THE 1st ANNUAL LIST OF RACIST JUDGES AND OTHER PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN CALIFORNIA@ 2014

Los Angeles, California


LAURACK D. BRAY, M.S., M.P.A., J.D.


September 3, 2014
(Today's Date)


June 20, 2014
(Original Date)



@-This symbol before an individual's name on the list means that public "official" includes an employee, and/or that the individual named is not out of California, and is therefore an exception to the "in California" designation.


*Denotes change made in original blog, either adding or deleting information

**UPDATE (denotes NEW information added after original publication of blog)

***This blog is submitted as a contribution to and part of the War on Racial Discrimination (WRD) in California (and the United States)

#-This symbol before the name of an individual on the list means that the individual is one of several individuals that the FBI took action against pursuant to my federal criminal Complaints filed in the U.S. Attorney's Office in 2007. While the U.S. Attorney's Office has refused to prosecute any of the individuals on the List, the FBI, through its own powers, took certain actions, e.g., causing retirements or resignations, against certain individuals named in the 2007 Complaint.

##-This symbol before the name of judge Dickran Tevrizian means that Tevrizian underwent a forced retirement, made to appear as a voluntary retirement. Tevrizian was faced with a Judicial Misconduct Complaint filed against him, and rather than requiring Tevrizian to undergo the misconduct proceedings, 9th Cir. judge Harry Pregerson, through criminal misconduct, allowed Tevrizian to retire rather than face misconduct proceedings.





This is the beginning and first installment of what will be an annual listing of racist judges and other public officials in California. One of the purposes, among others, for the list is transparency and exposure of "action" conduct or action racism by those judges and public officials in California (whom I become aware of) who exercise racial discrimination and/or racism against other persons of another race or color. Usually when judges exercise their racial discrimination or racism, it is done "privately", in terms of public exposure (aided by the mainstream press's refusal to report "action" racism, in contrast to "speech" racism, i.e., racist words or statements, unless the action involves bodily harm, e.g., murder, or sometimes the press reports about written graffiti), although "publicly", as a matter of technical classification, i.e., open to the public. That is, while the discrimination takes place in a public proceeding, e.g., a courtroom or court chambers, or a hearing, regarding written opinions or decisions, because the actions aren't analyzed, designated, and reported by the mass news media, and I believe purposely, the actions are not made public. This blog is intended to change that (at least as to the indviduals on the List). And, at least as to the limited public that the blog may reach.

Again, the major thrust of this list will be "action" racial discrimination or racism and not "speech" racism, e.g., Donald Sterling(racist statements) and Paula Deen(racist words). And, as noted by the titles of the individuals selected for listing, this list will only cover "judges" and other "public" officials, and usually, it will only cover those judges and other public officials who have had formal, and usually federal, civil rights complaints filed against them charging racial discrimination or the violation of statutory or constitutional rights under color of law and based on race or color. But as usually is the case, there may be exceptions to the rule.

"Action" racism or racial discrimination is that discrimination or racism which is performed or implemented by or through acts or action by the discriminating person or persons against another person or persons of another race or color, based on that person's race or color. The acts are usually physical in some way, even if the physicality is limited, e.g., writing and/or issuing an order which results in causing harm to someone. But, sometimes the acts may be oral, such as an oral order to do something which results in causing harm to someone. But, if one views the movement of the mouth as physical, then even the oral act is physical. And, the acts are intended to, and usually do, cause harm of some kind, even if the harm is mental or emotional or results in mere hurt feelings or disappointment. The action racism performed by the individuals on this list, thusfar, are not accompanied by any associated racial words or terms, just the actions which results in harm. It is the action racism which is the worse kind of racism, because it causes the greatest harm. The most obvious type is the physical murder cases, e.g., James Byrd, dragged to death by a racist driving a truck. But, the most prevalent action cases are probably the type perpetrated by the individuals on this list, that is, utilizing written or oral orders or other writings, e.g., lying, to cause harm to another, e.g., deprivation of income,property, and the pursuit of happiness.

In most cases, the racism perpetrated by the individuals on this list will be evidenced by and through single acts. But, a single act is all that is needed, especially when that single act causes devastating results, e.g., the loss and continued deprivation of one's home, one's profession in a major way, including income and the ability to earn income, and one's ability to start and raise a family. Donald Sterling's designation as a racist was based on one act, i.e, racist statements made at one time and captured on audiotape, and that one act has caused Sterling devastating consequences, a fine of $2.5 million dollars, a lifetime ban from the NBA, and eventually, loss of ownership of the team. And, of course, Byrd and Matthew Sheppard, both of whom suffered a loss of life through a single act of racism. However, several of the individuals on this list committed multiple acts of discriminatory and/or criminal misconduct.

Although I had intended to publish this list at sometime in the near future, I was prompted to expedite publishing based on the recent Donald Sterling racism case. After Sterling was exposed on audiotape making racist statements, i.e., that he didn't want to be around Black people, generally, or, more specifically, that he didn't want an acquaintance or friend, V. Stiviano, bringing Black people to Clipper games or taking pictures with Black people, he was sanctioned or punished by the NBA, through the Commissioner. He was fined $2.5 million dollars, banned from the NBA for life, and was subjected to a process towards the goal of removing the L.A. Clippers team from his ownership.

In response to the punishment, Sterling asserted his beliefs that he was being treated differently or unfairly compared to other owners, and that he knew other people, be they owners or others associated with the NBA, who had exercised some form of discrimination against people of other races or of a different sexual orientation. And so Sterling set out to prove his beliefs by hiring investigators to "dig up dirt" on other owners and/or individuals associated with the NBA.

I, as a Black man and Black lawyer in California, support Sterling's efforts at uncovering other racists. I believe as many as possible should be exposed. Thus, this list is my contribution to Sterling's efforts.


I realize that calling or designating someone a "racist" is a very serious matter, and calling or labeling a judge a racist is even more serious; but, discriminating against someone racially, based on that person's race or color is just as serious, especially when devastating harm or damages result from the discrimination. And, if someone, including a judge (who is a public servant, who is put in place to determine whether others discriminate, and who is held to the highest standard of the land regarding ethical and professional conduct), decides to exercise racial discrimination against another, based on that person's race or color, then the judge should be prepared to suffer the consequences of that behavior, including being identified as a racist, which he or she is.

In my view, there are three (3)types of racists generally: (1) Type 1, the superiority racist--this is the most common type. This racist simply believes his race is superior to all other races, and conversely, all other races are inferior to him and should be subservient to him and should be poorer and less respected than him; he may or may not act on his beliefs; the superiority racist may not necessarily believe that he or she is superior to another race, but, he will believe that somehow he is better than or different from another race to the extent that he is repugnant to other races in certain circumstances. For example, although he may integrate or interrelate with other races, he may not want his children dating members of other races, or he may not approve of it; (2) Type 2, the oppressive racist--the oppressive racist is antagonistic towards members of a different race, and, whether he believes he is superior or not (he might not believe that he is superior), he, through whatever means or power he has available to him, takes steps or "action" to assure that members of other races or color remain below him or do not achieve what he or his people (or race) achieves, or obtain what he or his race has obtained, i.e., the "American dream" and beyond, or certain professions, e.g., lawyers, doctors, etc., or monetary levels of professions,i.e, persons of a *certain race can make this amount of money in an occupation or profession, but when they attempt to make a significantly higher amount, the oppressive racist takes steps or action to prevent it. For example, white plantation-owners to slaves (here, I am not including the brutality of slavery, simply the oppression in making sure that slaves remain slaves, rather than allowing slaves to become plantation-owners--many white plantation owners treated their slaves decently, and not brutal, but they would make sure, and take steps to assure, a slave remained a slave); some examples of the "action" taken by oppressive racists are lying, ignoring or disregarding rules, policies, or the law, falsifying legal documents, issuing illegal orders, issuing legal but false orders, and issuing legal but wrong orders (based on a biased interpretation of the law), all for the purpose of denying persons of another race or color from achieving success that might rise to the racist's level of success, or to a level that the racist believes the person (of another race) should not reach; and (3) the hateful racist--the hateful racist not only believes that he is superior to other races, but he hates or despises other races, and if the opportunity arises, he would cause physical harm or destruction to persons or property of other races simply because of his dislike for their race or sexual orientation, e.g., Byrd and Shepard, as the victims of hateful racists.

Every individual on this List is at least a Type 1 or Type 2 racist. Most of the individuals on the List are Type 2 racists. Some may be a combination of Type 1 and 2, and a few may be Type 3, but, I have no evidence of that at this point. But, whatever the classification, every individual on this List is a racist. See below.


Anyone who exercises invidious racial discrimination against another, based on that person's race or color, is, to some degree (however minute), a racist. But, this list is not based on this proposition alone. The individuals on the list are racists for the following other reasons as well:

1. The definition of "racism" and "racist". While there are various definitions provided for both racism and racist, I am relying on the following definitions for identifying the racists on this list: "Racism"--poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race, Merriam-Webster.com, Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 21 June 2014, and "racial prejudice or discrimination", Id., and "Discrimination or prejudice based on race", The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright 2000 by Houghton Miffiln Company, Updated in 2009; "Racist"--a person who believes in racism, Dictionary.com Unabridged, Based on the Random House Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2014, and "discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion", Thesaurus, Free Online Dictionary. According to these definitions, the individuals on this List are racists.

2. The United Nations' definition of racial discrimination: "The term 'racial discrimination' shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life." All of the individuals on this List exercised racial discrimination according to and based on the U.N.'s definition of racial discrimination.

3. The Federal Criminal Complaints--all the individuals on this List were charged, through federal criminal complaints, with racial discrimination pursuant to a federal statute which criminalizes racial discrimination, or were charged with another crime evolving from racial discrimination. All the Complaints are still pending. And, until the Defendants are brought within the confines of the criminal justice process and system, e.g., an arrest, and are cloaked with a "presumption of innocent until proven guilty", they remain "criminals", because they violated federal criminal law, and they remain "racists", because they have exercised racism and/or racial discrimination against a person of another race or color.

4. The (Donald Sterling) Principle and Presumption of Racism**** : "Where there's smoke, there's fire". The "smoke" is the production of some evidence demonstrating racial discrimination by one person or persons against another person of a different race or color. Using the Donald Sterling case as an example, the smoke would be the settled racial discrimination lawsuits and/or the lawsuit brought by Elgin Baylor alleging racial discrimination (I ignore the outcome of Baylor's case, because his case was mishandled--his race discrimination claim should never have been withdrawn). In law, this would represent circumstantial evidence of racial discrimination by Donald Sterling. The "fire" would be the audiotape conversations, statements, and evidence that Donald Sterling generally does not want to be around Black people, and more specifically, that Sterling does not want Black people to attend Clippers' games (at least not with his friend, Stiviano), nor to appear in pictures with Stiviano. In law, this would be direct evidence of racial prejudice and/or racial discrimination.

The (Sterling) Principle of Racism holds as follows : whenever there has been sufficient or some evidence (i.e., circumstantial evidence) produced that an individual has racially discriminated against another person, based on the person's race or color, it is very likely that greater or conclusive evidence of racial discrimination or racism will follow. "Where there's smoke, there's usually fire".

The (Sterling) Presumption of racism holds that : whenever there is sufficient or some evidence produced demonstrating the exercise of racial discrimination or racism by a person of one race against a person of another race or color, it will be presumed that greater or conclusive evidence of racial discrimination by the same person will follow or be produced. "Where there's smoke, there's fire".

(Donald Sterling) Principle #2 states : Whenever a white person is charged with exercising racial discrimination or racism against a black person, and the black person has produced sufficient or some evidence of racial discrimination or racism by the white person, and the white person is thereafter identified as a "racist" because of the discriminatory conduct, the fact that the charged white person has demonstrated some benefit or advantage to black people or the black community, e.g., the homeless or criminal defendants, does not mean that the white person is not a racist.

****NOTE : I created the (Donald Sterling) Principle and Presumption of Racism specifically for this List and blog. But, it is highly likely that I will rely on the principle and presumption regarding some future matters as well. Moreover, I believe the Principle and Presumption should be used in law for all criminal racial discrimination cases. It would serve to solidify circumstantial evidence cases.

All of the discriminatory actions by the individuals on this List are directed at black males. In most of the cases, but not all, I am the Black male, either as a plaintiff, or as a lawyer, or as both combined.

The titles or professions provided for the individuals are the titles that they maintained at the time the Federal Complaints against them were filed. Therefore, even if some of the individuals have retired or resigned or have obtained other positions or titles, they will be listed here according to the title that they maintained at the time of the filing of the Complaint. Primarily, they are assigned that title because that's the position (or title) they were in when they committed the racial discrimination or other criminal acts (and some on the list committed other acts besides the racial discrimination, e.g., lying and obstruction of justice) that they are charged with.

Each name on the List will be followed by the person's title and, in parenthesis, a brief description of the basic racially-motivated conduct giving rise to the individual being placed on the list (for more descriptive information, see my "ICR" blog, and for even more descriptive information, contact the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles for the criminal complaints filed against the individuals).*****


With the above in mind, the First Annual List of Racist Judges or Other Public Officials in California (and the United States) is as follows:

1. # Steven Hintz, Judge, Superior Court of California, Ventura County (intentionally caused the eviction of a Black man from his home-law office, causing the loss of the same).

2. # Barry Klopfer, Judge, Superior Court of California, Ventura County (conspired to deny a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and lied to do so).

3. David Long, Judge, Superior Court of California, Ventura County (conspired to deny a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and lied to do so).

4. Ken Riley, Judge, Superior Court of California, Ventura County (conspired to deny a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and lied to do so).

5. ## Dickran Tevrizian, Judge, United States District Court for the Central District of California (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and conspired to do so). Tevrizian committed multiple acts of misconduct directed at a Black man.

6. William Schwarzer, Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (denied social security relief to the white client of a Black lawyer because the lawyer was black; and otherwise denied the constitutional rights of both client and Black lawyer under color of law).

7. Harry Pregerson, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied the constitutional rights of clients of a Black lawyer because the clients' lawyer was black)), and other violations based on the race or color of the Black lawyer. Pregerson was involved in two separate matters on two separate panels denying rights or involving violations of criminal law with judge Margaret McKeown.

8. Richard Tallman, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (intentionally denied a Black man a preliminary injunction, because of the race or color of the Black man).

9. N.Randy Smith, Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a default judgment to the white client of a Black lawyer because the lawyer was black). Smith was involved in at least two cases involving the Black lawyer where federal criminal violations were committed.

10. M. Margaret McKeown, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a default judgment to the white client of a Black lawyer because the lawyer was black). McKeown was involved in two separate matters on two separate appellate panels denying rights or involving violations of criminal law with judge Harry Pregerson.

11. Ronald Gould, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a white Social Security disability appellant relief on appeal because the appellant's lawyer was Black, and because the Black lawyer refused to accept a white lawyer, offered by the court, as counsel in the case).

12. Richard Paez, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in a case where two petitioners, one white and one black, relied on the same premise for relief, and sought the same relief from the Court, Paez granted relief to the white petitioner, but denied relief to the black petitioner, for no legitimate reason; and no reason was given).

13. Michael Pastor, Judge, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County (suspended the medical license of a black male doctor without due process of law and under color of law, and conspired to do so).

14. Robert J. Perry, Judge, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles (denied a deceased black man and the deceased black man's family due process of law, and under color of law, based on the deceased black man's race or color and the race or color of the living white man who murdered the black man (but was convicted of manslaughter).

15. Christina A. Snyder, Judge, United States District Court for the Central District of California (denied a black man his constitutional rights under color of law, in two separate cases). Snyder was assigned to two separate cases for the specific purpose of denying a Black male his constitutional rights.

16. Jay S. Bybee, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and conspired to do so, and by lying).

17. ******Richard Clifton, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a Black man his constituional rights under color of law, and conspired to do so, and lied to do so), plus other acts in prior actions.

******I brought a prior criminal complaint against Clifton, but I withdrew it, based on a matter unrelated to the merits of the criminal complaint itself. But, based on Clifton's recent actions which have required me to file another and separate criminal complaint against him, the prior complaint is now re-instated.

18. William A. Fletcher, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and conspired to do so, and lied to do so).

19. @William K. Suter, Clerk, U.S. Supreme Court (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and conspired to do so).

20. @Jeffrey Atkins, Deputy Clerk, U.S. Supreme Court (acted to deny a Black male petitioner his constitutional rights under color of law, and conspired to do so).

21. @Jacob Travers, Deputy Clerk, U.S. Supreme Court (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and conspired to do so).

22. Cormac J. Carney, Judge, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, in part by refusing to rule on a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and in part by issuing two illegal orders).

23. # Cathy Catterson, Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and committed fraud in doing so).

24. Molly C. Dwyer,(current) Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a Black man his constitutional rights under color of law, and attempted to do so on another occasion; and committed fraud).

25. Mary Schroeder, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (denied a white female disability discrimination appellant due process in her appellate proceedings, and a white male social security benefit applicant due process in his appellate proceedings because their lawyer on appeal was a Black male). Supported and participated in other discriminatory and fraudulent acts directed at discriminating against the Black male lawyer but affecting his clients.

NOTE : Schroeder is also named in another blog of mine, published concurrently with this blog, associated with major league baseball player Barry Bonds regarding Bonds appeal of his obstruction of justice conviction. Schroeder wrote the opinion in the Bonds' appellate decision, but Schroeder herself had also been charged with obstruction of justice by me in a federal criminal Complaint, but the Justice Department refused to prosecute the Complaint. See the blog at laurackdbray.blogspot.com.




*****In all cases where it is alleged that the named individual denied a black man constitutional rights under color of law, it also means that the individual denied the black man his constitutional rights "based on the black man's race or color".





HOW TO GET OFF OF THE LIST


There are ways for individuals to get off of the racist List. Here are some of the ways:

1. Be found not guilty of racial discrimination (or other federal crimes charged in the federal criminal complaints that I filed with the U.S. Attorney's Office in L.A.) by a federal jury after submitting to prosecution by the U.S. Justice Department.

2. Plead guilty to a charge of racial discrimination or other charges in the respective federal criminal Complaint filed against the respective individual and PAY RESTITUTION (except for judge Pastor, see below) to the Black male victim (or other, e.g., see Judge Perry below), and others, where applicable, after submitting to prosectution by the Justice Department.

3. Without pleading guilty to racial discrimination or other charges identified in respective federal criminal Complaints, PAY RESTITUTION to the Black male victim, and others, where applicable, pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA), after submitting to prosecution by the Justice Department.

4. Without pleading guilty to racial discrimination or other charges identified in the respective federal criminal Complaints, PAY RESTITUTION to the Black male victim, and others, where applicable, pursuant to a non-prosecution agreement (NPA), after submitting to prosecution by the Justice Department.

5. Without pleading guilty to racial discrimination or other charges identified in the respective federal criminal Complaint, and WITHOUT submitting to prosecution by the Justice Department, PAY RESTITUTION DIRECTLY TO ME for the criminal acts identified in the federal Complaints, whereby the individual's name will be removed from this List and the respective criminal Complaint will be withdrawn.

6. For judge Pastor, he merely would need to make a public apology for his racial discrimination against Conrad Murray or any other Black males whom he has discriminated against in the past.

7. For judge Perry, he would need to pay reasonable RESTITUTION to the father of Oscar Grant, the deceased young man, in my opinion, murdered by BART officer Johannes Mehserle. The restitution paid would not be for Oscar's death, but for Perry's actions only.




Unless and until an individual's name is removed from the List based on one of the above or other reasons, his or her name will remain on the List for each annual publication. The new annual listing will be published in January of each year.


**UPDATE--August 4, 2014

DISTRICT JUDGE CORMAC J. CARNEY IS STILL A RACIST AND HIS RECENT DEATH PENALTY DECISION DOES NOT CHANGE THAT. NOT ONE BIT.

Recently, judge Carney has ruled that the death penalty is unconstitutional, as violative of the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. How convenient! That ruling follows this blog's publication identifying the list of racists, which includes Carney. Carney's death penalty ruling is nothing more than an attempt to clean up his image after this blog's publication. Why didn't he make the ruling before the blog? I don't know for sure at this time, but it is most probable that the inmate the ruling was made for is Black. So, for an explicit reason why Carney's ruling does not change anything regarding his racism, see the Sterling Principle #2 above, which states "Whenever a white person is charged with exercising racial discrimination or racism against a black person, and the black person has produced sufficient or some evidence of racial discrimination or racism by the white person, and the white person is thereafter identified as a "racist" because of the discriminatory conduct, the fact that the charged white person has demonstrated some benefit or advantage to black people or the black community, e.g., the homeless or criminal defendants, does not mean that the white person is not a racist." Here, Carney has helped a presumed Black criminal death penalty defendant. So, it does not mean that Carney is not a racist. And, in fact, he is.