Bill Lerach for Attorney General

By February 1, 2008Briefly Legal

Since his hubris knows no bounds.

William Lerach is the former Milberg-Weiss attorney who practically invented class-action abuses, draining billions from productive economic uses — and shareholders, don’t forget the shareholders — but ginning up lawsuits against companies. Turns out many of the lawsuits were the result of years of conspiracies involving the illegal solicitation and payoffs of plaintiffs who searched for a cause of action.

So Lerach’s going to prison, and as is usual, his supporters have written to the court asking for leniency because he’s a kind and noble fellow. The Examiner reports on the details today, laying into Lerach for demanding that his legal brief and supporting documents, including the letters, be sealed. In an editorial, “Treat Lerach as he treated others,” the Examiner marvels at the hypocrisy.

Lerach is the man who has banked tens of millions of dollars through securities class-action lawsuits against corporations and executives, often filed without any evidence of wrongdoing and based merely on what he called his own internal “X-ray vision.” His wondrous vision supposedly allowed him to find corporate wrongdoing where nobody else saw anything but bad market conditions. Then, using variations of the argument that no internal, private corporate record is ever off limits to the crusading Lerach, he would “always find a document to incriminate them.” (Never mind, say multiple detractors, that the “incrimination” often amounted to portraying the documents wildly out of context.) Yet now we see that this same lawyer, who regularly insisted on the right to what amounts to fishing expeditions without a single shred of proof, insisting that documents concerning his own felony conviction should be secret.

If ever a subject called for Congressional hearings, it’s the coordinated assault on the legal underpinnings of our free-market system by the plaintiff’s bar. Unfortunately, millions of dollars of campaign contributions over the years seems to have bought protection from such legitimate oversight.

But the courts maintain their independence. Lerach was convicted on felony charges for corrupting the legal system, fabricating and manipulating attacks against companies owned by millions of shareholders. The public has a right to know the nature and extent of that corruption.

UPDATE (9:25 a.m.) Ted Frank marvels, as well, at the Point of Law blog, a post that includes several useful links.

Join the discussion One Comment

  • Gary Joseph Bonas says:

    Examiner’s on Lerach – If you only had a clue:

    Re: A.G.’s Secret – Kick Back Felonies & Fall Guy Lerach

    Date: 02-07-08

    This is a short presentation to assist in a more informed sentencing (or even entertaining it) relating to Mr. Bill Lerach. The parties have been courtesy copied, return receipt, by U.S. Postal Road e-mail surveillance plus, for clarification. Sadly, this is a case of calling the kettle black owing to our A.G., Inc.’s felony suppression & harboring of mammoth executive kick-back felonies by A.G. Ronald Chengs’ team, all in accord, including Yang, Russi, Barbara Masterson & Dan Barrios, for their executive ghost clients.
    First, I remind this honorable court about our submission about “IT,” receipt confirmed:
    Ex 11-27-07 – A.G. is advancing Wall Street Ponzi Schemes
    A) Here, the creed statute’s PLAIN LANGUAGE is CONCLUSIVE.
    B) This is too extravagant to be maintained.
    C) The intelligence contained on the enclosed CD is for your info [Judge Walter!

    Second, We understand that sometimes our guardians need reminders about what they may & may not do, which dovetails into our system of check & balance, which the following adds to, for clarification. Here, We shift to A.G. Cheng’s team’s kick-back crimes & their media campaign, backed by the State Bar, to cover those crimes by engaging, under colors of authority, our We The People guardian, Mr. Lerach:

    The key tangible harm falsely claimed by A.G. here is that identified Wall Street Executives were Mr. Lerach’s We The People clients after they manipulated the face value of their own currency downward (Article 1 Coin) that they contracted to sell to We sold to We The People. That is the root of the cancer here, not Bill Lerach playing the cards your U.C.C. all capitalized name people chattel trafficking legislatures dealt him. Judicial notice shall be taken of that truism.

    It is the nature of an A.G. sociopath to project accusations of what A.G. is onto another, to divert the reality of it’s misdeeds as a plotted media play campaign. That, We submit, is what is going on here. It is a confirmed fact that A.G., all in accord, has felony suppressed deep executive kick-back facts on behalf of its executive clients, cementing its own harboring, aiding & abetting & accessory realities. Indeed, the very indictment allegations A.G. slung at Mr. Lerach are easily converted into one against A.G., with verified facts; A.G. has perniciously turned the tables, wickedly, to shelter itself.

    Kick-Back Facts
    First, so we are speaking the same language, the term kickback is a synonym for felony “concessions” as defined in Sugar. Here, We present some short, sworn to under oath, CEO kick-back facts, all of which A.G. has been on actual notice of since 2001:
    Q. When you first took over responsibility for [your staple items]…, were there any rebates [off invoice kickbacks]?
    A. No.
    Q. Did there come a time when there started to be rebates [called kick-backs]?
    A. Yes.

    1985 – 1988

    Q. First … are they taken into account in computing the … margin [10K-10Q]?
    A. No.

    Q. What is the largest amount of one you can recall?
    A. [I]n excess of $24,000,000 (from Hallmark).

    A. If I, if I … I … keep that money…. [stick one]!

    A. We use some of it to put it against our gross margins to smooth out [artificially] our gross [revenue reporting 10K-10Q] so that we were on a consistent reporting basis – so on a quarterly basis we were able to achieve whatever we wanted to report.
    Q. So … the [invoice] price … went up when you had [bad Sugar] slotting?
    A. Absolutely.

    A. So by taking those monies and setting them aside in a [shush] fund….
    A. That’s how the rebate program got started and continued.
    A. And now I have … rebates and … could do something really exciting.

    A. [Executives stumbled, confessing] If I, if I … I … keep that money….

    A. [W]e … put that money up in a holding account with our accounting department ….

    A. Let’s say for an example that we were having a relatively good period & we did not need that money to achieve our gross margin for that period, & we knew that the next month we were going to have a pretty difficult time meeting revenue forecasts.

    A. We would put that money up in a holding account with our accounting department, & they would hold it until the next period. We use some of it to put it against our gross margins to smooth out our gross so that we were on a consistent reporting basis – so on a quarterly basis we were able to achieve whatever we wanted to report.

    Q. … without giving specifics of any of these other contracts, what types…of commodities or products have been involved?
    A. Greeting cards, light bulbs, pasta, dry beans, rice, private label products, numerous…items across the store.
    Shifting, to translate a bit, the felony kickback facts marked above were specifically discussed & expressly banned in 1936, verbatim supreme:
    [T]he [Major Crime Unit] practice [of pawning off invoice numbers as one’s real cost] developed on the part of some, but not all, [sellers] … of giving secret concessions [off invoice money for the account].

    There were some…who never indulged in that practice, but others, called [& confirmed] ‘unethical’ … did so to such an extent that …all…[stuff] sold …carried secret [kick-back] … of some kind.

    [Some book keepers, for example,] … falsely represent— [invoice] prices [to clients, the IRS, & on S.E.C. filings, for example] which they said they … procure[d] & actually paid] from [franchise]… sellers.’”


    Now, A.G. sociopath Ronald Cheng’s team has been on actual notice of the above crimes since & before 2001. Doing just the opposite of what We pay A.G. to do, A.G. Cheng has usurped his position by agreeing, in & out house:
    A) To harbor the above crimes for Wall Street; &
    B) To turn the tables & attack Mr. Lerach for it.

    To be very clear, know that Mr. Lerach too has known about the above major crimes since at least 2001. Mr. Lerach, however, is not charged with the duty to cure it, like your A.G. Cheng is. Maybe Mr. Lerach did use his knowledge of the above major white collar crimes to leverage better settlements on behalf of We The People, who roundly get jacked by the fiat money the executives you’re A.G. identified in your indictment against Mr. Lerach.
    So you know, Mr. Lerach & the other major We The People guardians you’re corrupt A.G. has attacked are not the only ones privy to this felony intelligence nor are they the only ones who compensate clients for stepping up to address riddled with corruption fiat money manipulation. Mr. Lerach & Lazar, e.g., ghave simply been targeted for tarring by your A.G., representing their identified executive clients, which, We submit, is out of order. A.G. bringing it in the first place is corrupt, knowing the above facts. That an honorable court has endorsed this venal action, by entertaining it from go, is a symptom, in our view, of a deeply infected by Wall Street Court Cancer. Is this honorable court a holder of any stock is a critical inquiry on the appeal We shall make, our way, if necessary!
    Sadly, it is crystal clear that both A.G. & this court, in concert, are executing a broad message to the We The People plaintiff’s bar to back off filing cases to address a riddled with corruption Wall Street? As an example, perhaps this honorable court would like to explain to US how Mr. Richard Grasso came up on a roughly 200 million severance package from the EX-CHANGE? Simple theft is one reality. That known, We cite Jefferson:
    “To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse.”

    About citing Jefferson, common law & the rule book, our Articles, for clarification, We understand that in your court citing our founders (whom I am surely no wiser than) is not permitted by your smoke filled Ivy room agenda, under colors of authority. Our thought on that, however, is that you, not I, will have a grand difficulty explaining that, formally, if necessary, at an impeachment hearing for very bad behavior & public fraud, under colors of authority.
    Next, the legal reality of which judicial notice is taken is that this is not your court: it is a We The People common law only court, to remind you. And it is not from you that “We the free” derive & invoke our bourn rights:
    “A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
    “That liberty [is pure] which is to go to all, and not to the few or the rich alone.”

    Curse of Cane

    As I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil. For my staff & my rod, they comfort me. Psalms 23

    About the above kick-back felonies, Mr. Mogin too has been on actual notice of them as I personally presented them to him in 2000 & in 2001, which triggered his joining hands with Mr. Noonan/Greg Stone to have me kidnapped & double prosecuted, in concert with Ronald Cheng, to suppress the disclosure of that sensitive, public Niche Field Felony information.
    Shifting, one of the methods of leveraging the facts & rules pertaining to the niche field involves coupon settlements, in lieu of owed hard cash. Here is a quote, from Freeman v. Shack marking one sample of the back door deal making “contract settlement agreement in restraint of trade” entered by some, not all, fiduciary class guardians, verbatim:
    In May 2004, Freeman, Schack, Barry, and Mogin participated in a mediation planning session in Los Angeles. At the mediation, Schack and Mogin began proposing that Freeman II should be settled for coupons to the class members valued at approximately $30 or less.

    Last, I again remind of the nature of a sociopath, like Joanne Remke, whose team has been on actual notice of the above major kick-back crimes since 2004. In an overt act of rebellion against this directive, verbatim:
    A lawyer will not be subject to retrial on … charges of threatening … counsel….

    To parrot the sociopath herself right back at her, she wrote, verbatim:
    There are [no] … mitigating circumstances [for any of players involved].

    In a fraud opinion stacked with lies & deceit, here I present one flat lie Remke flat lie deception, without citing a signle fact, sadly sponsored by who prtends to be a semi competent judge, verbatim:
    Respondent made threatening references to Mogin’s family.

    Ms. Remke knows full well what the facts are, verbatim I said:

    A) Congratulations, I hear you are a Lucky [Stores] parent [American Stores];
    B) Ever need help [case] baby sitting …; &
    C) Before asking me … ask the king [pin] man, Elliot Disner.

    See, unlike Ms. Remke, a real Judge (ME) cites facts, to the record, instead of citing herself or parroting poison replayed, like a broken record, regurgitating cud, not facts, felony “re-examined” by the entire STD San Diego Bench by seditious DA-AG’s kidnapping & court attacks on me & my character. About Joanne Remke et al the players involved, this one needle of chronic fraud by Remke fits like a glove pertaining to her own arrogantly bold gamble, verbatim:
    [My] … Court concludes that the facts and circumstances surrounding [Remke – Mogin et als] … commission of the [harboring, suppressing, libel, slander plus] offenses for which [plenty are on actual notice of & have been unmasked & convicted by peers] … involved moral turpitude. “Moral turpitude” has been defined by the California Supreme Court as ~’an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which a man [and Remke] owes to his fellowmen, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man.” (In re Craig (1938) 12 Cal.2d 93, 97.) Holding that an attorney’s act constitutes moral turpitude characterizes the attorney as unsuitable to practice law. (In re Strick (1983) 34 Cal.3d 891,902; In re Higbie (1972) 6 Cal.3d 562, 570.)

    Significantly notice there are no verifications nor a single fact cited footnote in Remke’s Hustle article about me. That reality is because there are no facts & the facts she cites are open lies by sociopath guilty law hookers to cover their own crimes, harboring & leveraging felony facts for big money class action settlements – Anti-trust & securities. We thank Remke’s clan very much for confirming her lack of judicial integrity cemented by her own Hustler lies, research & Hustler publication (s), which we shall come back to for further clarification, Countrywide.
    Next if you think I didn’t check myself into protective custody given the mammoth crimes involved, on cue, as directed, after Greg Stone threatened the lives of my family, you are sorely mistaken! I joke you not, those remotely familiar with My field know full well that defense bar boys, like Greg Stone, are flat corporate mafia advocates, proficient in the art of linguistic & illegal deceit, like their clumsy advocate Remke!
    CEO Burd – Remke’s client, unmasked
    CEO Johnson – Remke’s client, unmasked
    CEO David Dillon _ Remke’s client, unmasked

    Article 1, section 3 reads, verbatim:
    Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to [common] Law.

    Article 3, Section 1 reads, verbatim:

    The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court [which is not California’s], and in such inferior Courts [which is not Remke’s or Robert Trentacosta’s] as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour….

    Article 1, Section 6 reads, verbatim:
    The … Representatives [meaning judges, D.A.- A.G.] …. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest….

    Article 2, Section 4 reads, verbatim:

    [A]ll civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

    Article 3, Section 3 reads, verbatim:
    No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

    One count of Remke treason with regard to me, e.g., is the fact that she, and others, refused to give any faith, any credit to the public record of my federal state order of dismissal, with prejudice in 2003:
    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. Article 4, Section 1.


    The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence. Article 4, Section 4.

    Again, the cannon the court owes duty to reads:

    [The] … plain language is conclusive.

    Now, “I may err in my measures, but never shall [I] deflect from the intention to fortify the public liberty by every possible [lawful] means, and to put it out of the power of the few to riot on the labors of the many.”
    Next, supreme dicta ON MY RULE WORD “NO” reads:
    “[A] function of free (e) speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger.”

    “Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. “

    “That is why freedom of speech . . . is . . . protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest. . . .”

    There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view. For the alternative would lead to standardization of ideas either by legislatures [Harrassing Toilet paper], courts, or dominant political [Esquire] or community [Dunk] groups.”

    “[Sugar Schedule Cartel’s are] … vampire-like, lives only by sucking living labor, and lives the more, the more labor it sucks.”

    The above known, We suggest the following options:
    A) Dismiss IT, with prejudice;
    B) Continue IT & think about IT, wisely; &/or
    C) Other info & options are on the enclosed CD.

    On a final note, did you know that my mother had a double liver & kidney transplant in the middle of my ‘99 Agent double planted “Yoke/Caviar” case? On the white cross, on my mother & father’s grave, I share this now.
    Godspeed & in hoc signo vinces my brother Walter!

    Gary Joseph Bonas II

    P.S. Plato said, “Compared with your mother & father & all the rest of your ancestors your country is something far more precious, more venerable, more sacred, & held in greater honor both among gods & all reasonable minds.”

Leave a Reply