angeles County (Supervisors) To The Los Angeles County Superior Court Judges,” over $300 million since the late 1980s.
Over the same period, these “judges decided cases and made orders in favor of the County to the exclusion of the opposing parties in cases before them.” For example, from 2005 – 2007, no one won a case against the county in courts presided over by LA Superior Court judges. Over many years, as a result, Californians were swindled out of hundreds of millions of dollars, and most troubling of all, county judges knew “taking payments from LA County was unconstitutional,” in violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics and Political Reform Act for not disclosing them.
The same practice was common around the state, but not like in LA County, where state legislators exempted judges and county supervisors from prosecution.
For his many years of crime fighting, Fine was charged with “contempt of court” and “moral turpitude,” disbarred by California’s Supreme Court and jailed by Superior Court Judge David Yaffe “in retaliation for bringing the cases and exposing the unconstitutional payments,” ones later held to be unconstitutional.
Fine’s case is currently before the US Supreme Court. The California Bar waived its right to respond, meaning his appeal is unopposed. Also in his favor was a late 2009 decision in Sturgeon v. LA County (brought by Judicial Watch) deciding that county payments to judges are illegal.
Yet, with the help of California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald M. George, state-paid lobbyists got legislators to pass “a midnight bill” (SBX2-11) at the peak of last year’s budget crisis, changing the law to make the payments appear legally authorized to continue, besides giving everyone involved retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution.


Note: immunity is never given when no crime was committed.



Richard Fine's Judicial Lynching



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join