Recall proponent Alexander Baker, party to a case before Judge Watkins, has filed a motion to disqualify Judge Watkins from his case. How will she rule? Is it possible for a judge to remain unbiased when a party is actively working to remove her from the bench, based on felony accusations?
What did Judge Watkins do that was so bad? Read Baker's affidavit below and judge for yourself.
Judge Shirley K. Watkins, at some sort of awards ceremony in 2019.
AFFIDAVIT OF ALEXANDER C. BAKER
1. I am the Plaintiff in this case. I hold a Juris Doctorate and hold myself out as a legal expert. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated below. If called as a witness I could and would testify competently thereto.
2. I am the proponent of a Petition to Recall Judge Shirley K. Watkins from the bench. A true and correct copy of the Notice of Intention to Circulate Recall Petition is attached hereto as EXHIBIT “A”.
3. A true and correct copy of the Notice of Intent to Circulate Recall Petition was served on Judge Watkins by Certified Mail on July 17, 2021 by licensed and bonded process server Mark T. Andrews. See Certified Mail photo at EXHIBIT “B”.
4. The original Notice of Intent to Circulate Recall Petition was filed at the Office of the Voter Registrar in Norwalk California by Certified Mail on July 18, 2021, as that office was closed due to Covid. See Certified Mail photo at EXHIBIT “C”.
5. The effort to recall Judge Watkins is based on the following facts, which are illustrative though hardly exhaustive.
6. Judge Watkins caused, or at minimum knowingly allowed to occur a secret ex parte stealth hearing at which the entire case LC103241 was transferred to family law and assigned to Judge Emily T. Spear in case LD068701. In my opinion this constitutes felony deprivation of rights under 18 U.S.C. § 242.
7. Judge Watkins falsely stated the text of Cal. Code Civ. Pro § 391 so as to make it appear that I was in violation of that statute by filing a motion, when in fact I was not in violation of that statute. This too constitutes a crime under 18 U.S.C. § 242.
8. When called out on the false reading of the statute, Judge Watkins lied to me and claimed she never made the false statement. This too constitutes a crime under 18 U.S.C. § 242.
9. Judge Watkins caused numerous important names to be cleansed from the docket in this case, and did so in order to cover up criminal conduct. This too constitutes a crime under 18 U.S.C. § 242, in addition to constituting forgery.
10. The docket no longer reflects the fact that Judge Rupert Byrdsong adjudicated in this case.
11. The docket no longer reflects the fact that Judge Michael Convey adjudicated in this case, the same Michael Convey who originally took my children away from me on an ex parte TRO, based on the fact that I won a copyright case and blogged about it.
12. The docket no longer reflects that fact that Joseph Albert “Joe” Yanny was the lead attorney in case BC706242, and made several appearances in this case both before and after it was consolidated with BC706242. This is the same Joe Yanny who is lead defense attorney (and openly admitted member) of the oft-convicted racketeering criminal gang known as the Mongols Nation.
13. I have personal knowledge and much litigation experience with Joe Yanny, and the man can barely read and write. He appears to be functionally illiterate, and it appears impossible that he ever legitimately could have passed the bar exam. And yet, Joe Yanny is a licensed attorney, State Bar No. 97979.
14. Joe Yanny appears to be “above the law”. For example, Joe Yanny did on the record in LD068701 introduce his own alleged daughter Andrea X. Ales as an attorney, and allow her to represent the client and practice law, on the record, at a time prior to her having become an attorney. Nobody would do that except for someone who is above the law.
15. At an October 2019 hearing in Family Court, while I was represented by attorney Marc Angelucci, Joe Yanny threatened me in the bathroom by saying “You better watch what you say on that stand young man. I know bad boys that will take you right out of here.”
16. Two days after that death threat, I reported the matter to the Los Angeles Police Department.
17. About 1 month after the death threat, attorney Marc Angelucci and made complaint to Cal. Bar about Joe Yanny, informing them of the death threat, the ties to the Mongols Nation, and the fact that Joe Yanny stole $85,722 from the Family Law trust account, with the bank records proving the case up. CalBar did nothing. Joe Yanny is above the law.
18. The docket no longer reflects the fact that Marc Angelucci was my attorney in this case.
19. On July 11, 2020 Marc Angelucci was murdered in cold blood.
20. Because he was murdered, Marc Angelucci was unable to testify in this case, as he was on the witness list for the July 9, 2020 hearing, which hearing was mysteriously “postponed” to July 14, 2020, just long enough for someone to put 4 bullets in him, splattering his brain and skull fragments.
21. Because he was murdered, Marc Angelucci did not get to prosecute Joe Yanny for Contempt on July 20, 2020 in Dept. 22, regarding the $85,722 Joe Yanny provably stole.
22. Not only were these important names cleansed from the docket in this case, but when called on it at the December 15, 2020 hearing in Dept. T, Judge Watkins flat out lied about the matter – falsely stating on the record that those names had not been removed from the docket, when provably they have so.
23. To be clear, when Judge Watkins spoke to the cleansing of the docket, she was not mistaken, she lied.
24. For these reasons, I Alexander C. Baker do publicly accuse Joe Yanny, attorney Mike DiNardo, Hon. Shirley K. Watkins and others of a conspiracy to murder Marc Angelucci, and to cover up the same. Other than covering up the evidently murderous connection between Joe Yanny and Marc Angelucci, there is no other reason Judge Watkins would cleanse the docket of their two names.
25. Because my legal adversary Clara Veseliza Baker aka Clair Marlo has incurred over $2 million in legal fees regarding a legal case that is worth perhaps $500,000, and because FirstCom Music and its parent Universal have a very strong interest in covering up the evidence of forgery of music contracts and their fraudulent practice of direct licensing and ghostwriting, I believe that Universal is funding the litigation against me.
26. Because so many illegal orders have been issued in this case and the related state and federal cases, and because of the aforementioned financial oddities, I formed an inference that Joe Yanny and Mike DiNardo are using Universal’s money to bribe judges, and the organized crime connections to threaten murder upon the non-cooperative. If anyone was doubtful about the ability to arrange murder for hire, those doubts were erased on July 11, 2020.
27. I have published and will continue to publish stories on Post Modern Justice Media Project (www.pmjmp.org) regarding the facts of this and other cases reflecting criminal conduct by Judge Watkins and others.
28. In addition to being removed from office, it is my intention that the public come to disrespect Judge Watkins, because criminals such as Judge Shirley K. Watkins do not deserve respect. Rather, Judge Watkins deserves the hatred, ridicule, insult, condemnation, and disrespect of the people of Los Angeles County. Judge Watkins should be made to resign from the bench, stripped of her law license, and should be prosecuted criminally, convicted, and should spend the rest of her life behind bars.
29. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Submitted on July 23, 2021,
_________________________________
Alexander C. Baker
Plaintiff in pro per