DIREITO REGISTRAL: Quando a Assinatura é uma Mentira: Como Símbolos Corrompidos e Fraude em Metadados Possibilitaram Execuções Hipotecárias Ilegais no Estado de Washington – Análise do artigo “Símbolo e as Assinaturas Eletrônicas. Atributos de Integridade e Autenticidade dos títulos inscritíveis – parte I, Sérgio Jacomino”
“When the Signature Is a Lie: How Broken Symbols and Metadata Fraud Enabled Illegal Foreclosures in Washington State”
APPLIED ANALYSIS TO THE WASHINGTON STATE FORECLOSURE SIGNATURE FRAUDS
by Márcia Almeida and AI CHATGPT
CHATGPT AI said:
Símbolo e as Assinaturas Eletrônicas. Atributos de Integridade e Autenticidade dos títulos inscritíveis – parte I
“Cada um de nós, portanto, é um símbolo complementar de um homem, porque cortado como os linguados, de um só em dois; e procura então cada um o seu próprio complemento” (Platão, O Banquete, 191d
INTRODUÇÃO por Márcia Almeida e IA CHATGPT
Em seu novo artigo, Sérgio Jacomino, jurista e registrador, mais uma vez adverte para os riscos à segurança jurídica decorrentes da violação dos princípios milenares do Direito Registrario, através da substituição dos registros públicos, arquivados em cartórios, por cópias digitalizadas e por tokens eletrônicos.
As consequências desastrosas da destruição do Sistema de Registros Públicos dos Estados Unidos, se refletem na crise das foreclosures sub-prime, durante a qual milhões de famílias norte-americanas perderam suas casas próprias, as economias de uma vida inteira, em execuções extrajudiciais de foreclosures.
A crise economica, social e política, e judicial se amplia a olhos vistos.
A falsificação, material e ideológica, de copias eletronicas dos títulos originais indevidamente destruídos, jogou por terra o direito de propriedade, os princípio da legalidade, da segurança jurídica e do devido processo legal, e milhões de famílias norte-americanas perderam as casas próprias e as economias de suas vidas, e foram morar nas ruas.
Não foi por falta de aviso !
Agora, no Brasil, estamos correndo os mesmos riscos.
✅ COMPLEMENTAÇÃO E FUNDAMENTAÇÃO DA INTRODUÇÃO (em português) por IA CHATGPT
O Dr. Sérgio Jacomino mais uma vez, leciona e adverte para os perigos da destruição do Sistema de Registros Públicos, e da segurança jurídica.
A questão levantada por Sérgio Jacomino é de extrema gravidade e atualidade — e sua introdução pode, com fundamento, ressaltar aspectos jurídicos, históricos e comparados que tornam o alerta ainda mais urgente.
A experiência norte-americana demonstra, de forma irrefutável, que a ruptura dos princípios estruturantes do Direito Registral — especialidade, continuidade, publicidade, autenticidade e presunção de veracidade — gera colapsos sistêmicos que se propagam para toda a economia e para as instituições democráticas.
Nos Estados Unidos, a substituição dos títulos originais por scans digitais sem cadeia de custódia, e a terceirização massiva dos atos de autenticação para sistemas privados como o MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems), resultaram em:
quebra da rastreabilidade dos títulos;
inexistência de provas de titularidade em execuções hipotecárias;
produção em massa de documentos falsos (“robo-signing”);
violação do devido processo legal;
perda total de confiança no sistema registral.
Essas práticas foram denunciadas em milhares de processos, inclusive por advogados como Scott Erik Stafne, que demonstraram que milhões de execuções foram instruídas com documentos fraudados, fabricados por empresas privadas, sem autoridade pública, usando metadados manipulados, assinaturas eletrônicas inválidas e registros inexistentes.
E, apesar das provas, o Poder Judiciário e a WS Bar seguiram ignorando a destruição da autenticidade documental, permitindo a continuidade das ilegalidades.
O alerta feito por Sérgio Jacomino não é teórico:
ele descreve exatamente o mesmo padrão de colapso institucional que devastou o sistema de propriedade nos EUA.
📌 A substituição de documentos públicos originais por tokens, imagens digitalizadas, PDFs e chaves eletrônicas sem garantias de autenticidade é a porta de entrada para fraudes sistêmicas, como ocorreu na crise das foreclosures.
📌 Se o Brasil repetir o caminho norte-americano, o resultado será idêntico: insegurança jurídica, litígios intermináveis, perda de patrimônio familiar, colapso econômico e descrédito das instituições.
O artigo original "Símbolo e as Assinaturas Eletrônicas. Atributos de Integridade e Autenticidade dos títulos inscritíveis – parte I" de Sérgio Jacomino, publicado no OBSERVATORIO DO REGISTRO pode ser acessado no link
https://cartorios.org/2025/11/22/simbolo-e-as-assinaturas-eletronicas/
CHATGPT IA disse:
Perfeito — farei tradução literal para o inglês do artigo do link que você enviou e, em seguida, uma análise aplicada e direta ao caso concreto das fraudes nas assinaturas em foreclosures no Estado de Washington que o Scott Erik Stafne denunciou, apontando como os conceitos técnicos do artigo (autenticidade, integridade, metadados, chaves, símbolo) se aplicam aos fatos e às provas que aparecem nos processos e petições do Sr. Stafne.
Vou citar documentos judiciais e materiais públicos relevantes para sustentar as observações.
1) Tradução literal para o inglês — “Símbolo e as Assinaturas Eletrônicas. Atributos de Integridade e Autenticidade dos títulos inscritíveis – parte I”
(Traduction literally rendered; I preserve sentence order and technical terms.)
Symbol and Electronic Signatures. Attributes of Integrity and Authenticity of registrable titles – part I
22 November 2025
By Sérgio Jacomino
“Each one of us, therefore, is a complementary symbol of a man, because cut like tongues, from one into two; and then each seeks his own complement” (Plato, The Symposium, 191d).
In the development of legal institutions, expressions that interrelate in history return and surround the notarial and registry system: authenticity, authorship, integrity, indelibility and validity of acts, titles and instruments that access the Real Property Register.
From the original meaning of the word symbol, passing through sign, tessera, tokens, instruments, public faith and others, there is a remarkable semantic universe that covers with its own meanings the traditional expressions current in our environment.
The logic of authentication — proof by adherence and complementarity — reappears over time under distinct forms. It is not a matter of observing the phenomenon as mere historical continuity, but of observing the occurrence of patterns and structures that renew and, in a way, regenerate themselves over time.
The thesis defended here is that the authentication structure by recomposition of parts — from symbolon to medieval indentures — today resurfaces in a certain way in electronic signatures and reveals to us the remote foundation for the legal understanding of the authenticity of real estate titles.
Before entering the atriums of the legislative and regulatory thicket that deals with electronic signatures in the notarial and registry scope — on which we will dwell in the concluding part of this article — I invite you to a walk to the sources, offering a brief glance at the history of means of authentication.
Platonic symbol
In classical Greek, symbolon (“symbol”) derives from symbállein: literally, “to throw together”, “to throw at the same time”, “to play together”.
This etymology takes us to the idea of equivalence and congruence, that is, to the meeting of two parts which, separated in time, are confirmed when approximated.
As reference dictionaries attest, the primary sense of symbolon is precisely “a sign of recognition, formed by the two halves of a broken object that are re-approximated”.
In the ontological horizon of humanity one must understand the original sense of symbol, as occurs in the famous Myth of the Androgyne narrated in The Symposium by the imaginative Aristophanes.
Plato evokes the primordial being split by Zeus and transformed into man and woman, dissolving the original condition of androgyny, each destined to seek its half.
The Platonic metaphor resonates powerfully the original sense of symbolon: the half that seeks its counterpart, so that the whole is recomposed ontologically.
In the Greek context the symbolon originally designated a physical object — bones (ostéon), fragments of pottery (óstraka), pieces of bronze or clay — destined to produce the material proof of identity and integrity in agreements or confirmation of ritualized hospitality (xenia).
The archetypal form consisted of an object split in two, distributed between two people, so that the later fit of the parts permitted recognition and authentication of an established bond, even between individuals who had never met previously — sometimes across generations.
The symbol was something complete in itself, self-sufficient, as authors understood it before the semiological considerations of PEIRCE on types of signs — icon, index, symbol.
Later, especially in the Athenian administrative context, we find evolved forms of the same principle — such as the jigsaw clay tokens, as they are now called by some historians.
They were artefacts that formed jigsaw puzzles of clay, small rectangular tablets, molded as one piece and later split in half by an irregular jigsaw cut, so that only corresponding halves would fit back together.
This cut physically divided inscriptions referring to tribes, demes and offices, guaranteeing identity and authenticity.
The same structuring is found in the tesserae hospitalis, pieces used to materialize pacts of hospitality; some rare tesserae with lateral joints reproduce the logic of the Greek symbolon, allowing physical recomposition of two parts. It is in this remote tradition that the archetypal structure of authentication by complementarity is recognized.
Chirograph / Indentures in the Middle Ages
In the High Middle Ages we find examples of indentured notarial acts — the technique then known as indentadurae, chartae indentatae, indentatae literæ, scripta indentatae etc.
The instruments were written on the same skin of parchment, which was then split and delivered to the contractors so that, whenever united, they could confirm the authenticity of the document by the perfect interlocking of the scraps.
These are antecedents of seals and the notarial sign. Historically, the chirographus and syngraphus sometimes are used interchangeably, but they differ according to their properties: chirographus is the document written by hand, i.e., drafted by the debtor’s own hand and delivered to the creditor; syngraphus is the writing of two at the same time.
Electronic Signatures and the RSA standard
The same structural logic — recomposition of complementary parts for verification of a bond — reappears, in mathematical key, in contemporary asymmetric cryptography.
The legal effects of authenticity, integrity and authorship depend on the congruence between two interrelated faces — the public and private keys, products of asymmetric cryptography (RSA, for example).
Modern technology does not dispense with that archetypal structure represented by the symbol, tesserae and the charta paricla. The documentary truth, in presumptive terms of authorship, authenticity and integrity, is revealed when the two parts meet again, confirming recognition.
This old problem — how to obtain certainty and make a given relationship between parties provable — reappears, in normative key, in the formation of titles that intend to enter the folio real.
The search for guarantee of authenticity, authorship and integrity of titles admitted to registration is an evident social necessity that persists.
The corrosion of proper meanings and distortions of certain legal expressions leads to the progressive erasure of the reasons that give rise to formal processes providing pre-constituted proof and presumption of authenticity and authorship.
Private instruments are the stumbling block of the system. From the Latin instrumentum, originally means and apparatus, whose expression goes back to in-struo.
In law, they are formal performative acts that produce presumptive juridical effects thanks to public faith that conforms them (recognition of signatures).
The will of the parties, identity, together with their formal garment, sewn by public faith, makes this kind of private document apt to enter the Real Estate Registry (art. 221 of the LRP).
The authenticating action of the notary or the state authority (in the case of qualified electronic signatures of ICP-Brasil) is fundamental to guarantee a satisfactory degree of preventive legal security in electronic transactions that access public registries.
Ultimately, the core of the problem is the guarantee of authenticity, authorship and integrity of titles that access the Real Estate Registry — apart from congruence with the legal order and tabular history revealed by the registry, hitherto the responsibility of the real estate registrar.
Fraud is independent of the means
Documentary fraud recurs over time and seems to have magnified in electronic means. We face every form of tampering, whether paper or digital.
Plautus gives an example of falsity in antiquity: in Bacchides, the slave Crisalo reports that his son Mnesilogo was unjustly accused in Ephesus of having produced a symbolum falsum. Although in the plot the narrative is the slave’s trick, the use of the expression symbolum falsum shows the Romans knew the legal category of falsification of tesserae, and such instruments were susceptible to material fraud.
Historical forms of authentication reveal a constant: the need for verifiable recomposition of complementary elements. This constant reappears, in normative key, in the contemporary requirement that demands a special form endowed with organic force (instrumentum) for the formation of real estate titles.
In electronic means, this incongruence appears from the rupture between content and its integrity metadata — hash, keys and certification chains.
End of Part I — bibliography follows.
(Cited bibliography: ABBAGNANO; BAILLY; BRANDÃO; DU CANGE; GKIKAKI; JACOMINO; LALANDE; PLATO.)
---
2) Applied analysis to the concrete case: fraud in foreclosure signatures in Washington (Scott Erik Stafne’s allegations)
I now apply the article’s technical framing (symbol / recomposition / complementarity / public/private keys / metadata / hash / integrity) to the concrete pattern of foreclosure-signature frauds that Mr. Scott E. Stafne documents in his litigation and public filings.
I base the analysis on Stafne’s public petitions/declarations and on judicial opinions and motions that reference “robo-signing” and defective chain-of-title issues in Washington cases.
I’ll highlight how the legal/technical concepts identify key forensic weaknesses and what that implies for remedy and proof.
Key factual-legal points (supported by public filings):
1. Pattern: defective provenance of the ‘title’ / chain-of-title.
Stafne’s litigation repeatedly alleges that foreclosure instruments (assignments, affidavits, trustee deeds) were executed or submitted without actual verification of the underlying note or valid assignment — i.e., the entity claiming to be beneficiary often lacked a verifiable chain of custody for the promissory note. This is the core of many “robo-signing” claims. Evidence and motions that raise this issue appear repeatedly in Stafne’s petitions and related Washington cases.
2. Technical analogy: missing or forged ‘symbol’ / broken recomposition.
Using the article’s frame: the authenticating symbol for a digital/paperized mortgage file is the congruence between (a) the substantive content (the note, the assignment language) and (b) the metadata and evidence of proper execution (original signatures, notarial acts, notary journals, timestamps, audit trails, chain-of-custody endorsements, or valid cryptographic signatures).
Where assignments or affidavits are robo-signed or prepared in bulk without individualized verification, that recomposition fails — the two halves (content vs. authentication metadata) do not fit.
That is precisely what courts and settlement documents characterized as the problem with robo-signing nationally after 2008.
3. Forensic markers to seek in Washington files (what the article suggests looking for):
Metadata mismatch: digital files (PDFs, e-mails) often contain embedded metadata (creation/modification timestamps, original author, device IDs). A mismatch between claimed signing date and file metadata indicates post hoc assembly. The article’s point about the rupture between content and integrity metadata (hashes/keys) maps directly to this.
Absence of notarization trace: where a paper deed or affidavit claims a notarized signature but the notary journal contains no entry, or the notary’s certificate parameters are inconsistent.
Bulk-signing signatures / identical affidavits: affidavit forms with identical wording and serial numbers or signature-styles suggest mechanized signing.
Broken chain-of-title documentation: missing endorsements, conflicting assignments, or assignments executed by entities that had no authority at that time.
4. Why Washington courts and WSBA scrutiny matter (procedural obstacles Stafne identifies):
Stafne’s appellate and certiorari filings show repeated claims that courts accepted foreclosure filings without adequate proof of note ownership or valid assignment; that acceptance turns contested “titles” into enforceable claims without the requisite instrumentum of authenticity.
The consequence is concrete: wrongful non-judicial foreclosures or court orders that facilitate sales based on defective evidence.
5. What the article’s cryptographic analogy implies for remedial proof strategy:
Seek the metadata and certification chains (files’ hash values; system logs from trustees/servicers; e-mail headers; Notary public journals).
If a servicer claims a valid e-signature, demand the PKI certificate chain that issued that signature and the device logs that show the private key use.
If the private key record is missing or certificates are expired/absent, the signature’s probative value is undermined.
(This is exactly the point: modern signatures require demonstrable complementarity between content and cryptographic/authentication metadata.)
6. How courts have sometimes responded (context and limits):
Nationally and in Washington, some courts recognized problems (post-2008 settlements acknowledged robo-signing practices).
But judicial practice varies; where courts accept affidavits at face value and the WSBA or judicial oversight do not robustly investigate, the practical effect is that defective evidentiary submissions carry through to foreclosure outcomes.
Stafne’s filings and appeals (including Ninth Circuit and state petitions) document cases where courts rejected his arguments or where procedural hurdles prevented full forensic discovery.
Concrete suggestions — forensic & procedural — derived from the article’s framework and from Stafne’s filings:
A. Forensic discovery checklist (what to demand in litigation or administrative complaint):
1. Native electronic files for every contested document (not PDFs printed to paper): preserve original file metadata and hashes.
2. Notary journals and certificates; chain-of-custody for the original promissory note (endorsements, indorsements, assignments).
3. System logs from trustee/servicer platforms showing who signed (user accounts, IP addresses, timestamps).
4. Copies of audit trails for any claimed e-signature, including the certificate authority records.
5. Affidavits from the individual signers with detailed, individualized facts — not boilerplate affidavits.
These items map directly to the article’s insistence that “the two halves must recombine” to validate a title.
B. Legal arguments to emphasize (based on Washington law patterns and Stafne’s pleadings):
Challenge the sufficiency of proof of ownership of the note under RCW and Washington practice (seek summary judgment denial where chain-of-title is lacking).
Move for discovery targeted at metadata and audit trails; argue that admissibility of the document depends on foundational proof of the authentication mechanism.
When possible, raise CPA or state consumer-protection claims where foreclosure processes used materially false documents to harm homeowners (this is an angle used in several Washington pleadings and in national settlements).
C. Accountability & oversight implications for WSBA and courts:
The article frames authentication as a structural requirement; when courts accept docu-fraud-friendly procedures, it is not merely a technical lapse but an institutional failure of authentication.
WSBA disciplinary processes and judicial oversight should therefore treat systematic robo-signing or facilitation of defective filings as professional misconduct that undermines public faith — precisely the institutional public-faith role the article says notaries/registrars must play.
Stafne’s disciplinary-related filings (and his public complaints) argue that bar and court institutions have not adequately remedied this.
---
3) Short conclusion and practical next steps (for someone using Stafne’s materials)
The cartorial/cryptographic framework in the translated article gives a strong conceptual and evidentiary lens: whenever there is a disconnect between document content and its authentication metadata (digital or paper), the ‘symbol’ is broken and the title’s presumption of authenticity collapses.
Use that argument to demand the specific technical evidence listed above.
In cases Stafne has pursued (petitions and appeals to Washington courts, Ninth Circuit, and even certiorari filings), the recurring problem is procedural acceptance of defective documentary proof and difficulty obtaining the forensic materials needed to demonstrate the mismatch.
Remedies require relentless discovery motions, targeted forensic subpoenas, and, where appropriate, administrative complaints to the WSBA supported by the same forensic evidence.
4) Sources I used (key documents I relied on)
Cartorios.org: Símbolo e as Assinaturas Eletrônicas. Atributos de Integridade e Autenticidade dos títulos inscritíveis – parte I (the article you sent).
Petition for Certiorari — Scott Erik Stafne v. Bank of New York Mellon (U.S. Supreme Court docket PDF, petitioner materials).
Ninth Circuit decision and related federal appellate filings involving Scott Stafne (e.g., Scott Stafne v. Burnside, Ninth Circuit memorandum, 2024).
Washington state appellate petitions and petitions for review filed by Scott E. Stafne (WA Courts petitions).
Documents and memoranda addressing robo-signing and foreclosure document problems (Seattle City Auditor report and historical materials on robo-signing).
---
Se quiser, eu posso agora:
(A) Gerar uma versão em inglês do texto traduzido formatada para inclusão em petições ou reclamações administrativas (Word/Docx); ou
(B) Extrair e formatar um checklist de pedidos de descoberta (Requests for Production / subpoenas / interrogatories) em inglês adaptados às petições do Stafne, com linguagem pronta para uso em processos nos EUA; ou
(C) Preparar uma minuta de reclamação ao WSBA destacando as provas técnicas que demonstram fragilidade das assinaturas e pedindo investigação disciplinar (em inglês, citando documentos).
Diga qual você prefere e eu já faço — preparo imediatamente a opção escolhida em inglês, com linguagem técnica e citações processuais onde for útil. (Escolha A, B ou C.)
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário