The Corruption at the Los Angeles Superior Court as Lawyers Paz, Mercado, Conway, Maccarley, Counts, Shomer, Felton, Overton, Berke, Rykoff, And Judge Hickok Apparently Lie in Court!

7/31/2019 The Corruption at the Los Angeles Superior Court as Lawyers Paz, Mercado, Conway, Maccarley, Counts, Shomer, Felton, Overton, Berke, Rykoff, And Judge Hickok Apparently Lie in Court!

1/48


2/48

Case Number GC 031549Case Number GC 031549

Case Name: Castaneda vs. CastanedaCase Name: Castaneda vs. CastanedaPasadena, CA May 10, 2005Pasadena, CA May 10, 2005

Dep. NE P Hon. Jan A. Pluim, JudgeDep. NE P Hon. Jan A. Pluim, Judge Appearances: (As heretofore noted.) Appearances: (As heretofore noted.)Reporter: Andrea J. BillueReporter: Andrea J. Billue

Time: 2:45 P.M.Time: 2:45 P.M.


3/48

Case No. GC 031549Case No. GC 031549

The court: Lets go back on the record.The court: Lets go back on the record.Call the witness, please.Call the witness, please.

Mr. Nacionales: Yes. Ms. Mercado.Mr. Nacionales: Yes. Ms. Mercado.

The Court:The Court: Ms. Mercado, approach theMs. Mercado, approach thewitness stand.witness stand.Sonia Mercado.Sonia Mercado.Called as witness by the Plaintiff, was sworn andCalled as witness by the Plaintiff, was sworn andtestified as follows:testified as follows:The Clerk: You do solemnly swear that theThe Clerk: You do solemnly swear that thetestimony you are about to give in the abovetestimony you are about to give in the above


4/48

Case No. GC 031549Case No. GC 031549Entitled action shall be the TRUTH, the wholeEntitled action shall be the TRUTH, the wholeTRUTH, and nothing but the TRUTH so help youTRUTH, and nothing but the TRUTH so help youGOD.GOD.Mrs. Mercado: I DO.Mrs. Mercado: I DO.The clerk: Please state you name and spell it.The clerk: Please state you name and spell it.Sonia Mercado: sonia mercado M-E-R-C-A-D-O.Sonia Mercado: sonia mercado M-E-R-C-A-D-O.DIRECT EXAMINATION.DIRECT EXAMINATION.

MS. MERCADO, what is your current occupation?MS. MERCADO, what is your current occupation? A. I am an attorney A. I am an attorneyQ. Where do you currently work?Q. Where do you currently work?


5/48

GC 031549GC 031549 A. I have an office downtown and one in Culver A. I have an office downtown and one in CulverCity.City.Q. Ms. Mercado, where did you attend LawQ. Ms. Mercado, where did you attend LawSchool?School?

A. I went to UCLA. A. I went to UCLA.Q. Where did you attend undergraduate School?Q. Where did you attend undergraduate School?

A. I attended school back East. A. I attended school back East.

Mr. Xavier: I stipulateMr. Xavier: I stipulateJudge Pluim: Where did you do undergraduateJudge Pluim: Where did you do undergraduate

work?work?Ms. Mercado: Atlanta Union College in Mass. AndMs. Mercado: Atlanta Union College in Mass. And


6/48

GC 039549GC 039549 A year and a half in France. A year and a half in France.Q. Do you have a specialty, Ms. Mercado?Q. Do you have a specialty, Ms. Mercado?

A. Yes I do. A. Yes I do.

Q. What is that specialty?Q. What is that specialty? A. My specialty is constitutional Law. I do civil A. My specialty is constitutional Law. I do civilrights in contents of jail, mental health andrights in contents of jail, mental health andmedical care.medical care.

Q. have you ever lectured anywhere or writtenQ. have you ever lectured anywhere or writtenany publications?any publications?

A. Yes, I have lectured in this very specific area A. Yes, I have lectured in this very specific areaTo law students, to judges who came from So.To law students, to judges who came from So.


7/48


8/48

GC 031549GC 031549The witness: Jose Castaneda. I knew Jose becauseThe witness: Jose Castaneda. I knew Jose becausehe accompanied his mother when he firsthe accompanied his mother when he first

retained me.retained me.Q. What did he retain you for?Q. What did he retain you for?

A. He retained me to represent her in the death of A. He retained me to represent her in the death of her son Luis who died in custody, committedher son Luis who died in custody, committed

suicide in custody. So it was a civil rights case.suicide in custody. So it was a civil rights case.Q. Who did you represent?Q. Who did you represent?

A. I represented Mrs. Castaneda, Luis Castaneda A. I represented Mrs. Castaneda, Luis Castanedawas my client.was my client.


9/48

GC 031549GC 031549Q. And basically what were the circumstancesQ. And basically what were the circumstancesunder which you were retained by Mrs.under which you were retained by Mrs.Castaneda?Castaneda?

A. There had been an underlying action in which A. There had been an underlying action in whicha prior attorney in Orange County, I think Mr.a prior attorney in Orange County, I think Mr.OReilly had represented Mrs. Castaneda.OReilly had represented Mrs. Castaneda.Q. And so you are familiar with the under lyingQ. And so you are familiar with the under lyingcase?case?

A. I am very familiar with it. It was part of it. A. I am very familiar with it. It was part of it.I had to become familiar with it. That is case II had to become familiar with it. That is case Ihandled for her.handled for her.


10/48


11/48

GC 013549GC 013549Health care that was indicated for him for whichHealth care that was indicated for him for whichhe had paid a large annuity.he had paid a large annuity.Judge Pluim: You mean the County of LosJudge Pluim: You mean the County of Los

Angeles paid annuity? Angeles paid annuity?Mr. Nacionales: Annuity was paid in a lawsuit.Mr. Nacionales: Annuity was paid in a lawsuit.Mrs. Mercado: that was---Mrs. Mercado: that was---Judge Pluim: You were employed by Mrs.Judge Pluim: You were employed by Mrs.Castaneda to bring wrongful death case againstCastaneda to bring wrongful death case againstthe county?the county?Mrs. Mercado: Correct.Mrs. Mercado: Correct.Judge Pluim: One of their affirmative defensesJudge Pluim: One of their affirmative defenses


12/48

GC 031549GC 031549Was that, this meaning the county, was thatWas that, this meaning the county, was thatapparently the decedent had not been given theapparently the decedent had not been given themental health help that he should have gotten;mental health help that he should have gotten;is that right?is that right?

Mrs. Mercado: it was an issue of causation theMrs. Mercado: it was an issue of causation theissue was causation, whether his mental healthissue was causation, whether his mental healthcare condition deteriorated in custody orcare condition deteriorated in custody orwhether he already had a deterioration of whether he already had a deterioration of mental health care he had not been receivingmental health care he had not been receivingmental that was supposed to be paid throughmental that was supposed to be paid throughannuity.annuity.By Mr. Nacionales:By Mr. Nacionales:


13/48

GC 039549GC 039549Q. Who was in charge of getting mental healthQ. Who was in charge of getting mental healthcare?care?Mrs. Mercado Jose told me he was the personMrs. Mercado Jose told me he was the personthat was in charge of that particular money fromthat was in charge of that particular money fromthat lawsuit for Luis care.that lawsuit for Luis care.Q. So you found out that Jose was not gettingQ. So you found out that Jose was not gettinghim Health care.him Health care.Mrs. Mercado: I had asked Jose for verificationMrs. Mercado: I had asked Jose for verificationthat he was actually getting Psychologist,that he was actually getting Psychologist,Psychiatrist, people like Luis, the money goes toPsychiatrist, people like Luis, the money goes topay for what is called day care programs.pay for what is called day care programs.They go to places where they take care of themThey go to places where they take care of them


14/48

GC 031549GC 031549 All day. So that was the weakness in my case. All day. So that was the weakness in my case.

Q. Did Jose ever accompany your client to yourQ. Did Jose ever accompany your client to yourmeetings?meetings?

Mrs. Mercado: Initially he did.Mrs. Mercado: Initially he did.Q. And he stopped coming?Q. And he stopped coming?Mrs. Mercado: I requested that he stop coming.Mrs. Mercado: I requested that he stop coming.Q. Why did you requested that he stop coming?Q. Why did you requested that he stop coming?

Mrs. Mercado: because Jose wanted to be veryMrs. Mercado: because Jose wanted to be verymuch in charge of that case that I was handling.much in charge of that case that I was handling.Judge Pluim: Who did?Judge Pluim: Who did?


15/48

GC 031549GC 031549

Mrs. Mercado: Jose was accompanying hisMrs. Mercado: Jose was accompanying hismother. I asked her not to accompanying memother. I asked her not to accompanying meanymore. Because he was very controlling in theanymore. Because he was very controlling in the

case I was handling. It was becoming ancase I was handling. It was becoming animpediment. The weakness that the case had,impediment. The weakness that the case had,that he had not used funds to take care of thisthat he had not used funds to take care of thisbrother. That was one issue. The other issuebrother. That was one issue. The other issuewas that I needed to represent my client andwas that I needed to represent my client andher best interests and Jose wanted to be inher best interests and Jose wanted to be incontrol of that money as well.control of that money as well.


16/48

GC 031549GC 031549Mr. Nacionales: How did you know that JoseMr. Nacionales: How did you know that Josewanted to be in control of that money?wanted to be in control of that money?Mrs. Mercado: Because he was asking to be partMrs. Mercado: Because he was asking to be partof everything in her case and we were comingof everything in her case and we were comingclose to a settlement, and he wanted to be inclose to a settlement, and he wanted to be incharge of that settlement. I suggested to mycharge of that settlement. I suggested to myclient that it was her money and that she be inclient that it was her money and that she be incontrol of it.control of it.

Q. Mrs. Mercado, what was the attorney feeQ. Mrs. Mercado, what was the attorney feearrangement between you and F. Castaneda?arrangement between you and F. Castaneda?Mrs. Mercado: I worked strictly on a contingencyMrs. Mercado: I worked strictly on a contingencyfee basis. When I win a case the court mayfee basis. When I win a case the court may


17/48

GC 031549GC 031549 Award me attorney fees and costs. So my Award me attorney fees and costs. So mycontingency is strictly based upon my success incontingency is strictly based upon my success inthat case. So I usually take on a contingency. If that case. So I usually take on a contingency. If I win, I get paid. If I dont win, I dont get paid.I win, I get paid. If I dont win, I dont get paid.

Q. I would like to direct the witness to exhibitQ. I would like to direct the witness to exhibit192.192.Judge Pluim: Do you have the exhibit book inJudge Pluim: Do you have the exhibit book infront of her?front of her?

Mr. Nacionales: I am going to bring her theMr. Nacionales: I am going to bring her theExhibit right now.Exhibit right now.Mr. Nacionales: This is a check purportedly to beMr. Nacionales: This is a check purportedly to bemade out by Sonya Mercado to Jose Castaneda,made out by Sonya Mercado to Jose Castaneda,


18/48

GC 031549GC 031549Date of check is September 20, 1996Date of check is September 20, 1996(SEE LINK ABOVE URL for checks)(SEE LINK ABOVE URL for checks)Nacionales: Do you recognize that check? It is aNacionales: Do you recognize that check? It is acheck for $2000.00.check for $2000.00.Mercado: it has my name on it and Iguess theMercado: it has my name on it and Iguess thebottom part is a signature section?bottom part is a signature section?Nacionales: Did you remember cashing thatNacionales: Did you remember cashing thatcheck?check?Mercado: I dont remember this check. It isMercado: I dont remember this check. It isdated 96.dated 96.Nacionales: I would like to direct you toNacionales: I would like to direct you to


19/48

GC 031549GC 031549

Exhibit 193, a check.Exhibit 193, a check.Judge Pluim: Can you look at the back of Judge Pluim: Can you look at the back of this exhibit 192. Is that your signature?this exhibit 192. Is that your signature?Mercado: it is similar to my signature,Mercado: it is similar to my signature,your honor. There are some numbersyour honor. There are some numbersthere. I always cross my sevens. I dothere. I always cross my sevens. I doEuropean sevens.European sevens.(SEE LINK ABOVE URL for samples)(SEE LINK ABOVE URL for samples)


20/48

GC 031549GC 031549

Judge Pluim: What is the point of this testimonyJudge Pluim: What is the point of this testimonythen? Are you suggesting she did not sign this?then? Are you suggesting she did not sign this?Is that what I am supposed to infer from all of Is that what I am supposed to infer from all of

this, counsel?this, counsel?Mr. Nacionales: Not only she did not sign this.Mr. Nacionales: Not only she did not sign this.She is claiming these checks were paymentShe is claiming these checks were paymentmade to her from annuity. What we are gettingmade to her from annuity. What we are gettingat is that he did not actually made this paymentat is that he did not actually made this paymentfrom annuity to her. That is what we are gettingfrom annuity to her. That is what we are gettingat. (SEE LINK ABOVE URL check pd M. Martinez)at. (SEE LINK ABOVE URL check pd M. Martinez)


21/48

GC 013549GC 013549Judge Pluim: She said she didnt remember thisJudge Pluim: She said she didnt remember thischeck. Is that your account number on thecheck. Is that your account number on thebottom of this?bottom of this?Mr. Xavier: Your honor, the witness is speakingMr. Xavier: Your honor, the witness is speakingto counsel right now. That is not appropriate.to counsel right now. That is not appropriate.Judge Pluim: Lets look at this check. This is theJudge Pluim: Lets look at this check. This is theway the trial has been going. I cant tie anythingway the trial has been going. I cant tie anythingup.up.

Can you look at this 192? Is that ----you say thatCan you look at this 192? Is that ----you say thatdoes not appear to be your signature. It isdoes not appear to be your signature. It issimilar to your signature. Is that correct?similar to your signature. Is that correct?Mercado: it is my name, your honor. that is notMercado: it is my name, your honor. that is not


22/48

GC 031549GC 031549my exact number.my exact number.Judge Pluim: That is not you signature? Is thatJudge Pluim: That is not you signature? Is thatwhat you are saying?what you are saying?Mercado: I don t know.Mercado: I don t know.Judge Pluim: How about underneath that , is theJudge Pluim: How about underneath that , is theaccount number?account number?Mercado: The account number.Mercado: The account number.Judge Pluim: Is that your account number?Judge Pluim: Is that your account number?Mercado: I have no idea.Mercado: I have no idea.Judge Pluim: do you normally put accountJudge Pluim: do you normally put accountnumber on a check?number on a check?


23/48


24/48

GC 031549GC 031549Mr. Xavier: Home Savings?Mr. Xavier: Home Savings?Do you have a bank account with Home SavingsDo you have a bank account with Home Savingsand Loan?and Loan?Mercado: I dont have one. I dont know if at theMercado: I dont have one. I dont know if at thepresent time I did, your honor.present time I did, your honor.Judge Pluim: All right.Judge Pluim: All right.By Mr. Nacionales:By Mr. Nacionales:Q. Ms. Mercado, how do you usually have feeQ. Ms. Mercado, how do you usually have feeagreements---are they contingency of hourly?agreements---are they contingency of hourly?Mercado: I give clients the option. They canMercado: I give clients the option. They caneither pay me contingency or hourly. However,either pay me contingency or hourly. However,


25/48

GC 031549GC 031549as to retainer, I never take retainer. I haveas to retainer, I never take retainer. I havetaken one retainer I personally recall that wastaken one retainer I personally recall that wasfor a sheriff that wanted me to represent hisfor a sheriff that wanted me to represent hisson-in-law. I dont know if the checks made toson-in-law. I dont know if the checks made to

me but my custom and practice would be not tome but my custom and practice would be not totake a retainer. If there was any money given totake a retainer. If there was any money given tome, the money would have been reimbursed tome, the money would have been reimbursed toclient because it would only go to the cost of theclient because it would only go to the cost of thecase.case.Judge Pluim: There is another check here, thereJudge Pluim: There is another check here, thereis exhibit 191---192, and there is exhibit 193.is exhibit 191---192, and there is exhibit 193.Mercado: He showed me both.Mercado: He showed me both.


26/48

GC 031549GC 031549Judge Pluim: Neither of these two contain yourJudge Pluim: Neither of these two contain yoursignature?signature?Mercado: Your honor, what I am saying, theMercado: Your honor, what I am saying, thesignature is similar to mine. Not quite mysignature is similar to mine. Not quite mysignature. I dont remember, and I dont know if signature. I dont remember, and I dont know if that is the signature at the time, and I dontthat is the signature at the time, and I dontrecognize that account number. I dont know itrecognize that account number. I dont know itthat was my account or not.that was my account or not.

Judge Pluim: Do you get costs?Judge Pluim: Do you get costs?Mercado: The costs come out of case when IMercado: The costs come out of case when Isettle case.settle case.Judge Pluim: You dont normally get cost $2K 4K Judge Pluim: You dont normally get cost $2K 4K


27/48

GC 031549GC 031549Mercado: No, your honor.Mercado: No, your honor.Judge Pluim: it this money was paid to myJudge Pluim: it this money was paid to myoffice, it would have been anominaly. I neveroffice, it would have been anominaly. I neverasked clients to give me retainer for costs. Whenasked clients to give me retainer for costs. WhenI was doing business years ago, I may haveI was doing business years ago, I may havetaken a retainer. If this money was paid to mytaken a retainer. If this money was paid to myoffice, there would be a record in a bank. I dontoffice, there would be a record in a bank. I dontrecall if the retainer was paid to my office. Itrecall if the retainer was paid to my office. Itwould have gone exclusively to trust accountwould have gone exclusively to trust accountand exclusively for costs, and it would have beenand exclusively for costs, and it would have beenreturned to clients when case was settled.returned to clients when case was settled.Judge Pluim: Did counsel talk to you about theJudge Pluim: Did counsel talk to you about the


28/48

GC 031549GC 031549the two checks beforehand.the two checks beforehand.Mercado: Only opposing counsel, Mr. JoseMercado: Only opposing counsel, Mr. JoseCastanedas counsel called me last night.Castanedas counsel called me last night.Judge Pluim: Did counsel standing next to youJudge Pluim: Did counsel standing next to youtalk to you about the two checks.talk to you about the two checks.Mercado: he asked me to come here today. HeMercado: he asked me to come here today. Hesaid there were two checks he had never shownsaid there were two checks he had never shownthem.them.

Judge Pluim: would the records of your officeJudge Pluim: would the records of your officeshow you had ever received the two checks orshow you had ever received the two checks ornot?not?


29/48


30/48

GC 031549GC 031549Suggesting that Jose signed her name andSuggesting that Jose signed her name anddeposited in somebodys account at Homedeposited in somebodys account at HomeSavings. I just dont know what to make of allSavings. I just dont know what to make of allthis, counsel. Is Mrs. Mercado lying? (BINGO!)this, counsel. Is Mrs. Mercado lying? (BINGO!)

Nacionales: I only know from what the witnessNacionales: I only know from what the witnesstold me, that she does not remember receivingtold me, that she does not remember receivingthe check. She only received a retainer onthe check. She only received a retainer onoccasion. That is only thing I know. I cantoccasion. That is only thing I know. I cantprovide proof that Mr. Castaneda deposited inprovide proof that Mr. Castaneda deposited inhis account. We cant get records that far back.his account. We cant get records that far back.It is eight years. The records get destroyed.It is eight years. The records get destroyed.Mr. Xavier: Counsel is testifying at this pointMr. Xavier: Counsel is testifying at this point


31/48

GC 031549GC 031549In time.In time.Judge Pluim: Lets finish up this testimony. isJudge Pluim: Lets finish up this testimony. isthat all?that all?Judge Pluim: yes. That is all, your honor.Judge Pluim: yes. That is all, your honor.CROSS EXAMINATION (DAVID XAVIER)CROSS EXAMINATION (DAVID XAVIER)Xavier: Ms. Mercado, do you have your file onXavier: Ms. Mercado, do you have your file onthis case?this case?Mercado: No, I do not/Mercado: No, I do not/Xavier: Is it destroyed?Xavier: Is it destroyed?Mercado: After five years, the files wereMercado: After five years, the files weredestroyed. So I dont know if it is destroyeddestroyed. So I dont know if it is destroyed


32/48

GC 031549GC 031549or not.or not.Xavier: You didnt bring it with you today?Xavier: You didnt bring it with you today?Mercado: nobody asked me to bring anything.Mercado: nobody asked me to bring anything.

Xavier: I asked yes or no?Xavier: I asked yes or no?Mercado: I spoke with you last night. You didMercado: I spoke with you last night. You didnot ask me to bring it.not ask me to bring it.Xavier: I am asking if you brought it today?Xavier: I am asking if you brought it today?

Mercado: No Sir, I did not.Mercado: No Sir, I did not.Xavier: let me show you a letter dated March 3Xavier: let me show you a letter dated March 3 rdrd ,,1998.1998.


33/48

GC 031549GC 031549Do you recognize this letter dated March 3Do you recognize this letter dated March 3 rdrd 1998?1998?Mercado: Yes, that is my address and letterhead.Mercado: Yes, that is my address and letterhead.Xavier: Is that your signature?Xavier: Is that your signature?Mercado: It must be. That is Santa Ana Address.Mercado: It must be. That is Santa Ana Address.It must be Mr. OReilly.It must be Mr. OReilly.Xavier: That is the prior attorney who referredXavier: That is the prior attorney who referredthis case or had it prior to your retention on thisthis case or had it prior to your retention on thiscase?case?Mercado: I am sorry?Mercado: I am sorry?


34/48

GC 031549GC 031549Xavier: That is attorney who either referred thisXavier: That is attorney who either referred thiscase to you or you took this case over from; iscase to you or you took this case over from; isthat correct?that correct?Mercado: My understanding was from Mr. JoseMercado: My understanding was from Mr. JoseCastaneda, was his moms prior counsel, that isCastaneda, was his moms prior counsel, that iscorrect.correct.Xavier: Did you ever have a bank account atXavier: Did you ever have a bank account atHome Savings?Home Savings?

Mercado: May have.Mercado: May have.Xavier: In 1996, did you have a bank account inXavier: In 1996, did you have a bank account inHome Savings?Home Savings?


35/48

GC 031549GC 031549

Mercado: I may have.Mercado: I may have.Xavier: Did you bank at Home SavingsXavier: Did you bank at Home Savingsright there and your office is downtown?right there and your office is downtown?There is a facility, Home Savings there?There is a facility, Home Savings there?Mercado: where?Mercado: where?Xavier: On Figueroa.Xavier: On Figueroa.

Mercado: Yes, I did bank on Figueroa.Mercado: Yes, I did bank on Figueroa.Xavier: 660 South Figueroa Street, L.A.Xavier: 660 South Figueroa Street, L.A.Home Savings?Home Savings?


36/48

The end misrepresentation of factsThe end misrepresentation of facts

Mercado: I dont know what the addressMercado: I dont know what the addressis. I did bank on Figueroa.is. I did bank on Figueroa.Mr. Xavier: Thank you.Mr. Xavier: Thank you.I have no further questions.I have no further questions.May the witness be excused, your honor?May the witness be excused, your honor?

The court: Thank you.The court: Thank you.(End of requested transcript)(End of requested transcript)


37/48


38/48


39/48

Are lawyers above the law? Are lawyers above the law?

7)Felicitas Castaneda was homeless7)Felicitas Castaneda was homelessbecause of me. This is another lie!because of me. This is another lie!8) According to Att. Mercado APS, or Adult8) According to Att. Mercado APS, or AdultProtective Services was investigating meProtective Services was investigating mefor an Elder Abuse Claim, and Mercadofor an Elder Abuse Claim, and Mercado

volunteer testimony to Mr. Sergio Seche volunteer testimony to Mr. Sergio Seche(I was cleared by the APS investigation)(I was cleared by the APS investigation)


40/48

Are lawyers above the law? Are lawyers above the law?

As far as the $100k investment made at As far as the $100k investment made at Attorney Mercados financial institution: Attorney Mercados financial institution: Attorney Mercado puts her clients money Attorney Mercado puts her clients moneyin her own bank. Isnt this a conflict of in her own bank. Isnt this a conflict of interest? Because now the money isinterest? Because now the money ismissing? Attorney Mercado stole themissing? Attorney Mercado stole themoney from an 85 year old senior citizen,money from an 85 year old senior citizen,who was her client, and stole from her. If who was her client, and stole from her. If not where is the money!?not where is the money!?


41/48

FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SPEECHFIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SPEECH

IF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS TAKENIF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS TAKEN AWAY THEN DUMB AND SILENT WE MAY AWAY THEN DUMB AND SILENT WE MAY BE LED LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER BE LED LIKE SHEEP TO THE SLAUGHTER GEORGE WASHINGTONGEORGE WASHINGTON

CENSORSHIP REFLECTS A SOCIETY LACK CENSORSHIP REFLECTS A SOCIETY LACK OF CONFIDENCE IN ITSELF. IT IS THEOF CONFIDENCE IN ITSELF. IT IS THE

HALLMARK OF AN AUTHORITARIANHALLMARK OF AN AUTHORITARIANREGIME REGIME

JUSTICE POTTER STEWART JUSTICE POTTER STEWART


42/48

FALSE STATEMENTS BY OFFICERS OF THE COURT: DEVANON,FALSE STATEMENTS BY OFFICERS OF THE COURT: DEVANON,SAM R. PAZ, SONIA MARIA MERCADO, LISA MARIE MACCARLEY,SAM R. PAZ, SONIA MARIA MERCADO, LISA MARIE MACCARLEY,

I NEVER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITHI NEVER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITHHOW MRS. CASTANEDA SPENT HER HOW MRS. CASTANEDA SPENT HER SETTLEMENT MONEY, HAD NOSETTLEMENT MONEY, HAD NOINVOLVEMENT WITH WHERE SHEINVOLVEMENT WITH WHERE SHEINVESTED IT, OR WHAT SHE DID WITHINVESTED IT, OR WHAT SHE DID WITHIT SONIA MARIA MERCADOIT SONIA MARIA MERCADO

Attorney Mercado testifies to the above, Attorney Mercado testifies to the above,but yet, puts her clients money in her ownbut yet, puts her clients money in her ownbank? And money is now missing?bank? And money is now missing?


43/48

SAM R. PAZ APPARENLTY FALSE STATEMENTS IN CASE BCSAM R. PAZ APPARENLTY FALSE STATEMENTS IN CASE BC402096, AND BS 118244 MADE TO WIN ALMOST A MILLION $402096, AND BS 118244 MADE TO WIN ALMOST A MILLION $

HE FORCED OUR HAND, WE JUST DID WHAT WE HADHE FORCED OUR HAND, WE JUST DID WHAT WE HADTO DO GET THIS ORDER P. 5, L. 4-5 (R/T 4-13-2009)TO DO GET THIS ORDER P. 5, L. 4-5 (R/T 4-13-2009)

FIRST THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO QUESTION THATFIRST THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO QUESTION THATTHEY ARE THE PREVALING PARTY, ABSOLUTELY NOTHEY ARE THE PREVALING PARTY, ABSOLUTELY NOQUESTION. EVERYTHING WE ASKED FOR IN THEQUESTION. EVERYTHING WE ASKED FOR IN THEORIGINAL PETITION IS IN THE STIPULATION, AND THEORIGINAL PETITION IS IN THE STIPULATION, AND THECOURT SIGNED THE ORDER P. 4, L. 20-23 (R/T 4-13)COURT SIGNED THE ORDER P. 4, L. 20-23 (R/T 4-13)

WE DONT WANT TO GO TO COURT, HE FORCED USWE DONT WANT TO GO TO COURT, HE FORCED USTO DO THIS WE DID NOT WANT TO ENGAGE WITHTO DO THIS WE DID NOT WANT TO ENGAGE WITHTHIS MAN AT ALL, HE FORCED US TO DO THIS ( IFTHIS MAN AT ALL, HE FORCED US TO DO THIS ( IF

ANYTHING IS BY FORCED ITS ILLEGAL AND WRONG!!! ANYTHING IS BY FORCED ITS ILLEGAL AND WRONG!!!


44/48

DISHONEST ATTORNEY LISA MARIEDISHONEST ATTORNEY LISA MARIEMACCARLEY FROM GLENDALEMACCARLEY FROM GLENDALE

IT HAS BEEN PROVEN THAT ATTORNEY MACCARLEY,IT HAS BEEN PROVEN THAT ATTORNEY MACCARLEY,LIED AND CONSPIRED WITH ATTORNEY PAZ, MERCADOLIED AND CONSPIRED WITH ATTORNEY PAZ, MERCADO

AND MY OWN ATTORNEY JACK K. CONWAY FROM SAN AND MY OWN ATTORNEY JACK K. CONWAY FROM SANMARINO. THE RUMOR APPARENTLY WAS THAT LUISMARINO. THE RUMOR APPARENTLY WAS THAT LUIS

LEFT MILLIONS IN HIS ESTATE AND THAT I, HAD SOMELEFT MILLIONS IN HIS ESTATE AND THAT I, HAD SOMEHOW STOLEN THE MILLIONS. THE PLAN WAS TO DRAGHOW STOLEN THE MILLIONS. THE PLAN WAS TO DRAGME THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM, AS LAWYERSME THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM, AS LAWYERSUSUALLY DO TO MAKE MONEY, BY ENGINEERING MY USUALLY DO TO MAKE MONEY, BY ENGINEERING MY

LOSS IN MY CASES. LUCKILY, I FOUND DAVID A XAVIER LOSS IN MY CASES. LUCKILY, I FOUND DAVID A XAVIER WHO KNEW THE TRUTH AND WILL TESTIFY OF HIS NONWHO KNEW THE TRUTH AND WILL TESTIFY OF HIS NONINVOLVEMENT OF THE THEFT OF THE MISSING MONEY.INVOLVEMENT OF THE THEFT OF THE MISSING MONEY.


45/48

THE TRIER OF FACTS, OR LIES, JUDGETHE TRIER OF FACTS, OR LIES, JUDGEJOSEPH F. DEVANON, WHO ALSO LIESJOSEPH F. DEVANON, WHO ALSO LIES

HE NEVER CONTACTED THE COURT, Judge DeVanon AT TRIALHE NEVER CONTACTED THE COURT, Judge DeVanon AT TRIALON FEBRUARY 22, 2010. THIS IS A PROVEN LIE BY THE MC-50!ON FEBRUARY 22, 2010. THIS IS A PROVEN LIE BY THE MC-50!

THIS IS A PROVEN LIED BY COURT MANAGER CHARLES LOVE WHOTHIS IS A PROVEN LIED BY COURT MANAGER CHARLES LOVE WHO

CONFIRMS THAT THE MC-50 WAS FILED ON FEBRUARY 22, 2010CONFIRMS THAT THE MC-50 WAS FILED ON FEBRUARY 22, 2010BUT WITHHELD INTENTIONALLY BY THE COURT TO STEAL MY BUT WITHHELD INTENTIONALLY BY THE COURT TO STEAL MY PROPERTY.PROPERTY.

IN FACT, MY OWN ATTORNEY, AND CO-CONSPIRATOR ATT.EMAHNIN FACT, MY OWN ATTORNEY, AND CO-CONSPIRATOR ATT.EMAHN

COUNTS TOLD STATE BAR INVESTIGATOR THAT THE MC-50 WASCOUNTS TOLD STATE BAR INVESTIGATOR THAT THE MC-50 WASFILEDFILED FEBRUARY 19, 2010! ATT. COUNTS IS JUST ANOTHER FEBRUARY 19, 2010! ATT. COUNTS IS JUST ANOTHER DISHONEST INDIVIDUAL THAT LIES. FOR PROOF, LA COUNTY BAR DISHONEST INDIVIDUAL THAT LIES. FOR PROOF, LA COUNTY BAR ORDER HIM, COUNTS, TO RETURN MY MONEY IN ARBITRATION!ORDER HIM, COUNTS, TO RETURN MY MONEY IN ARBITRATION!


46/48

THE LIAR AND PERJURER ATTORNEYTHE LIAR AND PERJURER ATTORNEYJACK KENNETH CONWAYJACK KENNETH CONWAY

MR. SHOMER: GOOD MORNING YOUR HONOR. IVAN SHOMER MR. SHOMER: GOOD MORNING YOUR HONOR. IVAN SHOMER STANDING IN FOR JACK CONWAY WHO WILL BE MR. CASTANEDA STANDING IN FOR JACK CONWAY WHO WILL BE MR. CASTANEDA

ATTORNEY OF RECORD. ATTORNEY OF RECORD. (R/T 1-13-09, P.1, L. 21-23) (R/T 1-13-09, P.1, L. 21-23) CONWAY: IF WE LOOK AT THE ACTIVITY THAT HAS BEEN DONECONWAY: IF WE LOOK AT THE ACTIVITY THAT HAS BEEN DONEIN THIS CASE, WE HAVE A TRO THAT WAS ISSUED ON JANUARY IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE A TRO THAT WAS ISSUED ON JANUARY 13, 2009, THAT WAS BEFORE I WAS INVOLVED IN THE CASE AS13, 2009, THAT WAS BEFORE I WAS INVOLVED IN THE CASE ASTHE ATTORNEY BEFORE I WAS RETAINED. THIS IS A LIE!!!THE ATTORNEY BEFORE I WAS RETAINED. THIS IS A LIE!!! (R/T (R/T 4-13-09, P. 7, L. 6-9) 4-13-09, P. 7, L. 6-9) JUDGE RITA SUNNY MILLER TO CONWAY: WHEN WERE YOUJUDGE RITA SUNNY MILLER TO CONWAY: WHEN WERE YOURETAINED FOR THIS CASE? RETAINED FOR THIS CASE? MR. CONWAY: YOUR HONOR, I WAS RETAINED FOR THISMR. CONWAY: YOUR HONOR, I WAS RETAINED FOR THISPARTICULAR CASE IN THE EARLY PART OF FEBRAURY, FEBRUARY PARTICULAR CASE IN THE EARLY PART OF FEBRAURY, FEBRUARY 22NDND, FEBRUARY 3, FEBRUARY 3RDRD THIS IS ANOTHER LIE OF MANY BY CONWAY THIS IS ANOTHER LIE OF MANY BY CONWAY


47/48

THE CONSPIRACY IS PROVEN BY THETHE CONSPIRACY IS PROVEN BY THESIGNING OF THE STIPULATION 2-2-09!!SIGNING OF THE STIPULATION 2-2-09!!

THE QUESTION BEFORE A COMPETENT COURT IS: WHO WAS THETHE QUESTION BEFORE A COMPETENT COURT IS: WHO WAS THEBIGGEST LIAR, MERCADO OR CONWAY?. DID MERCADO LIED INBIGGEST LIAR, MERCADO OR CONWAY?. DID MERCADO LIED INTHE ERRATA DECLARATION THAT WAS FILED ON MAY 3, 2009, OR THE ERRATA DECLARATION THAT WAS FILED ON MAY 3, 2009, OR WAS ATTORNEY CONWAY NOT ONLY LYING BUT PROVING THATWAS ATTORNEY CONWAY NOT ONLY LYING BUT PROVING THATTHE CONSPIRACY WAS ALREADY ON ITS TRACKS. HOW CANTHE CONSPIRACY WAS ALREADY ON ITS TRACKS. HOW CANCONWAY NOT RESPOND TO COMPLAINT NOR INTERROGATORIES?CONWAY NOT RESPOND TO COMPLAINT NOR INTERROGATORIES?WHY WOULD CONWAY NOT PRESENT ALL EVIDENCE PRESENTEDWHY WOULD CONWAY NOT PRESENT ALL EVIDENCE PRESENTEDREGARDING THE JANUARY 4, 2008 LAST WILL AND TESTAMENTREGARDING THE JANUARY 4, 2008 LAST WILL AND TESTAMENTHE FILED IN PROBATE, THE JANUARY 4, 2008 FALSE, FABRICATEDHE FILED IN PROBATE, THE JANUARY 4, 2008 FALSE, FABRICATEDDECLARATION OF SUSANA CASTANEDA OF A PURPORTED VISITDECLARATION OF SUSANA CASTANEDA OF A PURPORTED VISIT

TO SEE MOTHER AT HOSPITAL WHEN NO MOTHER WAS NOT INTO SEE MOTHER AT HOSPITAL WHEN NO MOTHER WAS NOT INHOSPITAL, THE CHECK PAID TO CONWAY ON JANUARY 4, 2008,HOSPITAL, THE CHECK PAID TO CONWAY ON JANUARY 4, 2008,THE CHECK DEPOSITED ON JANUARY 4, 2008, AND WHY WOULDTHE CHECK DEPOSITED ON JANUARY 4, 2008, AND WHY WOULDCONWAY SETTLE THE CASE ON FEB. 2, 2009 WITH PAZ & BERKE?CONWAY SETTLE THE CASE ON FEB. 2, 2009 WITH PAZ & BERKE?


48/48

The Corruption at the Los Angeles Superior Court as Lawyers Paz, Mercado, Conway, Maccarley, Counts, Shomer, Felton, Overton, Berke, Rykoff, And Judge Hickok Apparently Lie in Court!

Documents