Richard I. Fine Is Free: Result of Judicial Conscience or Confusion?


Dr. Richard I Fine, Court Critic
Former U. S. Prosecutor, Dept. of Justice Washington D.C.

Los Angeles, CA — On Friday, September 17, 2010 at 10 p.m.Richard I Fine was released from his solitary “coercive confinement” cell in L A County Mens Central jail where he spent the last 18 months. He was unexpectedly released by Order of California Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe who had just posted a Minute Order on September 16, 2010, one day before, where he restated that Fine should continue incarceration, setting a hearing date for six months in the future. Although Richard Fine was never charged with a crime or convicted he was incarcerated after attempting to disqualify Judge Yaffe from sitting on his civil contempt of court case due to a conflict of interest.

Yom Kippur Turn-Around?:

Why would Judge Yaffe reverse himself the very next day on September 17th on Kol Nidre, the first day of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement in the Jewish religion. Judge Yaffe apparently had a change of heart, issuing an Order that Sheriff Baca release Dr. Richard Fine from jail. It should be noted that the U.S. Supreme Court precedent in the 1974 case of L.A. Times reporter William T. Farr (In Re Farr) held that a person should not be held for more five days in “Coercive Confinement” for civil contempt of court. Was this the reason Judge Yaffe had a change of heart?

Yaffe Explains His Confusion:

Judge Yaffe took pains to explain his frustration in his September 17, 2010 Minute Order releasing Dr. Fine from jail:

“For reasons known only to himself, Fine is attempting to obtain his release from this court and from the appellate court at the same time.He filed a motion for such relief in this court, and then, before it could be heard, he requested the same relief from the Court of Appeal. It is unclear what he expects this court to do in light of his petition to a higher court.”

Full Disclosure contacted Dr. Fine By Telephone For Response:

“Judge Yaffe was confused because he could not determine the difference between a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed in the Appellate Court to obtain my release and a Motion filed in his court to Void and Annul All Orders and Judgments in the (case of) Marina Strand Colony II Homeowners Assn. Vs. L A County .”

Editors Note: View the document here that was before Judge Yaffe (Notice of Motion to Null & Void All Orders in the Marina Strand Colony II vs County of Los Angeles) No. BS109420 Richard Fine’s Motion is based upon the court documents filed with the higher courts by Yaffe and his lawyer Kevin McCormick which he has now admitted were based on false information and a non-existent court order. These documents were filed in opposition to releasing Richard I. Fine from jail.

Judge Yaffe Admitted Taking Payments From LA County

Judge Yaffe had admitted in court testimony that he was receiving illegal payments from L. A County who was a party to the case. In 2008 the Sturgeon vs County of Los Angeles case held that the County payments to State Judges was illegal and unconstitutional. It has been estimated that State Superior Court Judges have received over $300 million in illegal payments from the County since 1987 and have failed to disclose this fact to litigants in the courtroom.

On October 13, 2010 the Fourth District Califorinia Court of Appeal will hold Oral Arguements in the Sturgeon vs County of LA case where the Judicial Watch organization is seeking Injunctive Relief to stop the illegal County payments to State Judges that are now $57,000 per judge per year on top of their State Salary of $180,000. These developments have caused considerable tension within the Superior Court and Judge David Yaffe especially regarding the handling of the Richard I Fine case. The announcement a few weeks ago that Yaffe was going to retire in November before his term of office was to expire led to speculation that Yaffe was “resigning” rather than retiring from office.

Why Did Judge Yaffe Reconsider Fine’s “Coercive Confinement”

When writing his release Order, Judge Yaffe questioned “whether Fine’s continued confinement serves any useful purpose.” He went on to justify his original Contempt Order and indefinite sentence of Dr. Fine with the following statement:

“By keeping him incarcerated for 18 months, the court has deterred others from defying its orders to the extent that it is possible to do so given the facts of this case.” Judge David P. Yaffe 

Opinion Survey: Leave your answers in the comment section at bottom of page:

Should the Court punish lawyers who raise the issue of Judicial conflict?

Yes or No?

Is this why only 3 successful lawsuits against LA County in 10 years?

Yes or No ?

Does Yaffe’s Statement Indicate Retaliation Against Fine?

Yes or No ?

Should Lawsuits against L A County be Prohibited Entirely ?

Yes or No?

State Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe

Resigned From Office Effective November 1, 2010

Judicial Obstruction of Justice Prosecution Demanded

Richard Fine submitted a September 3, 2010 letter to California Attorney General Edmund G. (Jerry) Brown, Jr., Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, U. S. Attorney Andre Birotte, Jr., and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder requesting Grand Jury Investigations and Indictments of Yaffe and 21 other State and Federal Court Judges.

The Concluding Statement Of Richard Fine’s Investigation Demand 9-23-10:

“Since the judiciary has clearly shown itself both incapable and unwilling to root out the corruption within its ranks, the responsibility falls upon each of you as the respective leaders of our law enforcement agencies to prosecute the wrongdoers. Rid our Federal, State and Municipal Governments of corrupt politicians and remove all corrupt judges from office.”

“At the present time, our judiciary is akin to one which has been ‘purchased’ by the cartels in Mexico or subject to the corruption in Iraq, Iran or Afghanistan.”

“The State trial court judges in LA County have been ‘purchased’ over the last 23 years for $300 million. Judge Yaffe has been ‘purchased’ for $500,000. Ninety percent of the California trial judges in 55 of the 58 counties have been ‘purchased.’ The federal judiciary, up through the U.S. Supreme Court, has been complicit and has allowed this to happen, irrespective of all Supreme Court precedent forbidding such.”

“I have provided you the facts to start your grand juries. As a former Justice Department lawyer who indicted GM and Ford for price fixing and investigated international pulp, paper and newsprint cartels through the use of grand juries, I have complete confidence that, with a concerted effort, each of you will be successful.”

“Once that success is achieved, the United States will again have the finest judicial system in the world.” View Entire Document Here

Full Disclosure Network covers in-depth issues mostly ignored by mainstream media.

FDN is an electronic media and television service, tax-exempt under the IRS Code 501(c)(3) a non-profit educational organization program of the American Association of Women, founded in 1984.

Full Disclosure Network®
742 Washington Blvd.
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
310-822-4449



Categories: Court Corruption, FDN, Judicial, Law Enforcement, Political Corruption, Richard Fine
Tagged In: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Get the post permalink.