Chung Winner’s “The Equalizer”


Chung Winner & Jan Tucker

I previously announced a documentary film project about myself, which has now come to fruition. See my prior blog posting at:

You can see the result at: and by clicking the episode known as, The Equalizer at the top of the page. Hearkening back to the old Equalizer series on TV, one of my long time clients years ago dubbed me the real equalizer because of the way I assist people who have been oppressed, repressed, and generally fucked over by the powers that be. Filmmaker, Chung Winner, has done what I think you’ll agree is a superb job of capturing the essential Jan Tucker (you’ll know my essence if you know me personally).

LOCATION CREDITS:  Sky Caberet, Rancho Dominguez; City Center Parking, DTLA

Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Leave a comment

Judge Randall F Pacheco on Lesbian family law


Pot and Kettle – “Who are you to judge?”

The recent ruling by the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Bayev and others versus Russia has implications for the Hon. Judge Randall F Pacheco who sits in the George Deukmejian courthouse in Long Beach of the Los Angeles Superior Court. In an ongoing case involving child custody of two lesbians who adopted their son from Russia Judge Pacheco took it upon himself to suggest that there was something wrong with lesbians deceiving the Russian authorities about their sexual orientation and status.

It is intuitively obvious that Russia discriminates against LGBT people. In spite of that Judge Pacheco gave credence to the horrendous laws against gay people in Russia who are prohibited from adopting children amongst other things. Discrimination against gay people is so overt that laws were passed against so-called homosexual propaganda under the pretext that promoting the rights of LGBT people could be construed as an attempt to lure children into a same-sex lifestyle. These laws have been struck down as violating not only the European Convention on Human Rights but also the Russian Constitution itself.

Underscoring the horrendous treatment of gay people in Russia are the concentration/torture camps that LGBT people are being subjected to in Chechnya. For more on this veritable pogrom against the gay community see

If these prospective lesbian parents had told the truth to the Russian authorities they would never have been allowed to adopt their son. It’s long been held ever since Marbury versus Madison in 1803 that an unconstitutional law is not a law; the legal significance of an unconstitutional law or government practice is that it might as well have never existed before or after a court gets around to declaring it unconstitutional. This goes for Russia the same as it goes for the United States and certainly that’s the way Judge Pacheco should have ruled in the Long Beach Courthouse.

When it comes to family law any American judge who gives any credibility to the legal shenanigans that go on in Russia needs to be carefully scrutinized. For example in a well reported move in late January 2017 the Russian parliament voted 380-3 to decriminalize domestic violence unless it causes substantial bodily injury or occurs more than once a year. In other words you get to beat your wife or child once a year and God knows what they mean by substantial bodily injury. Like, is it okay to just bruise them or give them a black eye just as long as you don’t break any bones?

Russian President Vladimir Putin August 2007. EPA/DMITRY ASTAKHOV RIA NOVOSTI/KREMLIN POOL
Do you trust Putin’s policies anymore than you would Republican appointed judge Pacheco’s?

Russian diplomatic authorities have attempted in the past to call into question the legitimacy of this adoption. Their obvious intent is to force this now 14-year-old American child to come back to Russia, because of Russia’s abhorrence of the rights of LGBT people. Judge Pacheco has effectively aided and abetted the sick and authoritarian Russian government with his words that are a part of the court record.

USA Today reported that:

Critics of the new measure warned it would encourage domestic violence and fuel crime.

This bill would establish violence as a norm of conduct,” Communist lawmaker Yuri Sinelshchikov said during the debate.

Women’s rights lawyer Mari Davtyan told The Moscow Times

( that the legislative moves are dangerous and “send a message that the state doesn’t consider familial battery fundamentally wrong anymore.”

If Judge Randall F. Pacheco is correct about the legitimacy of Russian law, these statistics from the Moscow Times are what would await any Russian adopted by LGBT Americans if the Russian government got its way and returned them to their country of birth.

The 14-year-old adopted from Russia, as a baby, who has now grown up to be a typical California 14-year-old youth, is thankfully now protected by article 1 section 1 of the California Constitution which states “All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.” If he lived in Russia however his rights to life liberty safety and happiness would all be compromised because it would be perfectly legal to subject him to domestic violence.

Enter the Trump connection

A recent development in scandals surrounding Donald Trump’s campaign having meetings with Russians linked to the Russian government and to Vladimir Putin all of a sudden has highlighted the issue of Americans who adopted children from Russia. See

Natalia Veselnitskaya

Ostensibly, Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya met with Donald Trump Junior, Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort of the Donald Trump for Pres. campaign in a purported effort to end the ban instituted by Vladimir Putin on Americans adopting children from Russia due to the passage of the Magnitsky Act, an American law passed to sanction specific Russians involved in corruption that had been exposed by a Russian lawyer for whom the act is the named. Attorney Magnitsky died in a Russian prison beaten to death in his cell, conveniently.

In the event that the general policy of Donald Trump’s administration becomes the law of the land and the Magnitsky act is repealed, resulting in the resumption of Russian adoptions by Americans, the United States should not allow such adoptions unless and until Russia allows equal participation by LGBTI Americans. That is the only way we can be consistent with the United States Constitution and international law, not to mention common decency.

Conflicts of interest?

The judicial canons of ethics for California require that a judge not only not engage in impropriety but additionally they must avoid even the appearance of impropriety. According to the 2010 California judge’s bench guide regarding disqualification of a judge a judge should disqualify him or herself if “A person who was aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt about the judge’s impartiality….”

In spite of the fact that in addition to his salary as a judge, Judge Pacheco reports receiving in excess of $100,000 per year as an educator for the Huntington Beach Union High School District on his form 700 statement of economic interests he has failed to disqualify himself from participating in this case. The appearance of impropriety involves the fact that in addition to having its own police department the high school district also uses the services of the Huntington Beach Police Department. The Huntington Beach Police Department is designated by the judge as the pickup and drop off point for the minor child, one of the mothers being a resident of Orange County. Because of that fact Huntington Beach PD officers are witnesses in this case and one of the litigants reports that Judge Pacheco in a past ruling refused to allow evidence or testimony from HP PD on issues relevant to child visitation and custody.

As a teacher for the high school district can Judge Pacheco afford to piss off police officers who he might depend on for protection and assistance in the case of an emergency at the school he teaches at? In such a situation wouldn’t a reasonable person consider this a conflict of interest, and a clear appearance of impropriety?

For more info:{%22itemid%22:[%22001-174422%22]}

Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Gay Conversion?


Article by Steve Hassan pictured here with Jan Tucker

See also:

Posted in Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

3 Million hits on Jan Tucker’s Detective’s Diary


Site Statistics

Unique Pages Served: 77912

Total Sessions: 940004

Total Page Hits: 3144895

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Power of the People Cofronts The York on York


For backgroumd:

Article by Chris Peel in the Occidental Weekly:

Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Los Angeles Elections 2017


March 7 2017 LA Election Recommendations

City of Los Angeles


Jan B Tucker in blue, Eric Garcetti in black

Ho-Hum….Eric Garcetti is going to win. It’s a fait accompli. It’s not that he hasn’t done anything decent; he has. When it comes to following through on promises he made to me and mine four (4) years ago….well there’s just no track record. For example, read: Take note that even though I asked for any documentation as to whether in four whole years Eric has done anything about changing the LAPD’s unscientific and effectively racist eyewitness identification procedures that I requested on December 27, 2016, I’m still waiting for a response. The city keeps giving me one compliance deadline after another, most recently promising compliance after the election on March 24. Technically they were supposed to comply within ten days of December 27, 2016. Do Black, Brown and Yellow lives matter or do they have to wait another four years to reform effectively racist procedures?

City Attorney and City Controller

As much as I like Mike Feuer and Ron Galperin they’re unopposed because Los Angeles maintains onerous filing fees and petition requirements that discriminate against poor people and working class candidates….and those laws are remain on the books because limousine liberals like it that way. For more on this issue:

City Council District 1

Jesse Rosas

The only candidate who showed up at our NOW and CALLAC forum on sexual harassment and racism in the district was Jesse Rosas. He’s well spoken and supportive of our issues.

City Council District 15

Caney Arnold is supported by all the Berniecrats I know.

Board of Education District 2

Carl Petersen submitted an outstanding questionnaire response to SFV/NELA NOW and has our endorsement.

Community College Board of Trustees Office 2

Vote AGAINST Steve Veres. When he was on the San Fernando City Council he was in the pocket of developer Sev Ashkenazy, who is a pig.

Community College Board of Trustees Office 4

Dallas Fowler

Vote for Dallas Denise Fowler without hesitation. She’s great. Incumbent Ernie Moreno botched an investigation into corruption at Mission College when he was President—which would be excusable except that I’d given him written advice which he declined to take beforehand that would have prevented the debacle. His statements to my face about planning for a satellite campus were also proven false when I got his own emails under the California Public Records Act.

Community College Board of Trustees Office 6

Jan B. Tucker & Nancy Pearlman

Nancy Pearlman is the best thing since sliced bread on the College Board. See In the past I’ve supported her opponent Gabriel Buelna, but I suspect that he got suckered by the “Mexican American” [read that like “Negro” as opposed to Black or African American, and as juxtaposed to Chicano] political hacks around town to run against Nancy. The hacks of all stripes have wanted to take her down for years because she’s too damn honest and principled.

Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Immigrant Rights Brochure for Employers


If you have immigrant employees, documented or undocumented, if they’re detained by ICE that disrupts your business.  Following is a leaflet you can give your employees to instruct them on their rights to consular protection under the Vienna Convention.  To download the brochure in PDF find it at:

Posted in Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Alzheimer’s Disease Forum March 4 2017 in Inglewood

This gallery contains 37 photos.

More photos by Donna Dymally at Tweet

More Galleries | Leave a comment

Bruce Yasmeh: Suicide or Murder?


Behrooz “Bruce” Yasmeh

I only met Behrooz “Bruce” Yasmeh once. Little did I realize when I met him that he’d be the nexus between a case I became peripherally involved in on disability rights and my infamous blog posting on The Small Freaky World of White Collar Crime [].

Yasmeh, along with his brother Alfared “Fred” Yasmeh and two business entities, INE CAPITAL HOLDINGS, LLC and AMERICAN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, are being sued in Los Angeles Superior Court Cases BC527112 and BC553653 for violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Disabled Persons Act. At a hotel they own and operate, they refused to allow a disabled person to rent a room with his assistance animal unless he paid a non-refundable $300.00 “cleaning fee.” When a relative offered to pay the fee, they still refused to rent the room, according to the lawsuit.

Judge Richard L. Fruin—a millionaire and then some according to his Form 700 (Statement of Economic Interests)–threw one of the cases out of court. The Court of Appeals unanimously reversed him in a published decision [See below, Osborne v. Yasmeh (Cal. App. 2nd Dist., Div. 4, July 28, 2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 1118].

A few months later, Yasmeh’s reported missing by his family: Later his body was found by the ocean. Here’s where it gets weird. One story is suicide, which, given that Yasmeh was a very religious Iranian Jew is just not plausible. My sources tell me however that what’s more plausible is that he owed money to “Mr. W” of the Jerusalem Network of the Israeli Mafia that can be very hazardous to your health. Look for the reference to Mr. W in the link above for The Small Freaky World of White Collar Crime.

Quoting from a 2013 memo I provided to a federal law enforcement agency about the inner workings of the Jerusalem Network in Las Vegas—where Bruce Yasmeh had all kinds of interests:

SA Murder

YE succeeded SA as accountant for the Jerusalem

Network. SA had been murdered by the same Bulgarian hit team

that killed SLKB, RT’s girlfriend. I am told that SA was murdered at the behest of the Jerusalem Network because he’d screwed up the accounting for their money laundering operations, inherently a death penalty offense within the Jerusalem Network’s framework.


SLKB was murdered as a message to RT to not withhold his “tax” payments from the W Brothers. It is believed that AW ordered her murder. Allegedly, the Bulgarians were living in a bungalow on the premises where Sherry was staying. She knew DBB and he was assigned to get her to open the door, whereupon the Bulgarians did their thing. I am told that the Bulgarians were questioned by local police and let go, whereupon they split the country.

Incidentally I’m told that after killing SLKB they left her and RT’s infant son alive at the scene with his dead mother.

Before the lawsuit was ever filed against Yasmeh, word had it that he was “the beard” for another Iranian Jewish family whose patriarch had been the money launderer for the late Shah Reza Pahlavi of Iran. A “beard” is a front man and his role had purportedly been to launder $40 million that went missing from a bank owned by one of the family members (that family member got federal prison time for it). Much of the money I’m told was invested through a plaza in Las Vegas with properties and businesses flipped back and forth to muddy up the money trail.

Then too there’s Bruce Yasmeh’s criminal past. On December21, 1981 he was sentenced to up to two years in prison in Oklahoma for First Degree Arson. Oklahoma law, 21 OK Stat § 21-1401 provides that:

A. Any person who willfully and maliciously sets fire to or burns, or by the use of any explosive device, accelerant, ignition device, heat-producing device or substance, destroys in whole or in part, or causes to be burned or destroyed, or aids, counsels or procures the burning or destruction of any building or structure or contents thereof, inhabited or occupied by one or more persons, whether the property of that person or another, or who willfully and maliciously sets fire to or burns, or by the use of any explosive device, accelerant, ignition device, heat-producing device or substance causes a person to be burned, or aids, counsels or procures the burning of a person shall, upon conviction, be guilty of arson in the first degree, which is a felony, and shall be punished by a fine not to exceed Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), or by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections for not more than thirty-five (35) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Did that case come back to haunt him?

So suicide? I can think of at least 40 million other reasons why a lot of people would have wanted Bruce dead if what I’m told is true…

Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump Attacks the California Constitution


Speaking before the Conservative Political Action Conference President Donald Trump has pronounced about the news media: “They shouldn’t be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody’s name,” he declared. “Let their name be put out there.”



(a) Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.

(b) A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, or by a press association or wire service, or any person who has been so connected or employed, shall not be adjudged in contempt by a judicial, legislative, or administrative body, or any other body having the power to issue subpoenas, for refusing to disclose the source of any information procured while so connected or employed for publication in a newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication, or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public.

Nor shall a radio or television news reporter or other person connected with or employed by a radio or television station, or any person who has been so connected or employed, be so adjudged in contempt for refusing to disclose the source of any information procured while so connected or employed for news or news commentary purposes on radio or television, or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public.

As used in this subdivision, “unpublished information” includes information not disseminated to the public by the person from whom disclosure is sought, whether or not related information has been disseminated and includes, but is not limited to, all notes, outtakes, photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort not itself disseminated to the public through a medium of communication, whether or not published information based upon or related to such material has been disseminated.

(Sec. 2 amended June 3, 1980, by Prop. 5. Res.Ch. 77, 1978.)

States are barred from denying immunities…how about the President of the United States?

In Constitutional law, there are rights, privileges, and immunities. Article I, Section 2(b) establishes an immunity. It means that the press is immune from a contempt proceeding for refusing to disclose confidential sources.

This provision was passed by California voters in response to court decisions Rosato v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. App. 3d 190 (1975) and Farr v. Superior Court, 22 Cal. App. 3d 60 (1971), both of which affirmed orders compelling reporters to divulge sources of information regarding pending criminal trials.

After this 1980 amendment to the state constitution in New York Times Co. v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. 3d 453 (1990), the California Supreme Court held that a civil litigant has no interests sufficient to overcome the constitutional reporter’s privilege. Id. At 456. In Miller v. Superior Court, 21 Cal. 4th 883 (1999), the Supreme Court held that a prosecutor in a criminal action has no interests sufficient to overcome the reporter’s immunity. Id. at 901. The Supreme Court explained in Miller, “the absoluteness of the immunity embodied in the shield law only yields to a conflicting federal or, perhaps, state constitutional right.” Id.


California’s legislature should draw a line in the sand and pass a resolution denouncing the President’s attack on our Constitution. I am going to ask my union, the Freelancer Unit of Pacific Media Workers Guild, Local 39521 CWA, AFL-CIO, CLC in turn to pass a resolution asking the California legislature to take this position.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment