Digitally signed

by Joseph Zernik
Human Rights Alert Human DN: cn=Joseph
Zernik, o, ou,
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 email=jz12345@e
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
Rigbts arthlink.net, c=US
Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Date: 2011.01.24
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
Alert 14:26:34 +02'00'

11-01-22 Declaration of George McDermott in re: Attempt to Access US Supreme Court Paper
and Electronic Records to Inspect and to Copy
Attached is the January 22, 2011, Declaration of George McDermott, of the People of Maryland, regarding his
attempts to access paper and electronic records of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Fm;MyF.x • Joseph Zernlk To:McD9rmott G9org. (13018385816) 21:68 01l22/11GMT-06 Pg 02-04

Declaration of George McDermott

Re; Attempt to gain access to papeJ: and electronic records of the
Supreme Court of the United States

I, GEORGE MCDERMOTT, hereby deelare as follows:

Instant Declaration was written at the request of Joseph Zemik, as a
memoTandum of my January 18-20, 20 II, visits to the Office of the Clerk of
the Supreme Court of the United States in Washington DC, the Library of
Congress and the National Archives, and as authentication of the records,
which are attached as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 to this declaration.
I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein, which I know
to be true and correct, except as to those matters therein stated as based upon
information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true and
COrrect as well. If called as a witness, I could and would competently testify
with respect thereto.
1) On January 18,2011, I arrived at the Office of the Clerk of Supreme
Court ofthe United States at One First Street, NE, Washington, DC
20543, and provided the my written request to access records of the
Supreme Court of the United States in a list of seven (7) caseS. C]
2) Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy ofthe written request, including:
a) A letter signed and dated January 18,2011, addressed to Clerk of the
Court William Suter, and
b) A letter signed and dated January 18, 2011, addressed to Clerk of the
Court William Suter, listing the sever (7) cases.
Both records Were stamped "RECEIVED" with the date stamp "January
18,20ll".

I Video recordings pertaining to instant Declaration can be' viewed at: htt.p:/Jsecretjustice.ci:nu/, videos
#252,253,254,255 .
• Page 1/3
Fm:MyFox - Josoph Zornlk To:MoOormott Go<>rgo (1301 838a816) 21:66 01l221110MT·Oe PQ 03·04

3) On January 19,2011, I again came to the Supreme Court ofthe United

States. I was met by an Intern name Matt He consulted with his
Supervisor regarding my requests, and then informed me that none of the
case files Were in the Court. I also questioned Matt regarding the
electronic records of the same court files. I was told none were at the
Court. Matt further suggested that 1might find the case files in the
Library of Congress or the National Archives, on Seventh Street
4) On January 19, 2011, I proceeded to the Law Libraty of the Library of
Congress. TIle only documents in the custody of the Narional Archives
was the date stamped copy of Fine v Baca (09-1250) Petition for Writ of
Certiorari with an unsigned paper of its dismissaL
5) On Januaty 20,2011 I return to Washington DC to the National
Archives, attempting to gain access to the Supreme Court records. Only
one (1) of the seven (7) cases, was discovered during this visit: Jason
Withan v. Christian County, Missouri et aZ, the oldest case among the
requested files, dating back to 2007. I was unable to inspect the full file.
6) Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the Reference Service Slip and
Equipment Receipt from my January 20, 2011, visit to the National
Archives.
7) During my visits, described above, on January 18-20,2011, I discovered
records of only two (2) ofthe requested seven (7) court meso In none of
the seven (7) cases was any signed order discovered. In none of the cases
was access provided to the electronic court files.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe United States that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this2.%-day in January, 2011, in the Town otTorest Heights, State
of Maryland,

• Page 2/3
Fm: MyFax • Joaeph Zernik TO:MoDormott George (1 J016JS~616) 21:66 01122111GMT-O~ p~ 04-04

~~
J

GE GE EDWARD MCDERMOTT
Maryland Court Watch
143 North Huron Dr-, Forest Heights, MD 20745
Phone: 301-839-5816; Cell: 301-996-9577
E-mail: secretjusticepr@yahoo,com

• Page 3/3
EXHIBIT 1
 George McDermott
, 143 N. Huron Dr.
Forest Beights, MD 20745
phone 301-839-5816 oe1l301-996-9577
e-mail @secretjusticepr@yahoo.coin ,
"'-''''~~''"
January 18,2011 ~

To the clerk ofthe Supreme Court of the United States. William Suter:

Attached you will find a formal request to review seven, case files in your possession. I will be
on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, July 192001 and would appreciate ifthe court could have these
records available for inspection. I plan to be at the court around I :30 PM.

Attached is a list arthe case files 'and formal request to your office. I am doing research
for my petition to this court. Under application number 10 - A662 I would also like to see this
case file. In conjunction with the oilier 7 requested files.

1 contacted the administrative office of the United States eouct. As of today and was put
in contact with the head of the IT department ofML Clay McClay, who informed me that. My
question regarding request for the name of the FOrA cODlRliance office 0'- officer within the
court, administrative offices could not be answered. AndI quote ("the United States Federal
Court System is not subject to FOIA TlTLE 5 PART I CHAPTER 5 SUBCHAPTER II § 552
(a) (1) (2) (A) CB) (e) (1)), it would be greatly appreciated. If the clerk's office could provide a
1
copy of the legislative order exempting the Federal Courts compliance under five USC 522.

In Brady v. Maryland. the Supreme Court held '"that the suppression by the prosecution
of evidence favorable to an accused UP9n request violates due process. If the clerk could be so
kind as to identify where one might locate the original petition filed in the Brady case with this
court and the current location ofthe Qase file, as a defendant myself I believe it would be very
important to read. the concurring and dissenting opinions in this case, as well as the petition
which the Court granted, setting forth this landmark case in preparation for my petition. [An 11
f.Qnnal request review and copy court files. IAtt 2] This court's order grsnting extension of ti~

If all or any part of this request is denied, I request tha.t I be provided with a
written statement of the grounds for the denial. If you detennine that some portions ofthe
requested infonnation or if the requested records are exempt fr0111 disclosure, please
provide me with the portions that can be disclosed. I thank you for your time and
attention in this matter. And I will be at your office~ January 19,2000 and 2 PM
, '

"'_.''''~.,-._\ ..

'I,

I Keeping a "watchful eye" on the US court. The pUblic at large and computing professionals. in partjcul~, mUSI ~ume their
civic duties ill ongoin,g monitoring tl1e integrity of ~lectronic court records. The common law right to inspect and tl;> copy jllrlici~l
records was rcaffinned by the US Supreme Court in N&ccm v Wqmer CommlAnications, Inc (1978) as inherent to the First
Amendment. In doing SO. the US Supreme Court said that the right Was nece.wqy for the public "to keep a watchful eye on
government". Today, the public must keep a watchful eye particularly on (llettronic court records. No otlltr measures could
sUbstiMe for public scrutiny ofcourt records .in safegUlll'ding the integrity ofthe courts and Human Rights in the Digital Era,
 George McDermott
143 North Huron Drive
Forest Heights, MD 20745
Phone: 301-839-5816 Cell: 301-996-9577
E-mail: secretjusticepr@Vahoo.com

To the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States William Suter:
The undersigned, George McDermott, requests to access court dockets and judicial
record in the paper court files and in the yet to be identified case management system of
the Supreme Court of the United States, to inspect and to copy.
Instant request is made pursuant to the First Amendment right to inspect and to copy
court records, as re-affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States in Nixon v
Warner Communications, Inc (1978).
Instant request is;
I) To inspect and to copy the paper court files in the cases, listed below, and
2) To inspect and to copy the electronic records from any case management system,
which the Supreme Court of the United States may employ, and which may
include certifications by the Justices and the Clerk of the Court (or persons who
may be authorized by him) in a form that is deemed valid by the Justices and/or
the Clerk of the Court.
Instant request is explicitly NOT for copies ofany records, which are published in
the online public access system of the Supreme Court of the United States, but for
records from the case management system of the Supreme Court of the United
States, which are NOT pUblished in the online public access system of the
Supreme Court of the United States.
Instant request includes, but is not limited to, the text notations in such electronic
records, as well as the "audit data" Oogin time and user name of the persons, who
entered the notations or certified the records electronically).
Instant request pertains to the dockets and records in the following cases:
1) Judson Witham v Christian County, Missouri, et al (07-2254);
2) Gregory S Hollister v Barry Soetoro et al (09-5080);
3) Richard I Fine v Leroy D Baca, SheriffofLos Angeles County, California (09-
1250);
4) .Richard I Fine v Leroy Baca, SheriffofLos Angeles County, California (09-
A827);
5) Richard I Fine v Leroy Baca, SheriffofLos Angeles County, California (lO-A24);
6) Orly Taitz v Thomas D MacDonald, Colonel Garrison Commanda, Fort
Benning, et al (lO-A56);
7) William M Windsor v Maid ofthe Mist Corporation, et at (IO-A404);

~·~~O
".-~.,
~.
...

George McDennott
EXHIBIT 2
fV"
REFERENCE SERVICE SLIP
v
!ti"ATE I
NO.
...
Ift:M
r

EOF REQUESTOR "'GE~CY OR ADDRE5:l

TD SOURCE OF REQUEST (Check)

UNITS OF SERVICE
INFORMATION RECXlRDS NA AdmlnllltrMlv~1,1 '0
SERvice FURNISHED T~TUAl., 6TILi.. Agfjney lIf Origin
MOTION SOUND
(Number of Tip(;e5) fNllmberoj PICTI,IKli:S, ETO, PICTUAEG RECORDINGS
I~ (NIIMM (NIIIII~ (Number Other Oowmment
WRJTIEN ORAL of~) Wfl!et) QIf"f) NOll(lOWmm.nt
REOUeST IolANDLED BY

RG

Z67
BTACKAREA ' ROW COMP....RT... ENT SHIiOLF I OI,lTCARD NO.

FtIWORO IDENTIFICAtION

A~)4-+e 6 7
cl1S'~ F,'/c:
- 22~Y-
National Archives and RC\iords Administra1lon
700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20408-0001

RIECf:lVEDBY
IDATE RElUANl!
I~
~*'l

m;
~
Tel",hO'" 1-86..",-120'
""io.,l Arohi"" ,t Colleg' p,""
8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, MD 20740-6001
I
Telephone: 1.866-212.6272
NATIOI'iAL ARGHIVES AIlID RECOIIDS ADMINISTRATI()1\1 DO NOT RI www.archives.go v

C1£d~ EQUIPMENT RECEIPT

This receipt is to bEl used whenever personal equipment is brought into the National Archives BUilding. Complete
ER #171122.

this form, keep the original, and give the copy to the guard. When you wish to leave,the buildIng you must present
the original of this receipt to the guard,

NAME (ponl) ~<E"~E J/fdie.2Kt:,-Tt _

(fast, first, initial)

DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
TYPE

DATE TIME OF: ARRIVAL ' /.. If DEPARTURE _

NATIONAL ARcHtnS AfolD RECOROIi ADMINiSTRATION N4 FORM 6030 (t·go)

"~.. - - - - - - - ' - ' .~--