Dutton v. LA County Sheriff's Department
LINK

Judicial Watch filed on behalf of Leslie Dutton and the American Association of Women against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff Leroy D. Baca for denying Dutton’s “Full Disclosure Network” an opportunity to interview inmate Richard Fine. Mr. Fine is under incarceration indefinitely for contempt of court in Los Angeles County’s Men’s Central Jail stemming from his legal efforts to counter alleged corruption in the Los Angeles County court system. Plaintiffs allege the Sheriff’s Department and Baca have violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit against LA County Sheriff for Denying Press Interview with Inmate

The "Full Disclosure Network" Seeks Interview with Richard Fine, Incarcerated During Legal Battle against Corruption in Los Angeles Judicial System
Contact Information:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305

Washington, DC -- February 4, 2010
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that fights government corruption and judicial abuse, announced today that it has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Leslie Dutton and the American Association of Women against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff Leroy D. Baca for denying Dutton’s “Full Disclosure Network” an opportunity to interview inmate Richard Fine. Mr. Fine is under incarceration indefinitely for contempt of court in Los Angeles County’s Men’s Central Jail stemming from his legal efforts to counter alleged corruption in the Los Angeles County court system. Plaintiffs allege the Sheriff’s Department and Baca have violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

Since April 2009, the Full Disclosure Network, an Emmy Award-winning public affairs program available on public access channels and over the Internet, has been attempting to interview Mr. Fine for its “Judicial Benefits and Court Corruption” series. The Full Disclosure Network and Mr. Fine have been highly critical of a “double dipping” scheme by Los Angeles County to compensate judges with benefits and perks they are already receiving from the state. (Judicial Watch has filed a separate lawsuit over this same issue.) The Full Disclosure Network has also been critical of the decision to incarcerate Mr. Fine.

According to Judicial Watch’s complaint, filed on January 27, 2010: “Defendants Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and Baca have repeatedly denied Plaintiff Dutton’s and the American Association of Women’s requests to interview Mr. Fine at the Men’s Central Jail. [These denials] have been arbitrary and capricious, and, on information and belief, also have been unlawfully based, at least in part, on Plaintiff Dutton’s and the American Association of Women’s coverage and criticism of Mr. Fine’s continuing, indefinite incarceration for civil contempt.”

As the complaint notes, while Sheriff Baca has repeatedly denied the Full Disclosure Network’s requests for interviews, a reporter from the Los Angeles Times was granted access to an interview with Mr. Fine for an article published in the June 7, 2009 edition of the newspaper. In April 2009, a deputy for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department informed Dutton no interview with Mr. Fine could take place because “the judge said so,” despite the fact that no copy of a court order to that effect was produced. In September 2009, Sheriff’s Department spokesman Steve Whitmore said that no interview could take place “because it was the policy of [Sheriff Baca] not to allow interviews of Mr. Fine.”

“It certainly appears Sheriff Baca was playing favorites with the press, denying our client the opportunity to interview Mr. Fine because he didn’t like what the network’s editorial content,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Obviously, it is constitutionally impermissible for law enforcement officers to target citizens because of the opinions they express. We hope other media rally to our cause in this fight to uphold the First Amendment.”

Free Richard Fine

Richard Fine (CJ Inmate 1824367) Appeal to Los Angeles Sheriff Baca to review whether his arrest, booking, and jailing conformed with the fundamentals

Thursday, January 21, 2010
Attorney Richard Fine - dissident's false hospitalization in Los Angeles County, California

If you stand up to corrupt power in America, they can either disappear you in prison, mental health facilities or unmarked graves.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Attorney-Richard-Fine--di-by-Joseph-Zernik-100118-435.html

January 21, 2010
Attorney Richard Fine - dissident's false hospitalization in Los Angeles County, California
By Joseph Zernik
LINK
Large-scale false imprisonments in Los Angeles County, California, were previously reported. [1] Here, a related practice is reported false hospitalization of attorneys who filed complaints pertaining to the widespread corruption of Los Angeles County judges: Attorney Richard Fine, falsely hospitalized since March 4, 2009, and Attorney Ronald Gottschalk, since released on bail. In both cases, there was no medical justification for the hospitalizations, which were coerced. Conditions in Los Angeles County are a Human Rights disgrace of historic proportions, and direct extension of false imprisonments of thousands, documented in the Rampart scandal (1998-2000), which were never reversed ever since.[[Rampart re]]

Most published reports regarding the false hospitalization of Richard Fine failed to provide the fundamental facts. Starting in 2001, Richard Fine, a former US Prosecutor, exposed and protested the then secret payment to all Superior Court of California judges by Los Angeles County. He also was the first to compile data to demonstrate that in parallel it became practically impossible to win a case in court against Los Angeles County. In October 2008, such payments - today amounting to over $45,000 per judge per year - were ruled "not permitted" by the California Court of Appeals, 4th. By February 20, 2009, the California Governor signed into law retroactive immunities/pardons for all judges who had taken such "not permitted" payments. Less than two weeks later, Atty Richard Fine was taken into false hospitalization by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

However, there was no warrant ever issued for the arrest of Mr. Fine. Likewise, there was neither a valid and effectual conviction, nor was there a valid and effectual sentencing. The March 4, 2009 proceeding, at the end of which Mr. Fine was abducted, never appeared as part of the respective litigation (Marina v Los Angeles County - BS109420) chronology - it was - from court's perspective - an "off the record" proceeding.

Furthermore, in the past 10 months, despite the Habeas Corpus Petition to the US District Court Los Angeles, and the Emergency Petition to the 9th Circuit, the LA Superior Court has denied access to the Register of Actions (California docket) of Marina v LA County - in which Mr. Fine was purportedly arrested. How the US Court engaged in a habeas corpus review with no docket, and how the US Court of Appeal, 9th circuit, failed to notice that there was no docket, no warrant, no conviction, and no sentencing, remains unknown ...

The review of the Habeas Corpus Petition, Fine v Sheriff (2:09-cv-01914), was suspect on additional counts. Donna Thomas, Courtroom Assistant to Magistrate Carla Woehrle, who engaged in transactions in the US District Court docket, which were subject to complaint to FBI, was never authorized as Deputy Clerk. Furthermore, the Clerk of the US Court, Terry Nafisi, has refused to allow access to any of the records in Mr. Fine's case, and likewise, is refusing to answer the questions: (i) Was Donna Thomas authorized as Deputy Clerk at the time she engaged in the transaction in Fine v Sheriff?(ii) Is the docket of Fine v Sheriff an honest, valid, and effectual docket of the US Court in compliance with US law?

In a matching parallel, Lee Baca, Sheriff of Los Angeles County, after over three months of communications, including intervention by the Honorable Michael Antonovich, Los Angeles County Supervisor, has refused to comply with the law, and has continuously denied access to California Public Records, which were the arrest and booking papers of Mr. Fine. Instead, Sheriff Baca office has repeatedly referenced the fraudulent data posted in its online Inmate Information Center. The fraudulent Inmate Information Center falsely stated that Mr. Fine was arrested and booked at the "San Pedro Municipal Court". However, such data were false on numerous accounts: There were plenty of witnesses and newspaper reports that the abduction of Richard Fine took place in the Central District - Judge Yaffe's Courtroom. Furthermore, there were no booking facilities in San Pedro at all. Likewise, the single sheriff Deputy in San Pedro denied that anybody was arrested or booked there anytime in memory. Finally - Municipal Courts ceased to exist in Los Angeles County almost a decade ago.

The fraudulent listing of the arrest and booking of Richard Fine under the San Pedro Municipal Court was, however, employed by the Sheriff's Department. In response to requests to access the arrest and booking papers, public records by California Public Records Act, the sheriff's bureau claimed that the standard policy was that the booking papers were held with the "Booking Agency". In this particular case - this is the non-existent Municipal Court of San Pedro...

Furthermore, since Mr. Fine was never arrested, and never booked, he is not on the "Count List" of the Men's Central Jail. Therefore, Mr. Fine has never even once in ten months participated in the mandatory three times a day "Inmates Counts", which apply to all inmates in the jail. Instead, Mr. Fine was held under false, coercive hospitalization, with no medical reason at all.

The story as a whole, was eerily reminiscent of coercive hospitalizations of dissidents by the KGB under the former Soviet Union. Given the failure of the US justice system to investigate, prosecute, and judge its own corruption, it appeared that the only remedies could come through international intervention.

Attorney Richard Fine - dissident's false hospitalization in Los Angeles County, California
Litigation Documents
•Complaint - January 27, 2010
Press Releases
•Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit against LA County Sheriff for Denying Press Interview with Inmate - February 4, 2010