Kobe Bryant Supports Aaron & Margaret Wallace Foundation

Primary Position: General Partner, Bryant Stibel
In 1991, Bryant started his basketball career when he played for his high school team at Lower Merion High School. In 1996, he was drafted into National Basketball Association (NBA) by the Charlotte Hornets and was subsequently traded to Los Angeles Lakers. In 1997, he founded Kobe Family Entertainment, an entertainment company. In 2013, he co-founded Bryant Stibel, a venture capital firm. In 2014, he founded Kobe Incorporated, a venture capital firm that majorly invests in sports industry. In April 2016, he played his last game.

GIVING HISTORY
Philanthropic donor gives primarily to healthcare causes. Lifetime giving exceeds $10,000. Notable gifts include: At least $10,000 to Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and at least $1,000 to Children`s Hospital Orange County (CHOC). He has also donated to American Red Cross, Aaron & Margaret Wallace Foundation and Dream Foundation; exact donations made are unclear. Founder of the Kobe & Vanessa Bryant Family Foundation. The foundation is dedicated to improving the lives of youth and families in need, and encouraging young people to stay active through sports. The foundation operates Mamba Football Club, a youth soccer club in Orange County, California that teaches young athletes how to become leaders and independent thinkers. The foundation has partnered with several Los Angeles, California-based organizations including Step Up on Second, My Friend’s Place and United Way. He has reportedly granted undisclosed amount to the Make-A-Wish-Foundation, Saint Jude’s Children’s Hospital, the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, the Center for Abused Children, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Plaza de la Raza Cultural Center. He is actively involved with NBA Cares. He has reportedly supported the victims of the conflict in Darfur, Sudan, earthquake in China and Haiti and the disaster in Japan. He has also established the international youth scholarships for the Kobe Basketball Academy. In 2009, he partnered with the China Soong Ching Ling Foundation to launch the Kobe China Fund as his first global charitable initiative to raise funds and awareness for education and health program. He is a corporate sponsor of the Scholastic Sports Network.
Bryant is the Honorary Chair of the United Way’s HomeWalk.

How the Red Cross Raised Half a Billion Dollars for Haiti ­and Built Six Home

Marie Arago, special to ProPublica
How the Red Cross Raised Half a Billion Dollars for Haiti ­and Built Six Homes

Even as the group has publicly celebrated its work, insider accounts detail a string of failures

by Justin Elliott, ProPublica, and Laura Sullivan, NPRJune 3, 2015

THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF CAMPECHE sprawls up a steep hillside in Haiti’s capital city, Port-au-Prince. Goats rustle in trash that goes forever uncollected. Children kick a deflated volleyball in a dusty lot below a wall with a hand-painted logo of the American Red Cross.

In late 2011, the Red Cross launched a multimillion-dollar project to transform the desperately poor area, which was hit hard by the earthquake that struck Haiti the year before. The main focus of the project — called LAMIKA, an acronym in Creole for “A Better Life in My Neighborhood” — was building hundreds of permanent homes.

THE LATEST

Internal Reports: Red Cross May Not Know How Millions Were Spent July 21

Red Cross Holds a Press Conference In Haiti. It Doesn’t Go Well. June 12

Reddit chat with the reporters June 12

DOCUMENTS: INSIDE THE RED CROSS’ HAITI FAILURES

Confidential memo warns of “failed results”

Report on key project finds no “contributions of any sort to the well being of households”

Red Cross CEO emails about “wonderful helicopter idea” to spend money

Today, not one home has been built in Campeche. Many residents live in shacks made of rusty sheet metal, without access to drinkable water, electricity or basic sanitation. When it rains, their homes flood and residents bail out mud and water.

The Red Cross received an outpouring of donations after the quake, nearly half a billion dollars.

The group has publicly celebrated its work. But in fact, the Red Cross has repeatedly failed on the ground in Haiti. Confidential memos, emails from worried top officers, and accounts of a dozen frustrated and disappointed insiders show the charity has broken promises, squandered donations, and made dubious claims of success.

The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six.

After the earthquake, Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern unveiled ambitious plans to “develop brand-newcommunities.” None has ever been built.

Aid organizations from around the world have struggled after the earthquake in Haiti, the Western Hemisphere’s poorest country. But ProPublica and NPR’s investigation shows that many of the Red Cross’s failings in Haiti are of its own making. They are also part of a larger pattern in which the organization has botched delivery of aid after disasters such as Superstorm Sandy. Despite its difficulties, the Red Cross remains the charity of choice for ordinary Americans and corporations alike after natural disasters.

One issue that has hindered the Red Cross’ work in Haiti is an overreliance on foreigners who could not speak French or Creole, current and former employees say.

In a blistering 2011 memo, the then-director of the Haiti program, Judith St. Fort, wrote that the group was failing in Haiti and that senior managers had made “very disturbing” remarks disparaging Haitian employees. St. Fort, who is Haitian American, wrote that the comments included, “he is the only hard working one among them” and “the ones that we have hired are not strong so we probably should not pay close attention to Haitian CVs.”

The Red Cross won’t disclose details of how it has spent the hundreds of millions of dollars donated for Haiti. But our reporting shows that less money reached those in need than the Red Cross has said.

Lacking the expertise to mount its own projects, the Red Cross ended up giving much of the money to other groups to do the work. Those groups took out a piece of every dollar to cover overhead and management. Even on the projects done by others, the Red Cross had its own significant expenses – in one case, adding up to a third of the project’s budget.

Where did the half billion raised for Haiti go? The Red Cross won’t say.

Facebook Twitter
In statements, the Red Cross cited the challenges all groups have faced in post-quake Haiti, including the country’s dysfunctional land title system.

“Like many humanitarian organizations responding in Haiti, the American Red Cross met complications in relation to government coordination delays, disputes over land ownership, delays at Haitian customs, challenges finding qualified staff who were in short supply and high demand, and the cholera outbreak, among other challenges,” the charity said.

The group said it responded quickly to internal concerns, including hiring an expert to train staff on cultural competency after St. Fort’s memo. While the group won’t provide a breakdown of its projects, the Red Cross said it has done more than 100. The projects include repairing 4,000 homes, giving several thousand families temporary shelters, donating $44 million for food after the earthquake, and helping fund the construction of a hospital.

“Millions of Haitians are safer, healthier, more resilient, and better prepared for future disasters thanks to generous donations to the American Red Cross,” McGovern wrote in a recent report marking the fifth anniversary of the earthquake.

In other promotional materials, the Red Cross said it has helped “more than 4.5 million” individual Haitians “get back on their feet.”

It has not provided details to back up the claim. And Jean-Max Bellerive, Haiti’s prime minister at the time of the earthquake, doubts the figure, pointing out the country’s entire population is only about 10 million.

“No, no,” Bellerive said of the Red Cross’ claim, “it’s not possible.”

When the earthquake struck Haiti in January 2010, the Red Cross was facing a crisis of its own. McGovern had become chief executive just 18 months earlier, inheriting a deficit and an organization that had faced scandals after 9/11 and Katrina.

Gail McGovern (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Inside the Red Cross, the Haiti disaster was seen as “a spectacular fundraising opportunity,” recalled one former official who helped organize the effort. Michelle Obama, the NFL and a long list of celebrities appealed for donations to the group.

The Red Cross kept soliciting money well after it had enough for the emergency relief that is the group’s stock in trade. Doctors Without Borders, in contrast, stopped fundraising off the earthquake after it decided it had enough money. The donations to the Red Cross helped the group erase its more-than $100 million deficit.

The Red Cross ultimately raised far more than any other charity.

A year after the quake, McGovern announced that the Red Cross would use the donations to make a lasting impact in Haiti.

We asked the Red Cross to show us around its projects in Haiti so we could see the results of its work. It declined. So earlier this year we went to Campeche to see one of the group’s signature projects for ourselves.

Street vendors in the dusty neighborhood immediately pointed us to Jean Jean Flaubert, the head of a community group that the Red Cross set up as a local sounding board.

Sitting with us in their sparse one-room office, Flaubert and his colleagues grew angry talking about the Red Cross. They pointed to the lack of progress in the neighborhood and the healthy salaries paid to expatriate aid workers.

“What the Red Cross told us is that they are coming here to change Campeche. Totally change it,” said Flaubert. “Now I do not understand the change that they are talking about. I think the Red Cross is working for themselves.”

The Red Cross’ initial plan said the focus would be building homes — an internal proposalput the number at 700. Each would have finished floors, toilets, showers, even rainwater collection systems. The houses were supposed to be finished in January 2013.

The Red Cross promised to build hundreds of new homes in Campeche but none have been built. Many residents still live in crude shacks. (Marie Arago, special to ProPublica)
None of that ever happened. Carline Noailles, who was the project’s manager in Washington, said it was endlessly delayed because the Red Cross “didn’t have the know-how.”

Another former official who worked on the Campeche project said, “Everything takes four times as long because it would be micromanaged from DC, and they had no development experience.”

Shown an English-language press release from the Red Cross website, Flaubert was stunned to learn of the project’s $24 million budget — and that it is due to end next year.

“Not only is [the Red Cross] not doing it,” Flaubert said, “now I’m learning that the Red Cross is leaving next year. I don’t understand that.” (The Red Cross says it did tell community leaders about the end date. It also accused us of “creating ill will in the community which may give rise to a security incident.”)

The project has since been reshaped and downscaled. A road is being built. Some existing homes have received earthquake reinforcement and a few schools are being repaired. Some solar street lights have been installed, though many broke and residents say others are unreliable.

The group’s most recent press release on the project cites achievements such as training school children in disaster response.

The Red Cross said it has to scale back its housing plans because it couldn’t acquire the rights to land. No homes will be built.

Other Red Cross infrastructure projects also fizzled.

A Red Cross effort to save Haitians from cholera was crippled by internal issues. “None of these people had to die,” said a Haitian official.

Facebook Twitter
In January 2011, McGovern announced a $30 million partnership with the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID. The agency would build roads and other infrastructure in at least two locations where the Red Cross would build new homes.

But it took more than two and a half years, until August 2013, for the Red Cross just to sign an agreement with USAID on the program, and even that was for only one site. The program was ultimately canceled because of a land dispute.

A Government Accountability Office report attributed the severe delays to problems “in securing land title and because of turnover in Red Cross leadership” in its Haiti program.

Other groups also ran into trouble with land titles and other issues. But they also ultimately built 9,000 homes compared to the Red Cross’ six.

Asked about the Red Cross’ housing projects in Haiti, David Meltzer, the group’s general counsel and chief international officer, said changing conditions forced changes in plans. “If we had said, ‘All we’re going to do is build new homes,’ we’d still be looking for land,” he said.

The USAID project’s collapse left the Red Cross grasping for ways to spend money earmarked for it.

“Any ideas on how to spend the rest of this?? (Besides the wonderful helicopter idea?),” McGovern wrote to Meltzer in a November 2013 email obtained by ProPublica and NPR. “Can we fund Conrad’s hospital? Or more to PiH[Partners in Health]? Any more shelter projects?”

Jean Jean Flaubert says the Red Cross promised to transform his neighborhood. “Now I do not understand the change that they are talking about,” he said. (Marie Arago, special to ProPublica)
It’s not clear what helicopter idea McGovern was referring to or if it was ever carried out. The Red Cross would say only that her comments were “grounded in the American Red Cross’ strategy and priorities, which focus on health and housing.”

Another signature project, known in Creole as “A More Resilient Great North,” is supposed to rehabilitate roads in poor, rural communities and to help them get clean water and sanitation.

But two years after it started, the $13 million effort has been faltering badly. An internal evaluation from March found residents were upset because nothing had been done to improve water access or infrastructure or to make “contributions of any sort to the well being of households,” the report said.

So much bad feeling built up in one area that the population “rejects the project.”

The Red Cross says 91% of donations went to help Haitians. That’s not true.

Facebook Twitter
Instead of making concrete improvements to living conditions, the Red Cross has launched hand-washing education campaigns. The internal evaluation noted that these were “not effective when people had no access to water and no soap.” (The Red Cross declined to comment on the project.)

The group’s failures went beyond just infrastructure.

When a cholera epidemic raged through Haiti nine months after the quake, the biggest part of the Red Cross’ response — a plan to distribute soap and oral rehydration salts — was crippled by “internal issues that go unaddressed,” wrote the director of the Haiti program in her May 2011 memo.

Throughout that year, cholera was a steady killer. By September 2011, when the death toll had surpassed 6,000, the project was still listed as “very behind schedule” according to another internal document.

The Red Cross said in a statement that its cholera response, including a vaccination campaign, has continued for years and helped millions of Haitians.

But while other groups also struggled early responding to cholera, some performed well.

“None of these people had to die. That’s what upsets me,” said Paul Christian Namphy, a Haitian water and sanitation official who helped lead the effort to fight cholera. He says early failures by the Red Cross and other NGOs had a devastating impact. “These numbers should have been zero.”

So why did the Red Cross’ efforts fall so short? It wasn’t just that Haiti is a hard place to work.

“They collected nearly half a billion dollars,” said a congressional staffer who helped oversee Haiti reconstruction. “But they had a problem. And the problem was that they had absolutely no expertise.”

Lee Malany was in charge of the Red Cross’ shelter program in Haiti starting in 2010. He remembers a meeting in Washington that fall where officials did not seem to have any idea how to spend millions of dollars set aside for housing. Malany says the officials wanted to know which projects would generate good publicity, not which projects would provide the most homes.

“When I walked out of that meeting I looked at the people that I was working with and said, ‘You know this is very disconcerting, this is depressing,’” he recalled.

The Red Cross said in a statement its Haiti program has never put publicity over delivering aid.

Malany resigned the next year from his job in Haiti. “I said there’s no reason for me to stay here. I got on the plane and left.”

Transitional shelters like these on the outskirts of Port-Au-Prince, paid for by the Red Cross, typically last three to five years. (Marie Arago, special to ProPublica)
Sometimes it wasn’t a matter of expertise, but whether anybody was filling key jobs. An April 2012 organizational chart obtained by ProPublica and NPR lists 9 of 30 leadership positions in Haiti as vacant, including slots for experts on health and shelter.

The Red Cross said vacancies and turnover were inevitable because of “the security situation, separation from family for international staff, and the demanding nature of the work.”

The constant upheaval took a toll. Internal documents refer to repeated attempts over years to “finalize” and “complete” a strategic plan for the Haiti program, efforts that were delayed by changes in senior management. As late as March 2014, more than four years into a six-year program, an internal update cites a “revised strategy” still awaiting “final sign-off.”

The Red Cross said settling on a plan early would have been a mistake. “It would be hard to create the perfect plan from the beginning in a complicated place like Haiti,” it said. “But we also need to begin, so we create plans that are continually revised.”

The Red Cross says it provided homes to more than 130,000 Haitians. But they didn’t.

Facebook Twitter
Those plans were further undermined by the Red Cross’ reliance on expats. Noailles, the Haitian development professional who worked for the Red Cross on the Campeche project, said expat staffers struggled in meetings with local officials.

“Going to meetings with the community when you don’t speak the language is not productive,” she said. Sometimes, she recalled, expat staffers would skip such meetings altogether.

The Red Cross said it has “made it a priority to hire Haitians” despite lots of competition for local professionals, and that over 90 percent of its staff is Haitian. The charity said it used a local human resources firm to help.

Yet very few Haitians have made it into the group’s top echelons in Haiti, according to five current and former Red Cross staffers as well as staff lists obtained by ProPublica and NPR.

That not only affected the group’s ability to work in Haiti, it was also expensive.

According to an internal Red Cross budgeting document for the project in Campeche, the project manager – a position reserved for an expatriate – was entitled to allowances for housing, food and other expenses, home leave trips, R&R four times a year, and relocation expenses. In all, it added up to $140,000.

Compensation for a senior Haitian engineer — the top local position — was less than one-third of that, $42,000 a year.

Shelim Dorval, a Haitian administrator who worked for the Red Cross coordinating travel and housing for expatriate staffers, recalled thinking it was a waste to spend so much to bring in people with little knowledge of Haiti when locals were available.

“For each one of those expats, they were having high salaries, staying in a fancy house, and getting vacation trips back to their countries,” Dorval said. “A lot of money was spent on those people who were not Haitian, who had nothing to do with Haiti. The money was just going back to the United States.”

Soon after the earthquake, McGovern, the Red Cross CEO, said the group would make sure donors knew exactly what happened to their money.

The Red Cross would “lead the effort in transparency,” she pledged. “We are happy to share the way we are spending our dollars.”

That hasn’t happened. The Red Cross’ public reports offer only broad categories about where $488 million in donations has gone. The biggest category is shelter, at about $170 million. The others include health, emergency relief and disaster preparedness.

After the earthquake, Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern unveiled plans to “develop brand-new communities.” None has ever been built. (Marie Arago, special to ProPublica)
It has declined repeated requests to disclose the specific projects, to explain how much money went to each or to say what the results of each project were.

There is reason to doubt the Red Cross’ claims that it helped 4.5 million Haitians. An internal evaluation found that in some areas, the Red Cross reported helping more people than even lived in the communities. In other cases, the figures were low, and in others double-counting went uncorrected.

In describing its work, the Red Cross also conflates different types of aid, making it more difficult to assess the charity’s efforts in Haiti.

For example, while the Red Cross says it provided more than 130,000 people with homes, that includes thousands of people who were not actually given homes, but rather were “trained in proper construction techniques.” (That was first reported by the Haiti blog of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.)

The figure includes people who got short-term rental assistance or were housed in several thousand “transitional shelters,” which are temporary structures that can get eaten up by termites or tip over in storms. It also includes modest improvements on 5,000 temporary shelters.

The Red Cross also won’t break down what portion of donations went to overhead.

How the Red Cross’ Overhead Claim Stacks Up

The Red Cross says that for each dollar donated, 91 cents went to Haiti. But here’s what actually happened in one $5.4 million project to improve temporary shelters.

Overhead and Management
Spent on Doing the Work
What They Say
What Actually Happened
9%
91%
9%Red Cross’ overhead
24%Red Cross’ program management and other
~7%Other groups’ overhead
60%
Source: American Red Cross and ProPublica Analysis
Credit: Sisi Wei/ProPublica

McGovern told CBS News a few months after the quake, “Minus the 9 cents overhead, 91 cents on the dollar will be going to Haiti. And I give you my word and my commitment, I’m banking my integrity, my own personal sense of integrity on that statement.”

But the reality is that less money went to Haiti than 91 percent. That’s because in addition to the Red Cross’ 9 percent overhead, the other groups that got grants from the Red Cross also have their own overhead.

In one case, the Red Cross sent $6 million to the International Federation of the Red Cross for rental subsidies to help Haitians leave tent camps. The IFRC then took out 26 percent for overhead and what the IFRC described as program-related “administration, finance, human resources” and similar costs.

Beyond all that, the Red Cross also spends another piece of each dollar for what it describes as “program costs incurred by the American Red Cross in managing” the projects done by other groups.

The American Red Cross’ management and other costs consumed an additional 24 percent of the money on one project, according to the group’s statements and internal documents. The actual work, upgrading shelters, was done by the Swiss and Spanish Red Cross societies.

“It’s a cycle of overhead,” said Jonathan Katz, the Associated Press reporter in Haiti at the time of the earthquake who tracked post-disaster spending for his book, The Big Truck That Went By. “It was always going to be the American Red Cross taking a 9 percent cut, re-granting to another group, which would take out their cut.”

Given the results produced by the Red Cross’ projects in Haiti, Bellerive, the former prime minister, said he has a hard time fathoming what’s happened to donors’ money.

“Five hundred million dollars in Haiti is a lot of money,” he said. “I’m not a big mathematician, but I can make some additions. I know more or less the cost of things. Unless you don’t pay for the gasoline the same price I was paying, unless you pay people 20 times what I was paying them, unless the cost of the house you built was five times the cost I was paying, it doesn’t add up for me.”

A resident in a Port-Au-Prince transitional shelter paid for by the Red Cross. (Marie Arago, special to ProPublica)
This story was co-published with NPR. Mitzy-Lynn Hyacinthe contributed reporting. Design direction by David Sleight, production by Hannah Birch.

Read about how the Red Cross botched key elements of its mission after Superstorm Sandy and Hurricane Isaac in PR Over People: The Red Cross’ Secret Disaster. And about how the Red Cross’ CEO has been serially misleading about where donors’ dollars are going.

If you have information about the Red Cross or about other international aid projects, please email justin@propublica.org.

Justin Elliott is a ProPublica reporter covering politics and government accountability. Previously, he was a reporter at Salon.com and TPMmuckraker and news editor at Talking Points Memo.

Laura Sullivan is a NPR News investigative correspondent whose work has cast a light on some of the country’s most disadvantaged people.

It has proven itself unequal to the task of massive disaster relief. We need a new kind of humanitarian response.

By Jonathan M. Katz
 
In 2004, I was just starting my first full-time job in a Washington newsroomwhen disaster struck. It was on the other side of the world: an extraordinarily powerful earthquake in Sumatra, Indonesia, that triggered a tsunami across the Indian Ocean. But thanks to CNN it felt like the anguish and terror were happening in the next cubicle. I still remember the fear on the fishermen’s faces and watching mothers cry as they searched for their children in the waves. Powerless, eager to help, I did the only thing I could think of: I went online and sent $20 to the American Red Cross.
Thirteen years later, we’re watching another disaster, this time much closer to home. Tropical Storm Harvey, supercharged by a freakishly warm Gulf of Mexico, has slammed into the Texas coast and is now running a dayslong conveyor belt carrying trillions of gallons of water from the ocean to the sky to the bayous and streets of Houston. Highways have become rivers in America’s fourth-largest city. Apartment complexes are filling up like bathtubs. Dams are nearing failure. Thousands have had to be rescued from the still-rising floodwaters in the overbuilt, improperly drained city. The scariest part is that, with the water still rising, no one can really know how bad the damage has been so far or what is to come. Once again, most of us outside the zone feel powerless but want to help. Once again, leaders and noble souls are telling us the best way to do so is to turn to the best known, most bipartisanly loved brand in humanitarian relief.

But I won’t be donating to the Red Cross this time. And after years of reporting on and inside some of the biggest disasters of the decade and change, I know what a costly mistake the focus on donating anywhere can be.

Part of the problem is the American Red Cross’ track record when it comes to disasters. It isn’t great. I learned this best in Haiti, where I survived the Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake and ran the Associated Press bureau from 2007 until 2011. When the earthquake struck, killing an estimated 100,000 to 316,000 people, American Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern’s staff swung into action doing what it does best: raising money. Their appeal to “save lives,” aided by endorsements from President Obama and celebrities, and fueled by a pioneering text message campaign, raised a staggering $488 million.

It quickly became clear that the organization’s biggest problem would be figuring out what to do with all that cash. The U.S. chapter had just three full-time staff in Haiti at the time of the disaster. Though it soon sent more, and subcontracted staff from the local Haitian Red Cross, the truth was that there wasn’t all that much they could do: ARC isn’t a medical aid group à la Doctors Without Borders. It doesn’t do development work or specialize in rebuilding destroyed neighborhoods. What it does best is provide immediate assistance—often in the form of blankets, hygiene kits, or temporary shelter—and as incredibly destructive as the earthquake was, there wasn’t half a billion dollars of tarps and hygiene kits to hand out. Staffers came up with all kinds of creative ways to unload the money, including handing it off to other aid groups that could use it better (after ARC had taken its customary 9 percent administrative cut). As it became increasingly clear that the entire earthquake response, from the lowliest neighborhood to the top floor of the United Nations Secretariat—had been a failure, ARC found itself scrambling to explain why the half a billion dollars it took hadn’t made a substantive difference in survivors’ lives. “There’s only so much money that can be forced through the emergency phase,” an ARC spokeswoman told me when I asked how it was possible that just a third of the money it had raised had even been committed, much less spent, two years later.

What no one at the organization bothered to do was explain to the public—in Haiti or back in the States—that it had never needed anywhere near that much money in the first place. (In contrast, some NGOs state their fundraising goals in advance and cap or redirect donations once they have exceeded those amounts.)

ARC was roundly blasted in the U.S. for its shambolic response to 2005’s Hurricane Katrina, with international observers warning that elements were so bad that they verged on criminal wrongdoing. Seven years later, despite an internal retooling effort, it failed again in 2012’s Superstorm Sandy and Hurricane Isaac. (The response was “worse than the storm,” one Red Cross driver told ProPublica during its jaw-dropping investigation.) Typically, the organization has had more success responding to small-scale disasters; it’s common to hear stories people tell of the blankets and compassion they got from Red Cross volunteers after house fires. But even there, they’ve been getting into trouble: ARC’s 2015 response to a string of northern California wildfires was so bad—showing up unequipped and unprepared, shutting down other volunteer operations, and then failing to provide promised food or shelter on its own—that locals shunned the organization to focus on their own relief efforts.

Worse than what we know is what we don’t. The ARC, which boasts annual revenues of more than $2.6 billion, is notoriously opaque when it comes to what it does with the money it raises for disasters. It has never produced a meaningful breakdown of its spending after the Haiti earthquake. If you look at RedCross.org right now, you’ll see a prominent link inviting you to “make a difference” by donating to its Harvey effort. But nowhere does it say what it will do with the money. A tiny video shows empty cots in a shelter.

When I emailed and called the organization’s full-time media relations department Sunday and Monday asking how much it had raised so far, how much it thought the group might need, and what Red Cross volunteers and staff were doing in the response to Hurricane Harvey, I eventually got back this reply: “At this point in our active disaster response, we are unable to answer your questions by your deadline. Thank you for understanding.” I followed up again. A few hours later, the organization sent a second note saying it was providing food, cots, blankets, and other support to 6,000 people in various shelters across the region—again with no information about the cost or money raised so far.

It isn’t just journalists who get the shaft. ARC’s leaders have misled Congress. In a scathing 2015 report, the federal Government Accountability Office noted that “no regular, independent evaluations are conducted of the impact or effectiveness of the Red Cross’s disaster services.”

As ProPublica’s Justin Elliott has reported, many of these issues are the result of a team of former AT&T executives taking over a complex organization—one that manages tasks as critical and disparate as blood-banking and providing resources to military families, while operating in a blurred, neither-fish-nor-fowl zone with some of the privileges of a government agency (such as free rent for its D.C. headquarters) but the moneymaking latitude and lack of oversight of a private corporation.

ARC and its defenders sometimes protest that there’s too much focus on them; that scores of other actors have also failed in their responses to the same disasters. In part, that’s just the other side of the double-edged sword that comes with having a higher profile than others and raising far more money than anyone else—for being, as McGovern likes to say, “a brand to die for.”

The hard reality is that we still don’t know what the needs in Houston are going to be or who will be best to respond to them.

But in another way, they are entirely right. There is too much focus on the ARC in disasters such as Harvey, in a way that goes beyond any one organization. The way our society handles disasters—first the calamity; then the outpouring of sympathy and donations; then the long, slow rebuild—is wrong. As humans have long known, it is easier, cheaper, and better to mitigate or prevent disasters from happening than to rescue victims and rebuild after them. We’ve known for centuries about the threat of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico. Experts have warned for years that the Texas coast needed to make serious investments to prepare for nigh-inevitable storms, including preparing mitigation specifically for intense, unprecedented floods worsened in part by climate change. It seems that some, including many of Houston’s hospitals, heeded those warnings and are benefiting from the preparation. Other sectors did not. At a systemic level, instead of taking those threats seriously, Texans elected a governor who distorts facts about climate change. Americans picked a president who—days before this disaster and moments before rushing to the defense of rampaging neo-Nazis—announced in front of his gilded elevator that he was scrapping federal construction standards that had required new projects to account for climate change’s effect on storms like Harvey.

Local news organizations in Texas are maintaining lists of organizations, both local and run by the Red Cross, where those affected by the storm can get help and those inclined can send donations. Experts and experience say that, if you are going to donate to anyone from outside the disaster zone, send cash, not stuff. Boxes full of food, clothes, or other stuff will clog up supply lines and as likely as not go unused.

Yet the hard reality is that we still don’t know what the needs in Houston and other parts of Texas or Louisiana are going to be or who will be best to respond to them. Millions of people are still in the middle of the storm, with the National Hurricane Center warning that some areas could get double the already awe-inducing amounts of rain they’ve already received. Survivors, in other words, haven’t even gotten past the emergency to take stock of the damage and really begin the difficult relief phase; if this was an earthquake, the ground would still be shaking.

It is difficult for rescuers to get in. There is nowhere for most people to go. While there are heroic efforts going on right now by locals and neighbors to save as many as they can from the floods—efforts that authorities should encourage and help coordinate—the hard, frustrating reality is that there is not very much an untrained outsider can do to help once a complex disaster has begun. And with, at a bare minimum, hundreds of billions of dollars in damage expected and future storms on the way, the costs in cleaning up this mess and getting people back into their old lives again are going to be astronomical, on the level that only wealthy and powerful governments, and the combined power of their citizenry, will be able to address.

Top Comment

The author says we should “stop debating the stop debating the best place to send $20” and instead fully commit to fixing everything damaged, prevent future disasters, and address climate change. No. Send the $20 now.  More…

486 CommentsJoin In

Some people get personally offended by talk like this. They are seeing pain, they are being generous, and they hope it might help—just like I did watching the pictures from Indonesia from my cubicle years ago. The people suffering in this storm deserve all of that and more. But what you learn when you really dive into these situations is that momentary intentions, no matter how kind, are not enough—not on this scale. Those past, ineffective, and opaque disaster responses, from Haiti to New Jersey to the Gulf Coast, have created a legacy of mistrust, not only of the Red Cross but of the entire humanitarian aid apparatus its iconic brand represents. We can’t afford to do that again.

If we really care about the people of Houston and the rest of the Gulf Coast, we have to commit fully to a combined, sustained, serious response to recover and rebuild—meaning lots of money, lots of attention to helping those areas adapt for the future, and lots of concern for the people who we know are most vulnerable. We all need to come together to prevent future disasters, whether the growing risk of a major Oklahoma earthquake, a Caribbean tsunami, and especially the many threats we face from climate change. The sooner we acknowledge and act on that and stop debating the best place to send $20, the better off all of us will be.

Kamala “Kriminal Harass” Harris Embezzles FaceBook Legal Counsel and Fundraiser! Extorts Parents!

MEDIA ADVISORY
October 20, 2016, Oakland, CA:
Contact
Martin Silverman

(510) 394-4701
nowtruth@nowtruth.org;

Kamala “Kriminal Harass” Harris Embezzled Child Support from kamala-harrisFaceBook Legal Counsel and Fundraiser! Extorts Parents, Targets and Threatens Father!
Superior Court Judges, District Attorney, Department of Child Support Services ALL involved in Admitted Fraud, Extortion Case!

The decades old conflict between Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim and Family with the Alameda County District Attorney (DA) and the Department of Child Support Service (DCSS) is among the most extensively told in the history of the American judiciary. The dispute concerns the admitted willful fraud and extortionate scheme that the District Attorney and DCSS extensively exercised to persecute the family that they are liable for.

al-Hakim had to file an action against Tom Orloff, the DA and ACDCSS because they failed and refused to enforce the courts own orders for the fair and proper application and accounting of payments al-Hakim made in trust to the DA in their fiduciary capacity for the minor al-Hakim child depriving al-Hakim and the minor child of over $2,000 of monies paid, then illegally charging al-Hakim with the crime of violating the child support statute for nonpayment. Full Story with Videos and Documents at http://tinyurl.com/ljk8av

Attorney General “Kriminal Harass” and the Office of The Attorney General of The State of California substituted in as attorney of record in this case for the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services allegedly “in the interest of justice”. What justice is there in the Attorney General defending, concealing and thereby further complicitly committing the admitted willful and intentional extrinsic fraud upon the court; prosecutorial misconduct; willful and malicious prosecution; misconduct; conflict of interest; obstruction of justice; denial of due process under the law; willful and intentional fabrication and authoring false evidence; misstating and mischaracterizing evidence; misrepresentation and concealment of material facts with knowledge of the truth with the intent to induce the court’s act or reliance; harassment; and intimidation on behalf of District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, former DA Tom Orloff, Maureen Lenahan, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, and accountant Mr. Lovelady and others unnamed in the DA’s office; various judges and Commissioner Oleon’s abuse of discretion, willful misconduct, conduct prejudicial, illegal ex-parte communications and bias that resulted in error.This was done to excuse and protect the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services from their ongoing conflict of interest in their alleging to represent the interest of Joette Hall, whom they had defrauded along with al-Hakim of the funds paid to the DCSS in trust for their minor child.
The Alameda County Department of Child Support Services was never representing the al-Hakim Hall family, they were defending and covering up their extrinsic fraud upon the state and the families. The Alameda County Department of Child Support Services wanted to conceal their attempted coercion of al-Hakim to pay the arrearage they created in his name. al-Hakim and his family had complained many times each year about the misapplication of the funds tendered to the Department of Child Support Services in trust for the al-Hakim Hall family.
Harris, now running for U. S. Senate from California, publicly said she wants “to make sure that we’re giving those children due process of law” echoing comments made a day earlier by Gov. Jerry Brown, a fellow Democrat. “These are children, and many of them have relatives that are in California and other parts of the United States who are working, contributing to the well-being of people in the United States,” Brown said. “So given the principle of family values and family reconciliation, I want to give utmost consideration to what is in the best interest of those children, not what is in the best interest of politicians who might want to exploit this particular topic.” Harris said she wants “to make sure that we’re giving those children due process of law”.
cdm5eyhueaacvpjNew York Times story named Harris one of four state attorneys general who launched investigations into complaints against Trump University and also accepted campaign contributions from the school’s namesake, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump then stopped the investigation.But as any good politician has done, she has actually been involved in stealing child support from Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim’s minor child with an outstanding order! She not only worked in the DA’s office during the time this embezzlement was happening but then represented the Department of Child Support Services and the DA’s office AGAINST al-Hakim. Now 25 years later, that minor child that Kriminal Harass embezelled is Bari al-Hakim-Williams.

bari-wobamaAbdul-Jalil al-Hakim’s daughter, Bari al-Hakim-Williams, honored for her fine achievements this bari-facebookyear, was at the White House where she was hosted by President Obama and Michelle Obama, is one of the Nations “40 Under 40” top lawyers by the National Bar Association, among others. She was featured in Black Enterprise Magazine, discussing her plight as a minority and woman of color in a major corporation, in a commanding leadership position over men, lawyers and engineers, and the Diversity Program she founded at FaceBook. Her title there is Legal Counsel, Global Infrastructure & Operations at Facebook where she governs everything that is purchased. She created the Diversity program and talks about it here.al-Hakim-Williams has hosted and attended multiple fundraisers for Harris, even held at her home, that was promoted on bari-harris-fundraiser
“Heyevent.com”.
Host included ROBERT L. HARRIS, ESQ., SHONDA SCOTT, DEMETRIUS SHELTON, ESQ., LALITA TADEMY, BARRY LAWSON WILLIAMS, JAIME A. WILLIAMS, HON. JOEL YOUNG
Shelton posted:
Fundraiser – Kamala Harris for CA Attorney General
Saturday, 14 November 2009, 15:00
 At the Home of Bari and Jaime Williams – Oakland, CA
Fundraiser – Kamala Harris for CA Attorney General
Friends,
Please join me at a fundraiser in suppoort of my friend and colleague
SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT ATTORNEY
&
CANDIDATE FOR CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL 2010 KAMALA D. HARRIS
Saturday, November 14, 2009 3:00 – 5:00 pm
AT THE HOME OF JAIME & BARI WILLIAMS OAKLAND, CA*
Hosted by –
ROBERT L. HARRIS, ESQ., SHONDA SCOTT, DEMETRIUS SHELTON, ESQ., LALITA TADEMY, BARI A. WILLIAMS, ESQ., BARRY LAWSON WILLIAMS, JAIME A. WILLIAMS, HON. JOEL YOUNG
Guest . . . . . . . . . $250
If you are unable to attend the event, but would like to support. You can donate online by visiting: http://kamalaharris.org/donate/event/534. Please let me know if you donate via the website so that I can track your contribiution.
Thanks in advance for your support!
DemetriusOddly enough Shelton is involved in the al-Hakim legal action against the City of Oakland in the Case of al-Hakim vs CSAA and Rescue Rooter, et. al. You can hear Demetruis Shelton, President of the National Bar Association and City Attorney employee’s Voicemail “Russo Received Trial Subpoenas!!!”
DShelton-CityOakSubp.mp3 (9044 KB)
http://www.box.net/shared/88g62hzaky
This is an over $30 million, 25 year; contentious action; with the largest case file in the history of Alameda County Superior Court, over 70 file boxes; over 100 motions and responses; plaintiff had over 300 trial exhibits; over 5,000 pages of exhibits; 3,000 pages of documents for trial rebuttal argument; 20 expert witnesses; 77 other witnesses; over 100 pages of jury instructions; numerous allegations of judicial misconduct, where EVERY judge and commissioner in this case has admitted error, committed perjury, recused themselves, or all three!
As a result, Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim, a very well known business manager, producer, and Muslim of native African-Native American descent from Oakland, California, filed a Federal Complaint with the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, of a hate crime of Islamophobia and Xenophobia committed against him by Judge David C. Lee during the Rescue Industries trial in Superior Court of Alameda County, California.Kamala D. Harris, Judge Pulido and Commissioner Olean, Nancy O’Malley and Matthew Brega caught in Fraud of a minor child at:
http://nowtruth.org/attorney-general-superior-court-judges-district-attorney-and-department-of-child-support-services-caught-in-fraud-of-minor-childal-Hakim will begin the task of unraveling the facts that former and current Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff and Nancy O’Malley, former and current Director of Alameda County Child Support Services Maureen Lenahan and Matthew Brega, former and current Attorney General of State of California Jerry Brown and Kamala Harris, their staff’s, agents and contractors committed Extrinsic Fraud Upon the Court, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Willful and Malicious Prosecution, Conflict of Interest, Obstruction of Justice, Denial of Due Process, Willful and Intentional Fabrication and Authoring False Evidence; Misrepresentation and Concealment of Material Facts.It will examine the role of former DA Tom Orloff, Nancy O’Malley, Kevin Dunleavy, Ann Deim, Towanda Lee, Michael O’Connor, Bob Conner, Bruce Brock, David Stein, Matthew Golde and others unnamed in the DA’s office; and DCSS office including but not limited to former Director Maureen K. Lenahan, Director Matthew Brega, Charlene Perry, Sue Eadie, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, accountant Mr. Lovelady, Mrs. Reese, Mrs. Remelton, Ms. Alder, Mrs. Carlilse, Mrs. Ricca Alcantara, Terry Simmons-Booker, B. Hoffmann, Mr. Williams and others unnamed in the DA’s and ACDCSS’ offices; various judges and Commissioner Glenn Oleon; Michelle Escerra, Tanisha Jones, others unnamed in the Superior Court’s Family Law Clerk’s officein these criminal acts.
Nancy O’Malley, former DA Tom Orloff, Ann Diem, Kevin Dunleavy, Bob Connor, Bruce Brock, Michael O’Connor, and Judge Pulido?
What is the relationship between former DCSS Director Maureen Lenahan, Matt Brega, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, accountant Mr. Lovelady, Ricca Alcantara, Ombudsman Mrs. Reese, Mrs. Remelton, Terry Simmons-Booker, others unnamed in the DCSS office; and Judge Pulido, Judge Bean, Judge Tara DeSautels, Commissioner Thomas Nixon, ?

al-Hakim has asked the court to remand this case to the Civil Court trial level to continue further trial proceedings consistent with the requested decision and order for former and current Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff and Nancy O’Malley, former and current Director of Alameda County Child Support Services Maureen Lenahan and Matthew Brega, former and current Attorney General of State of California Jerry Brown and Kamala Harris, their staff’s, agents and contractors face charges for committing Extrinsic Fraud Upon the Court, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Willful and Malicious Prosecution, Conflict of Interest, Obstruction of Justice, Denial of Due Process, Willful and Intentional Fabrication and Authoring False Evidence; Misrepresentation and Concealment of Material Facts, among others, as demanded.

This matter has been sumitted to Judges Winifred Smith Presiding Judge, Superior Court of California, C. Don Clay- Supervising Judge, Stephen Pulido- Presiding Judge Family Law, Judge The Hon. Melinda Haag- Director- No. District U. S. Attorney’s Office, The Hon. Claudia Wilken-Chief District Judge U. S. District Court- No. Division, Kamala D. Harris- Attorney General of California, Mr. Brega, Nancy O’Malley and County Supervisor Keith wherein they have ALL failed and refused to investigate the matter even though it was requested by the U. S. Department of Justice.

The following is an actual copy of the letter that was faxed, hand delivered, personally served, and filed in the Alameda County Superior Courts in response to the continued persecution and extortionate scheme of the al-Hakim Family by the Alameda County Superior Court, District Attorney and Department of Child Support Services or more appropriately entitled the “Department of Child Support Fraud Services”.
The DA’s goon, Bob “BULL” Conner is coincidently the chief investigator for the DA in the Oscar Grant case, yet was listed as the chief witness for the DEFENSE in that case. HHhhmmmmm? The main investigator and witness for the prosecution is the main witness for the DEFENSE???!!!
Further, the County judge in the Oscar Grant case, Judge Don Clay whom is very familiar with Conner, also failed and refused to pursue a formal complaint by Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim against “Bull” Connor for his armed accosting al-Hakim, falsely arresting/detaining him in a room, threatening al-Hakim, forcing from the Courthouse, and telling al-Hakim “don’t ever come back!”. A racist example no less violent then the original “Bull Connor” from Alabama! It must be his daddy!
These actions are unconscionable!
Read and distribute widely!!!

Martin

http://nowtruth.org/occupiers-redeem-kings-dream-while-keith-carson-and-his-poverty-pimps-are-killers-of-kings-dream-sell-it-out/

FAX MEMO
ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
7633 SUNKIST DRIVE, OAKLAND, CA 94605-3024
PH (510) 394-4501

TO: The Honorable Winnifred Smith The Honorable C. Don Clay
Presiding Judge Supervising Judge
Superior Court of California Superior Court of California
County of Alameda County of Alameda
1225 Fallon St., Dept #1 1225 Fallon St., Dept #6
Oakland, CA 94612 Oakland, CA 94612
Fax No.: 510 891-6276 Fax No.: 510 891-6276

TO: The Honorable Sandra Bean The Honorable Stephen Pulido
Alameda Family Law Court Presiding Judge Family Law Court
Superior Court of California Superior Court of California
County of Alameda County of Alameda
2233 Shoreline Drive 24405 Amador Street
Alameda, CA 94501 Hayward, CA 94544
Fax No.: 510 263-4309 Fax No.: 510 690-2824

The Honorable Elizabeth Hendrickson
Dept. 103 Traffic
WILEY W. MANUEL COURTHOUSE
661 Washington Street
Oakland, CA 94607
Fax No.: 510 627-4906

bcc:
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: January 30, 2014
NO PAGES: 14
RE: Stipulation in Superior Court Case #511339-2; The People vs Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim, Docket # WWM00000560171and reassign this matter as per then Judicial Administration Rule 6.603 (b) (1) (D) now Rule 10.603 (c) (1) (D); requesting security after being identified and targeted by the District Attorney and Sheriff’s Deputy.

Dear Judges Smith, Clay, Pulido Bean and Commissioner Hendrickson,

This three decades old continuing story of the conflict between the al-Hakim Family with the Alameda County District Attorney (DA) and the Department of Child Support Service (DCSS) must be among the most extensively told in the history of the American judiciary. This and other courts have previously described in detail the parties’ underlying dispute, which concerns the admitted willful fraud and extortionate scheme that the District Attorney and DCSS extensively exercised to persecute the family that they are liable for.
In the case of Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim v. CSAA, Alameda County Case No. 811337-3 an over $25 million,12 year; contentious legal action; that has the largest case file in the history of Alameda County Superior Court, with over 60 file boxes of pleadings; over 120 motions and responses; plaintiff had over 300 trail exhibits; over 5,000 pages of exhibits; 3,000 pages of documents for trial rebuttal argument; 20 expert witnesses; 77 other witnesses; over 100 pages of jury instructions; with DQ’s filed against EVERY Judge for numerous charges from judicial misconduct to corruption, where EVERY judge in this case has admitted error, committed perjury, recused themselves, or all three!
Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff’s Extrinsic Fraud Upon the Court, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Willful and Malicious Prosecution, Conflict of Interest, Obstruction of Justice, Denial of Due Process, Willful and Intentional Fabrication and Authoring False Evidence; Misrepresentation and Concealment of Material Facts
al-Hakim had to file an action against Tom Orloff and the Alameda County District Attorney’s (DA) and the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services (ACDCSS) because for over 25 years they repeatedly failed and refused to enforce the courts own orders for the fair and proper application and accounting of payments al-Hakim made in trust to the DA in their fiduciary capacity for the minor al-Hakim child depriving al-Hakim and the minor child of over $2,000 of monies paid, thus creating a “mythical” arrearage and open account in al-Hakim’s name and on his behalf owed to the minor child, then illegally charging al-Hakim with the crime of violating the child support statute for nonpayment, reporting the alleged violation to the State of California for Collection and the State Department of Motor Vehicles for suspension of his driving privilege for nonpayment and illegally tossing al-Hakim into “debtors prison”, suspending his drivers license, revoking his passport, and ruining his credit. ACDCSS actions and claimed “right” to perform in this manner are not contained in any State or Federal statute, regulation, or other legislative act and therefore, do not have the force of law and renders it constitutionally infirm and no court officer can merely “grant” a ruling in their favor to cover getting caught having done so. Full Story with Videos and Documents at http://tinyurl.com/ljk8av
Attorney General of The State of California Substituted In for DA Tom Orloff
On January 22, 2008 Attorney General Jerry Brown and the Office of The Attorney General of The State of California substituted in as attorney of record in this case for the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services allegedly “in the interest of justice”. What justice is there in the Attorney General defending, concealing and thereby further complicitly committing the admitted willful and intentional extrinsic fraud upon the court; prosecutorial misconduct; willful and malicious prosecution; misconduct; conflict of interest; obstruction of justice; denial of due process under the law; willful and intentional fabrication and authoring false evidence; misstating and mischaracterizing evidence; misrepresentation and concealment of material facts with knowledge of the truth with the intent to induce the court’s act or reliance; harassment; and intimidation on behalf of District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, former DA Tom Orloff, Maureen Lenahan, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, and accountant Mr. Lovelady and others unnamed in the DA’s office; various judges and Commissioner Oleon’s abuse of discretion, willful misconduct, conduct prejudicial, illegal ex-parte communications and bias that resulted in error.
This was done to excuse and protect the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services from their ongoing conflict of interest in their alleging to represent the interest of Joette Hall, whom they had defrauded along with al-Hakim of the funds paid to the DCSS in trust for their minor child.
The Alameda County Department of Child Support Services was never representing the al-Hakim Hall family, they were defending and covering up their extrinsic fraud upon the state and the families. The Alameda County Department of Child Support Services wanted to conceal their attempted coercion of al-Hakim to pay the arrearage they created in his name.
al-Hakim and his family had complained many times each year about the misapplication of the funds tendered to the Department of Child Support Services in trust for the al-Hakim Hall family.
For nearly three decades the District Attorney and DCSS has launched criminal legal proceedings that can aptly characterized as “unique in the annals of American judicial history.” Through these proceedings – which have resulted in numerous illegal orders and opinions from the courts, the District Attorney and DCSS gained access to an extraordinary quantity of material, including all of al-Hakim’s litigation files in totally unrelated cases that have absolutely NO value in this case to further their litigation, legislative, and political strategies to compel their enforcement strategy, extortionate scheme to force him to pay their fraudulent arrears including enforcement in multiple jurisdictions by placing illegal and unwarranted holds on his drivers license with the California Department of Motor Vehicles with the intent of al-Hakim being arrested and harmed physically and financially; placing illegal and unwarranted holds on his passport with the State Department; and these efforts to use judgment enforcement for settlement leverage to undertake in the event they don’t prevail before the courts. These proceeding efforts are ongoing.
The District Attorney and DCSS presented its admitted evidence of fraud and bribery to the trial court, convincing it to rule against the family’s court ordered compliant payments complete with DCSS’s own receipts for same– instead using its unfettered, presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of admitted fraud and bribery, accounting report– as the basis for the trial court’s final decision. On the basis of these and other materials, the ruling and judgment was fundamentally obtained and tainted by fraud. The heart of the alleged fraud is two-fold.
First, the District Attorney and DCSS and their judicial team of covert illicit participants– the putative accounting expert that created and complied the entire presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of admitted fraud and bribery, the accounting report used as the sole basis for the judgment by Commissioner Glenn Oleon despite the fact he knew it was the product of fraud.
Second, the District Attorney and DCSS wresting control of the judicial process by exercising a clearly illegal conflict of interest in misrepresenting the family, conducting a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence before admitting the conflict AFTER the trial was completed, exerting undue influence in the process, by conspiring with the court Commissioner Oleon; applying political pressure in order to obtain a judgment based on political advantage rather than the rule of law. Upon the substitution of attorneys, then California Attorney General Jerry Brown, responsible for carrying out investigation of Alameda County Superior Court and State Appeals Court judges, District Attorney Tom Orloff, Oakland City Attorney and various corporate defendants is himself defending some of the criminals and covering up the very same corruption he is supposed to be investigating and prosecuting! Full Story with Videos and Documents at http://tinyurl.com/ljk8av
Nevertheless, as noted above, the court returned a judgment against the family, rejecting the decades of presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of admitted fraud and bribery in the proceedings; family’s claims of civil conspiracy; conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice; obstruction of justice; conspiracy to commit extrinsic fraud; extrinsic fraud; fraud upon the court and The People of the State of California; conspiracy to commit extortion; extortion; conspiracy to commit bribery; bribery; conspiracy to commit embezzlement; embezzlement; conspiracy to commit intimidation; intimidation; conspiracy to commit harassment; harassment; conspiracy to commit blackmail; blackmail; conspiracy to misappropriate funds; misappropriation of funds; conspiracy to violate fiduciary trust; violation of fiduciary trust; conspiracy to co-mingle funds; co-mingling of funds; conspiracy to commit deception; deception; conspiracy to commit concealment; concealment; conspiracy to commit misrepresentation; misrepresentation; conspiracy to commit diversion of funds; diversion of funds; conspiracy to create and falsify documents as evidence; creating and falsifying documents as evidence; conspiracy to procure false testimony; procuring false testimony; witness tampering; conspiracy to violate racketeering laws; violate racketeering laws; conspiracy to commit tortious interference with contract; tortious interference with contract; conspiracy to commit unjust enrichment; unjust enrichment; conspiracy to commit conflict of interest; conflict of interest; admitting conflict of interest AFTER the trial was completed; conspiracy to commit misrepresentation; misrepresentation; conspiracy to intentionally inflict maximum pain, suffering, emotional distress; the intentional infliction of maximum pain, suffering, emotional distress; conspiracy to commit ; slander; conspiracy to conduct a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence; conducting a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence; conspiracy to exert undue influence in the judicial process; exerting undue influence in the judicial process; civil conspiracy with court Commissioner Oleon; conspiracy to directly or indirectly funding, commencing, prosecuting, advancing in any way, or receiving benefit from any action or proceeding; directly or indirectly funding, commencing, prosecuting, advancing in any way, or receiving benefit from any action or proceeding; conspiracy to litigate for recognition or enforcement of an illegal judgment previously rendered in the court; litigating for recognition or enforcement of an illegal judgment previously rendered in the court; among others.
I last contacted you all above with the exception of Commissioner Hendrickson on January 9, 2014 after I went to the Alameda Family Law Court to file a letter to the Judges dated January 7, 2014 and was prevented from doing so by a County Sheriff’s Deputy who informs me that I must go to Judge Pulido’s courtroom to file the letter and that he would be handling this matter in Probate Court. Both letters had already been faxed, served, or both on all the parties above except the January 7, 2014 one to Judge Smith and this is the first to Commissioner Hendrickson. The family and I have had no response to ANY of the five previous letters to the court to clarify the pending matters in this case totally comprised of the District Attorney (DA) and Department of Child Support Service (DCSS) presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of their admitted fraud in the proceedings that they themselves alone developed. The court must now address that issue with the family in open court with these admission and the product of fraud upon the court, The People of the State of California and the family. The District Attorney and DCSS’ larcenous moral turpitude, obstruction of justice and misrepresentation is all that remains of this case.
So again, now we need to know if in fact Judge Pulido is handing this matter, and if so, in what capacity and jurisdiction. Is he acting as the Family Law Presiding Court Judge or as the Judge in Probate Court? Is this a Family Law matter addressing the stipulation, or is this a Probate matter?
We need to know what Civil Code section specifically requires that a Stipulation by the parties without attorneys MUST be notarized? Who rejected the Stipulation and when?
The family has accounts that confirm that the Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS and other representatives engaged in repeated, substantive ex-parte meetings and communications with the judicial officials presiding over litigation involving the family, including meetings and communications relating to the case and stipulation with court administration personnel that has very limited knowledge of civil law rules, substantively and especially procedurally including the selection of Judge Pulido to preside over this case in Probate. Such evidence would further establish the Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS ex-parte contacts are improper under law and would also further prove the Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS were attempting to exert undue influence over the court. This evidence indicates that the Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS meetings were inappropriate and secret.
The family believes the Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS nefarious and inappropriate abandonment of the family’s right to settle the case and have the courts to acknowledge the stipulation without any civil law citations and no evidence of such to support the alleged ruling by a judge is an untenable to prevent efforts to move the case towards resolution. The family has every right, and very good reason, to seek an end to the individual persecution that they believed the Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS has been using as a way to extort the family, drag out the case and bleed their resources. We are requesting that the court immediately sign the order for the stipulation and noting that we realize that it should have already been ordered. By requesting that it be ordered, we are simply exercising our procedural right to that evidence.
The family believes that this maneuver by the Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS attempted to alter the ordinary course of the trial and inject more delay into already protracted proceedings.
Now we have the pending matter of The People vs Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim, Docket # WWM00000560171, Citation # 5330190 presently assigned to Dept. 103 the Traffic court for trial on February 10, 2014 at 2:00 PM.
With this matter involving the alleged crime of driving with a suspended license, it would be an impossible burden on the court to hear the matter in Dept. 103 and further would be an unavoidable conflict nor would the family EVER agree for the matter to be heard by a commissioner after the most recent travesty of justice by yet another one. It was unconscionable that Commissioner Oleon would EVER entertain the presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of the District Attorney and DCSS admitted fraud much less use it SOLEY as the basis for an illegal judgment and think he could get away with it! Amazing!
In furtherance of their obstruction of justice and attempted extortion of the family, the District Attorney and DCSS has failed and refused to submit any of the releases of child support holds my drivers license to the California State Department of Motor Vehicles for nearly ten years! This despite court orders to do so and the account being current. Dept. 103 does not provide the time to plead, examine and hear this matter and we do not want to provide the same excuse that Oleon used of a “lack of time” to hear the matter, “it should be in another courtroom”. If he were truly concerned about a lack time to hear the case and JUSTICE, he NEVER would have heard the only evidence presented by the District Attorney and DCSS, that of their admitted fraud upon the court.
For these and the reasons presented herein, we request that this matter be re-assigned to another court room that has the necessary facilities of time and court staff, including a reporter and security. I have been threatened by both judges and the District Attorney staff and had requested security from both since 1989. So as Judge Northridge did in November 8, 2006, I am asking this court to reassign this matter as per then Judicial Administration Rule 6.603 (b) (1) (D) now Rule 10.603 (c) (1) (D).
However, it should be noted the family will contest jurisdiction because the testimony of various parties was merely legal theory orchestrated by the District Attorney and DCSS to willfully deceive the court, to allow them to pretend that the Family was represented by the District Attorney and DCSS and whose work was manipulated by the District Attorney and DCSS. Since this is admitted fraudulent evidence and testimony there is no need to impeach these assertions about the District Attorney and DCSS’ conduct. Nothing else has any bearing on this case. This was done in context for the District Attorney and DCSS’ furtherance of their fraud upon the court, the People of California and the family with the intent to deceive and their continued obstruction of justice scheme supported by the court itself to enhance their overall extortion scheme to make al-Hakim pay for their fraud and bribery- not a purported justification or belief in a larger good. This judgment is NOT the legitimate product of an impartial court.
Thus, throughout these extraordinary trials, the most important facts have gone uncontested:
the family has made it abundantly clear and by their actions and evidence that the District Attorney and DCSS violated a court order, perpetrated fraud upon the Court, defrauded the People of the State of California and the al-Hakim family, violated their fiduciary trust, engage in civil conspiracy, bribery, paid a testifying witness for admitted fraudulent evidence and testimony, obstructed justice and has pursued this litigation by a variety of unethical, corrupt, and illegal means, including exercising a clearly illegal conflict of interest in misrepresenting the family, conducting a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence before admitting the conflict, exerting undue influence in the process, by conspiring with the court Commissioner Oleon, its designated accounting expert presenting admitted fraudulent evidence, and by controlling the subsequent production of that evidence over the objection of the family allegedly as a neutral damages assessment.
Certainly, there is no reason to deem a single judge in the Superior Court of Alameda County even capable of deciding whether norms of civil procedure or legal ethics have been or can be followed in this case. Yet that is exactly what needs to be done here as the family has asked this Court to do just that. Indeed, it has gone further, putting the’s entire County government, the Superior Court, the District Attorney and DCSS on trial. A courtroom spectacle more anathema to justice and civil rights is hard to imagine.
All of this is bad enough. But it is made worse by the central irony hanging over this case: The reason the case is toxic is because the District Attorney and DCSS alleged “representing” the family, their creation and use of the presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of admitted fraud and bribery in the proceedings, the substantive merit of their paid testifying witness for admitted fraudulent evidence and testimony on that subject, the judgment as the illegitimate product of an partial court, conducting a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence before admitting the conflict. For nearly a quarter century, the District Attorney and DCSS showered praise on itself and the judiciary, extolling its impartiality and independence in an effort to persuade this Court to award litigation in it’s favor. That effort succeeded. The Court concluded the case in their favor every time with dubious and illegal rulings that contravened procedural law despite the evidence and testimony as it had “everything to do with extorting money from al-Hakim and persecuting the family and nothing to do with the truth, facts or evidence.
There are multiple legal defects that independently require that this case be dismissed but I will discuss this one:
First, there can no longer be any question that this Court lacks jurisdiction. No court has jurisdiction unless the plaintiff has standing, the courts and RICO imposes rigorous standing limits. The District Attorney and DCSS alleged “representing” the family, their creation and use of the presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of admitted fraud and bribery in the proceedings, the substantive merit of their paid testifying witness for admitted fraudulent evidence and testimony on that subject, the judgment as the illegitimate product of an partial court, conducting a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence before admitting the conflict is yet another admission of willful fraud and bribery and lack of standing. Intent on depriving the family of their constitutional right to a fair trial- and apparently lacking confidence in its own actions and evidence- dropped all of its claims of representation of the family upon the filing of appeal of trial. The California State Attorney General substituted in for The People of the State of California and the family. That also was a conflict as the family had filed a complaint with the U. S. Department of Justice that was referred to and filed with the California State Attorney General regarding these and other activities of the Superior Court, the District Attorney, DCSS, the Oakland City Attorney, other governmental and political officials, attorneys and their contractors, agents and employees. Though the conflict is clear, the investigation has not yet been done nor enforced, so its injury is still pending, not concrete nor non-speculative, and the evidence has gone uncontested.
The Superior Court, District Attorney and DCSS case fares no better on the facts. Given the mountain of discovery at its disposal, one would expect them to present a coherent narrative, backed by evidence. It hasn’t, it won’t and it can’t. Even on its own terms, this theory was implausible: how could anyone in the family possibly cause the District Attorney and DCSS to commit this willful fraud to the family’s own detriment and be responsible for it?
In my last letter to the courts, I said I would address several open concerns as well as the issue of being identified by the Sheriff’s Deputy and Court Administration without having announced my name and being pulled aside by the Sheriff Deputy in the next communication with the court. I will now do so.
We have been informed and thereon believe that several unknown operatives made illegal ex-parte contact with the Superior Court, the District Attorney, DCSS and County Sheriff’s Department regarding this case. al-Hakim has previously been asked by the the District Attorney to place himself in harms way that could have easily resulted in his death, and by design, it would have rid the Superior Court and the District Attorney of the one indispensable factor in proving the guilt of a rampant Police Department theft ring that the chief investigator, Bob Connor wanted to DISPROVE!
He first investigated al-Hakim, the victim, to compile/create enough evidence to force al-Hakim to give up the investigation/prosecution of the known guilty cops. I complained about his tactics and felt he wasn’t doing the job of investigating the burglars but the victim in an effort to let them off. Then he began to try to compile/create enough evidence to exonerate the known guilty cops. I again complained about his tactics and felt he wasn’t doing the job of investigating the burglars but trying to create a means to let them off. Realizing that he could not do so, he began to try to compile/create enough evidence to exonerate others involved in the same crimes, over 30 officers, and restrict the prosecution to the two known guilty cops. Upon having compiled enough evidence to convict the two known guilty cops, he began to try to negotiate with me how the case would be tried to the exclusion of others involved unless I was able to personally identify the guilty cops in the course of the burglary. He stated that he had knowledge that they were going to strike again and proposed that I pretend to leave the store, lock it up, yet wait inside for the burglary to occur and step out to identify the burglars. I asked if he had this knowledge, why wouldn’t they just “stake out the building and capture them when they set off the bomb on the windows and entered the store?”. He couldn’t answer with any logic other than to say he needed an eye witness. I rejected this fool hearty request to put my life in the line of fire to be shot by the same cop who set off the bomb to commit the burglary and then kills the the alleged perpetrator (me) whom he caught in the building while responding to the burglary-in-progress call he himself had made. Perfectly stupid!!! I complained about his tactics and felt he wasn’t doing the job of investigating the burglars but trying to eliminate the victim in an effort to let them off. I made it clear that I had no intention to talk to him again. He lastly came to the store to inform me that they had secured enough evidence and information to serve a search warrant and file a criminal complaint, that I should not speak to anyone, including the media excluding Tribune reporter Harry Harris. He further stated that I should know that half the police force thought I was a hero and the other half thought I was a “problem” and I should watch by back. My family, friends and I have lived with that fear since then. It was exacerbated when one night I came home from the store and laid down when shortly I heard a loud noise and saw bright lights hovering over the roof of my home. Since the home has skylights I could see a helicopter hovering over the home and shining a light around my home. I got a phone call from the Oakland Police Department asking me to identify myself, what was going on in the home, who was there, etc. I asked why was there a helicopter over my home and was told there was a report of a “burglary in progress” at my home. I told the person on the phone that there was no such thing happening and that this was perpetrated by some elements of the Police Department that wanted me out the way. They called off the report and I later went outside to find my house surrounded by police and one makes the remark “ you got away this time!”. Life threatening scary, but forces you to resolve NEVER to be intimidated by REAL PIGS! No decent, honorable human being would EVER initiate such actions because a person stood up to crime! Is that not what they are hired to do or are they above the law? This same investigator Bob Connor.
In letters to Judge Clay and others, I have expressed my fear for my safety after being verbally accosted; physically threatened; attempted to be baited, provoked and intimidated into a physical altercation; threatened with arrest, disallowed from going to Judge Leo Dorado’s courtroom; forcibly removed and escorted from the courthouse building; and ordered not to return by District Attorney Officer Bob Connor on November 22, 2010 at approximately 3:45 p.m I had litigation that was to be filed in November 2010 the day of my being forcibly removed from the court house and threatened with arrest if I returned by District Attorney henchman Bob Connor whom is very well known to me. The District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s office has compromised these suits and this issue also must be corrected ASAP. District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s abridging these inalienable, sacred rights are not a joke to African-Americans.
This apparently was on order from Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley and assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavy as I sat alone in the lobby of the D. A.’s office for 30 minutes waiting to speak to Dunleavy on an update on the formal 200 page Corruption, Extrinsic Fraud, Criminal Misconduct, Ethics and “Whistle-Blower” Complaint complete with audio CD filed and served on their office on June 7, 2010 stemming from criminal actions committed by John Russo and the City Attorney’s office resulting from the sewer main collapse alongside my home in 1991. After requesting a response to Formal Complaint Served and Filed June 7, 2010 and several conversations with the Alameda County District Attorney office, District Attorney Nancy O’Malley assigned the case to Assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavy. After his review and several more conversations with me, Dunleavy decided to assign the case for investigation after he had been assigned this case in July 2010 when he told me months before that he had assigned it to another investigator.
The D. A.’s lobby reception area is merely a very small space between the elevators and the bullet proof glass doors and windows that separate the public from the D. A. There are only a few chairs that line one side of the space and is not meant to accommodate more than 4-8 people. During the 30 minutes that I waited in the lobby, only 3 people from the general public came onto the floor from the elevators, yet 10-12 came to and from the D. A.’s office. Clearly I represented no threat to anyone, and I could have been assisted without any concern nor fear on anyone’s behalf. I’m sure that the lobby area is equipped with surveillance cameras and would verify my account of this incident.
After the encounter with Bob Connor and my ouster from the Courthouse that was ordered by Dunleavey, I spoke with District Attorney Matt Golde and Superior Court Judge Leo Dorado regarding my treatment and called O’Malley to voice my extreme concern wherein I received a return call from Dunleavy. Dunleavey expressed his concern for the fact that I knew Golde and Dorado, but not as if it would have made a difference in their decision or actions in having me threatened and removed from the courthouse. He laughed as he recanted stories about them playing on a basketball team together, never once exhibiting any remorse for his or O’Malleys’ actions. The recorded conversation with Dunleavy regarding the encounter with Connor and the investigation can be listened to and/or downloaded at: http://www.box.net/shared/x46rvjorhj.
We discussed Dunleavy’s second call to me stating the he would speak with the Department of Child Support Services attorney Valgeria Harvey that had to admit in court several times that they and the D. A.’s office had committed fraud, embezzlement and theft against me and my family. When I refused to pay for the D. A.’s fraud, they attempted to extort the money from me by suspending my drivers license and revoking my passport! You can listen to D. A. Kevin Dunleavy voicemail as he tells me he is going to talk with V. Harvey of CSS http://www.box.net/shared/ma0fyvzkdc.
At the conclusion and throughout these conversations, I had been discussing this matter with Rodney Brooks, the Chief of Staff for Supervisor Keith Carson who said that he would talk with Nancy O’Malley and get back to me.
Again on February 23, 2011, I spoke with Rodney for 25 minutes wherein he said that he had discussed the case with Assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavey, the same DA that had me forcibly removed from the Courthouse without notice, cause or legal grounds.
Rodney informed me that Dunleavey admitted he had me removed from the Courthouse without notice, cause or legal grounds and gave no reason nor legal grounds for doing so. Rodney further expressed through his “teeth clenched disdain” that the D.A. had concluded an investigation of the cases, found no wrong doing, and had sent me a letter of their findings and decision. I informed Rodney that Mike O’Connor, Senior Deputy District Attorney, had left me a voice mail message stating that, but in fact I have never received anything from them at all and asked him for a copy of this investigation report, and if he had read it. You can listen to D. A. Mike O’Connor voice mail stating he has ended the investigation at: http://www.box.net/shared/3oampngtby.
Rodney said that he had not seen the report and did not have a copy. I asked Rodney if he trusted the person whom ordered me removed from the courthouse to conduct a fair and impartial investigation of his employer, boss, co-workers, department, friends, allies and himself- he couldn’t answer, but he didn’t need to. I reiterated my request for a copy of the alleged “investigation report” from the D. A.’s office and that this matter be referred to the Justice Department and the Alameda County Grand Jury for investigation. Throughout the entire conversation Rodney was clearly discourteous to the point he was aggressively attempting to provoke a verbal response from me such that he could abruptly end the conversation. I merely acknowledged his attitude and stayed the course to ascertain that he would respond to my requests in writing and provide a copy of the alleged “investigation report” from the D. A.’s office. Needless to say I have received nothing from Rodney, and after his actions for the last year, it is not unexpected.
It is unfathomable that such a thing could happen right in your lobby and visitors reception area in today’s highly charged racial, political, and law enforcement versus community interactive environment, especially in Oakland and Alameda County where deadly force seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Given the history of the D. A.’s office, and in your short tenure, I should have expected it!
To allow the D. A.’s office to handle me and my complaint in such a Gestapo fashion and to use Judge Leo Dorado as a ruse is unacceptable, needs to be investigated, the responsible parties held accountable and punished.
Clearly something must be done as I have waited for Judge Clay and everyone notified to get back to me to move this process forward. There is no circumstance or law that can justify this use of force, intimidation, and threat of imprisonment under the guise and color of law! The family will not allow this continuing injustice to go on unnoticed and want to know what time is best for Judge Clay to meet as soon as possible!
The critically serious, incriminating, willful admissions in the conversations and interactions of Rodney Brooks and yourself Judge Clay with D. A.’s Connor, Dunleavey and O’Malley has made everyone witnesses to these actions of the D. A. and any non-action on the prosecution of these crimes will entrap YOU ALL in complicity in the commission of these crimes, in it’s corruption, conspiracy, fraud, obstruction of justice, false imprisonment, aiding and abetting the crimes mentioned, the attempted cover up of these crimes, and willful blindness, among others. It is settled law that the cover up of a crime is itself greater than the crimes themselves! Those stakes are raised exponentially when it concerns corruption on behalf of Judges, elected public officials, law enforcement and legal servants whom are embodied with protecting the public trust.
In May 2008 Alameda County Superior Court Judge Jon Tigar attempted to provoke plaintiff Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim with comments made during a side bar at the recent testimony on behalf of plaintiff by fellow Judge Leo Dorado in al-Hakim’s bad faith insurance case.
As a result of this and Tigar’s continuing misconduct, al-Hakim took the extraordinary measure of filing another complaint with Victoria Henley and the Judicial Council, Alameda County Superior Court Presiding Judge Yolanda Northridge and former Presiding Judge George Hernandez demanding that all side bars be recorded for his own security.
You can view, listen to, and/or download the following related documents or audio files:
Judge Dorado Responds to D. A.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/4ai0vr2s5j

City Administrator Dan Lindhiem Respond Russo Formal Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/yfyvhaug0l

City Administrator Dan Lindhiem Post Russo Complaint Meeting.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/6gj1ae9pa4

D. A. O’Malley Responds to Russo Formal Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/pdquncg8x6

County Presiding Judge Rolfenson Responds to Russo Formal Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/n8xxh4a93e

County Presiding Judge Rolfenson Discards Formal Complaint- Maggie Takeda Voice mail
http://www.box.net/shared/g10s3kzxn7

County Presiding Judge Rolfenson Receives Formal Complaint Maggie Takeda email
http://www.box.net/shared/2fqsl69z79

City Auditor Courtney Ruby Responds to Russo Formal Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/pdi4kxel16

City Auditor Courtney Ruby’s Second Respond Russo Formal Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/5a5ndkbmrb

al-Hakim’s Notice to Russo of Action.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/lnvn6kn92k

Russo Responds to Formal Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/dz72had24u

District Attorney Investigates City Attorneys John Russo, Jayne Williams, Meyers Nave Corruption Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/sjgi7ynhgh

Oakland City Administrator to Meet al-Hakim on Fate of City Attorneys John Russo, Jayne Williams, Meyers Nave Corruption Complaint.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/kuf0d18b7i

al-Hakim’s Second Notice to Russo of Action.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/9gn72snasl

al-Hakim’s ROAR Complaint Against Russo.pdf
http://www.box.net/shared/4424e7822p

D. A. Kevin Dunleavy Removed al-Hakim from Davidson Courthouse Building VM
http://www.box.net/shared/x46rvjorhj

D. A. Mike O’Connor Ends Investigation VM
http://www.box.net/shared/3oampngtby

D. A. Kevin Dunleavy Tells al-Hakim he to Talk with V. Harvey VM
http://www.box.net/shared/ma0fyvzkdc

We presented the Stipulation to the Court as we expect and appreciate the signing where indicated, for we all want this matter resolved immediately. We hand delivered the original and two copies to the Court for endorsement and filing and was to provide an endorsed filed copy to the Director of the Department of Child Support Services afterwards. We all look forward to resolving this matter as soon as possible.
I can be reached at (510) 394-4501 if you have any questions. Thanks’ for taking the time to address these issues and endorse and return this Stipulation.

Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil
Defendant

***

Forming a Legal Coalition for Victory
Suit vs. Alameda County District Attorney (DA), California Attorney General (AG) and the Alameda County Department of Child Support Service (DCSS)

This case is about, a civil and criminal judicial, governmental, and law enforcement fraud that goes back to the Department Of Justice- U. S. Attorney General and NSA. The government can not defend this admitted fraud, embezzlement, breach of fiduciary, extortion (recorded conversation and all documents can be listen to and/or downloaded below) and obstruction of justice in a MAJOR civil suit!

The nearly three decades old continuing story of the conflict between Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim and his Family with the Alameda County District Attorney (DA), the California Attorney General (AG) and the Alameda County Department of Child Support Service (DCSS) must be among the most extensively told in the history of the American judiciary. The related child support matter was being heard by Judge Stephen Pulido. Current Presiding Court Judge Winifred Smith has previously recused, as has former Presiding Judge Yolanda Northridge, Judge Sue Alexander, Commissioner Taylor Culver is conflicted, Commissioner Glenn Oleon has committed crimes that are the basis for this action and Supervising Judge C. Don Clay has been involved in this matter and exhibited highly questionable judgment by not pursuing a complaint against the investigator Bob Connor and the District Attorney’s office. We now have concerns about the impartiality of Judge Pulido with this case allegedly being assigned to him with the obvious exparte communications that have been had between him, court administration, the DA and DCSS. Pulido ducked out of the case after he incriminated himself, Commissioner Hendricks recused herself and even though she was TOTALLY conflicted by having worked in the D. A.’s office and was supervised by the mastermind of the fraud Sue Eadie, Commissioner Boydine Hall REFUSED to recuse herself and ruled in favor of her former supervisor! Hall, who first refused to answer if she worked for the D. A.’s office, then denied that she, later admitted that she had worked for the D. A.’s office. Hall had a 30 year career in the D. A.’s office, worked with ALL the individuals on this case that committed the admitted fraud, and Eadie was her supervisor! Just as soon as Hall admitted she worked for the DA, she denied it again when confronted with the fact that she was participating in this ongoing fraud and obstructing justice! In the related al-Hakim vs Rescue and CSAA et., al. there are numerous instances of judicial misconduct, where EVERY judge and commissioner in this case has admitted error, committed perjury, recused themselves, or all three!

In pursuing the matter with the leads that we have developed entraps those mentioned above and others that tried to investigate us for pushing back against the persecution and terrorizing that colluded with the real criminals that perpetrated these continuing crimes in their attempts to entrap us in crime. When there was no crime that we could be entrapped in, they created the crimes themselves and simply chose to prosecute on that basis. How does one answer to the question of “how can the District Attorney admit to committing a crime of fraud, embezzlement and obstruction of justice of a minor child and prosecute the father for it?”. How can ALL the State and Federal law enforcement agencies be on notice of the crime and prosecution, have received formal complaints of the crime and prosecution, be directed to investigate and prosecute the fraud and prosecution and do NOTHING but cover up the crime and prosecution?

We are seeking purposeful organizations that might be interested in forming a coalition for a MAJOR VICTORY that would inspire Muslims to stand up against the national criminal judicial, governmental, and law enforcement persecution and terror being inflicted upon innocent citizens everywhere! At the very least I would expect you ALL to support that effort. The government can not fight this admitted fraud and embezzlement in a civil suit! Since the facts and testimony is already admitted and developed over years, there’s little risk or costs involved and a GREAT REWARD/RETURN!! WE respect and recognize the boundaries that each of you have set for yourselves and if you would prefer not to get engaged in the task we ask that share this cause widely and refer it to others.

With that in mind, we would like to propose just that. Forming a Legal Coalition for Victory and would like references to organizations that want to participate in the civil suit against the DA and that will bring into focus the activities of the others in the cover-up and collusion. Ismail had mentioned the Muslim Advocates as a resource and I think they are a good fit. Please share this proposal with EVERYONE that you think might or should be interested in winning justice and respect for ALL childern, responsile parents, Muslims and people in general!

al-Hakim and family now wish to sue the DA, AG, DCSS, and possibly California Governor Jerry Brown. Due to the admitted, uncontroverted, uncontested evidence in this matter it could be won on summary judgment and I have attached recent filings to give you an idea of what has transpired in this matter. It just needs some relentless tenacity! Attorneys here are afraid of the system that has ignored the law for fear of being blackballed!

They created and complied an entire presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of admitted fraud and bribery, then exercised a clearly illegal conflict of interest in misrepresenting the family, conducting a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence before admitting the conflict AFTER the trial was completed and have sought to cover it up since!

The DA, AG and DCSS and their judicial team of covert illicit participants– the putative accounting expert that created and complied the entire presumptively inadmissible product and evidence of admitted fraud and bribery, the accounting report used as the sole basis for the judgment by Commissioner Glenn Oleon despite the fact he knew it was the product of fraud.

al-Hakim and Family assert that good cause exists to question the legality of the standing of ALL the Parties including the Attorney General of The State of California (AG) whom substituted in as Attorney of Record allegedly “representing” The People of The State of California, et. al., “In The Interest of Justice” in this case for the Alameda County District Attorney (DA) and the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) as they exercised a clearly illegal conflict of interest in misrepresenting the family, conducting a complete trial to defend their illegal actions and evidence before admitting the conflict AFTER the trial was completed. This act makes them ALL a co-conspirator in the DCSS’s continuing fraud upon The People of The Sate of California, the Superior Court and the al-Hakim Family, continuing their persecution of our family. They did not have standing then and CAN NOT NOW!

Thank you and I welcome and look forward to your response with the furthering of the litigation and resolution of this ongoing case.

Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim

keep looking »