Tag: Dr. Richard I. Fine

COURT VICTIM SOLUTION

  By , , , , , , , , ,

JUDICIAL CORRUPTION SOLUTION WHY IS THIS LEGISLATION NEEDED: This is a response to the systemic emergency judicial crisis in California existing since 1985 when individual counties and courts commenced paying State Superior Court judges sitting on State Superior Courts for their counties “supplemental or local judicial benefits” in addition to the State compensation (salary and benefits) paid to the judges by the State causing disparity in judges judicial salary and benefits, double taxation for citizens and residents in the “paying counties”, “unconstitutional (unlawful) ‘supplemental local judicial benefit payments’” to the judges resulting in 90% of California’s Superior Court judges receiving… Continue reading

Support this Bill to GET JUSTICE for ALL COURT VICTIMS Nationwide

  By , , , , , , , ,
Support this Dr Richard I Fine Los Angeles County California Corrupt Members ignore judicial corruption victims

History of SBX 211 and AB 2960 SBX 2 11 Commencing in the mid to late 1980s California Counties and State Superior Courts began paying State Superior Court judges (Trial Court judges) payments in addition to their State Compensation. These payments were called “Supplemental or Local Judicial Benefit Payments” (payments). California Constitution, Article VI, Section 19, required Judicial State Compensation could only be set by the California Legislature. The payments were held to violate the California Constitution in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, 167 Cal.App.4th 630 (2008), Review Denied, 2009). In response, the California Legislature approved and Governor Schwarzenegger… Continue reading

Support this Bill to GET JUSTICE for ALL COURT VICTIMS Nationwide

  By , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Support this Dr Richard I Fine Los Angeles County California Corrupt Members ignores judicial corruption victims

History of SBX 211 and AB 2960 SBX 2 11 Commencing in the mid to late 1980s California Counties and State Superior Courts began paying State Superior Court judges (Trial Court judges) payments in addition to their State Compensation. These payments were called “Supplemental or Local Judicial Benefit Payments” (payments). California Constitution, Article VI, Section 19, required Judicial State Compensation could only be set by the California Legislature. The payments were held to violate the California Constitution in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, 167 Cal.App.4th 630 (2008), Review Denied, 2009). In response, the California Legislature approved and Governor Schwarzenegger… Continue reading

5/12/2023 US Supreme Court Petition for Rehearing filed Petition not Opposed Supreme Court Conference Set For June 8, 2023

  By , , , ,
Los Angeles California Supreme Court ignores judicial corruption victims ignoring Amend SBX 2 11

The petition for rehearing is one of the most important cases before the Supreme Court. It will require the state government executive branch, legislative branch and judicial branch to uphold their oath of office to obey the U.S. Constitution and not “war against the Constitution”. It requires the U.S. Supreme Court to follow its precedents of Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. School Board and Cooper v. Aaron requiring the Supreme Court sets the law, due process must be followed and violating the oath of office is “war against the Constitution”, respectively. To deny the Petition for Rehearing, will be to… Continue reading

Dr. Richard I. Fine’s Personal Experience “Will the corruption finally end?”

  By , , ,

Will the Corruption Finally End? Involved Players in the silencing of Dr. Richard I. Fine, exposing the majority of California Superior Court Judges to accepting bribes. If this is what the top justice and Supreme court do when an ethical BAR member exposes bribery and corruption, it only confirms how corrupt the entire BAR and court system is No. 22-782 Title: Carol Pulliam, Petitioner v.  University of Southern California Docketed: February 17, 2023 Lower Ct: Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District Case Numbers: (B304749) Decision Date: August 23, 2022 Rehearing Denied: September 8, 2022 Discretionary Court Decision Date:… Continue reading

Supreme Court of the United States CAROL PULLIAM, Petitioner vs. USC On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari RICHARD ISAAC FINE

  By , , , , , , ,

“Richard I. Fine Presents the argument against paying County or Court Supplemental or Local Judicial Benefit Payments to Judges, to the US Supreme Court.” In The Supreme Court of the United States CAROL PULLIAM, Petitioner, vs. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Respondent. On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of The State Of California PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI RICHARD ISAAC FINE, ESQ. P.O. Box 789, 1187 Coast Village Rd., Ste. 1 Santa Barbara, CA 93102-0789 Telephone: (310) 622-6900 Email: richardfine@richardfinelaw.com Counsel for Petitioner Carol Pulliam COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM i QUESTION PRESENTED Do state court trial judges, court… Continue reading

ABOUT US

  By , , , , , ,

Jail 4 Judges is the brain child of Activist, Court Victim and Dr. Richard I. Fine who is in the process of working on his Bill “Amend SBX 2 11”  and who understands the key to bringing back Justice to Americans. If you’re unaware of the Epidemic of Judicial Abuse by the majority of judges in America you’re not paying attention. The fact that judges are all but every held fully accountable or prosecuted for their crimes, abuse, violation of oath and violating law. SEE Reuters Major investigative article Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws or oaths remained on… Continue reading

  • HAVE WE EXPOSED THE DEEPSTATE?

    Free Palestine