- Denial of public
access to critical court records -- summons, authentication records,
contradicting the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ;
- Failure to issue and
execute service of summons at the onset of the litigation, instead only an
invalid summons was issued;
- Creation of invalid,
fraudulent docket notations in lieu of valid minutes for the 19 purported
proceedings in the case.
The Data Analytics paper also provides an overview of the false
reporting on the case the case by US and international media, which represented
it as enforcement of US banking regulation on Bank of America. The case was the subject of numerous reports
by major media outlests, which often applauded US Judge Jed Rakoff for his
tough stance vis a vis both SEC and Bank of America. Media also quoted SEC's false statements,
related to the case, of SEC's intention to "vigorously pursue our charges
against Bank of America and take steps to prove our case in court" We will use
the additional discovery available in the litigation to further pursue the
facts and determine whether to seek the court's permission to bring additional
charges in this case."
The
paper also highlights the role of prominent SEC and Bank of America attorneys
in conduct of the fraud on the People through the litigation in this case.
The
paper concludes that the integrity of the electronic record systems of the
courts of any nation are critical for the safeguard of Human Rights and Civil
Society, and their corruption bears a profound impact, which should be
considered an unannounced regime change.
The
paper calls upon computing experts in general, and data mining experts in
particular to assume a unique civic duty in monitoring the conduct of the
courts of their respective nations. Although
the courts today deny access to key records, in violation of the law, through
data mining, the fraud in such systems can still be elucidated.
The paper also notes that
the fraud inherent in the electronic record systems of the US courts is not
unique:
- Sustain, the electronic record
system of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, is believed
to be one of the earliest electronic record system of any court (implemented
around 1985). According to the web page of its maker, the Sustain Corporation,
the system is by now implemented in the courts of eleven states and three
nations. Sustain shows remarkably similar fraudulent features to those
described here in PACER and CM/ECF.
- An accompanying paper, also
peer-reviewed and published by Data Analytics, describes the electronic record
systems of the courts of the State of Israel, whose implementation a decade
later than PACER and CM/ECF involved US-based corporations IBM and EDS. The Israeli systems also show remarkable
similarity to the fraud inherent in PACER and CM/ECF.
Finally, the paper outlines
proposed corrective actions:
