Dr. Richard L. Fine imprisoned for 14 months for violating a judge’s order!

By: Chief Activist

Once a dapper Beverly Hills attorney known for his bow tie, Richard Fine has been held in solitary confinement at Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail for 14 months, even though he’s never been charged with a crime.

Dr. Richard Fine admits, “I ended up here because I did the one thing no other lawyer in California is willing to do. I took on the corruption of the courts,” Fine said in a jailhouse interview with CNN.

The full Interview with Dr. Fine.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcsbO_qPvwc&w=280&h=160]

The technical term is “coercive confinement” — jail-time until a person follows a judge’s order.
“He’s probably done more time than most burglars, robbers and dope dealers,” says Sterling Norris of the public-interest group Judicial Watch.

Norris says Fine’s confinement has gone on too long.

“I think it’s a lack of judicial integrity to say enough is enough,” Norris says. “We’ve got a man, 70-year-old attorney, in jail for over a year on coercive confinement and that is way beyond the pale. No matter what else he may have done, that is improper.”

To read the whole story follow this LINK

6 Comments

  • Hugh Whinfrey:

    It’s people like Dr. Fine who are the only hope of America winning back its lost freedoms. Putting them in prison like this actually makes martyrs and icons of them, so his sacrifice is not wasted by any means.

    Dissent and disagreement are what makes a society work – these are the wellsprings of the innovation and dynamism that cause the whole to be worth more than the sum of the parts. Sociopaths, by definition, don’t make that calculation.

    When in the name of obedience to officials stoned on what Henry Kissinger himself referred to as the “aphrodisiac of power”, smashing all dissent becomes the governing policy of the American Borg then the value of the whole diminishes. A better approach is to implement mechanisms to work with the dissent and address the issues raised.

    For starters, take a look around you – most of the population are not lawyers. Why must they speak with the trained eloquence and wisdom of aged sages to be taken seriously in their complaints about experiencing low or no standing in the legal system? The great unwashed are not capable of undergoing such training or experiencing immediate IQ boosts, so that isn’t the answer. The answer is to change the system instead so the review process will actually respectfully accommodate all the citizens it claims to serve. Otherwise, it only serves the lawyers themselves, which I think folks may quite justly characterize as “corruption”.

    • Bill S:

      Hugh, what you say is said with such wisdom and eloquence it encapsulates our reality in the same way Einstein’s E=mC2 describes our Universe. Thank you for your contribution to this site. I hope what you say resonates with all who read it. Bill

  • Hugh Whinfrey:

    Thanks Bill. I had been meaning to set up a site like this for years, but I’m a busy guy and this Penoyar Conduct Scandal thing is centered around, frankly, such a pompous little weenie that I hadn’t felt it was worth much of my time. So I’m glad I found your site, and I intend to continue to contribute now every few days or so until we can get some more issues/problems fully outlined and work commenced on some constructive and much-needed solutions.

  • Patrick McGilvery:

    I am in a county where by strange coincidence most men share the name of Lemuel who are the most able and qualified persons, with enthusiasm, in the art of pulling ferry rafts across rivers excepting of course an occasional and embarrassing grunt.
    I very much enjoyed your video Message to Police and find the message very refreshing to hear. Refreshing to hear the words spoken instead of reading our founders intent written down over 200 years ago. Clearly it is such hopeful intent that produced the words you have spoken. I have little to add to your several comparisons of early America with today and that was to my delight. I ask you to consider the “founding principles” that does apply to any government in the United States and would deliver to a sharp focus the issues and questions you have correctly raised. These principles are of extreme importance yet sadly ignored. One must first find these founding principles and second understand what they state. Tyrants and their Toadies have been quite busy covering them over, which, you may know that the only fear which truth has is its concealment. Justice James Wilson’s 1790 Lectures in Law are 3 volumes that hold 514 pages that were lost in 1804 but “rediscovered” in 1969 and a fascinating read for sure. He uses the word principles many times. I did a computer word search of “principles” in Wilson’s manuscript which returned a find that numbered 458. Wilson was a signer of the Declaration of Independence and also was on the 5 person committee who helped guide Jefferson’s hand to write it. Wilson also contributed to the Articles of Confederation and was a signer of the U.S. Constitution of 1789 and is given credit for the “We the People” phrase in it. That phrase expressly ties the U.S. Constitution to the founding principles. The U.S. Constitution is the form that is expressed from these founding principles. This is very important to understand because should communist principles be used to interpret any constitution, no matter how well written, it would eventually devolve into a communist form of government. Likewise, if the founding principles were exclusively used in an established communist form of government, eventually a good government in liberty would result simply by nullifying the bulk of its communist form. The legal definition of Principles is very important to fully understand forwards and backwards; to and from.
    Please carefully read the founding principles from which a form (state and federal constitutions) are expressed. The definition of PRINCIPLES is included in a letter to law professor Wes Oliver and attached – please read. Online Bouvier’s is here http://www.constitution.org/bouv/bouvier_p.htm Our nation uses First Principles as its founding principles for governments. Attached is from the congressional record and orders for distribution. After the Revolutionary War several sovereign nations traded with the United States. The Declaration of Independence is here to stay. An order vacating it would be without the consent as that man would rise above all others. The Articles of Confederation (attached) “organized its powers in such form” but not more obvious than the Constitution for the United States of America, Art. I, II, III. Here are our founding principles of government and I took liberty helping you to better understand. Do not speed read these through because they come from a special place. Read slowly and carefully and always keep all five true in your final interpretations. I correctly read these 3 years ago and can still find new and very good meaning somehow missed before. Kind of like a cup that never empties.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident,
    1. (a) that all men are created equal,
    (b) that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
    (c) that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
    2. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from
    the consent of the governed. (note consent is properly used here as a noun – not a verb)
    3. That whenever any Form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the Right of the
    People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles
    and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and
    Happiness.

    …organizing its powers in such form… see U.S. Constitution Article I, II and III. Legislative Powers shall be, Executive Powers shall be, Judicial Powers shall be. This ought to show, even to Lemuel and muscle headed “patriots”, that the U.S. Constitution is the form of government expressed by the 5 self-evident truths; the founding principles. Now a good question to ask police or any government authority is this: Can a form correct, alter or abolish its principles? More bluntly: Can man correct, alter or abolish God? Careful thought, no, very careful thought in this area will deliver a bounty of Good News and a terrible measure of fear to the tyrant and his despairingly wretched and miserable servants. In such light the tyrant would have the life of a toad beneath a harrow. It will reveal the correct meaning of just what “CONSENT” means; that before consent, the verb, TWO must hold a right to it. I have yet to see or hear consent used correctly in this truly idolatrous modern world of today: not once ever! Didn’t Michigan prosecutors use common law to get Dr. Death Jack Kevorkian who could enter his signed contract in commercial jurisdiction but could not at common law? The victim could perhaps agree to be killed but never did Jack hold that right to kill when all men are created equal. Incidentally I must point out that the “all men created equal” phrase, then “governments instituted among Men” phrase means that “among Men” is a sub set of or a smaller group of “all men” the total group but still all created equal. Then I jump to the 5th self-evident truth “the Right of the People to alter or abolish” includes women because that is what People are: men and women. It does not say “the right of all men” or “the right of all Men (within the form)” it says people and that places women, at the very least, upon an equal footing but is also open to women as a higher status than all men. Have you considered that one before? There is so much more to these truths whose end I have not yet and probably will not or can not find!
    What does all this mean? All law, statutes, rules or regulations require principles they are expressed from. They must connect to a principle but what principle do they connect to? Is it a founding principle? It had better dammed well be here in the United States! Can a rule ever be without a principle? No it is impossible because before you write or decree you must first think using some principle consciously or subconsciously with a good principle in truth or with an evil principle in sin. That applies to everything we do or say. Take a stop sign rule or driving on the correct side of the road rule. Do these rules have connection to an unalienable right to life and property? Yes they do so these rules are with the consent because the rule maker and the rule makee (if you will) are all created equal with a right to life. There are some rules or laws of the United States of America that cannot be reconciled to a connection of founding principles because they require one man higher than another. Those rules are without the consent. Should “what principle” be asked of plaintiff or defendant through the court? What would it mean in open court actors in government who use foreign principles that subvert or war with the “foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form”? In my opinion such admission brings the information of Treason. The founders of our nation were carefully guided by the philosophy of Richard Rumbold to define what Treason ought to be in the United States. Rumbold who on the gallows at 63 years of age in 1685 recited only an abbreviated statement due to circumstances that he was facing but I will include the full quote that so much impressed Wilson, Jefferson and others. This stand of Rumbold’s contributed to his fate by the filth and corruption of Charles II, no by the several morally bankrupt men who followed Charles II and not too distant from the police today:

    “Had it been the intention of Providence, that some men should govern the rest, without their consent, we should have seen as indisputable marks distinguishing these superiors from those placed under them, as those which distinguish men from the brutes. That the Almighty intended, the greatest part of mankind should come into the world with saddles on their backs and bridles in their mouths, and that a few should come ready booted and spurred to ride the rest to death. That I have never beheld subjects born with bunches on their backs, like camels, and kings with combs on their heads, like cocks; from which striking marks it might indeed be collected, that the former were designed to labor and to suffer, and the latter, to strut and to crow.”

    Patrick McGilvery
    Reading, Michigan

    “The Romans figured it out 3,000 years ago!
    Why waste money on schools and universities!
    They just built coliseums because they knew
    a dumbed-down people are easier to rule”
    3 AttachmentsView allDownload all

  • Arthur Israel:

    Why not follow the Commercial Lien law Process and establish dishonour by Serving a “Courtesy Notice” upon these corrupt judiciary – unpublic servants – nazis followed by……………………………………:
    :” Making a Claim”
    ie. Is it not true that you Judge John Doe have knowingly participated in fraud and criminal conduct in the matters of Richard L Fine ?
    Your none reply Judge John Doe will be your tacit eager consent – admission of guilt to the above claim, an admission of guilt made voluntarily without fear favour or prejudice of any kind by us towards yo8u Judge John Doe………………….
    Serve dishonor notices three times ad then have :………………
    Commercial Liens filed and served upon these culprits all in their private capacity!!!
    These Commercial Liens will / should have the effect of freezing all bank accounts and us eventually moving in with container trucks, tow trucks etc seizing all vehicles, boats, caravans etc and the entire contents of their homes and throwing them out on the streets! all to be sold and proceeds into a trust fund after all expenses are deducted and all properly accounted – audited !
    This is what we do down here in New Zealand & Australia as we speak.
    We do not argue, do not get angry just quietly get even and bugger them up.
    “If they will not leave us alone! We will make them leave us alone!
    We will and can make their lives utterly miserable for a long time before we act!!!!
    Aroha tino nui haere ra
    Arthur Israel Skype contact

    • Bill S:

      Arthur, can you provide some resources for people to read about this Commercial Lien Law Process?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Visitors since August 2016

wordpress stat
Back to Top
Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com