top of page

L.A. Judge Emily T. Spear Accused in Family Court Bribery Scheme

Mongols Nation racketeering gang also implicated.

In a new federal civil rights complaint, Superior Court judge Emily T. Spear stands accused of bribery and corruption in the Los Angeles divorce case between music composer / producer Alex Baker and his ex wife / business partner Clair Marlo. Judge Spear has illegally closed discovery, and illegally waived Marlo’s duty to provide a final declaration of disclosure. Anyone familiar with the court process knows that conducting discovery and receiving disclosures are fundamental rights, not privileges, as clearly written in the statutory law.

With the long-awaited Baker-Marlo trial now fast approaching, this means that Baker cannot get the evidence the Court needs to make correct rulings regarding the money and real estate at issue. And that means that these judges, in collaboration with a group of high-powered attorneys with known criminal ties, are about to let Marlo get away with over $1 million.

This “in your face” corruption comes on the heels of Baker losing custody and visitation with his daughter because of a domestic violence restraining order. Baker has no history of any sort of violence, as most people understand the word. But California’s Domestic Violence Prevention Act (“DVPA”) allows for a restraining order for “non-physical” conduct that upsets the “mental or emotional calm” of the other person. In Baker’s case, Marlo obtained a restraining order because Baker successfully sued Marlo for copyright infringement, and had the gall to post the judgment on a blog. This upset Marlo’s emotional calm. She requested a restraining order, which was granted.

The DV restraining order not only prevented Baker from seeing or contacting Marlo, but also from seeing or contacting their daughter, who Baker had been visiting with twice a week since the couple split 2 years prior. This restraining order regarding the daughter was not even requested. A temporary judge in the case, Michael Convey, issued the order for what was later established to be no reason. Court Commissioner Alicia Blanco presided over the ensuing trial for a permanent restraining order, and, when asked, admitted that she “did not know how or why” the restraining order came to be issued regarding the child. Receiving money from a bribery or federal kickback scheme would appear to be plausible explanation, since Commissioner Blanco re-issued the restraining order 8 more times after admitting that there was no good cause to do so.

Based on this and numerous other events indicating judicial bias, Baker attempted to remove Commissioner Blanco from trying the restraining order hearing. Not only did Commissioner Blanco deny Baker’s for-cause challenge, but then later said that challenge was actually the reason for the restraining order in the first place! You read that right.

On the record, the following exchange took place:

Baker: “For the record, could you please state what the good cause is for this restraining order?”
Commissioner Blanco: “The good cause, sir, is that you have put into question whether or not this court has jurisdiction to hear any matters in your case.”

Baker appealed the DV restraining order through the California Court system and all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, who ultimately declined to hear the matter. Baker believes the restraining order was all part of the “kids for cash” scheme under Title IV, and that he is now being railroaded into an unfair trial as punishment for his having dared to call attention to court corruption.

Baker and Marlo have been litigating their high-conflict divorce / custody / community property battle since 2014, and are also adversaries in a related civil fraud case, regarding Baker’s allegations that Marlo “stole the business” from him. While Baker has had to mostly represent himself, Marlo is able to afford “an army of high priced lawyers” as Baker puts it. “I can’t get a lawyer without my money, but I can’t get my money without a lawyer”.

Baker has taken to protesting over a series of orders have been made in the cases that Baker says are “not just “erroneous, they are clearly illegal”.

“By the way, I’m not just a musician, I also have a law degree, a juris doctorate” says Baker, third from the left, protesting outside the Stanley Mosk Courthouse on March 2, 2020. “Technically, I’m a legal expert. I know the difference between an order that is wrong versus an order that is illegal.”

Understanding the illegality of Judge Spear’s orders is straightforward. California Code of Civil Procedure § 2024.020 says this:

“…any party shall be entitled as a matter of right to complete discovery proceedings on or before the 30th day before the date initially set for the trial of the action.”

Among the judges and attorneys involved, it is very well known that Baker has for years been diligently trying to obtain necessary documents from his ex wife Marlo through the discovery process, only to be relentlessly stonewalled. Then, on October 7, 2019, Judge Spear ordered that “discovery is ordered closed this date”. There was no motion or request to close discovery, and no reason or explanation was given. At that time, trial had never been set in the case.

Similarly, California Family Code § 2105 mandates that each party to a divorce case must serve a Final Declaration of Disclosure (“FDD”) prior to trial. A proper FDD must include statements and documentation regarding the income, expenses, assets and debts of each person. This is absolutely standard, it is a matter of statutory law, and there is no discretion for any party or any judge to get around it. Serving FDD is an essential requirement of a fair trial.

Marlo did serve a Final Declaration of Disclosure on Baker, but it was woefully deficient. It did not include her real estate documents, or her bank statements, or her tax documents, all of which are positively required under the law. Baker brought a motion to compel Marlo to comply, but on January 8, 2020, Judge Spear said that she was “waiving” Marlo’s duty to comply. No reason was given. This is simply an illegal order, and one that is clearly intended to allow Marlo to get away with a lot of money.

“What these judges have done to me, especially Judge Spear, is so blatantly against the law, that bribery is the only explanation.”

At issue in Baker’s divorce case are three real estate properties acquired during the marriage, with equity in excess of $1 million. For the Court to properly decide who is entitled to what share of that equity, it must have access to the bank records and real estate records, standard stuff in any divorce case. But all of Baker’s efforts at obtaining those documents in discovery have been stonewalled by her notorious criminal defense attorney Joseph A. “Joe” Yanny.

Besides representing Clair Marlo, Joe Yanny is well known for representing Church of Scientology in their successful effort to avoid charges of tax evasion, and the “Mongols Nation” in their 2019 federal criminal racketeering trial in Santa Ana federal court. But Joe Yanny’s involvement with the Mongols Nation appears to go much deeper than representing them in criminal trials.

As Baker explains, on May 3, 2019, in the hallway outside Judge Spear’s courtroom, Joe Yanny took great care to explain to him that he came to owe a debt of gratitude to the Mongols for having rescued him and his motorcycle by the side of Pacific Coast Highway. Mr. Yanny revealed that the Mongols have a saying "Mongols Forever, Forever Mongols", which means that Mongols always defend and protect one another. Mr. Yanny stated that he had been present at the infamous Laughlin Nevada shootout between the Mongols and the arch rival gang, the Hell's Angels. And, Mr. Yanny claimed to have testified at trial in support of Mongols murder defendants.

Needless to say, Mr. Yanny's stories of deep involvement with the Mongols terrified Baker, who wondered why any attorney would admit, let alone boast about being the member of a criminal gang, other than in a deliberate effort to intimidate. And the intimidation escalated on October 2, 2019, on the 6th floor of the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, during the afternoon recess of Baker’s testimony at a hearing regarding Marlo forging Baker’s signature on music contracts. According to Baker, Joe Yanny confronted Baker in the courthouse bathroom and said to him:

"You better watch what you say up on that stand young man. I know bad boys who can take you right out".

Baker had two handwriting experts prepared to testify as to Marlo’s forgery. But Judge Spear inexplicably refused to allow the experts to testify, then inexplicably stopped the entire proceeding, right in the middle of Baker’s testimony, with Baker still on the witness stand. Clearly Joe Yanny has some sort of extraordinary power over judges.

Another very suspicious, on-the-record event clearly shows that Joe Yanny operates above the law. At the beginning of that same October 2, 2019 hearing, Joe Yanny formally stated his own appearance, then said:

“I'm here with another lawyer from my office, my daughter, Andrea Ales.”

Joe Yanny’s daughter Andrea Ales had introduced herself by email to Baker over a year prior as the “junior associate attorney” for the Law Office of Yanny & Smith, and had appears many times in court.

There is just one little problem: Andrea Ales is not and never has been a licensed attorney. The California Bar Association has an attorney search function that documents every California attorney, licensed or disbarred, living or dead.

Consider that under California law, practicing law without a license is a crime, punishable by up to 1 year in prison. So, to the readers I pose this question:

Why would attorney Joe Yanny go on the record in Judge Emily T. Spear’s courtroom and introduce his own daughter Andrea Ales as an attorney, knowing that she is not?

Why would any lawyer take what appears to be a very foolish risk??

The reasonable explanation is that Joe Yanny is above the law. And the reasonable explanation for that is that Joe Yanny has the connections and the money to grease the wheels. It is only since Joe Yanny came to represent Clair Marlo that these strange and illegal things keep happening. Before that, Baker was doing quite well in the litigation struggles, having won the right to visitation with his daughter, and won a copyright infringement case, which judgment was upheld on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.

Everything has changed since Marlo’s legal dream team, led by Joe Yanny, has taken over. Besides the events mentioned already, there many other signs of corruption, including the time in 2018 where another judge, Gregory J. Weingart, allowed Marlo to get away with $225,000 in cash. Marlo took that money by secretly refinancing a disputed property, in clear violation of Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders (“ATROs”), which strictly prohibit selling or refinancing any disputed property without permission. After getting caught, Marlo admitted, in writing, under oath that she took the money, and admitted, in writing, under oath that she violated the ATROS. This was all admitted into evidence at a contempt proceeding, but Judge Weingart simply let her get away with it.

Baker is being railroaded into an illegal trial, stonewalled from fairly bringing his own claims, and was gaslighted with a restraining order because he tried to remove a judge.

“Railroading, Stonewalling and Gaslighting. That’ll be the title of my book when I get a chance to write it. But right now I’m too busy being railroaded, stonewalled and gaslighted” Baker says, not joking.

Along with other board members, Baker has formed a non-profit educational news organization called the Post Modern Justice Media Project, at They have applied for 501c3 tax exempt status, and are exclusively dedicated to investigative journalism, news reporting and media content creation about corruption in the family court and child welfare court systems. Membership is free but will be required to access premium content. PMJMP’s mission statement:

“Giving voice to people devastated by family breakups and parental alienation through storytelling of heroic efforts to affect systemic change.”


bottom of page