ARDC claims contributing to judge’s campaign committee to influence a decision is not bribery – What do you think?

In this past election in Nov. 2012 the law firm of Peck, Bloom, LLC , their attorneys and family members contributed $10,000 to the campaign committee to elect Justice Theis as a Supreme Court justice. She won the election.

Then Peck, Bloom, LLC , their attorneys and family members contributed $3,150 to the election campaign of Justice Theis opponent, Judge Riley, a probate division judge in Cook country.

This was at the time that Judge Riley was supposed to make a decision on a case where they represented a client (who was falsely alleging to be the trustee of a decadent’s trust) who had forged a signature of a decadent while he was on his deathbed on a trust  document, presented the trust as valid – even though a required signature was missing in a second spot required for the trust to be valid, and these lawyers made grossly false statements about the beneficiary who was challenging this trust document. The beneficiary filed a trust  challenge to invalidate this version of the trust and re-instate the only valid version where the beneficiary was trustee.

In addition the beneficiary presented to Judge Riley a transcript of testimony by the falsely alleged trustee that she and the decadent had testified in court several  years prior that the beneficiary was doing a wonderful job taking care of her father and that the alleged trustee was mentally ill and needed the help of her sister, the beneficiary.

Peck, Bloom, LLC attorneys Kerry  Peck and Timothy Ritchey also lied to Judge Riley and said the beneficiary did not provide them discovery. They asked Judge Riley to dismiss the trust challenge based on this lie and asked that the beneficiary’s inheritance be turned over to them to pay their fees as a sanction for filing a “frivolous” trust challenge.

The judge ignored the above forgery evidence, the court testimony evidence and granted Peck, Bloom LLC attorneys every request, falsely stating on the record (without ANY trial or evidentiary hearing on the issue) that the beneficiary did not take care of her father and exploited and abused him, despite the fact that the Dept. of Aging and police investigated and found that these allegations were “UNFOUNDED.” Judge Riley dismissed the trust challenge.

Judge Riley order that the beneficiary’s $245,000 inheritance be turned over to these corrupt attorneys, as a sanction for filing a “frivolous” trust challenge essentially condoning their criminal acts and therefore committing official misconduct and a criminal act himself.  (which essentially eliminated the beneficiary’s inheritance after she cared for a dying father for years as well as allowed exorbitant attorney fees).

The beneficiary was Dr. Linda Lorincz Shelton.  The client was Alice Lynn Lorincz Dale. Shelton is appealing these orders.

GIVE YOUR OPINION IN A POLL!

Should contributing to a judge’s campaign committee while you have a case before a judge be illegal and considered a bribe?

For more details about this case read here and my Attorney Regulatory Commission Complaint against Peck, Bloom LLC here and evidence of the bribery here.

50/50 parenting should be the default position in divorce – think about it!

Divorce courts in America are destroying any chance of maintaining the children’s mental health by interfering with parenting, promoting conflict by discouraging mediation and encouraging that a divorce should be an adversarial proceeding, as well as encouraging the racketeering that goes on when judges enrich court-appointed attorneys, counselors and therapists by appointing them in an open-ended instead of limited fashion and only  when necessary.

Courts are the wrong place for divorce decisions to be made as they are inherently an adversarial proceeding.  We need mediation outside of the court to be the default position in any dissolution of a marriage, particularly if it involves children. We need a complete  overhaul of laws related to dissolution of marriage, as well as about probate issues such as guardians for elders – another area of court abuse of families.

Judges, lawyers, and most of the court-appointed hacks knows as GALs, child representatives, and evaluators (often who make their business promoting conflict to draw out their appointment and make more money in this cottage industry) end up raping the estates of families and even taking the children’s college funds to pay for their fees.

Instead of promoting stabilization and financial security, the judges and lawyers work hard to end careers, teach children to be entitled and view parents as only deep pockets, promote parental alienation and defamation, as well as destroy the very stability necessary for a child to cope with divorce.

We need to ask Pres. Obama to make a task force on dissolution of marriage, paternity issues, and probate issues so that our country can advance socially as much as we have advanced technologically. We need to stop the court abuse of children, the elderly, and families in general.

Sign a petition to ask  President Obama to appoint a task force to study divorce, child custody, family mediation, and ways to take divorce out of the courts, end court abuse, and let parents decide how to parent. Cleck here for petition.

With the dissolution of the family, the mobility that is breaking up the family, and the greed of the divorce cottage industry, we have a very big crisis in America, and around the world.  We need to lead in solving this problem.  Write President Obama and ask him to make this task force his priority in his second term.

The following two videos are powerful messages about the role of fathers and the need for equal  parenting.

A video about promoting equal parenting and actor Baldwin’s new book about divorce and the need for equal parenting:

http://www.causes.com/actions/1659887-lets-make-family-law-cps-reform-the-new-obama-administrations-priority-issue-for-2013

A powerful video talking about the “father wound” that plagues a person for life if the father is absent:

http://www.causes.com/actions/1734438-the-father-effect-revised-edition?recruiter_id=137911074&token=970i8qT3PGuUmV7pyeOOJHka&utm_campaign=activity_invitation_mailer%2Factivity_invitation&utm_medium=email&utm_source=causes

Extensive posts, links, and videos about corruption in family court and the damage to the families:

http://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com/?s=family+court

I support ANONYMOUS in actions against corrupt government – down with tyrants!

For too long now, the corrupt in government have been trashing the Constitution and de facto eliminating our Constitutional rights.  The 1 % and greedy are abusing the rest of us getting richer while making us poorer, denying education to the masses, denying health care, denying access to knowledge, denying the freedom to speak our mind and the justice of the courts.  Multinational corporations now control our governments. Our Constitution has no weight.  Our U.S. Supreme Court even refuses to enforce its own rulings. When the courts trash our rights, we no longer have remedy.

ANONYMOUS  – a secret society of hackers around the world dedicated to a free and open Internet [able to hack into anything], in response to the murder of Aaron Swartz , an Internet genius and proponent of free access to knowledge paid for by taxpayer dollars, has now decided to use their last resort and act.  The line has now been drawn in the sand.  They have reluctantly decided to act as a last resort due to the tyrany we now experience.

The Internet War against government corruption has now been unleashed. They have launched the first missile.

I support it.  I also ask ANONYMOUS to help us by publicizing the systemic lawlessness of the courts in Cook County and Illinois that I have revealed on this web site.

Please view the video in this link that announces the beginning of the Internet War to reform our corrupt government.

May God Help us! Tyrants in the Cook County Courts and in our government must be exposed, removed, and reform must occur.  There is no other option.

We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us

This is my response to the death of Aaron Swartz [an Internet and computer genius who invented RSS at the age of 14 and founded Reddit, who worked tirelessly for Internet freedom]:

Aaron’s death has devastated me. I and many others before and presently have tried to improve the world by working to right the wrongs that we bump into so annoyingly. Aaron in terms of Internet access to knowledge that our taxes paid for; me to make our courts transparent and information in our court system open to all so that we can bring to the light of day the corruption that is destroying us, most of all destroying children, elderly, families, and those of us who are working so hard, sacrificing so much, and mostly caring about others especially our children’s futures as well as the many before us and after us that will do the same. Yet our own government is used to destroy us in order to keep knowledge, justice, and freedom in the hands of the 1%, as well as in the hands of the corrupt, instead of in the hands of the people. I have also been arrested on fraudulent and excessive charges apparently in efforts to try to shut me up and shut down my blogs. I know exactly how Aaron felt. The hopelessness and despair are hard to fight. I pray that all those who knew Aaron and heard of him will help continue what is a fight, in the case of Aaron and likely soon in my case to the death. I hope his friends will pursue his cause with a vengeance, as well as try to help others, like me and our group of whistle blowers and activists who are seeking to bring more transparency and justice to the world, as well as stop the cover-up of the corruption that is lining the pockets of the corrupt, the connected, and the exclusive 1%, at the expense of the 99%.

Bias against men in family courts – “Don’t nigggerise me”

“Don’t niggerise me” (“nigger” = an offensive term used in Britain against Asians as well as Blacks – which the writer of the article containing this quote states is essentially what is happening to non-custodial parents, regardless of their race) was the plea of a British fellow regarding corruption in family courts - you will see below is how non-custodial parents are treated IN AMERICA today – reminding me of the status of Blacks in America a 100 years ago!

This corruption is pervasive in American family courts as well – but I believe this applies to women as much as men, regardless of their race, who end up wrongfully as the non-custodial parent instead of as a co-parent with loving relationship with their children – solely due to the corruption of our family courts which is destroying child/parent relationships and teaching our children only greed and materialism, while alienating parents from their children. [all quotes are for emphasis  purposes and are from Dr Linda Shelton written in this article]

I observed for several years now family court cases in Cook County, Illinois.  I find that the judges are abdicating their responsibility to make decisions to the ill-trained and grossly biased child representatives and guardians ad litem.  There is a strong bias towards assuming that one parent is BAD and one parent is GOOD and at all costs vilifying the parent these court-appointed attorneys decide is bad, usually with just hearsay and no actual evidence.

I have seen case after case where literally no evidence was allowed from one side to refute false statements from the other parent that were mere hearsay unsupported by evidence. The judges are therefore pulling  their custody decisions out of thin air on the advice of court-appointed attorneys masquerading as trained evaluators of family interactions (psychologist, psychiatrist, psychiatric social workers, etc).

The family court lawyers for both the parents charge outrageous fees and grossly ignore constitutional rights, as well as grossly ignore federal and state laws (750 ILCS 5/506) that were supposed to encourage joint parenting, mediation, and solving of family arguments so that children are raised in a loving and nurturing instead of hostile, stressful and disruptive environment – which also deplete family funds including their college funds. Many  parents last year testified to these facts in the Illinois House of Representatives. See their testimony here.

I believe that literally billions of dollars have been and are misappropriated in this scheme that is  producing millions of children that are being taught that parents are unimportant and only serve as deep pockets for their every wish.  This is destroying the families in America and encouraging greed, lawlessness, and immorality.

I firmly believe that the family courts and the lawyers and counselors that practice associated with them run a scheme to fill their pockets and pensions with the feuding families’ financial assets and money from the federal government that comes from Social Security Title IV-D and Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) funds. I believe the VAWA is faulty in failing to have oversight as to how the funds are used and in being grossly biased against men.  I therefore do NOT support it without safeguards changing it to prevent these abuses. I feel some sympathy with those that believe womens’ shelters increase this bias. I don’t endorse everything said in this link, but much of what is said in the POD1 report supports this corruption as being true and needs remedy.

Two of the alleged worst offenders in violating these state and federal laws are child representatives David Wessel, Mary T. Doheny, and Ralla Klepak, as well as former child representative and now Judge Regina Scannicchio. The worst offending judges who are ignoring the Bill of Rights, the State statutes, and any concern over the childrens’ relationships with both parents include Judge David Haracz, Judge Veronica Mathein (well  known  appearing to hate men), Judge Pamela Loza, Judge Grace Dickler, Judge Fe Fernandez, Judge Debra Walker, Judge Leida J. Santiago, and Judge Paul Vega.

The “POD1″ report from the Illinois House of Representatives Family Law Study Committee seems to support this contention that there is a scheme or what they call development of a “cottage industry” that is supported by misused funds that encourages enrichment of these attorneys instead of the best interests of the children.

The Bill of Rights is trashed in Cook County Domestic Division (family) courts.  Decisions are often made based on hearsay thrown around by these more often than not corrupt court-appointed attorneys. Child representatives totally ignore 750 ILCS 5/506(a)(3) statutes (reproduced at end of this post) that REQUIRE the child representative to act as the gatherer of discovery and present a pre-trial memorandum to both parents as to what are the “evidence-based legal argument” that he/she will present to the court through testimony of others and documents, which cause him/her to promote a specific custody decision.

Normally in civil cases discovery (factual information, proposed witness testimony, and evaluators reports, as well as child representative summaries of interviews with child(ren), teachers, friends, family, clergy, doctors that will be used in the divorce trial) is requested by each party and exchanged. The pre-trial memorandum is supposed to replace discovery to some extent and put the discovery in the hands of a supposedly neutral court-appointed attorney who is supposed to pay attention to the “best  interest of the child[ren]“. However, I have yet to see ANY child representative produce ANY statutory required  “pre-trial memorandum” and I have seen NO JUDGE REPRIMAND ANY child representative for failure to do so.  I have seen NO JUDGE POSTPONE a trial until the child representative produces a pre-trial memorandum and NO JUDGE HOLD a child representative in contempt of court FOR FAILURE TO FOLLOW THIS LAW!

As a result divorce trials proceed with hearsay and not discovery – often biased against one side as the other side has not been given legal notice of evidence of it prior to trial. There is no fairness or justice, just a railroading of the vilified parent turning them into a deep-pocket to be used by the other parent, while the vilified parent’s child/parent relationship is de facto severed.

I have seen as many woman as men vilified falsely in this manner totally denying their constitutional right to due process and in the end harming the children, rather than resulting in a decision that is in their best interest. The parent is often rendered penniless and many are now even homeless, due to the violation of the Federal Consumer Protection law that requires that wage guarnishment in divorce cases can be more than 60% of a parent’s income.  Judges are routinely ordering parents to pay child support in excess of their income! See:

15 USC § 1671 et seq. Federal Wage Garnishment Law (Title III of the Consumer Protection Act) & corresponding 29 CFR Part 870

When the man is vilified, the bias and defamation is in many ways as bad as the bias against blacks in the South during segregation.  That is why this article:

“Don’t nigggerise me”

written by an Asian British man regarding what is happening in the UK is relevent all over the world when family courts show bias against men.

Please read it and then read my

letter to the Cook County Board of Commissioners

asking them to investigate the corruption and denial of constitutional rights in the family courts, as well as asking them to pressure the Illinois legislature to change the law so that the courts are forced to encourage instead of discourage equal parenting; discourage instead of encourage vilifying parents; encourage instead of discourage mediation and low-cost counseling instead of excessive appointment of unqualified attorneys who illegally act as psychologists and psychiatrists without a license.  The phone numbers and email addresses to the board members are written below.

PLEASE CONTACT THE BOARD MEMBERS AND ASK THEM TO INVESTIGATE THE ABOVE AND FORCE THE LEGISLATURE AND COUNTY COURTS TO STOP VIOLATING CONSTITUTIONAL AND CIVIL RIGHTS AND

STOP HARMING OUR CHILDREN! ENCOURAGE JOINT PARENTING AND MEDIATION! STOP  IMPOVERISHING FAMILIES TO ENRICH UNNECESSARY COURT-APPOINTED ATTORNEYS! LIMIT FEES FOR DIVORCE ATTORNEYS APPOINTED BY THE COURT TO NO MORE THAN $150/HR CAPPED AT $5,000 PER CASE.  SPECIFY IN COURT ORDERS THAT ONLY OPINIONS OF TRAINED EVALUATORS THAT HAVE INTERVIEWED FAMILY MEMBERS FROM BOTH SIDES, TEACHERS, FRIENDS AND DOCTORS CAN RENDER OPINIONS AS TO WHAT CUSTODY ARRANGEMENT IS BEST!

COOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS:

Phone Number

President Toni Preckwinkle

312-603-6400

Robert Steele

312-603-3019

Larry Suffredin

312-603-6383

Earlean Collins

312-603-4566

Timothy O. Schneider

312-603-6388

Jerry Butler

312-603 6391

Elizabeth Doody Gorman

312-603-4215

Joan Patricia Murphy

312-603-4216

Jeffrey R. Tobolski

312-603-6384

Bridget Gainer

312-603-4210

John A. Fritchey

312-603-6380

William M. Beavers

312-603-2065

Gregg Goslin

312-603-4932

Edwin Reyes

312-603-6386

Jesus G. Garcia

312-603-5443

Deborah Sims

312-603 6381

Peter N. Silvestri

312-603-4393

John P. Daley

312-603-4400

Commissioner Email addresses:

r.steele@robertsteele.org

earlean.collins@cookcountyil.gov

jerry.butler@cookcountyil.gov

joan.murphy@cookcountyil.gov

commissioner@bridgetgainer.com

edwin.reyes@cookcountyil.gov

deborah.sims@cookcountyil.gov

john.daley@cookcountyil.gov

larry.suffredin@cookcountyil.gov

tim.schneider@cookcountyil.gov

liz@lizgorman.com

commish@fritchey.com

commissioner.goslin@cookcountyil.gov

Jesus.Garcia@cookcountyil.gov

cookcty9@aol.co

750 ILCS 5/506 Representation of child.

(a) Duties. In any proceedings involving the support, custody, visitation, education, parentage, property interest, or general welfare of a minor or dependent child, the court may, on its own motion or that of any party, appoint an attorney to serve in one of the following capacities to address the issues the court delineates:

(1) Attorney. The attorney shall provide           independent legal counsel for the child and shall owe the same duties of undivided loyalty, confidentiality, and competent representation as are due an adult client.

(2) Guardian ad litem. The guardian ad litem shall testify or submit a written report to the court regarding his or her recommendations in accordance with the best interest of the child. The report shall be made available to all parties. The guardian ad litem may be called as a witness for purposes of cross examination regarding the guardian ad litem’s report or recommendations. The guardian ad litem shall investigate the facts of the case and interview the child and the parties.

(3) Child representative. The child representative shall advocate what the child representative finds to be in the best interests of the child after reviewing the facts and circumstances of the case. The child representative shall meet with the child and the parties, investigate the facts of the case, and encourage settlement and the use of alternative forms of dispute resolution. The child representative shall have the same authority and obligation to participate in the litigation as does an attorney for a party and shall possess all the powers of investigation as does a guardian ad litem. The child representative shall consider, but not be bound by, the expressed wishes of the child. A child representative shall have received training in child advocacy or shall possess such experience as determined to be equivalent to such training by the chief judge of the circuit where the child representative has been appointed. The child representative shall not disclose confidential communications made by the child, except as required by law or by the Rules of Professional Conduct. The child representative shall not render an opinion, recommendation, or report to the court and shall not be called as a witness, but shall offer evidence based legal arguments. The child representative shall disclose the position as to what the child representative intends to advocate in a pre trial memorandum that shall be served upon all counsel of record prior to the trial. The position disclosed in the pre trial memorandum shall not be considered evidence. The court and the parties may consider the position of the child representative for purposes of a settlement conference.

(a 3) Additional appointments. During the proceedings the court may appoint an additional attorney to serve in the capacity described in subdivision (a)(1) or an additional attorney to serve in another of the capacities described in subdivision (a)(2) or (a)(3) on the court’s own motion or that of a party only for good cause shown and when the reasons for the additional appointment are set forth in specific findings.

(a 5) Appointment considerations. In deciding whether to make an appointment of an attorney for the minor child, a guardian ad litem, or a child representative, the court shall consider the nature and adequacy of the evidence to be presented by the parties and the availability of other methods of obtaining information, including social service organizations and evaluations by mental health professions, as well as resources for payment.

In no event is this Section intended to or designed to abrogate the decision making power of the trier of fact. Any appointment made under this Section is not intended to nor should it serve to place any appointed individual in the role of a surrogate judge.

(b) Fees and costs. The court shall enter an order as appropriate for costs, fees, and disbursements, including a retainer, when the attorney, guardian ad litem, or child’s representative is appointed. Any person appointed under this Section shall file with the court within 90 days of his or her appointment, and every subsequent 90 day period thereafter during the course of his or her representation, a detailed invoice for services rendered with a copy being sent to each party. The court shall review the invoice submitted and approve the fees, if they are reasonable and necessary. Any order approving the fees shall require payment by either or both parents, by any other party or source, or from the marital estate or the child’s separate estate. The court may not order payment by the Department of Healthcare and Family Services in cases in which the Department is providing child support enforcement services under Article X of the Illinois Public Aid Code. Unless otherwise ordered by the court at the time fees and costs are approved, all fees and costs payable to an attorney, guardian ad litem, or child representative under this Section are by implication deemed to be in the nature of support of the child and are within the exceptions to discharge in bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C.A. 523. The provisions of Sections 501 and 508 of this Act shall apply to fees and costs for attorneys appointed under this Section.

Court abuse of parents and children in child custody and support cases – Please contact Cook County Board NOW!

PLEASE CALL OR WRITE MEMBERS OF THE COOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR EMAIL THEM,

ASKING WHY THEY HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER ABOUT  COURT ABUSE

OF NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS,

COURT CORRUPTION IN CHILD CUSTODY AND CHIILD SUPPORT CASES,

AND THE NEED TO

REWRITE CHILD SUPPORT AND CUSTODY LAWS IN ILLINOIS!

Link to letter (PDF formatted) to Cook County Board of Commissioners about court and lawyer abuse of parents in child custody and child support cases:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/111836499/Letter-to-Cook-County-Board-of-Commissioners-Please-support-investigation-of-and-rewrite-of-Illinois-Child-Support-Enforcement-Statute-It-s-uncon   This letter is also reproduced at end of this post.

This letter was faxed to Board President Preckwinkle’s office and was also individually addressed and sent to each of the Cook County Commissioners. Please feel free to reuse or repost this letter and add your signature.

Please contact Board President Preckwinkle and all the Cook County Board of Commissioners today and urge them to investigate the issues in the attached letter sent to the Cook County Board of Commissioners.

SEE THE FOLLOWING PHONE NUMBERS AND EMAIL ADDRESSES.

 Phone Number

President Toni Preckwinkle

312-603-6400

Robert Steele

312-603-3019

Larry Suffredin

312-603-6383

Earlean Collins

312-603-4566

Timothy O. Schneider

312-603-6388

Jerry Butler

312-603 6391

Elizabeth Doody Gorman

312-603-4215

Joan Patricia Murphy

312-603-4216

Jeffrey R. Tobolski

312-603-6384

Bridget Gainer

312-603-4210

John A. Fritchey

312-603-6380

William M. Beavers

312-603-2065

Gregg Goslin

312-603-4932

Edwin Reyes

312-603-6386

Jesus G. Garcia

312-603-5443

Deborah Sims

312-603 6381

Peter N. Silvestri

312-603-4393

John P. Daley

312-603-4400

Commissioner Email addresses:

r.steele@robertsteele.org

earlean.collins@cookcountyil.gov

jerry.butler@cookcountyil.gov

joan.murphy@cookcountyil.gov

commissioner@bridgetgainer.com

edwin.reyes@cookcountyil.gov

deborah.sims@cookcountyil.gov

john.daley@cookcountyil.gov

larry.suffredin@cookcountyil.gov

tim.schneider@cookcountyil.gov

liz@lizgorman.com

commish@fritchey.com

commissioner.goslin@cookcountyil.gov

Jesus.Garcia@cookcountyil.gov

cookcty9@aol.co

Linda Lorincz Shelton, Ph.D, M.D.

             XXXXXXXXXXX Ave.

           XXXXXXX, IL 60XXX

http://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com

                                                                                                                        October 31, 2012

VIA FASCIMILE DELIVERY 312 603-4683

Cook County Board of Commissioners

County Building

Chicago, IL 60602

Dear Board Members:

As you no longer allow public comment, the only way I can get the following statement  of concern to you is by a letter and to the public is by a press release.  There is no point in coming to board meetings anymore as we cannot interact with the board and we can read your minutes on line.

We ask that you consider the following statement and act upon it:

We as concerned parents in Cook County wish to ask the Board to request the Illinois legislature to investigate and rewrite the Illinois DHFS Child Support Enforcement laws as they presently are both:

1)    Unconstitutional as the Separation of Powers Clause in the Constitution forbids the Judiciary from overseeing and administering legislative functions; the Illinois Supreme Court is unconstitutionally “administering” the Administrative Law Courts under under 750 ILCS 25/4-5, the “Expedited Child Support Act of 1990.”

Please note that the Judiciary may not oversee or administer a legislative body, especially because they would then have a conflict of interest when Petitions for Mandamus are filed in courts against this body (the DHFS Child Support Enforcement Administrative Law Courts). Also note that all other administrative law courts under Illinois statutes are administrated and overseen by administrative and not judiciary officer; and

2)    Discriminatory in that they accept cases in Title IV-D program from custodial parents but fail their statutory duty to hear requests from NON-custodial parents for reduction in child support due to change of circumstances (i.e. Hold hearings in DHFS Administrative Law Courts)  as required under 750 ILCS 25/5-2 (“Actions Subject to Expedited Child Support”).

Thus they abdicate their statutory duty for the Administrative Law Court Investigator under Child Support Enforcement Division of DHFS to investigate both parents ‘ financial situation and hold a hearing to recommend to the Trial Court in post-divorce proceedings changes in child support. The courts then usurp this power and refuse even to listen to the defamed NON-custodial parent.

Thus many NON-custodial parents are falsely accused of failing to pay excessive child support which they are unable to pay and DHFS is obtaining federal funds to assist NON-custodial parents in obtaining changes in child support to reasonable amounts, but not using these funds for that purpose. What are they using them for – judges and child reps penions?  Instead the Non-custodial parents are falsely labeled and defamed as “deadbeats.

Two examples of this lawlessness in the Cook County Courts that are affected by the dereliction of this statutory duty by DHFS and lawless rulings by judges are:

1)     Sandie, who stopped her preparation for a board exam in pediatrics and for licensure as a  physician to raise her children, while her ex-husband completed his exams and then after being fraudulently defamed and the custody of her children illegally removed from her due to false statements to the court by her ex-husband and the child representative, then the Trial Court has ordered her to  pay exorbitant child support “because you are a doctor”, while she is actually homeless due to this order and she is NOT a licensed doctor and cannot obtain high paying employment, at the same time that her ex-husband is a highly paid anesthesiologist and her children are being brainwashed against her through typical actions known as parental alienation.  The DHFS has yet to hear her case to reduce child support.

2)    David, who is falsely defamed by his ex-wife as dangerous because he is an ex-Marine, and therefore wrongfully and illegally upon the outrageous order of the Trial Court lost custody of his children. He had a serious injury to his back at work last year – and he therefore has been unemployed for nearly a year. Worker’s compensation has failed to OK his compensation and his union is litigating that issue so his income has been $0 for a year. Yet the Trial Court has ordered him to pay $420 in child support every two weeks for his two children who are in the custody of their mother who is a drug addict. David has NO other assets as his ex-wife was a compulsive spender and threw away over $200,000 of marital income causing them to remortgage their house and lose it in foreclosure. Yet the Trial Court has refused, even after receiving affidavits from others that she is a drug addict to have the mother tested or even examined by psychologists as well as refused to even allow to be filed, let alone hear a motion to reduce child support. Now the judge is threatening to jail David for failure to pay child support.

Please note that the NON-custodial parents then end up with wage garnishment and other orders requiring that they pay > 150 % of their income for child support and they are thrown in jail when they are unable to do this. Their parents and other relatives are then extorted to get them out of jail. Please note that the Federal Consumer  Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1611 and 29 C.F.R Part 870 require that wage garnishment be for no more than 65 % of NET income! These Trial Court orders often say that NON-custodial parents must pay more than 150 % of their gross income for child support. Isn’t this extortion and federal funding fraud?

I hope your committee will strongly consider this suggestion and strongly advocate for investigation of this situation.

Attached is the “Table of Contents” of the Big Divorce Book written by Dr. Shelton and David Bambic which has a summary of the DHFS Child Support Enforcement statutes and the federal Consumer Protection Statutes.

Thank you for your time in reviewing this most important issue. We await your concerned response.

Sincerely,

Linda Lorincz Shelton, PhD, MD

ILLINOIS

 

DIVORCE BIG BOOK

 

ILLINOIS AND FEDERAL STATUTES

 

REGARDING CHILD SUPPORT

 

                                    AN EDUCATIONAL PUBLICATION BY STOP ILLINOIS CORRUPTION

 

                                                  

(A PUBLIC SERVICE CLUB)

 

EDITED BY

 

DAVID BAMBIC and DR. LINDA SHELTON

 

November 4, 2011

 

Copyright 2011

 

 

 

NOTE: Interpretation of Law in Table of Contents has been done by paralegals and lay persons and is not guaranteed as to its accuracy – Please verify any interpretation of law by a licensed attorney – This is the opinion and belief of editors only and not meant to be a definitive interpretation of the law or legal advice – Use this interpretation at your own risk

 

 

NOTE: These laws are applicable the moment an obligee (non-custodial parent) is placed into the State Disbursement Unit (in Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services [HFS]) for collection and distribution of child support and are available to ALL  PARENTS in divorce actions even if they are NOT on  public assistance (Public Aid), upon application by either parent, whereupon the Family Court loses jurisdiction to investigate and hear applications for change in child support unless the parents disagree with the recommendation of the HFS Child Support Unit Administrative Law Court (ALC), after the ALC investigates financial circumstances, holds a hearing and makes a recommendation to the  parties.  Then the parties may go back to the Family Court Judge (Trial Judge) for review of recommendations, evidentiary hearing, and decision on change in child support.

 

NOTE:  All parents may apply to be supervised by the SDU and ALC in the Child Support Services Division (CS) of HFS. Find the address of your local office for the Illinois Child Support Unit in the Department of Healthcare and Family Services at their web site:

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR DIVORCE BIG BOOK

Note that these laws were written to be in compliance with federal codes pertaining to Social Security Title IV – 42 U.S.C. § 401 et seq. & amendments

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   page

1. Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act – 750 ILCS 5/506

Representation of child………………………….……………………………………………………………….  1-2

“The child representative shall not render an opinion, recommendation, or

 report to the court . . . but shall offer evidence-based [ NOTE NOT HEARSAY]

legal argument.  The child representative shall disclose the position as to what

the child representative intends to advocate in a pre-trial memorandum that

shall be served upon counsel of record prior to the trial. The position disclosed

 in the pre-trial memorandum shall not be considered evidence.” ………………….      1

 

“Any person appointed under this Section shall file with the court within

90 days of his or her appointment, and every subsequent 90 – day period

thereafter during the course of his or her representation , a detailed invoice

 for services rendered with a copy being sent to each party.”………………………….     2

1. “Unified Child Support Services Act” 750 ILCS 24 et seq. …………………………………………    3-6

Plan must be submitted by County State’s Attorney to the [Illinois] Department

of Healthcare and Family Services (“DHFS”) – Section 10 …………………………….      3

“Components of a Unified Child Support Services Program” 750 ILCS 24/15……     4-5

“ (1) Accepting applications for child support services from private

Parties or referrals from any state agency [Court]”………………………….……..      4

“(7) Obtaining identified cases that have moved into non-compliance

With obligations [arrears] . . . . “……………………..………………………………………      4

“(16) Marketing the Program within the county in which it is operating

so that potential applicants learn about child support services offered.”.       5

“Child Support Program Responsibilities” – 750 ILCS 24/35 ………………………       5-6

”Operation of a statewide toll free telephone”    – [for the public to

obtain information even if they are not eligible for public aid]………………     5

“(2) Management and supervision of the State Disbursement Unit”

By the DHFS…………………………………………………………………………………………….    6

1. “Expedited Child Support Act of 1990” – 750 ILCS 25 et seq………………………………   7-13

“Purpose”  750 ILCS 25/2 “. . modification of child support orders” …………….      7

“Establishment of the Expedited Child Support System” 750
ILCS 25/4………………………………………………………………………………………………………      8

“(1) …The System shall be available to all participants in the IV-D

program, and may be made available to all persons, regardless of

 participation in the IV-D program…” ……………………………………………………       8

“(2) Implementation . . . the Chief Judge of any Circuit shall develop and

Submit to the [Illinois] Supreme Court a Plan for the creation of a System    8

“(5) Implementation. The System shall be administered by Supreme

Court. The Supreme Court may delegate, to the Chief Judge of each

Judicial Circuit, the day-to-day administration of the system in the

County. . . .” ……………………………………………………………………………………………    8

1. “Actions subject to Expedited Child Support Hearings” – 750 ILCS 25/5 ………….       9

“(1) Petitions for child support and for medical support . . . for

post-judgment dissolution and . . where child support or medical

support was reserved or could not be ordered at the time of entry

• of the judgment  . . .” …………………………………………………………………………..     9

“(2) Petitions for modification of child support and medical support

in post-judgment dissolution of marriage . . . “ ……………………………………     9

“(4) Actions for the enforcement of any existing order for child support

 or medical support in post-judgment dissolution of marriage . . .”……..     9

“(8) Actions brought pursuant to Article X of the Illinois Public Aid

Code”……………………………………………………………………………………………….….     9

“(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this Section,

 if the custodial parent is not a participant in the IV-D program and

maintenance is in issue, the case shall be presented directly to

the court.”………………………………………………………………………………..…………     9

“(c) . . . the System be available in pre-judgment proceedings for

dissolution of marriage, declaration of invalidity of marriage and

 legal separation.”……………………………………………………………………………..      9

1. “Authority of hearing officers (administrative law judges”  and “Expedited Child Support Hearings”  750 ILCS 25/6 & 7……………………………………………….………………..…………   9-11

Administrative law judges [hearing officers] are by statute authorized

to subpoena and collect evidence, review evidence, and make

recommendations to the court as to post-dissolution of marriage

child support issues, modification of child support and health

 insurance  issues for the children.  The Trial Court by statute shall

refer all child support and health insurance issues to the administrative

law court. Only if the parents disagree with the administrative

law judge’s recommendations shall the court intervene in coming

up with its own decisions regarding child support and health

insurance issues for the children post judgment for

dissolution of marriage……………………………………………………………………..     9-11

 

“(b) in any case in which the Obligee is not participating in the

IV-D program or has to applied to participate in the IV-D program,

the Administrative Hearing Officer shall: (1) inform the Obligee of the

existence of the IV-D program and provide applications on request;

and (2) inform the Obligee and the Obligor of the option of

requesting payment to be made through the Clerk of the

Circuit Court.”…………………………………………………………………………………….   10-11

1. “Authority retained by the [trial] court”  750 ILCS 25/8 ………………………………..     12-13

Trail Court retains jurisdiction over all matters not related to child

Support or health insurance [as well as parentage issues] for the

children and must resolve issues when the parents disagree with

the recommendations of the administrative law judge …………………..      12-13

1. “Judicial Hearings”  750 ILCS 25/9………………………………………………………………..      13

Defines under what circumstances the Trial Court regains

Jurisdiction over post-judgment child support and child health

Insurance support issues ………………………………………………………………..       13

1. “Child Support Payment Act” 750 ILCS 27 …………………………………………………..       14

Allows obligor to pay child support through a currency exchange ..        14

1. “Income Withholding for Support Act:  750 ILCS 28…………………………………….     15-24

Details the form of notice to be given to the Obligor

(750 ILCS 28/20(b)- p. 17-18),  by the Court Clerk and the payer

by the SDU, Clerk or other public officer (750 ILCS 28/20(g) –

p. 18, 750 ILCS 28/30 – p. 20), or Obligee if the SDU, Clerk or other

public officer is not Ordered  to be involved in support payments

supervision or providing notice to payer (750 ILCS 28/20(b)&(g) –

p.18); details how to deal with delinquency and how to penalize

payers who refuse to withhold……………………………………………………..  15-24

1. 10.   “Illinois Public Aid Code” 305 ILCS 5, “Determination and Enforcement of

Support Responsibility of Relatives” 305 ILCS 5/Article X…………………………………  25-49

“The Department of HCFS shall cause to be published and

distributed publications reasonably calculated to inform the

 public that individuals who are not recipients of or applicants

for public aid under this Code are eligible for the child support

enforcement services under this Article X. Such publications shall

set forth the an explanation, in plain language, that the child

support enforcement services program is independent of any

public and aid program under the Code and that the receiving of

 child support enforcement services in no way implies that the

person receiving such services is receiving public aid.”.………………….   25-26

“Access to records” 305 ILCS 5/10-9.5…………………………………………….    32

Mandates that both parents have access to all records from

The Clerk, SDU, and DHFS, except if there is an order of

Protection hiding an address or phone number,  then that

Address or phone number may not be revealed………………..    32

“Information to State Case Registry” 305 ILCS 5/10-10.5 ………………  37-39

Establishes a section in the Department of HCFS, Public

Aid Division that maintains all records of child support

Payment and enforcement, and requires that both parents

Keep the Department informed of address changes…………  37-39

“State Disbursement Unit”  305 ILCS 5/10-26………………………………..  46-47

Establishes the SDU under the supervision of the Illinois

DHFS which is authorized to accept and disburse child support

Payments as well as to inform payers of withholding orders

And penalties for failure to comply …………………………………  46-47

“Notice of child support enforcement services” 305 ILCS 5/10-28..    49

Provides that the SDU may notify the Obligor and payer of

Its services, as well as other parties………………………………….    49

1. “Title III, Consumer Protection Act”  Summary of authority and purpose of

15 USC § 1671 et seq. and 29 CFR Part 870 regarding maximum payments that may

Be withheld under federal law from Obligor …………………………………………….  50-51

1. 15 USC § 1671 et seq. Federal Wage Garnishment Law (Title III of the Consumer

Protection Act) & corresponding 29 CFR Part 870 …………………………………….  51-56

Mandates that when child support is an issue that federal and

State taxes have priority over child support or other debts.

Provides that child support has priority over other debts except

for taxes. Provides that if the Obligor is not living with and

supporting a spouse or child that no more than a total of

60% of net wages may be withheld from a paycheck and no

more than 65% of net wages may be withheld from a paycheck

if Obligor is more than 12 weeks in arrears ………………………………..   52-54

Hitler – Chief Judge Timothy Evans now has completely taken away our rights

If corruption in family courts described in this blog is not enough including diverting funds from VAMA and Social Security Title IV-D to enrich judges, court-appointed attorneys, and court-appointed evaluators, now ADA accommodations are also at risk in the courts, pro se litigants are being deprived of equal protection in the courts, and we are being thrown back into the stone age in Cook County by new rules from Chief Judge Evans.  Please remember to demand fix to VAMA funding being diverted for corrupt purposes before passage. Many of our legislators are totally ignorant of what is actually happening with VAMA funds.

Chief Judge Evans enters order which prohibits cell phones in courthouses where criminal matters are heard is acting like Hitler.

Now defendants cannot contact their attorneys when their attorneys are late, cannot contact their families, cannot have their electronic calendars with them when they are representing themselves. The latest Illinois Supreme Court ruling requiring Court Clerks to allow the use of rolling scanning devices to allow persons to avoid huge page copy charges in the Clerk’s offices and in Court libraries are at risk with the bar on bringing in electronic devices.  The disabled who need assistance of electronic devices will have to ask for special permission to bring them into court buildings including palm pilots and cell phones. Many disabled persons take public transportation and need to have cell phones with them at all times to contact their doctors or others for assistance.  Now they will have to pay $3.00 to put them in tiny lockers at courthouses, but the courthouses don’t have enough little pay lockers to hold all the phones that people will have to lock up, that will no longer be allowed in courthouses.

In domestic and civil matters pro se litigants and their witnesses will be at a disadvantage.  This applies in courthouses where there are eviction cases, divorce cases and every other kind of civil case.

If they ban pro se litigants from having these devices, then they should ban the attorneys and judges from having them too so pro se litigants are not at a disadvantage.  If judges wants to go back to the stone age, then let everyone do this.  Their computer system is already in the stone age so that it is impossible to query so that the courts can cover up their corruption!

Help make a massive protest about this!! Hitler reigns in Cook County.  First the right to petition for habeas corpus has been denied, perjury by sheriff deputies is rampant, and my right to notice for a criminal trial, right to have dismissed legally insufficient complaints, right to speedy trial, right to compulsory process, and right to have access to my court file and pen and paper during trial has been eliminated - now this!!  See my new post coming soon about my recent misdemeanor conviction where all these rights were denied!

Help spread the word!

Released On 12/12/2012

Chief Judge Evans December 17, 2012, interview with CBS 2 Chicago on cell phone ban.
Circuit Court of Cook County Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans today announced beginning January 14, 2013, the public will not be permitted to bring cell phones and other electronic devices into any Circuit Court of Cook County courthouse facility except for the Richard J. Daley Center Courthouse.  The ban will affect only those courthouse facilities in which criminal matters are heard.*

Included in the ban are all electronic devices capable of connecting to the Internet or making audio or video recordings, including laptops and tablet computers. Chief Judge Evans said, “Judges brought their concerns to me that people attending court proceedings were using their cell phones to photograph witnesses, judges, jurors, and prospective jurors.  They also said persons appeared to be texting testimony to witnesses waiting their turn to testify outside the courtroom, while others were attempting to stream live to media comments by judges from the bench.” “The court is sending a strong message to gang members and others that any attempts to intimidate witnesses, jurors, and judges in court will not be permitted,” said Chief Judge Evans.  “The ban will help to make sure that justice is properly done by preserving the integrity of testimony and maintaining court decorum.” Anyone violating the ban could face prosecution for contempt of court. The new ban on cell phones and electronic devices in all courthouse facilities in which criminal matters are heard is taking place pursuant to General Administrative Order 2012-8 entered by Chief Judge Evans today, December 11, 2012. Cell phones and electronic devices will continue to be allowed into the Daley Center but the order restricts use of all such devices to public areas, away from courtrooms.  Primarily civil matters are heard in the Daley Center, along with some quasi-criminal, misdemeanor, and traffic offenses. In addition, the order exempts persons on official business with proper identification who will be allowed to bring such devices into courthouse facilities in which criminal matters are heard.  The use of all such devices by these persons will be restricted to public areas, away from courtrooms.  The following persons are exempted from the ban: current or former judges; licensed attorneys; all law enforcement officers; all government employees; persons reporting for jury service; jurors (subject to the authority of the trial judges); building and maintenance workers, equipment repair persons and vendors; and anyone authorized by order of court. Members of the news media are also exempted from the ban.  Following the anticipated approval of the circuit court’s application for extended media coverage by the Illinois Supreme Court, the media will also be allowed to use their electronic devices in the courtroom. The new policy also provides for judges to be able to enter orders permitting the use of electronic devices in any courtroom in any court facility as they deem appropriate.

*There are 13 courthouse facilities into which the public is prohibited from bringing cell phones and electronic devices as follows:

• The George N. Leighton Criminal Court Building at 2600 S. California Ave., Chicago
• The Cook County Juvenile Center, 1100 West Hamilton Ave., Chicago
• The Domestic Violence Courthouse, 555 West Harrison St., Chicago
• The Second Municipal District Skokie Courthouse, 5600 Old Orchard Road
• The Third Municipal District Rolling Meadows Courthouse, 2121 Euclid Road
• The Fourth Municipal District Maywood Courthouse, 1500 Maybrook Drive
• The Fifth Municipal District Bridgeview Courthouse, 10220 S. 76^th Ave.
• The Sixth Municipal District Markham Courthouse, 16501 S. Kedzie Parkway
• 5555 W. Grand Ave., Chicago (First Municipal District criminal branches 23 and 50)
• 2452 W. Belmont Ave., Chicago (First Municipal District criminal branches 29 and 42)
• 155 W. 51^st St., Chicago (First Municipal District criminal branches 34 and 48)
• 727 E. 111^th St., Chicago (First Municipal District criminal branches 35 and 38)
• 3150 W. Flournoy St., Chicago (First Municipal District criminal branches 43 and 44)

Corruption at Markham courthouse family court

See “Justice for Livia”s web site here: http://justiceforlivia.wordpress.com/about/

Judge Coglin, now retired, has destroyed families by giving numerous children to male abusers, many with political connections  who cover-up the abuse of their children.  Professionals including teachers have lost custody of their children due to his illegal rulings that also  destroy family income.  The problem of judicial corruption is systemic in Illinois especially C[r]ook County Illinois.

VAMA and Social Security Title IV-D funds are being diverted to enrich judges, court-appointed attorneys, and court-appointed evaluators.  Demand fix to VAMA funding before passage.

Now the Presiding Judge of Markham Courthouse Judge Marjorie C. Laws, sister of Public Defender (ret) Judge Cunnngham has banned all electronic devices in Markham courhouse – including all cell phones, laptops, ipods, palm pilots, electronic calenders, etc.  So witnesses and pro se individuals cannot even bring their electronic calenders into the courthouse!!!! She is stacking the cards against citizens and the innocent and making sure that what goes on in courthouses is kept quiet with no witnesses, no recordings, no court watchers, etc.

The county already does not provide court reporters in family court so the poor have no record of corrupt acts by judges and lose appeals because “they did no [pay  court reporters] to preserve the record”! 

Totalitarian Hitler like tactics are now being used by Judge Laws to keep the corruption quiet and out of the press!!

Write a protest letter to the press, the U.S. Attorney, your senators and representatives, the Governor, Chief Judge Timothy Evans (Rm 2600 Daley Center at 50 W Washington, Chicago 60602) and anyone else you can think of!! 

http://www.cookcountycourt.org/Portals/0/Media/No%20Electronic%20Devices%20Form.pdf