Cook County Judges

Send your comments to picepil@aol.com (see about for guidelines)

Archive for January 2009

Judge Abisi C. Cunningham

leave a comment »


My observations of Judge Cunningham are that he has an excellent demeanor, very calm, cool, collected, and respectful of everyone on all sides of the issue. He listens well and is patient with pro se litigants.

He is intellectually honest and appears to have an excellent fund of knowledge. He is patient and researches the issues instead of making knee-jerk decisions. I believe he is likely to take a step back and take an issue under advisement instead of rushing to judgement in an arrogant or un-informed manner.

I highly recommend him as a judge. I believe it is very unlikely that he would become tainted by corruption.

UPDATE: As of April 1, 2009, Judge Cunningham has been appointed the new Cook County Public Defender. I am thrilled about this appointment and wish him the best of luck and God Speed!

Advertisements

Written by Linda Shelton

January 30, 2009 at 2:33 am

Judicial Misconduct of Judge Joseph Kazmierski under Review by Federal Court

leave a comment »


The Federal Court is now reviewing my Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus to overturn my wrongful conviction for battery to an officer where Judge Joseph Kazmierski and Prosecutors Andrew Dalkin and John Maher wrongfully convicted me through extreme judicial misconduct and prosecutorial misconduct. Cook County Correctional Officer – Sgt. Anthony Salemi had attacked me, falsified his records, said I attacked him, committed perjury at trial and intimidated others to support and cover-up his actions.

State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez Condones Nifong-Like Prosecutorial Misconduct – Federal Judge Coar Rules IL Appellate Court Violates Rights to Appeal

I, Dr. Linda Shelton, was wrongfully convicted of aggravated battery to a correctional officer on December 3, 2007. I have tried to appeal but the Illinois Appellate Court has illegally impeded my appeal. Fortunately Federal Judge Coar on January 14, 2009 has agreed with me and my case is now before him on a petition for writ of habeas corpus. I am optimistic that it will be granted. Cook County State’s Attorney Alvarez should withdraw the charges and ask for the case to be expunged due to extreme Nifong-like prosecutorial misconduct and perjury of the state’s witnesses as well as actual innocence. She is defending the state in the habeas proceedings. She should be held accountable if she fails to acknowledge these facts. See:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/10325794/Shelton-Federal-Petition-for-Writ-of-Habeas-Corpus-Aggravated-Battery-2009

Judge Coar in federal district court on 1/14/09 agreed with my petition for writ of habeas corpus that by refusing to enforce the trial courts order for the court reporter to prepare transcripts and file them with the court clerk, the state has impeded my right to a direct appeal and collateral state remedies and therefore has waived their right to insist that I exhaust state remedies. This is allowed under 28 U.S.C. section 2254 (b)(1)(B)(ii) and Lane v. Richards, 957 F.2d 363, 365 (7th Cir. 1992).

This means he has ruled that Appellate Judge Sheila O’Brien and P. Scott Neville Jr. by denying my multiple motions to compel court reporters to follow the trial court orders to prepare and file my transcripts with the court clerk, have committed an act that amounts to the state waiving their right to insist that I exhaust state remedies before seeking a fed writ of habeas corpus. This is also a violation of their oaths of office.

Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez has been ordered to reply within 21 days and reply to my motion for stay of sentence (parole) within 20 days.

Judge William O Maki

leave a comment »


Chancery Judge William O Maki:

I have very little experience with this judge, but so far my opinion is as follows:

Outstanding demeanor and temperment. Calm, patient, and measured.

Takes issues under advisement and researches topics before making decisions. Writes down references quoted by litigants and actually looks them up and studies them before making decisions. This is perhaps the most important character of a good judge – that he/she takes issues under advisement and takes time to research them and consider them instead of making a knee-jerk decision on an issue about which they are not expert. Knee-jerk decisions are dangerous, often colored by confirmatory bias, and often faulty, having more to do with boosting a judge’s ego than with justice.

Intellectually honest and appears to follow the law and state the basis for his decisions. Appears to treat both sides fairly and listens intently. Asks insightful questions of litigants on both sides. Allows adequate time for argument. Knowledgeable of the law.

On a provisional basis until I get to know this judge better, I highly recommend him as an extremely competent and reasonable jurist.

Written by Linda Shelton

January 27, 2009 at 8:42 pm

Confirmatory Bias by Judges – Shelton Judges Manual Part II

with one comment


Confirmatory Bias by Judges Against Pro Se Litigants, [In]Justice Extremes

Judges in the Circuit Court of Cook County should all be charged with practicing medicine without a license. They are very arrogant and end up being quite unfair due to their confirmatory bias. Confirmatory bias is when a person has preconceived ideas. In this case their ego will not allow them to acknowledge a non-attorney quoting cases or statutes which they either are not aware of or do not understand. They fail to acknowledge to themselves that they are NOT omnipotent repositories of all law, that they are ignorant of much law and rely on the attorneys to educate them on areas where they are weak through motions quoting case law. This is why they “defend” their egos and arrogance with “shoot-from-the-hip” irrational and unconstitutional rulings in fits of unconscious emotion. They unconsciously, through arrogance, ignorance, and inexperience, selectively listened and absorbed only misinterpreted facts and unverified hearsay that support this bias. This is the nature of the beast called confirmatory bias.

MY RECOMMENDATION TO THE JUDGES IS TO BACK OFF, TAKE A DEEP BREATH, AND QUESTION WHETHER YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES OF THE CASE OR ARE SUBJECT TO EMOTION AND CONFIRMATORY BIAS WHEN CONFRONTED WITH A VERBOSE, EMOTIONAL, INTELLECTUAL, OVERLY ENTHUSIASTIC DEFENDANT. MAYBE HE HAS SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO SAY BUT YOU CAN’T SEE THE FOREST AMONG ALL THE TREES HE IS POINTING OUT TO YOU. IT IS YOUR JOB AS A JUDGE TO TAKE CONTROL OF AND CLARIFY THIS EXCEEDINGLY (TO YOU) ANNOYING SITUATION.

There is a great mismatch between the style of judges/attorneys and physicians, as well as many other educated professionals. Judges/attorneys are taught to narrow the issues and make statements using the least words. Decisions are based on as few issues as possible. Physicians are taught to cover every issue (don’t miss a possible diagnosis in their differential and see the global health of the person). When physicians are wronged they tend to mix together the two issues of criminal law and civil law. In a criminal case they will try to discuss every irrelevent but connected issue so, as they perceive, the “court” will understand motive and circumstance. They are not aware that the “court” doesn’t care about motive and circumstance in all its details but just wants to limit the testimony and discovery to issues concerning elements of a crime. They are not aware that criminal courts are not the place to litigate torts or air grievances.

Judges/attorneys falsely believe that every pro se litigant is a rambling, irrational, incoherent nut. Therefore, they don’t even try to listen to or read the pleadings of a pro se physician or self-taught, ragged, and, to the uninformed and unwilling to listen, seemingly confused “legal expert” no matter how factual and accurate their statements and arguments may be. It is simply too much for their inflated egos to handle. Instead through confirmatory bias the judge will immediately order a fitness exam and ignore the defendant. Judges simply do not comprehend the fact that many defendants are “normal” but on the fringe in terms of extremely adamant positions on social and civil rights issues. For example: Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Ghandhi, anti-war protesters, civil rights activists are not all mentally ill. They are just determined, passionate, and adamant. Failure to accommodate these people in the courts, treating them like raving maniacs, harassing them and defaming them is a great injustice. The courts should have RESPECT and TOLERANCE for defendants with extreme and adamant social viewpoints.

Fitness for trial has a very low bar. All that is needed is an understanding of the players (what is a judge, jury, etc., and what do they do), the charge, the possible sentences, and the consequences of conviction, as well as an ability to interact with his attorney or tell the story and answer questions in some meaningful but minimal fashion. The defendant can be florridly psychotic, but if he meets these criteria he is legally “fit” although mentally ill. It is not necessary to make this basic determination to have a full mental health evaluation.

In fact it is a gross waste of resources to constantly refer defendants who are clearly fit to forensic clinical services (a department with notoriously incompetent and arrogant psychiatrists who blanketly deny even the defendants’s request to tape record or write down the interview on paper, which denies the defendant a record of the interview to have another psychiatrist of his choosing review for accuracy of the diagnosis – even the Supreme Court has implied through dicta that it is not unreasonable to record the interview – and professional psychiatric organization ethical rules do not bar such a recording).

For the judges to constantly defer to Dr. Markos’ innane rule barring any recording and other psychiatrist’s self-serving (to prevent proof of their malpractice, which shouldn’t be a concern as they have total immunity from malpractice torts) rule of not even allowing note-taking by the defendant is obscene in my view and firmly denies the write to confrontation when informaton from the interview is used against a person regarding sanity.

I recommend that judges when faced with a verbose, overly intense and emotional intellect in a defendant, especially a physician, should satisfy their curiosity about defendant’s fitness by asking some simple question and making the following statement to inform the person that courts are apples compared to the oranges in the practice of medicine (or other professional field) in the way they approach issues.

“I am going to give you some basic instruction about courtroom procedure and how attorneys and judges approach the practice of law to make your hearings run smoothly. I am not here to solve your personal issues regarding retaliation against you or harassment of you by rightful or wrongful conduct of others against you. The purpose of this court is to decide if you committed a crime. A crime is defined by elements. For example with the crime of trespass the State only has to prove you were told to leave a place and you refused to leave. Any arguments between you and the owner of the place are irrelevant to the determination of you innocence or guilt. They may however later be introduced at the sentencing hearing if you are found guilty as mitigating or aggravating factors. For the same reason, this court will find irrelevant and not allow the introduction at trial of any factors that occurred before or after this incident of an alleged crime as irrelevent. The issues in criminal court are narrowed to the elements of the crime and I will not allow this court’s time to be wasted or the court to be distracted by irrelevant materials. The court does recognize that under unusual circumstances factors that may superficially seem irrelevant may actually relevant. Therefore, for purposes of efficiency and judicial economy I ask both sides to put these issues in writing in a motion for leave to present them at trial.”
This would be a start in ending the war between pro se litigants who are not nuts (physicians, self taught “legal experts”, etc.) and moving cases along more efficiently and rationally.

It is my hope that this web site and the companion sites:

http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/ and
http://prosechicago.wordpress.com/
will be used both by judges/attorneys and the public (particularly pro se community) to reduce tempers, calm nerves, bring understanding, encourage justice, and move cases along more efficiently and less traumatically for all involved.

Impeach Judge Joseph Kazmierski – Prosecute States Attorneys Andrew Dalkin and John Maher

with 2 comments


Judge Kazmierski presided over a trial where I as a disabled non-violent pacifist who was wrongfully jailed for criminal contempt by a rogue judge, Kathleen Pantle, four weeks after I won an injunction against Cook County Sheriff Sheahan for violation of FOIA where he was concealing the fact that he was in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, was fraudulently charged with aggravated battery of a correctional officer, Sgt. Anthony Salemi.

Dishonorable Judge Kazmierski violated every aspect of due process, in that he:

  1. Permitted the case to proceed despite a legally insufficient indictment,
  2. Permitted clearly perjured testimony testimony by the state witnesses and then at sentencing when witnesses clearly impeached the statements of ALL state witnesses at trial he failed to declare me innocent not-with-standing the verdict,
  3. Permitted introduction of tampered evidence,
  4. Permitted the Nifong-like prosecutor to make statements banned by a motion in limine, testify as an expert during closing, denigrate the defense expert witness in contradiction to the facts and testimony,
  5. Failed to enforce subpoenas for key defense evidence,
  6. Permitted the trial to proceed after State destruction of weapon of crime – broken wheelchair allegedly used as a weapon (unable to show jury that the “weapon” didn’t work),
  7. Failed to allow jury instructions about spoilation of evidence,
  8. Failure to pay for expert witnesses for indigent defendant,
  9. Failure to hold evidentiary hearing on issue of perjury of sole grand jury witness,
  10. Denial of defendant’s right to present specific defenses,
  11. Permitted the prosecutor to mistate the law to the jury,
  12. Pemitting the prosecutor to blatantly and repeatedly mischaracterize the evidence to the jury at closing,
  13. Denial of offers of proof,
  14. Illegal repeatedly sustaining baseless prosecutorial objections thereby preventing defense counsel from questioning key witness who was necessary to introduce documents to impeach state witnesses, thus not permitting defense to impeach witnesses with evidence of falsification of records,
  15. Failure to permit defendant to hear side-bars,
  16. Denial of defendants right to self-representation, and
  17. Revoked my bail based on a false arrest and perjured testimony of Sheriff deputies who stated I failed to go through security at a courthouse on October 10, 2007, when in fact the surveillance video revealed I successfully passed through security, but Judge Kazmierski REFUSED to look at the surveillance video. The prosecutors suborned this perjury because they had possession of this video tape and knew that the deputies were lying.

The proof of all of the above is contained in my Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus now before the Federal District Court, Judge Coar – see link below for details. The state has waived the requirement to exhaust state remedies because even though the trial judge declared me indigent and ordered the court reporter to prepare two sets of transcripts (records of proceedings) and deliver one to the court clerk for preparation regarding the appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court has denied motions to compel court reporters to prepare and deliver transcripts to the Circuit Court of Cook County Clerk. The corut reporters are still refusing to prepare and file the transcripts with the clerk. Therefore, the Illinois Appellate Court after more than a year is actively and intentionally impeeding my direct appeal in violation of my federal constitutional rights.

The Nifong-like prosecutors are Assistant Cook County State’s Attorneys Andrew Dalkin and John Maher. They suborned perjury and withheld evidence, as well as tampered with evidence as described in the petition below. Both should be disbarred and arrested for felony obstuction of justice and conspiracy to violate civil rights under color of law.

In fact, I had been assaulted and battered by Cook County Department of Corrections Sergeant Salemi on May 16, 2005. He falsified his records, and he knowingly wrongfully filed a criminal complaint against me falsely alleging I attacked him, in retaliation for my complaining about the Cook County Department of Corrections violating my civil rights. He stated when he entered my cell after sending away the female unit officer, I attacked him while in a wheelchair and forcing my way through the door by ramming him with my wheelchair “skinning his shins” and then after this knocked him down and he stood up, “kicking him in the chest with my RIGHT leg.” This is despite the fact that I have partial right hemiparesis with impairment of my right leg so that I can not kick it with force above the waist, the wheelchair was broken and difficult to move, I have congenital injury to the spine causing life-long weak arms and shoulders making it difficult to move the wheelchair forcefully, and I was on the sixth day of a dry hunger strike, intensely dehydrated and unable to stand for more than a few moments due to weakness from the dehydration. My physicians gave unrebutted testimony affirming these facts, which was unrebutted by the State. I was wrongfully convicted because of a biased jury. The jury became biased because of extreme Nifong-like prosecutorial misconduct by Assistant States Attorneys Andrew Dalkin and John Maher, and by outrageous denial of due process and abuse of judicial discretion by Judge Joseph Kazmierski, all of which grossly denied me a fair trial. I was illegally sentenced to prison instead of probation, in violation of Cunningham v. California, 127 S. Ct. 856 (2007), and the Statutes of the State of Illinois. Therefore, I was required to serve at least half the time minus 6 months per Illinois law. I was denied a stay of sentence pending appeal. I was illegally abused and punished for refusing to walk (IDOC staff falsely claiming I was faking my multiple medical conditions and physical handicap) during the reception process, including a life-threatening assault on me with an ammonia inhalant (purportedly given to prove I was faking a collapse and asthma attack), but which exacerbated the attack, caused brief unconsciousness and is contraindicated in asthma, as well as denial of medical care. The IDOC staff are attempting to conceal the documents about my reception events at IDOC in order to cover-up their official misconduct and ADA violations, in refusing to release the reception summary to me.

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/10325794/Shelton-Federal-Petition-for-Writ-of-Habeas-Corpus-Aggravated-Battery-2009

Some Judges Should be IMPEACHED!

leave a comment »


Judges should be impeached when their conduct so intentionally impeads justice and so intentionally violates the Bill of Rights that they bring great disgrace upon the courts and cause great injustice. These impeachable acts are not just a mistake of law, or a judicial error, but rise to the level of intentional, disgraceful, illegal, unconstitutional, acts of harassment, retaliation, bullying, obstruction of justice, and aiding and abetting felony misconduct of prosecutors. These acts have caused great harm to their victims.  

I propose that articles of impeachment  should be brought against the following judges for the following reasons:

Dishonorable Judge Kathleen Pantle:

Dishon. Judge Pantle purposely violates the Constitution and the laws of both the United States and the country:

1. She issues excessive and unconstitutional bail orders out of spite, animosity, arrogance, narcissism, and deceit, even without a formal charge or due process.

On June 15, 2005 she raised my bail on a fraudulent Medicaid vendor fraud charge, upon a motion from the State for violation of bail, from a $10,000 personal recognizance bail to a $100,000 D-Bond (requires 10% payment) despite the fact she had declared me indigent, I am disabled, I had no criminal record, and I care for an elderly disabled father.  I had been jailed wrongfully by Pantle for contempt because I told her she was violating the law and had no jurisdiction in this void case, then politely attempted to walk out of the courtroom to preserve this issue for appeal, particularly because she had sue sponte removed me as pro se counsel and then denied me appointment of a public defender. During incarceration I was attacked by Sgt. Anthony Salemi, who falsified his record and said I attacked him from my wheelchair.

On December 14, 2005 in the same case Dishon. Judge Pantle arrested me executing her arrest warrant illegally issued on December 8, 2005, despite me informing her in writing on December 7, 2005 that I could not come to a court hearing on December 8, 2005 because Federal Judge Filip had scheduled my Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on this criminal contempt case to be heard on that morning, and even told me prior to the hearing informally through his courtroom deputy that another judge would not arrest someone for not appearing as long as they were given notice there was another court hearing. Judge Filip denied my petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. This Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus has now been refiled and is pending before Federal Judge Coar.   I had been illegally removed as pro se counsel (self-representation), although declared indigent denied a public defender for 7 months, denied a due  process hearing on her statement that she was jailing me because I failed to show up for hearing on December 8, 2005 and because I refused to answer questions at a fitness exam she had ordered although I showed up. It is actually a statutory right for me to refuse to answer questions. I did so in exercising this right because I am adamant that her orders are illegal and without jurisdiction – void ab initio. I refuse to bow to despots. The statute, 725 ILCS 5/104-13, even states that bail may NOT BE REVOKED to accomplish a fitness exam. Her order for a fitness exam was without legal basis – she only said my behavior in court (vigorously defending myself pro se by questioning her lack of  jurisdiction) and my copious pleadings (soon to be posted on the web motions to dismiss the case for lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction) suggested a mental unfitness. This statement is NOT a legally sufficient allegation in open court that would justify a fitness exam.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/9694342/Shelton-Federal-Habeas-PetitionCriminal-Contempt-Conviction2008

On January 6, 2006 after the Illinois Appellate Court freed me on December 30, 2005 and reduced bail from “no bail” to $10,000 personal recognizance bail, Dishon. Judge Pantle falsely stated on the record, without me in the courtroom and without benefit of counsel that I had lied to the IL Appellate Court to obtain release and then she raised the bail from $10,000 personal recognizance bail to $500,000 D-Bond (10$ cash required to get out). The IL Appellate Court again freed me 2 weeks later, overturning her order.

2. She committed felony conspiracy to violate rights under color of law in conspiring with Bill Bradley, IL State Police Investigator William Reibel, Patrick Keenan, Nicholas Cozzolino, John Fearon, Patrick Murphy, and Judges Kathleen Pantle, Jorge Alonso, and Lon Schultz, as well as other unnamed or unknown individuals to intentionally retaliating against those who are whistle blowers against government corruption in Illinois and Cook County in that she conspired to illegally prosecute providers of mental health services to those on Medicaid so as to deny care for mental health services to those on Medicaid – this is a gross violation of her oath of office in that prosecutions without personal or subject-matter jurisdiction are forbidden;

3. She committed felony violation of civil rights under color of law as above;

4.  She committed the act of aiding and abetting felony subornation of perjury by the employees of the IL Attorney General’s Office by failing to hold hearings on my motion to dismiss for fraud upon the grand jury, including the acts by State Police Inv. Reibel in making false statements to the grand juries that indicted Dr. Shelton and Mr. Glass, including false statements about the law and about evidence;

5. She violating her oath of office in allowing the void prosecution of Dr. Shelton and Mr. Glass for Medicaid Vendor Fraud without jurisdiction and in violation of the United States Federal Medicaid Code and the Constitution’s Supremecy Clause, as well as prosecuting these persons when she had evidence they were not guilty of the alleged acts;

6. She committed malicious prosecution against Dr. Shelton and Mr. Glass in that all these persons were whistle blowers against corruption in Illinois government and these fraudulent and malicious prosecutions amounted to retaliation for exposing the criminal conduct of members of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, as well as officials in the City of Chicago, County of Cook, and State of Illinois;

7. She was aiding and abetting the felony violaton of civil rights under color of law by AAGs Fearon, Murray who were and are still grossly violating due process in not only prosecuting these persons without subject matter or personal jurisdiction, but also in doing so in a process indicative of gross prosecutorial misconduct in violating many rights required by due process under the Constitution;

8. She committed the felony federal crime of slavery concerning Dr. Shelton in jailing her without legal process in violation of the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution;

9. She violated her oath of office and snubbed her nose at the Constitution in stating in open court in answer to my concerns about her lack of jurisdiction, “I don’t care,” in open defiance of the rules of law;

10. She gave false information to Judge Alonso , who had taken over the case against me when Judge Pantle was transferred out of the criminal court to the Chancery Division, while in the judge’s chambers behind the bench on April 13, 2007, so that Judge Alonso would again illegally hold me in contempt and summarily jail me – Judge Pantle was “visiting” the courtroom to finish up a few cases and hid herself in Judge Alonso’s chambers during one of my void pre-trial hearings – Judge Alonso, falsely thinking that Judge Pantle understood pro se and contempt issues BLINDLY followed her suggestions and procedures thereby also illegally finding me in contempt in an act of not just judicial stupidity, but also in an unconstitutional act;

11. She committed court ordered elder neglect, in a heartless and unethical act, by not considering my father’s situation and not allowing me to arrange for the care of my disabled father whenever she took me into custody- during May to June 2005 he lost 20 lbs and I found him at home dehydrated and depressed;

12. She ignored the well being and health of a defendant, as well as denied due process, by continuing hearings when I was substantially impaired by an asthma attack and/or dehydration and medical neglect – Cook County Jail staff had withheld my heart and lung medication;

***further details to be added to this post – work in preparation***

I call upon the Illinois House to investigate this matter and consider articles of impeachment. I call upon Chief Judge Evans to remove this incompetent, arrogant, dangerous, witch from the bench before others are harmed.

It is criminal in my opinion that she is now a bond judge in the main criminal court building concerning the most serious felonies in Cook County. Presiding Criminal Court Judge Biebel should be ashamed that he has appointed her to such an important task.

%d bloggers like this: