Digitally signed by Joseph

Joseph Zernik DMD PhD

Zernik
DN: cn=Joseph Zernik,
email=jz12345@earthlink.net,
Fax: (801) 998-0917 Email: jz12345@earthlink.net c=US
Date: 2009.04.10 16:02:21
-07'00'

09-04-10 Indictments/convictions of state judges by US DOJ/FBI per Public

Integrity Section annual reports 1985-2007 – uneven enforcement efforts,
and failure to enforce equal protection.

A. INTRODUCTION

In December 2008, in conjunction with the indictment of former New York State Supreme Court
Justice Spargo, the FBI released in New York the following prepared statement1:
"This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial corruption
vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most serious of all criminal conduct and
can tear at the fabric of a democratic society." [underline added – jhz]

Data analysis below reflects an attempt to establish whether FBI’s enforcement efforts are consistent
with its own stated policy.

B. REPORTED INDICTMENTS/CONVICTIONS OF STATE JUDGES 1985-2007

Table 1: Enforcement outcome per year 1985-2007

2
Indictments/convictions of state judges per annual reports of the Public Integrity Section of US Dept of Justice.

# YEAR STATE # STATE JUDGES NAMES OF JUDGES

INDICTED/ CONVICTED
1. 20093 Pennsylvania 2 indicted Judge Mark Ciavarella,
Judge Michael Conahan

2. 20084 NY State 1 indicted Former Supreme Court Justice Spargo

3. 2007 Mississippi 2 convicted Former Judge Walter W. Teel,
Former Judge John Whitfield
4. 2006
5. 2005
6. 2004
7. 2003 Mississippi 2 charged Former Judge Walter W. Teel,
Former Judge John Whitfield
Former Judge Ronald D. Bodenheimer
Louisiana 1 pled guilty FormerJudge Executive Donnie
Newsome
Kentucky 1 indicted
8. 2002 Louisiana 1 indicted FormerJudge Ronald D. Bodenheimer
9. 2001
10. 2000
11. 1999
1
Based on report by the Time Union December 11, 2008.
2
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/pin/
3
Based on media reports, no PIN annual report available.
http://inproperinla.com/09-02-11-two-pennsylavnia-judges_indicted.pdf
4
Based on media reports, no PIN annual report available.
http://inproperinla.com/08-12-11-usdoj-not-fbi-indicts-ny-state-judge-spargo-ny-s.pdf
 Page 2/6 April 10, 2009

12. 1998
13. 1997
14. 1996
15. 1995
16. 1994
17. 1993
18. 1992
19. 1991 Pennsylvania 1 convicted Judge Kenneth S. Harris
20. 1990
21. 1989
22. 1988
23. 1987 Pennsylvania 3 indicted, 1 convicted Judge Herbert R. Cain, Anonymous
Illinois 2 charged, 2 indicted, 2 Anonymous
pleaded guilty
Kentucky 1 pleaded guilty Anonymous
Arkansas 1 found guilty Anonymous
24. 1986 Illinois 3 convicted, 1 sentenced, 1 Anonymous
indicted
Mississippi 1 convicted Anonymous
Tennessee 2 convicted Anonymous
Kentucky 1 convicted Anonymous
25. 1985 Arkansas 1 convicted Anonymous
Illinois 8 indicted - 4 convicted Anonymous
Ohio 1 convicted Anonymous

C. ENFORCEMENT OUTCOME 1985-2007 VS DEMOGRAPHIC DATA OF STATES AND

TERRITORIES, 2008 ESTIMATES

No data were readily found for the numbers of state judges in each state and territory. In an attempt
to normalize actions by the US Department of Justice relative to estimated size of the state judiciaries,
data were provided for the population of the several states and territories.

5
Table 2: Indictments of state judges per annual reports of the Public Integrity Section of US Dept of Justice 1985-2007 , and media
6
reports for 2008-9, compared to demographic estimates for 2008 .

Rank Among Rank Among State Population Indictments

States All Territories (2008 est.) 1985-present
01 01 California 36,756,666 0
02 02 Texas 24,326,974 0
03 03 New York 19,490,297 1
04 04 Florida 18,328,340 0
05 05 Illinois 12,901,563 107
06 06 Pennsylvania 12,448,279 5
07 07 Ohio 11,485,910 1
8
Los Angeles County 10,363,850 0
08 08 Michigan 10,003,422 0
09 09 Georgia 9,685,744 0
10 10 North Carolina 9,222,414 0
5
Based on Public Integrity Section annual reports as described in Table 1, above.
6
Based on US Bureau of Statistics data, copied from Wikipedia, April 9, 2009.
7
All reported Illinois indictments resulted from enforcement in 1985-7, given that no names were mentioned, it was difficult to
ascertain the degree of overlap, or lack thereof, between actions reported in the individual years.
8
LA County population - based on California State Government's Population Bureau, estimate for January 1, 2008. Data
copied from Wikipedia April 9, 2009
 Page 3/6 April 10, 2009

11 11 New Jersey 8,682,661 0

12 12 Virginia 7,769,089 0
13 13 Washington 6,549,224 0
14 14 Arizona 6,500,180 0
15 15 Massachusetts 6,497,967 0
16 16 Indiana 6,376,792 0
17 17 Tennessee 6,214,888 2
18 18 Missouri 5,911,605 0
19 19 Maryland 5,633,597 0
20 20 Wisconsin 5,627,967 0
21 21 Minnesota 5,220,393 0
22 22 Colorado 4,939,456 0
23 23 Alabama 4,661,900 0
24 24 South Carolina 4,479,800 0
25 25 Louisiana 4,410,796 1
26 26 Kentucky 4,269,245 2
A 27 Puerto Rico 3,954,037 0
27 28 Oregon 3,790,060 0
28 29 Oklahoma 3,642,361 0
29 30 Connecticut 3,501,252 0
30 31 Iowa 3,002,555 0
31 32 Mississippi 2,938,618 3
32 33 Arkansas 2,855,390 2
33 34 Kansas 2,802,134 0
34 35 Utah 2,736,424 0
35 36 Nevada 2,600,167 09
36 37 New Mexico 1,984,356 0
37 38 West Virginia 1,814,468 0
38 39 Nebraska 1,783,432 0
39 40 Idaho 1,523,816 0
40 41 Maine 1,316,456 0
41 42 New Hampshire 1,315,809 0
42 43 Hawaii 1,288,198 0
43 44 Rhode Island 1,050,788 0
44 45 Montana 967,440 0
45 46 Delaware 873,092 0
46 47 South Dakota 804,194 0
47 48 Alaska 686,293 0
48 49 North Dakota 641,481 0
49 50 Vermont 621,270 0
B 51 District of Columbia 591,833 0
50 52 Wyoming 532,668 0
C 53 Guam 173,456 0
D 54 US Virgin Islands 108,448 0
Northern Mariana
E 55
Islands 84,546 0
F 56 American Samoa 57,291 0

9
In 2008, the Los Angeles Times, ran an acclaimed series of detailed reports on alleged corruption of the Nevada state
judges. FBI took no action at all.
 Page 4/6 April 10, 2009

D. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS

General
1. The number of indictments/convictions over the years demonstrates distribution that is far from
normal.
2. Various models can explain such abnormal distribution. Given the long tenures of judges, it is
unlikely that corruption of the judiciary appears in bursts. Therefore, one of the more plausible
explanations for the data is in uneven enforcement efforts, with bursts of activity, for example –
1985-87, followed by years of minimal or no efforts at all.
3. The number of indictments/convictions relative to state/territory populations shows abnormal
distribution as well.

Large Sun-Belt States: California, Texas & Florida

4. Particularly striking is the absence of any indictments over a quarter century in California, Texas,
and Florida, three large sun-belt states, with combined population of close to 80 millions.
5. Various models can explain such abnormal distribution. For example – large differences in
integrity among the state judiciaries, with California, Texas, and Florida being of integrity that is
significantly better than that of other states. Media report and court actions do not support such
a model (see below).
6. A more plausible model explaining the data – failure to enforce equal protection in these states.

Nevada
7. Nevada fits the class of sun-belt states, but its population is much smaller than that of California,
Texas, and Florida. The absence of any indictments or convictions in Nevada in the years covered
here - 1985-2007, is particularly striking given the reputation of Nevada state courts.
8. In 2006, the Los Angeles Times, ran an acclaimed series of detailed reports10 regarding alleged
rampart corruption of the Nevada state judges. One report quoted an opinion of
“…the incestuous nature of a judiciary fueled by friendships and campaign money."

Another report was titled:

“In Las Vegas, They're Playing With a Stacked Judicial Deck”.

The subtitle read:

“Some judges routinely rule in cases involving friends, former clients and business
associates -- and in favor of lawyers who fill their campaign coffers.”
9. No evidence that FBI took any action at all – alleged failure to enforce equal protection in Nevada.

Los Angeles County, California

10. The population of Los Angeles County, California, per 2008 estimates11, was 10,363,850.
Therefore, LA County, in and of itself, was more populous than 49 of the states and territories.
No indictments/convictions of state judges were found in Public Integrity Section annual reports
for 1985-2007, or in media reports for 2008-9. The absence of any indictments in Los Angeles,
over a period of quarter century is amazing, given the overwhelming evidence of widespread
corruption of the courts, with the Rampart scandal of 1998-2000 at the low point mark, and the

10
http://inproperinla.com/06-06-14-los-angeles-times_series-on-las-vegas-judges-renews-calls-for-reform.pdf
11
based on California State government's population bureau, estimate for January 1, 2008. Data copied from Wikipedia April
9, 2009
 Page 5/6 April 10, 2009

continued false imprisonment of the 10,000 Rampart-FIPs an inexplicable tolerance by US

Government of an ongoing, severe human rights abuse under the color of law.
11. KNBC, Los Angeles, reported in October 200812 that ALL judges in LA County (~500) took
payments of ~$45,000 per year per judge from LA County, which were ruled by court to be “not
permitted”13. During the same years that judges took such payments, the same judges did not
disclose to parties in cases involving LA County that they received such payments that were “not
permitted”. For some years, where data were analyzed, no judgment by court was ever issued
against LA County. In lay language such payments would therefore likely to be called “bribes”.
The KNBC report opened with a statement by activist John Rizzo, in re: Los Angeles County:
“Los Angeles has the best courts money can buy”.
12. Att Richard Fine, who led the efforts to expose this scandal, had been incarcerated for over a
month, and his imprisonment may be indefinite- purported to be for contempt14. It at least
appears as retaliation, intimidation, and harassment of a witness, victim, informant.
13. Opinion letter by veteran FBI agent, decorated by US congress, by US Attorney General, and by
Director of FBI, indicates that judges of LA Superior court were involved in real estate fraud.15
14. Evidence shows that the alleged corruption of the LA Superior Court is also tightly related to
obstruction of justice and conduct that is likely to be deemed racketeering by the Legal
Department of Countrywide, under its former Chief Legal Officer, Sandor Samuels. Moreover,
email notice by the same decorated veteran FBI agent quoted above, indicates that the reason for
the obviously aimless investigation of wrongdoing by Countrywide, is the desire to cover up the
corruption of LA Superior Court judges.16
15. Computer system installed in the LA Superior Court in 1985 is alleged to be a “voting machine”
scandal, producing alleged fraudulent court records on a daily basis for the past quarter century.17
16. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system , the LA Superior Court
eliminated a series of public records that are critical for the safeguard of the integrity of the
courts, including, but not limited to: Book of Judgments, Registers of Actions, Calendars of the
Courts, Index of All Cases, Index of All Prisoners.
17. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system, the LA Superior Court
has been denying public access to public records for the past quarter century in wholesale abuse
of Common Law and First Amendment rights. It adopted an unpublished rule:
“Sustain is privileged –for the court only”18.
18. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system, the LA Superior Court
failed to update its Local Rules of Court on critical matters, such as entry of judgment, for the past
quarter century, and therefore is operating with no valid published Rules of Court19.

12
KNBC, Los Angeles, report on October 16, 2008:
http://inproperinla.com/08-10-16-knbc-illegal-payments--la-sup-court-judges-s.pdf
13 th
Ruling by California Court of Appeal, 4 District, San Diego, October, 2008 –
http://inproperinla.com/08-10-10-cal-ct-app-4th-dist-la-county-judges-payments-not-permitted.pdf
14
The indefinite incarceration of Richard Fine followed his demand for disqualification for a cause of Judge Jaffe, on of the
judges who received the payments from LA County, which were deemed by court “not permitted”.
http://inproperinla.com/09-03-04-full-disclosure-network-att-richard-fine-jailed-in-attempt-to-disqualify-la-judge.pdf
15
The opinion was by veteran FBI agent James Wedick, best remembered for his performance in the Abscam affair.
http://inproperinla.com/07-12-17-wedick.memo.notarized.deeds.zernik.2009.02.05-s.pdf
http://inproperinla.com/07-12-17-grant-deeds-wedick-s-opinion-s.pdf
16
http://inproperinla.com/08-08-21-refusal-to-investigate-fbi-wedick-letter-s.pdf
17
Findings relative the fraudulent nature of “Sustain” the case management system produced by The Daily Journal – the
largest legal newspaper in California, and installed with no public scrutiny around 1985, are summarized in:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-computers-&-the-courts-abstract-&-figures.pdf
18
This unpublished rule was repeated verbatim once by Supervising Judge Gerald Rosenberg, in open court, as the
justification for denial of access to public records, and a second time by staff in the office of then Presiding Judge Stephen
Czuleger, for the same purpose.
19
Review of the failure to update the Rules of Court on critical matters such as entry of judgment:
http://inproperinla.com/.0Heading-152-conclusions-us-constitution-non-compliance.pdf
 Page 6/6 April 10, 2009

19. In parallel to the installation of the alleged fraudulent computer system, the LA Superior Court
adapted a “Local Custom” of “waivers of service and notice” of court orders, issued
unilaterally by judges of the superior court. Such local custom was routinely denounced by the
California Commission on Judicial Performance, but it continues even to this date.
20. As evidenced by the Blue Ribbon Review Panel (2006) report20 commissioned by the LAPD itself,
and by PBS Frontline21, the LA Superior Court judges continue the false imprisonment of at least
10,000 confirmed Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) a decade after large-
scale investigation (at times 200 investigators assigned to it) confirmed that they were convicted
and sentenced based on false evidence. Such evidence was generated by police through framing,
and at times also false confessions - extracted through torture. Regarding the findings of the
Rampart scandal, the following opinions were published:
“…judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not
commit. How could so many participants in the criminal justice system have failed either
to recognize or to instigate any meaningful scrutiny of such appalling and repeated
perversions of justice?”
“…we felt a particular obligation to ensure that no aspect of the Los Angeles criminal
justice system, including the lawyers and judges, escaped scrutiny.”
Prof David W. Burcham, then Dean, and Prof Catherine L. Fisk, Loyola Law School, Los
Angeles, Rampart symposium, 2000
“Any analysis of the Rampart scandal must begin with an appreciation of the heinous
nature of what the officers did. This is conduct associated with the most repressive
dictators and police states. “
“…and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.”
Erwin Chemerinsky, today Dean of Irvine Law School, University of California,
57 Guild Prac 121, 2000.
Needles to say, there is no way to justify the continued false imprisonment of the Rampart-FIPs a
decade later. The Rampart FIPs are mostly black and latino, and by their sheer number and
duration of false imprisonment they dwarf the detentions at Guantanamo Bay. It is a disgrace
of historic proportions. If nothing else, this paper is aimed as a request for President Obama
to act to end this disgrace before the end of his first 100 days in office, when it is still seen as part
of wrongs by a previous administration.
21. In contrast with the overwhelming evidence of alleged widespread corruption of the LA Superior
Court, there is no evidence that FBI took any action at all. Moreover, there is evidence suggesting
patronizing of the LA Superior Court corruption by the FBI – alleged failure to enforce equal
protection in Los Angeles County.
22. Conditions of the US justice system, such as seen in LA County, California, are
alleged severe violations of International Law, including, but not limited to the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 2, 7,8,10, 11 & 12.

20
Blue Ribbon Review Panel, 2006 report:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-rampart-blue-ribbon-review-panel-2006-report.pdf
21
Frontline PBS report on false imprisonments in LA:
http://inproperinla.com/01-05-01-pbs-frontline_rampart-false-imprisonments-s.pdf