Dr Z

Joseph Zernik, PhD

PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750;
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs

10-
10-03-
03-10 Partial response from Sheriff’
Sheriff’s Department on requests for issuance of complaint numbers.

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 03:22:00 -0800

To: "Stephanie Maxberry" <SMaxberry@css.lacounty.gov>, "Michael D. Antonovich"
<fifthdistrict@lacbos.org>
From: joseph zernik <jz12345@earthlink.net>
Subject: Partial response by Sheriff's Department on requests for issuance of complaint numbers

To Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich and Ombudsman Stephanie Maxberry;
By email.

RE: Partial response by the Sheriff's Department on requests for issuance of complaint
numbers

Dear Supervisor Antonovich and Ombudsman Maxberry:

Thank you for your ongoing assistance in re: Refusal of the Sheriff's Department to issue complaint
numbers. I have received by fax last night a very partial report, linked below. A list of nine (9) specific
complaints, copied below, was filed through the office of Ombudsman Maxberry with the Sheriff's
Department. The fax communication received from the office of the Sheriff listed only 4 of the specific
complaints, and if I understood the form correctly, the Sheriff's Department issued one complaint
number for all four unrelated complaints together, as if they were one complaint.

No mention at all was made of the remaining five complaints.

Moreover, two different conflicting numbers were presented in the fax transmission:
Service comment report # 200612
Service comment SC#2262473

Your help is again sought in affecting the issuance of honest, valid and effectual complaint numbers for
the individual nine (9) complaints.

Respectfully,
Dated: March 11, 2010
La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California Joseph H Zernik, PhD

By: ______________
JOSEPH H ZERNIK
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
Phone: 323.515.4583
Fax: 323.488.9697
Email <jz12345@earthlink.net>
Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs

Linked
1) March 10, 2010 Fax communication received from the Sheriff's Department
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-10-sheriff-dept-service-comment-200612-or-SC2262473.pdf

Page 2/2 March 11, 2010

List of nine (9) Complaints and an Addendum, pertaining to operations of the Sheriff's
Department of the County of Los Angeles, filed with the Ombudsman of the County of Los
Angeles, with request or the issuance of Complaint numbers.

1) Complaint #1 - False arrest and booking data for the falsely hospitalized Attorney Richard Fine,
which the Sheriffs Department refused to correct.

2) Complaint #2 - False or Missing Information Regarding Arrest and Booking of Numerous Inmates
Held by the Sheriffs Department

3) Complaint #3: False Hospitalizations With No Probable Medical Cause, Appearing As Cover Up For
False Imprisonments.

4) Complaint #4: Alleged widespread corruption in bail/bond operations

5) Complaint #5 - False arrests and jailing of Joseph Zernik on February 6 and February 19, 2010

6) Complaint #6 - Misprision of Felonies by the Sheriff's Department in re: Armed abduction of Joseph
Zernik by Richard Rodriguez and Javier on February 19, 2010.

7) Complaint #7 - RE: False jailing of Joseph Zernik on February 6 and February 19, 2010 - Disregard
for California Public Records Act, Gov Code Govt Code 6254(f).

8) Complaint #8 - RE: False jailing of Joseph Zernik on February 6 and February 19, 2010 - Alleged
corruption of bail/bond services and large-scale embezzlement of public funds

9) Complaint #9 - RE: False jailing of Joseph Zernik on February 19, 2010 - Robbery of personal
valuables from inmates, and retaliation/harassment/intimidation against victim/witness/informant.

10) Addendum to Complaints #1: #2 #3, #5, #6, #8, #9 - False arrests and jailing and hospitalizations
In conjunction with the complaints listed above, please accept the following addendum.

California Code of Regulations, Crime Prevention and Correction 3273 says:

3273. Acceptance and Surrender of Custody.
Wardens and superintendents must not accept or surrender
custody of any prisoner under any circumstances, except by valid
court order or other due process of law.
It is alleged that the complaints referenced above, #1, #2, #3, #5, #6, #8, #9, all involved conduct of the
Sheriff's Department where inmates were arrested or accepted into jailing with no valid court order or
due process of law; That the Sheriff's Department of Los Angeles County established in recent
decades computer systems which lacked and lack security, validity, and reliability and therefore must
not be deemed as valid court orders or due process of law; That such computer systems were and are
routinely used to affect arrests and jailing with no valid court order or due process of law; That for such
reasons, the Sheriff's Department was and is out of compliance and in violation of the law and/or
regulations.

Therefore, the proposed solution involved publicly accountable validation (certified functional logic
verification) of such computer systems, which were and are employed in determination of Liberty of
persons in Los Angeles County, California.