The U.S. Supreme Court refused to uphold their own holdings in denial of Shelton’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Dr. Linda Shelton was unlawfully convicted of contempt of court and summarily sentenced to 16 months in jail with no trial or due process because she followed Illinois law that allows a person other than the defendant to file a next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus on “behalf of another”. Judge McHale held that it was illegal for Shelton to file this petition on behalf of Annabel Melongo when Shelton was not an attorney. Melongo was released after 20 months when the Illinois eavesdropping law was declared unconstitutional. Melongo had been denied hearing on Shelton’s petition for her in an illegal act by Cook County judges who refused to hear this petition. Thus they violated the U.S. Constitution Suspension Clause that says that habeas may not be suspended except in times of war. READ THE FOLLOWING!!
Shelton alleges Judge McHale (substituting for Judge Biebel – presiding judge of the Cook County Criminal Court) illegally and in an act of felony federal treason and conspiracy to violate rights under color of law, after stating he would not hear her petition (i.e. admitted she was before him on an administrative matter and not with him acting as a judge) in retaliation for Shelton’s whistle blowing about judicial corruption in the Circuit Court of Cook County (she had given the FBI and U.S. Attorney extensive evidence about this corruption and published it on Internet blogs), in May through November, 2010, summarily convicted her of three (3) “cases” which should have been three (3) “counts” of criminal contempt for the legal act of filing a next-friend habeas petition ,as a NON-ATTORNEY, on behalf of Annabelle Melongo, a dual Haitian/Cameroonian citizen with language difficulties and who was confusing English and Roman law, and then telling the judge that his act of ruling that a non-attorney filing was “illegal” was a violation of his oath of office to follow the law as well as a criminal act. The conviction was not only illegal, but it was retaliatory.
The fact that he stated he would not hear the petition meant that there was no case before him when he charged me with contempt and this occurred after I asked for SOJ as a right, which also means that his orders are void as he did not follow the law on SOJ.
Shelton alleges Judge McHale’s consecutive SUMMARY sentences of 4, 6, and 6 months (total of 16 months) in CCDOC with good time jail credits quashed by order of Judge McHale, were in:
A) violation of IL Substitution of Judge (“SOJ”) as Right Statutes, 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 which make all orders given after denial of this SOJ as a right void, Jiffy Lube International, Inc. v. Agarwal,2 77 Ill.App.3d 722,727, 214 Ill.Dec. 609,661 N.E.2d 463 (1996); Curtis v. Lofy, 394 Ill. App..3d 170, 176 (2009);
B) violation of Habeas Statutes, 735 ILCS Art X which allow a person to file a habeas petition on “behalf of another”;
C) violation of IL Appellate Court holding that requires a full due process jury trial if contempt sentence is summarily imposed on a day other than the day in which the contemptuous act occurred In re Marriage of Betts, 200l ll.App.3d 26 (1990); Winning Moves, Inc., v. Hi! Baby, Inc., 238 Ill. App.3d 834 (1992); Kaeding v. Collins, 28I Ill.App3d 919 (1996)
D) violation of IL sentencing statutes requiring concurrent sentences for the same conduct or acts occurring during the same state of mind, 720 ILCS 5/3-3; and
E) violation of IL statute where habeas petition must be heard quickly before the chief judge of the division, Habeas statutes, 735 ILCS 5/10-119, and the rules of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Rule 15.2(d); and
F) violation of the U.S. Supreme Court holdings and IL Court holdings which:
1) require jury trial if sentences exceed 6 months aggregate for contempt, In re Marriage of Betts, 200 lll.App.3d 26 (1990), Cheff v. Schnackenberg, 384 U.S. 373 (1966); Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, 418 U.S. 506, 513, 94 S.Ct. at 2692 (1974); Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701;
2) forbid sentencing for more than one count of contempt during one trial or case, People v. Brown, 235 Ill.App.3d 945 (1992);
3) forbid removal of automatic statutory good time jail credits by a judge – Good Time Jail Allowance statute, 730 ILCS 130, gives jurisdiction for such credits to the county sheriff and not the judge, also violation of Codispoti v. Pennsylvannia 418 U.S. 506 (1974); and
4) specifically state it is legal for a non-attorney to file a next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus, U.S. ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 76 S.Ct 1 (1955) and Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S.Ct 2229 (2008); 735 ILCS Article X.
The Illinois Appellate Court in violation of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 298 and Smith v. Bennett and Marshall v. Bennett, 365 U.S. 708, 81 S.Ct. 895 (1961) denied my indigence petition , thus denied my appeal illegally.
The Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed Shelton s Federal Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus regarding these three convictions, ACC 100083-01, 93-01, & 94-01, falsely stating that Shelton did not exhaust state remedies. Judge Hart ignored and violated the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings in the line of cases Neirsheimer, Regan, and Loftus. People v. Loftus, 400 Ill. 432, 81 N.E.2d 495 (1948), (in response to order of Court in Loftus v. People of State of Illinois, 334 U.S. 804, 68 S.Ct 1212 (1948)); Woods v. Neirsheimer, 328 U.S. 211, 66 S.Ct. 996 (1946); White v. Ragen and Lutz v. Same, 324 U.S. 760, 65 S.Ct. 978 (1945); Young v. Ragen, 337 U.S. 235, 69 S.Ct. 1073 (1949).
There may be an exception to the exhaustion bar for cases involving colorable claims of actual innocence. See, e.g., House v. Bell, 47 U.S. 518, 522 (2006). This case also involves this is as since there is no possibility that filing a next-friend habeas petition is illegal or that complaining, as a litigant to a judge that he is violating the law, when he is violating the law, is illegal, there is no possibility that Shelton is actually guilty of contempt.
These sentences by Judge McHale were acts of felony treason, a violation of 18 U.S.C. §2381, punishable by a sentence of 20 yrs. to life, per previous holdings and/or dicta of the United States Supreme Court including:
1) that the judges in U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200 (1980) affirmed the statement of Chief Justice Marshall in Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821) that it is “treason on the constitution” when a judge “usurps [the jurisdiction] that which is not given”; and
2) that it is a “war on the constitution” when a judge violates his oath of office to support it [including supporting statutes of a state = due process], Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401(1958).
Judge McHale’s knowing violation of the statutes concerning petitions for writ of habeas corpus, SOJ as a right, good conduct jail credits; concurrent sentencing for the same act; violation of case law concerning right to trial if sentence is > 6 mo, right to trial if sentence for contempt is given out on day other than day of contempt incidence, ban on more than one count of contempt during one case or trial; and violation of U.S. Supreme Court holdings/dicta in U.S. ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 76 S.Ct 1 (1955) and Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S.Ct 2229 (2008) that a non-attorney may file a next-friend habeas petition prove Judge McHale illegally found Linda Shelton in contempt three times, illegally sentenced her, and knowingly did this in an act of treason, violating Shelton’s constitutional rights to be free of arrest and imprisonment without due process and in violation of law, denied her father’s need for her caretaker, companion, and executive assistant services and love in his final days in an act of cruelty and lawlessness, and denied Shelton’s need for medical care and proper diet.
In addition, Annabelle Melongo’s petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed by Shelton, has been ignored by Judges McHale, (Brosnahan, Wadas, Kazmierski – to whom Plaintiff presented habeas filing prior to presenting it to Judge McHale and all of whom refused to hear it stating that they have no jurisdiction to hear filings from a non-attorney on behalf of another, despite Plaintiff reading the IL habeas statute to them), and Judge Biebel and she is still in jail a year later! All these judges have therefore committed treason. This is a grotesque and extremely serious violation of the Constitution of the United States – suspension clause (Article I, section 9) which states that the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus may not be suspended except in time of war.
Judge McHale was fully informed in open court by Plaintiff of the case law, code, and constitutional issues stated herein and therefore cannot claim mistake or unintentional error. Plaintiff therefore now petitions the U.S. Attorney and U.S. Justice Department to pursue the violations of 18 U.S.C §241 AND 18 U.S.C §242, as well as 18 U.S.C. §2381 that are clearly documented in this document and attachments, under the jurisdiction as permitted by the Presentment Clause of the Constitution and under 18 U.S.C. §3332 – which specifically states, as is supported by case law, that a citizen with evidence of federal crimes may petition a judge to present this evidence to a special grand jury . I ask that the Justice Department bring this cause before a judge for an indictment against Judge McHale for corruption.
Judge McHale ILLEGALLY AND UNCONSTITUTIONALLY IN VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW incarcerated Shelton for 16 month summary sentence for which she served six months and during that time DISCRIMINATED AGAINST DR. SHELTON’S DYING FATHER, ALLAN LORINCZ, BY ILLEGALLY JAILING SHELTON, SNUBBING HER REQUEST FOR HOUSE ARREST TO CARE FOR HER FATHER, AND PREVENTING HER FROM CARING FOR HIM IN HIS LAST DAYS AS HE REQUESTED RESULTING IN HIS DEATH from self-starvation and dehydration due to depression over his loss of his caretaker and companion, Shelton and his progressing Parkinson’s disease. By turning a deaf ear, HE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST DISABLED SHELTON IN IGNORING HER DISABILITY NEEDS WHILE UNLAWFULLY JAILED BY HIM, in that he refused to order the Sheriff to provide her appropriate medications and food for her conditions. He, IN RETALIATION FOR HER WHISTLE BLOWING AND COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND SHERIFF STAFF, ILLEGALLY JAILED HER knowingly and willingly suspended her right to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, violated at least four U.S. Supreme Court holdings by unlawfully convicting her of contempt and summarily sentencing her to 16 mo. in jail, and trashed Shelton’s due process constitutional rights, as well as numerous Illinois statutes and Supreme Court and Cook County Court rules. Finally, he ordered a fitness exam when there was no reason to, in order to help justify his illegal conduct but ignored Shelton’s attorney’s motion that a person cannot be found in contempt if the judge questions their fitness as contempt requires intent and allegation of lack of fitness precludes concept of intent.
See the following criminal cases, appeals, motions for habeas & mandamus – which are explained in the following:
Cook County Court Habeas Petition: 09 CH 12736 – renumbered after transfer from Chancery division to criminal division to 09MR00025 (Shelton’s next friend habeas petition for Maisha Hamilton – allowed and Hamilton assigned a pro bono attorney); 10 HC 0006 & 7 (Shelton’s next-friend habeas petitions for Melongo – Judge McHale refused to hear, told Shelton filing it was criminal); 10 HC 00008 & 12 (Shelton habeas petition – Judge Porter summarily denied)
Cook County Criminal Contempt Cases: ACC 1000083-01, ACC 1000093-01, ACC 1000094-01 (Unconstitutional & Illegal against Shelton – summary total sentence of 16 months for filing next-friend habeas petitions for Melongo and defending her right to do so)
Cook County Criminal Cases: 10CR8092 (Melongo’s criminal eavesdropping case – declared unconstitutional eavesdropping law – this was upheld by IL Supreme Court) 08CR1050201 (Melongo’s computer tampering case which she later won as State committed fraud)
U.S. Supreme Court Complaint for Leave to File Mandamus: 12-6561 (Shelton pro se filing, granted in forma pauperis but denied leave to file brief)
Illinois Appellate Court: 10-3342, 10-3344, 10-3345 (Shelton’s appeal of contempt cases dismissed when denied in forma pauperis and demanded back payment for previous cases as well as $25 payment for each of these cases)
NOTE: the following case law
Sacher et al. v. United States, 343 U.S. 1, 72 S.Ct. 451, 96 L.Ed. 717 (1950)
Courage does not equal contempt.
An attorney has the right to make a fearless, vigorous argument
It is the right of counsel for every litigant to press his claim, even if it appears farfetched and untenable to obtain the trial court’s considered ruling. Full enjoyment of that right, wit due allowance for the heat of controversy, will be protected by appellate courts when infringed by trial courts. At 9
Men who make their way to the bench sometimes exhibit vanity, irascibility, narrowness, arrogance, and other weaknesses [ignorance] to which human flesh is heir. Most judges, however, recognize and respect courageous, forthright lawyerly conduct. They rarely mistake overzeal or heated words of a man fired with a desire to win, for the contemptuous conduct which defies rulings and deserves punishment. They recognize that our profession necessarily is a contentious one and they respect the lawyer who makes a strenuous effort for his client. At 12
Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194, Footnote 4, 88 S.Ct. 1477, 20 .Ed.2d 522 (1968)
The court has long recognized the potential for abuse in exercising the summary power to imprison for contempt—it is an ‘arbitrary’ power which is ‘liable to abuse.’ Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289, 313, 9 S.Ct. 77, 82, 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888). ‘(I)ts exercise is a delicate one, and care is needed to avoid arbitrary or oppressive conclusions.’ Cooke v. United States, 267 U.S. 517, 539, 45 S.Ct. 390, 396, 69 L.Ed. 767 (1925).4
Footnote 4. ‘That contempt power over counsel, summary or otherwise, is capable of abuse is certain. Men who make their way to the bench sometimes exhibit vanity, irascibility, narrowness, arrogance, and other weaknesses to which human flesh is heir.’ Sacher v. United States, 343 U.S. 1, 12, 72 S.Ct. 451, 456, 96 L.Ed. 717 (1952). See also Ex parte Hudgings, 249 U.S. 378, 39 S.Ct. 337, 63 L.Ed. 656 (1919); Nye v. United States, 313 U.S. 33, 61 S.Ct. 810, 85 L.Ed. 1172 (1941); Cammer v. United States, 350 U.S. 399, 76 S.Ct. 456, 100 L.Ed. 474 (1956).
United States v. Seale, 461 F.2d 345 (7th Cir. 1972).
[T]he conduct so personally involved the trial judge that the contempt hearing should be presented before another judge. “Attorneys have a right to be persistent, vociferous, contentious, and imposing, even to the point of appearing obnoxious, when acting in their client’s behalf.” In the matter of Dellinger, 461 F.2d 389, 400 (7th Circ. 1972)
Sentences more than six months either separate or aggregate require a jury trial:
When the aggregate punishments for a particular course of criminally contemptuous conduct committed in the presence of a judge exceed the parameters of punishments normally imposed for misdemeanors and the punishments are not imposed immediately after occurrence of the contemptuous conduct, the contemnor is entitled to a jury trial as to the contempt charges. The traditional test for determining whether or not a charged offense is a misdemeanor is whether the penalties exceed $500 or six months imprisonment. Where, as with criminal contempt in Illinois, no maximum punishment is prescribed for an offense, courts look to the penalty actually imposed to determine whether an offense is so serious that a jury trial was required. Some decisions suggest that in the context of contempt proceedings, the $500 fine component.., is subject to upward adjustment based on the contemnor’s financial resources and inflationary trends. In re Marriage of Betts, 200 Ill. App. 3d 26, 50, 558 N.E.2d 404 (4th Dist. 1990).
The following are holdings in Maita v. Whitmore, 508 F.2d 143 (9th Cir. 1975):
[Taylor v. Hayes, 418 U.S. 488, 94 S.Ct. 2697, 41 L.Ed.2d 897, and Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, 418 U.S. 506, 94 S.Ct. 2687, 41 L.Ed.2d 912.]
First: The rules as to whether an ordinary criminal offense is ‘petty,’ thus not requiring a jury trial, or ‘serious,’ thus requiring a jury trial, also apply to charges of criminal contempt. Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 513, 94 S.Ct. at 2692; Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701.
Second: ‘Crimes carrying more than six month sentences are serious crimes and those carrying less are petty crimes.’ (Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 512, 94 S.Ct. at 2691; Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701.
Third: ‘Judgment about the seriousness of the crime is normally heavily influenced by the penalty authorized by the legislature.’ Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 511, 94 S.Ct. at 2691. Indeed, if the penalty authorized by the legislature exceeds six months, there is a right to a jury trial, even though the judge could impose a sentence of six months or less. Baldwin v. New York, 1970, 399 U.S. 66, 68-69, 90 S.Ct. 1886, 26 L.Ed.2d 437, and cases there cited.
Fourth: Where the legislature has not prescribed a penalty, as is often the case when the charge is criminal contempt, the actual sentence imposed determines whether the offense is ‘serious’ or ‘petty.’ Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. 512, 94 S.Ct. 2687 at 2691; Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701. In such a case, when multiple contempts are tried together, the imposition of consecutive sentences aggregating more than six months makes the offenses ‘serious’ and requires a jury trial. Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 516-518, 94 S.Ct. at 2693-2694. On the other hand, where there are convictions for several contempts but the aggregate sentence does not exceed six months because the sentences are concurrent, jury trial is not required. Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 496, 94 S.Ct. at 2702. Moreover, it makes no difference that the trial judge at first imposes consecutive sentences totalling more than six months, if he afterward reduces them to six month sentences to be served concurrently; jury trial is not required. Id. at 496, 94 S.Ct. at 2702.
No justice; no peace – police Officer Servin gets away with murder, disabled activist charged with felony battery for “touching officer’s ear”, innocent grandmother convicted of murder of officer while confused in a seizure after being battered by officer
Its time for Chicagoans to stand up against police, prosecutorial, and judicial corruption in consistent, constant, recurring, protests until the Cook County Board, Chicago City Council, the FBI and U.S. Attorney, Illinois legislature, and U.S. Congress change training and police, as well as judicial, oversight to remedy the following:
The killing of 22-year-old Rekia Boyd by off duty Chicago police officer Dante Servin when he shot backward over his shoulder towards a group of people is clear murder as well as is involuntary manslaughter because he clearly meant to shoot someone in that direction although he may not have meant to shoot Boyd specifically. So it is both a voluntary act of shooting someone without premeditation (murder) and an involuntary act of killing someone he did not specifically target. You can be sure that if he was a civilian he would have been charged with murder and there are examples of such in the Court Clerk’s records.
Cook County States Attorney Anita Alvarez knows this and purposely undercharged him in my opinion as she always favors the police and covers up for their crimes and errors. She was in charge of the division in the State’s Attorney’s office under SA Devine which was responsible for prosecuting government corruption for a decade and essentially shut down that office. She has for decades had a history of reckless disregard for the rights of citizens, which corrupt and incompetent officials have violated.
This blog and other blogs by me (Shelton – http://cookcountysheriffdeputies.wordpress.com and http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com , http://prosechicago.wordpress.com , http://chicagofbi.wordpress.com and http://cookcountyjail.wordpress.com) are devoted to uncovering and exposing the methods of incompetence and corruption and the systemic lawlessness of our injustice system in Illinois, particularly Cook County.
Alvarez at the same time has continued to systemically target me by prosecuting me for now nearly 40 cases of unlawful and unconstitutional arrests over the last 15 years in retaliation for being a whistle blower against corrupt judges and corrupt Sheriff staff and police officers from Chicago, Evergreen Park, and Oak Lawn. I mostly defended myself successfully but the two cases for which I was convicted are just unjust wrongful convictions or meatballs that stuck when the spaghetti plate was thrown. Three contempt convictions with a summary sentence of 16 months later changed to 12 months consecutive were clearly unconstitutional and malicious by Judge McHale. See here description and case law. One felony conviction for “bumping an officer with my wheelchair” causing an abrasion and resulting in a two year outrageous sentence was also unlawful, never happened, and due to falsification of records and perjury by Officer Anthony Salemi (see appeal here). The denial of appeal by the Appellate Court was unlawful and based on an ad hominem attack by Appellate Justice Levin that ignored the arguments and case law in appeal brief. See outrageous opinion here where Judge Levin quotes defamatory rumors about my behavior in courts, which have no basis – here). The misdemeanor conviction for “bumping an officer with my walker” was again perjury by Courtroom Services Deputy Sheriff Ateca. She lied and said I was sitting and pushed my walker against her causing no injury. She actually walked in front of me when I was walking to the elevator and slowed down suddenly so I would accidentally bump into her. The judge fixed the case by not allowing me to make my medication for pain, vertigo, and PTSD so that I was so distraught and unable to properly question the witness as my own attorney and too sick to testify so I chose not to that I appeared crazy to the jury and confused so they ignored me and convicted me. This was an unlawful trial as I was denied American with Disability Act required accommodations (medications) during my trial as well as access to my legal documents while jailed during the trial. It’s a violation of civil rights to impede a self-represented person from access to her court documents, pen and paper, during a trial.
There is a pattern of under-trained officers who disregard the rights of defendants and abuse the disabled, especially the mentally ill, as well as purposely lawless judges who cover-up for criminal acts of police, retaliate against whistle blowers, and are biased against poor and minorities or uneducated. The public defender’s budget is minuscule compared to the prosecutor’s budget so that the public defenders do not have the time or resources to properly defend anyone. The gun (officer’s weapon) used by Robin Johnson was not checked for her fingerprints and no medical experts or doctors were called as witnesses in her defense for example.
Judge Porter is a cunning politician who never should have found Servin not guilty of involuntary manslaughter, despite the lack of the more appropriate murder charge. I suspect that Alvarez and Porter conspired to do this so that Alvarez can say she charged him, but Porter would have an excuse to find him not guilty – thus protecting the officer.
Judge Gainer wrongfully convicted Robin Johnson of murder of an officer in 2013, when Chicago police committed perjury – they shot their own man, by illegally refusing to allow testimony that Johnson was in a standing seizure (confused), had a long history of such seizures that were not controlled well and was often found wandering at night at bus stops, had a grand mal seizure in her bathroom at home that morning, that it took five years pretrial while she was in jail to mostly control her seizures, that she had been repeatedly bashed while in a head lock against a bus by her head by the deceased officer, and Johnson had no experience with guns or training in attacking others or defending herself – so how does a 5′ tall grandmother with no criminal history disarm a 6′ tall seasoned Sargent and shoot him in the head – with a large gun that is really too large for her tiny hand to hold and handle this weapon while in a confused state of mind due to a seizure? She clearly could have no intent if she was in a seizure and confused so the charge is void and the public defender refused to argue this defense. The state had multiple videos but the moments where she allegedly held the gun were missing for “unknown reasons”! The gun was lost for a period of time, which per the U.S. Supreme Court decision means that the case automatically should have been dismissed due to tampering with evidence. The state made up a baloney theory that her motive was that she was an “angry person” out to kill a cop! They didn’t let her children (including a daughter studying to be an attorney) and grandchildren, relatives and friends testify that she was not a violent, aggressive, or “angry” person. Notably, Gainer should have recused himself because his close relative was former top cop in the U.S. – Terrance Gainer who had at retirement been Chief of the Capital police in Washington, D.C., had long record of being chief of several departments and president of the American Society of Police Chiefs! He is often “randomly” assigned to cases involving police officers as victims or plaintiffs by “coincidence.” She is now serving a wrongful life sentence while her husband is dying for something she didn’t do in order for Alvarez to cover-up the shooting of the officer by police. Johnson barely survived 22 wounds when officers arriving on the scene emptied their guns against her, even though by then the videos show her unarmed and down. That’s attempted murder.
The FBI and U.S. Attorney should arrest Servin for criminal violation of civil rights under color of law and convict him in that manner.
Mayor Emmanuel should denounce this officer and criticize Alvarez but he has no guts to stand for the right.
Supt. McCarthy should call the kettle black and fire Servin for official misconduct due to clear violation of his oath of office to uphold the law and control his gun.
For 20 years I have been supporting the minority populations in Cook County as a physician standing up for my patients in court when no other doctor would do so, writing these blogs to expose corruption and providing the FBI and U.S. Attorney information about corruption and abuse at the jail and in the courts. I won a suit for mandamus, in the public interest, against the Sheriff in 2004-5 for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate disabled at courthouse entrances.
I have been repeatedly unlawfully arrested usually for trespass, resisting arrest, or battery of ONLY officers in courthouses usually with only police witnesses (!!) for falsely alleged “bumping them with my walker or wheelchair”, personally beaten by the Chicago Police and Cook County Sheriff staff, my mouth covered with duct tape during an asthma attack – which could have killed me except a Sgt. ordered it removed, my pony tail grabbed and my head banged against a wall despite major neck spine surgery – which could have caused death like with Freddie Grey, held on the floor by Correctional officers Ruiz and Levy and kicked with their boots (see pictures) and beaten by a Chicago Police Detention Aid Shell (see picture 1 & 2) for taking my medication for severe pain and vertigo after it was handed to me while in the police station during a release from unlawful custody, had my shoulder severely strained and mildly dislocated by Correctional officer Charles Johnson in Dec. 2006 confirmed by an orthopedic surgeon, been body slammed when C/O Johnson grabbed by handcuffed in front hands and swung them up and slammed me down against a row of chairs with arms causing contusions on my back especially near my surgery site – resulting in temporary paralysis and shock – then slamming me onto the floor where I laid outside the jail ER mocked by officers for hrs and temporarily unable to move without medical care – then a “nurse” looked at me and said nothing was wrong while ignoring the 5″ scar on the back of my neck from surgery, passed out from cardiac arrhythmia and severe neurocardiogenic syncope in the ER and ignored on the floor for hrs, suffered ischemia of the heart and a brief respiratory arrest when exposed to tobacco smoke in 2001 after a false arrest even though I told them I could not tolerate tobacco smoke – then when returned from the ER the medical staff failed to do the cardiac enzyme tests needed over 24 hrs to be sure I did not suffer a heart attack (I have the medical records), and finally I have been jailed for one year without bail for “touching an officer’s ear” during a PTSD flashback induced by Courtroom Services Sheriff’s Officers who misused information I gave to the Court Disability Coordinator Pacelli to trigger the flashback – then they failed to back off when I began to “misperceive ongoing events” crumbled to the floor and swung my hands around my head to block misperceived blows (due to flashback which is like reliving the nightmare in a daytime dream like altered state of consciousness) as well as grabbed out involuntarily to steady myself when pushed and picked up by them (due to my neurological disease and resulting balance issues). For more information see this link here.
Until justice is served, Chicago should have no peace.
“This is the first time I’ve ever seen (a) judge let a criminal go because he was improperly charged,” said Frank Chapman. “I have never seen that before,” confirming the intellectual, intentional misconduct of Judge Porter in refusing to convict on involuntary manslaughter because “it was voluntary” and he should have been charged with murder.
Chapman believes the state’s attorney’s office and the police department have too close of a relationship to look at cases like these objectively. They say Servin is the first Chicago police officer in 20 years to be charged with killing someone.
We are not asking for his release just that he be charged with what he actually did.
Would u please consider reading and signing my petition. I’d love for u to share it too if possible. If not it’s all good. Thank you in advance ♡♡♡
Shelton needs grass roots public support and lots of people in the courtroom to fight attacks against her by the injustice system. If you want to keep reading her blog posts, come and support her: read this post.
Fitness or mental competency to stand trial is a complicated topic. Legal fitness concerns the legal terms of fitness, sanity or temporary sanity, and may or may not be related to mental illness. It can also be related to physical illness or incapacity. This is an up to date and extensive memorandum of law which can be used, after review with an attorney and after addition of any new case law that may apply in any criminal case. The recent decision in People v. Stahl, by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2014 is included. This applies to Illinois law and U.S. Supreme Court case law.
MEMORANDUM OF LAW – FITNESS EXAMS – for Complete document download it here, which has extensive case law and authorities. List of Topics Covered:
- Due Process Clause Prohibits Conviction & Sentencing of Mentally Unfit Defendants – If Bona Fide Doubt of Fitness Present at Any Time Must Examine for Fitness & Hold Fitness Hearing
- Statutes REQUIRE the Judge Shall Inform the Defendant that He/She has the Right to Refuse to Answer Questions at the Fitness Exam
- Bail may NOT be Revoked or Denied Based on Order to Undergo Fitness Examination
- Mental Illness is Determined by a Physician; Fitness is a Legal Term Determined by a Court
- Determining if there is a Bona Fide Doubt of Fitness REQUIRES a Fact Specific Inquiry
- Definitions of terms “psychotic”, “irrational”, “delusional”, “hallucinating”, and “competent”.
- Defendant has a Right to Request and Examination by a Psychiatrist or Psychologist of His/Her Choice, in Addition to the Requirement that the Judge Review Prior Psychiatric Examinations, in Determining Fitness.
- Even though the Defendant is Sane at the Time of Trial, Lack of Sanity at Time of Offense may Result in Finding of Unfit for Trial when Defendant Unable to Testify about Mental State at Time of Offense & Unable therefore to Assist Counsel in His/Her Defense [General Insanity AKA Fitness or CST and Temporary Insanity are Two Different Issues]
- Once an Examiner’s Report is Received by the Court, it Must hold a Fitness Trial (Hearing) within 45 Days.
- If Found Unfit Must Determine Least Restrictive Environment for Treatment and Further Evaluation
- Edward’s Issues and Miscellaneous Concerns
UPDATE: 3-14-15 Judge Wadas quashed all Shelton’s subpoenas for witnesses concerning Judge Cannon’s misconduct and bias. He then cut off Shelton’s argument for substitution of Judge Cannon for cause (inability to remember discussions with court disability coordinator, violation of bail law, violation of fitness law, violation of due process in pervasive fashion, ignoring higher court precedent, quashing Shelton’s subpoenas for witnesses and discovery of documents needed for defense, etc) and essentially summarily denied Shelton’s Motion for substitution of judge for cause.
Please standup for civil rights and against pervasive violation of due process, habeas, right to compulsory process, etc., and against excessive force, officer’s false statements, violation of Americans with Disabilities act against a person suffering from PTSD and appear at every court hearing and trial for Shelton – next court date June 17, 2015 room 502, 2600 S. California in Chicago, IL. Then when he denies second motion for SOJ for Cause the case will instanter return to room 506.
Dr. Linda Shelton is falsely charged with felony aggravated battery to an officer for “touching an officer’s ear” during a PTSD flashback in the courtroom, purposely triggered by officers, who were violating a court disability coordinator agreement not to trigger flashbacks and to back-off if one occurred; See: https://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com/?s=court and https://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com/?s=court
Come to court and witness argument and Judge Wadas’ decision on this motion Feb. 20, 2015, 2600 S California, Chicago, rm 502 at 10 am. Stand-up against judicial incompetence and violation of due process!! Dr. Linda Shelton has filed a motion for substitution of Judge Cannon for cause in her case. This is the initial summary in this motion. For full motion see: M for SOJ for cause 11-22-14 . For exhibits contact Shelton by email at firstname.lastname@example.org to arrange to view them or obtain copies. For information about Shelton’s case read the motion and/or read this blog post here.
- Judge Cannon, continually over two years, except for the ten months of her absence, has conducted this case with such overwhelming and pervasive violation of statutes, violation of due process rights, violation of constitutional rights, and biased as well as irrational statements that she cannot be considered to have the capability to proceed in a fair manner. Her recent statements are so full of falsehood and confabulation that a case can be made that she is not fit to serve on the bench and should be examined by a psychiatrist for mental disability.
- Judge Cannon’s inability to remember discussing ADA accommodations with Court Disability Coordinator (“CDC”) Milissa Pacelli, inability to understand that Elgin Mental Health Center never treated Shelton for a mental disorder and they found her fit, thus J. Cannon’s continued accusations of unfitness and need for psychotropic medications appear to be bias or confabulation, inability to understand that J. Reddick – in her absence – had given Shelton extension of time to subpoena communications between the CDC and Sheriff staff on Oct. 3, 2013 , confused and irrational statements about whether Shelton had any medical records or had ever been in the courtroom , false statements and pervasive violation of statutes and due process rights, and imaginary rulings by a judge who was never assigned and never appeared in this case, could either be knee-jerk confabulation due to early dementia or malicious misconduct. She has been very ill for months and it may be possible that she has not recovered sufficiently to continue as a judge or that she has unfortunately fallen into the depths of early dementia. The failure of the Assistant State’s Attorney and Assistant Public Defenders to step in and question her extreme, pervasive, and continuing statutory, constitutional, and factual errors is inexcusable misconduct.
 See transcript summary and transcript 11/14/14 pp 24-25 & CDC Pacelli Shelton emails 1-1-13 on Exhibit CD  See transcript summary and transcript 11/14/14 p 5 l 1-7, pp 24-25, EMHC Report of 10/31/13; letter from Dr. Galatzer-Levy; Report from Dr. Rappaport p 24 or Bates #1041; EMHC 10-31-13 report p 4 on Exhibit CD  See transcript summary and transcript of 11/14/14 p 3-4, 12 where J Cannon does not appear to understand the reason for and function of court disability assistance Jeff Gertie, and calls J Reddick’s orders a “civil case” ; Transcript 10/3/14 p 78-80 on Exhibit CD  See transcript summary and transcript of 11/14/14 p 20-22 on Exhibit CD  See entire transcript summary and all transcripts on Exhibit CD; See this entire motion. See transcript summary and transcript of 11/14/14 p 6 where J. Cannon states J. Wadas denied Motion for Substitution of Judge In April 2013, but J. Wadas never appeared on this case on Exhibit CD
Click here to download full motion: Motion to declare Illinois battery statute unconstitutional
This motion alleges that the Illinois battery and aggravated battery statutes are unconstitutional because (a) they are discriminatory and therefore violate the Americans with Disabilities Act, (b) they suffer from overbreadth thereby making innocent contact criminal, (c) they are vague and therefore subject to misuse and impossible to determine if an act is innocent or criminal, (d) they deny equal protection as there is no rationality as to how they are applied to protect the public interests concerned, and (e) they deny due process in violating the Proportionate Penalties Clause of our Illinois Constitution (they are cruel, degrading or so wholly disproportionate to the offense committed as to shock the moral sense of the community in alleging the same act and penalty for touching an officer’s ear [or even for touching an officer’s bullet proof vest with a piece of paper] as for beating an officer so bad he is in critical condition, stabbing a citizen numerous times with a knife, or making a bomb which explodes and harms a person). These statutes also violate the separation of powers clause in that they de facto give the judiciary the power to legislate, in that the judges, not the legislature decide what conduct is a crime and what sentence a person committing that conduct should receive, out of a vast array of possible conducts, which are both unintentional and intentional, depending upon whom you believe.