Archive for the ‘Judge David E. Haracz’ Category
“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:
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
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:
President Toni Preckwinkle
Timothy O. Schneider
Elizabeth Doody Gorman
Joan Patricia Murphy
Jeffrey R. Tobolski
John A. Fritchey
William M. Beavers
Jesus G. Garcia
Peter N. Silvestri
John P. Daley
Commissioner Email addresses:
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.
Written by Linda Shelton
January 16, 2013 at 4:07 pm
Posted in child protective service, Cook County Courts, David Wessel, family court, Illinois corruption, Judge David E. Haracz, Judge David Haracz, Judge Debra Walker, Judge Fe Fernandez, Judge Grace Dickler, Judge Pamela E Loza, Judge Pamela Loza, Judge Regina Scannicchio, Judge Veronicz B Mathein, Judicial Misconduct, Mary T Doheny, Stop Corruption
Tagged with child custody, child representatives, Cook County Circuit Court Domestic Relations Division, Corrupt Judges, cottage industry, Division, divorce, divorce attorneys, divorce lawyers, family court, guardian ad litem, Judicial Misconduct, parental alienation syndrome, PAS, Title IV
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.
President Toni Preckwinkle
Timothy O. Schneider
Elizabeth Doody Gorman
Joan Patricia Murphy
Jeffrey R. Tobolski
John A. Fritchey
William M. Beavers
Jesus G. Garcia
Peter N. Silvestri
John P. Daley
Commissioner Email addresses:
Linda Lorincz Shelton, Ph.D, M.D.
XXXXXXX, IL 60XXX
October 31, 2012
VIA FASCIMILE DELIVERY 312 603-4683
Cook County Board of Commissioners
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.
Linda Lorincz Shelton, PhD, MD
DIVORCE BIG BOOK
ILLINOIS AND FEDERAL STATUTES
REGARDING CHILD SUPPORT
AN EDUCATIONAL PUBLICATION BY STOP ILLINOIS CORRUPTION
(A PUBLIC SERVICE CLUB)
DAVID BAMBIC and DR. LINDA SHELTON
November 4, 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
- 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
- “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
- “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
- “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
“(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
- “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
- “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
- “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
- “Child Support Payment Act” 750 ILCS 27 ………………………………………………….. 14
Allows obligor to pay child support through a currency exchange .. 14
- “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
- 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
- “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
- 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
Written by Linda Shelton
January 11, 2013 at 2:20 pm
Posted in attorney misconduct, child protective service, Child representative, Cook County Courts, David Wessel, family court, Fraud upon the court, government corruptiom, Guardian ad litem, Illinois corruption, Jaquiline Birnbaum, Judge Alfred Levinson, Judge Andrea Schleifer, Judge Barbara Meyeer, Judge Bonita Coleman-John, Judge Carole Karmin Bellows, Judge Celia Gamrath, Judge Daniel Miranda, Judge David E. Haracz, Judge David Haracz, Judge Debra Walker, Judge Dominique Ross, Judge Edward Arce, Judge Elizabeth Rivera, Judge Fe Fernandez, Judge Grace Dickler, Judge Helaine Berger, Judge Hyman Riebman, Judge Jeanne Cleveland Bernstein, Judge Jeanne Reynolds, Judge John Carr, Judge La Quietta Hardy-Campbell, Judge Leida Gonzalez Santiago, Judge Lisa Ruble Murphy, Judge Mark Lopez, Judge Martha Mills, Judge Mary Trew, Judge Marya Nega, Judge Michael Bender, Judge Michele Lowrance, Judge Nancy Katz, Judge Naomi Schuster, Judge Pamela E Loza, Judge Pamela Loza, Judge Patricia Logue, Judge Patrick Murphy, Judge Paul Vega, Judge Regina Scannicchio, Judge Renee Goldfarb, Judge Sharon Johnson, Judge Thomas Kelley, Judge Timothy Murphy, Judge Veronicz B Mathein, Judge William Boyd, Judicial Misconduct, Self-Representation (Pro Se), Stop Corruption
Tagged with 750 ILCS 25/4-5, 750 ILCS 25/5-2, child custody, child support, Cook County Board of Commissioners, DHFS Administrative Law Courts, divorce, Expedited Child Support Act of 1990, Illinois Actions Subject to Expedited Child Support, Illinois child support enforcement, Illinois DHFS, Illinois non-custodial parent, parental alienation, PAS, Social Security Title IV-D program
Activists ask U.S. Supreme Court to appoint special master to review and correct lawlessness in Cook County Courts
This motion to the United States Supreme Court requests that the high court consolidate the issue of lawlessness (denial of civil rights including right to petition for writ of habeas corpus, due process, compulsory process, trial by jury, right to counsel, speedy trial, substitution of judge for cause [bias] and ADA accommodations) in three cases before the court: 12-6561, 11-10814, and 11-10790. It exposes the pervasive and systemic ignorance, maliciousness, cover-up of corruption, and denial of civil rights by judges throughout the Circuit Court of Cook County.
The cases which the activists, Linda Lorincz Shelto, PhD, MD, and Mr. David Bambic are requesting to be consolidated over the issue of appointing a special master to investigate the Cook County Courts and institute systems of oversight of the judges and judicial education including civilian, non-court related oversight include the following three cases:
Motion to consolidate cases over issue of lawlessness in Cook County Courts exhibited by Judges: Michael McHale, Joseph Kazmierski, David Haracz, Peggy Chiampas, Jorge Alonso, Veronica Mathein, Kathleen Pantle, Marie Kuriakos Ciesil, Mary Margaret Brosnahan, Kenneth J. Wadas, Colleen A. Hyland, Noreen Daly, William D. Maddux, Timothy Evans, and E. Kenneth Wright Jr.
Original Petition for Writ of Mandamus in United States Supreme Court due to Trial Court (Judge Peggy Chiampas) ignoring due process and civil rights (speedy trial, compulsory process, ADA accommodations, substitution of judge for cause [bias]). Case No 11-10814
Motion for rehearing of 11-10814 after dismissal without comment.
Original Petition for Writ of Certiorari (appeal) to U.S. Supreme Court regarding lawlessness (violation of trial rights, compulsory process [discovery], refusal to follow Illinois Statutes, and use of hearsay for decisions) Case No 11-10790
Written by Linda Shelton
November 2, 2012 at 11:55 am
Posted in attorney misconduct, Child representative, Cook County Circuit Court Clerk Dorothy Brown, Cook County Courts, Criminal Court, David Wessel, family court, Federal District Court, Fraud upon the court, Habeas Corpus, Illinois Appellate Court, Illinois Supreme Court, Judge Colleen A. Hyland, Judge David E. Haracz, Judge Jorge Alonso, Judge Joseph Kazmierski, Judge Kathleen Pantle, Judge Kenneth J. Wadas, Judge Marie Kuriakos Ciesil, Judge Mary Margaret Brosnahan, Judge Michael B. McHale, Judge Noreen Daly, Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr., Judge Peggy Chiampas, Judge Timothy C. Evans, Judge Veronicz B Mathein, Judge William D. Maddux, Judicial Misconduct, probate court, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Self-Representation (Pro Se), Stop Corruption, United States Supreme Court
Tagged with anarchy, Computer Tampering, Contempt of court, Corrupt Courts, Corrupt Judges, eavesdropping, habeas corpus, Illinois Courts, Judge Chiampas, Judge Evans, Judge Haracz, Judge Wright, lawlessness, next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus, parental alienation syndrome, PAS
Pay to play family courts, extortion of parents’ estate to pay for judges’ pensions and court-appointed attorneys, awarding of custody to child abusers and drug addicts in order to remove the children from more wealthy parent, villify them and cause prolonged court actions that are used to fraudulently obtain federal dollars under social security act and violence agains women act – meant to preserve families and take care of children, has been admitted and proven, presented to federal officials and police, as well as senior court officials yet is ignored. Result is diversion of billions over decades from families and children, that instead of preserving the mental health and interests of the child destroy the children and the parents. See Dr. Sheila Mannix’s explanation as a victim of this court abuse:
Written by Linda Shelton
October 14, 2012 at 8:11 pm
Posted in attorney misconduct, child protective service, Child representative, Cook County Courts, David Wessel, family court, Judge David E. Haracz, Judicial Misconduct, Self-Representation (Pro Se), Stop Corruption
Tagged with David Bambic, David Wessel, Domestic Relations Court, Domestic Relatons Division, father's rights, felony federal funding fraud, Illinois family court, mother's rights, parental alienation syndrom, PAS, Sheila Mannix, Social Security funding fraud, Social Security title IV-D, VAWA
Dr Shelton asks U.S. Supreme Court to appoint special master to remove corruption in Circuit Court of Cook County
On this site and in their pleadings before the Circuit Court of Cook County, the Illinois Appellate Court and the Illinois Supreme Court, Dr. Linda Shelton, Dr. Sheila Mannix, David Bambic, Milijana Vlastelica, Frank Epstein, Sandra Padron, Karyn Mehringer, Mic Gerhardt, Maisha Hamilton, Vernon Glass, Naomi Jennings, Annabel Melongo, Davy Cady and many others have shown that the Circuit Court of Cook County has allowed its judges to disregard constitutional rights such as due process, speedy trial, the right to petition for writ of habeas corpus, the right to receive notice and discovery before trial, the right to have enforced state laws as to trial and court procedure, and the right to confront witnesses against them and not have court decision made based on hearsay.
The extreme lawlessness that Shelton has documented on this site is now before the United States Supreme Court in three Petitions for Certiorari and for Mandamus and five more are in preparation. You can read them in the links at the end of this post.
In the pleadings that follow, David Bambic and Linda Shelton are asking the United States Supreme Court to review this extreme lawlessness that has caused wrongful decisions in their cases, but that also is so pervasive that hundreds if not thousands of divorce cases, orders of protection cases, criminal cases, probate cases, and child custody cases must be overturned or retried.
The state of anarchy in Cook County due to judicial ignorance, corruption, misconduct, arrogance, and maliciousness is so extreme, so harmful to children, families, the elderly, and innocent accused of crimes particularly whistle blowers who are being retaliated against, as documented in these three U.S. Supreme Court proceedings that Shelton has requested the U.S. Supreme Court to appoint a special master to review the policies and procedures of the Circuit Court of Cook County and to institute a judicial education and supervision program so that the right to petition for writ of habeas corpus, the right for a speedy trial, the right to compulsory process, the right to notice and discovery before trial, as well as other rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights including due process or following the statutes and rules of the state and the federal codes and rules are preserved and no longer violated pervasively.
Shelton now calls for Cook County Board President Tony Preckwinkle to fire Chief Judge Timothy Evans for failure to ensure that the judges in the Circuit Court of Cook County follow the Constitutions of the United States and Illinois and the laws of the State of Illinois and these United States.
We can no longer allow this pervasive, malignant lawlessness to run our courts in Cook County and be steered by the corrupt government officials and police officials that have been doing so.
U.S. Supreme Court Petition for Writ of Mandamust concerning refusal to hear petition for writ of habeas corpus and false arrest and conviction for filing a next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus, as well as summary (no trial) conviction and sentence of 16 mo in jail for criminal contempt for filing the habeas petition as a non-attorney (the judge declared this illegal) despite the fact that Illinois law allows it: 735 ILCS 5/10 et seq.
Written by Linda Shelton
September 9, 2012 at 11:00 pm
Posted in attorney misconduct, child protective service, Child representative, Cook County Courts, Criminal Court, David Wessel, family court, Fraud upon the court, Habeas Corpus, Illinois Appellate Court, Illinois Supreme Court, Judge David E. Haracz, Judge Jorge Alonso, Judge Joseph Kazmierski, Judge Kathleen Pantle, Judge Kenneth J. Wadas, Judge Michael B. McHale, Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr., Judge Peggy Chiampas, Judge Timothy C. Evans, Judge William D. Maddux, Judicial Misconduct, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Self-Representation (Pro Se), Stop Corruption, United States Supreme Court
Tagged with Annabel Melongo, battery, Bill of Rights, Certiorari, child custody, civil rights, compulsory process, Cook County Circuit Court, court corruption, David Bambic, disorderly conduct, divorce, Dr Linda Shelton, Dr. Sheila Mannix, Due Process, Frank Epstein, habeas corpus, Illinois, Illinois Corruption, jusidical corruption, Karyn Mehringer, Maisha Hamilton, Mandamus, Mic Gerhardt, Milijana Vlastelica, Naomi Jennings, order of protection, PAS, Sandra Padron, speedy trial, trespass, United State, United States Supreme Court, Vernon Glass
Family court judge Haracz gives kids to drug-addict who threatened to take them out with her if discovered, ex-Marine dad frantic to protect them, ISBA attorneys had vowed to retaliate for his lobbying to lower their pay
In a dissolution of marriage case the mother, Catherine, is known to the community as a drug-addict, who a severely disabled neighbor on narcotics for severe pain has signed an affidavit stating that Catherine has threatened to kill herself and take her two kids with her if the neighbor turned her in when she was caught by the neighbor red-handed stealing narcotics (Vicodin). The neighbor had given Catherine a key to the house in case she needed help. The neighbor also said she admitted she was addicted and stated she failed a drug test at work, but ran to a doctor that day to get a prescription for Vicodin to cover-up that fact.
The neighbor only recently, after two years, reported Catherine to authorities because she feared for the lives of the children and only after Judge Haracz was given documents under seal so he could quickly act to protect the children, age 9 and 14. Judge Haracz failed to act. An emergency motion was made to the Illinois Appellate court and they refused to act. Clearly Judge Haracz and the Illinois Appelalte Court don’t give a darn about the best interest of the children, public safety, or drug abuse.
The father, David has also signed an affidavit that during the marriage he caught his ex-wife using narcotics, found empty pill bottles with the patients’ names on them (Catherine is a drug addiction counselor), and despite all his efforts, she refused to get help, so she still is a user. He says she admitted she failed a drug test at work, however she ran to a doctor that day to get a prescription for Vicodin to cover-up her habit. He also states that he didn’t report her because she threatened to commit suicide and take the kids with her.
After Catherine escalated in verbal abuse of David, ran up $60,000 in credit cards twice – forcing David to re-mortgage the house, which has now been lost in foreclosure because David has not been able to make as a big an income with the downturn in the economy as a general contractor and due to on the job injuries, and starting physically abusing David in front of the children (hitting him), David filed for divorce in 2009.
Shortly thereafter, Catherine filed a false statement for an order of protection stating that David was dangerous to the family as an ex-Marine and martial artist. She claimed he didn’t flush the toilet, sprayed perfume around the home, pulled up bushes and endangered a daughter by helping her climb through a window when the family was locked out.
Haracz has allowed NO due process and gave the house and almost everything in it to Catherine. Catherine threw out tons of work material that David was storing in the garage as a general contractor. She gave away his belongings through freecycle or into the garbage – even personal family things and his pictures of his children. I wonder why – maybe to support her drug habit?
Judge Haracz over the last two years has waged a campaign against David, using the false statements of child representative David Wessel, who has utterly failed to properly investigate the family circumstances. Wessel has not interviewed David’s parents or six siblings and large numbers of nephews and nieces which form a large and well-respected family support system. Wessel has not interviewed Catherine’s sisters, one who is a banker and handles a family trust which is supposed to pay for the kids’ college, and this information has been withheld by Catherine from the court. It is likely she is not reporting to the court income from the trust and is misusing the income for her drug habit. Catherine’s sister likely does not know the extent of Catherine’s misdeeds and drug abuse. Her sister administers a large family trust which Catherine has hidden the extent of from the court.
DCFS investigated Catherine’s complaints and they were determined to be UNFOUNDED. So when Catherine took the stand at trial in April and only testified that David is “dangerous” because of these unfounded complaints, (there were no other witnesses and the only other evidence was an alleged letter from a 13 yr old daughter purported to affirm some of what Catherine said but never given to David and the child was not put on the stand – so the letter was inadmissible hearsay) and the child rep and Catherine refused to inform Judge Haracz and Judge Haracz ignored David’s statement that the allegations were determined by a state investigative agency, DCFS, to be unfounded, Catherine committed felony perjury and child rep Wessell aided and abetted it perjury, suborned this perjury, and committed contempt of court because he failed to do what he was appointed by the court to do – look after the best interests of the children by investigating the situation.
Judge Haracz has FAILED to order a drug test for Catherine who claims to be able to hide drug abuse and circumvent urine drug test with the use of certain herbs. He has failed to have her examined by a psychiatrist for drug abuse. Catherine is known to order large quatity of “herbs” from foreign countries.
David is worried sick about what will happen to the kids – a bad result is likely due to the drug addiction and Catherine’s lies. Will they be hurt in an auto accident when the mother drives high? Will she neglect the kids in a drug stupor during a crisis? Is Catherine harming rather than helping her patients? They will be evicted soon – will she decompensate?
Please write Cook County Board President Tony Preckwinkle and ask her to fire Chief Judge Evans. This is NOT a solitary incident. This writer has investigated and this type of handling of divorce cases is common practice and pattern in Cook County!?!?
David Wessel and Judge Haracz have failed to inquire who was taking care of the children before the divorce – it was David as Catherine didn’t know how to cook, so he cooked. It was David because Catherine was so absorbed in her careers as a counselor and addict that she could not attend to the needs of the children.
Judge Haracz simply has been rubber stamping Catherine’s “fantastical” false statements under the guidance of child representative David Wessel who appears to be running Haracz’ courtroom. He is getting paid to be an incompetent creep who should be disbarred and who appears to be obtaining Title IV-D Social Security money fraudulently.
This writer has observed the proceedings recently, reviewed the court file, talked to David’s family members and finds that Judge Haracz and David Wessel are clearly aiding and abetting felony drug theft by failing to test Catherine and turn her in to authorities. They are endangering the lives of the children. The older daughter likely is babysitting the younger daughter as a mother on drugs sleeps so deeply that she can’t attend to her children.
Catherine is a danger to the community, her patients, her children and everyone on the road when she drives. Reportedly she had another traffic accident recently.
This writer has gotten to know David and his family over the last six months, I find it criminal and an insult to our military to say he is dangerous to his family because he is an ex-Marine, treasonous for a judge to blatantly ignore law and openly trash the constitution in willingly and pervasively denying due process, and criminal for the child representative to take sides before even seeing the kids (he told David upon meeting him that David needs to realize he won’t have his kids) – fail to do his job, and obtain payment without even giving the parents the statutory required detailed invoice for his unwanted services!
This writer has learned by following a half-dozen family court cases that Judge Haracz and other family court judges allow one parent to be wrongfully vilified, without regard to who really is a danger to the children, usually the parent that had been making the most money, which drags out the divorce, causes the Public Aid Department to be involved in terms of the State Disbursement Unit that Judge Haracz FALSELY tell the parents MUST receive and distribute child support payments (the parents can save money if they amicably agree to payments directly between them) and therefore the courts and the State obtain a huge amount of Title IV-D Social Security money, some of which goes to enrich child reps and guardian ad litems.
David Wessel stated to David outside the courtroom that attorney Jacqueline Birnbaum who had attended a meeting with the Illinois State Bar Association where they discussed that they would fight a bill to limit pay of child representatives and guardian ad litems agreed with him that they would target David for lobbying to limit their pay. He said that since David is lobbying a state senator to introduce a bill to limit pay of child representatives and guardian ad litems to $150 per hour that they would retaliate against David and Wessel did by misleading the trial court and causing David to wrongfully lose equal parenting and custody. The ISBA objected to this change saying it was unconstitutional. Birnbaum’s law firm obtains more than two million per year from the parents and Social Security Title IV-D money each year in divorce cases. This is an illegal penalty on David’s exercise of his constitutional rights and reveals that the depth of Cook County’s corruption is greater than anyone has imagined and reaches into the ISBA. Someone tell this writer how it is justified to pay these court appointed attorneys $300 – $1200 (bundled including services of staff) per hour when attorneys for murder defendants in Illinois are paid at the most only about $150 per hr.
This is clearly a RICO enterprise which is defrauding the Social Security Title IV-D program in misusing billions of dollars in acts of wire fraud and misuse of government funds, while it enriches the courts, the department of public aid in Illinois that runs administrative law courts that are supposed to provide services to take requests to change in child support orders after the dissolution of a marriage – even if not on public aid, and runs the state disbursement unit.
Where is the FBI and US Attorney?!?! When are we as a nation going to stop the abuse of our own citizens by the courts?!?!
Join govabuse.org now. Join occupy wall street and occupy Chicago. March in the streets and protest!?!? Write Cook County Board President Tony Preckwinckle and ask her to fire Chief Judge Evans and replace him with a judge who will follow the law and replace all judges like Haracz who violate it. Write Patrick Fitgerald, the US Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois and demand an in depth investigation of abuses in family and probate court by corrupt judges. (the same thing is happening in probate court where elderly persons are kidnapped, held hostage whether or not they are mentally disabled, and their estates are raped and confiscated by court appointed guardians, who prevent family members from having contact with their loved ones and intervening – see the story of producer Gloria Sykes and how her mother is being held hostage!?!?).
Read David’s appeal brief for his divorce case which was judge filed with the Illinois Appellate Court this week here.
Cook County Board President Tony Preckwinkle
118 N. Clark Street Room 537
Chicago, IL 60602
Phone: (312) 603-6400
Fax: (312) 443-4397
Mayor Rahm Emanuel
121 N. LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Dial 311 (within Chicago)
If calling from outside of Chicago, call: 312.744.5000
US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald
United States Attorney’s Office
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
219 S. Dearborn St., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-5300
Submit a tip to the FBI hotline on the crimes perpetrated by the family courts: https://tips.fbi.gov/
Write the Illinois State Bar Association and tell them how you are appalled that they would allow their members to be so unethical!
Illinois Bar Center
424 S. Second Street
Springfield, IL 62701-1779
Dear Director ISBA [or Chairman Preckwinckle, Mayor Emanuel, US Attorney’s Patrick Fitzgerald]:
I am writing you to ask you to investigate the following and use whatever resources you have to affect change ASAP. Our economy is suffering and our families are being destroyed because of the following. When parents’ assets are destroyed and their reputations ruined, they will not be able to contribute much to society in terms of taxes. More people end up on public assistance. This kind of family stress and wrongful vilification of parents has life-long effects on the mental health of the children.
This web site, https://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com, courageously reveals how the entire family court system in Cook County and perhaps other counties is grossly corrupted by money grabbing unethical child representatives and guardians ad litem, who are aided and abetted by the judges, that use the parents’ assets and Social Security Title IV-D money to enrich themselves while destroying families. The judges seem to just rubber-stamp their contemptuous and illegal acts.
It appears as if the CRs and GALs pick the parent with the most perceived income to vilify, withholding exculpatory evidence, aiding and abetting the presentation of fraudulent accusations and hearsay, wrongfully causing one parent to lose custody and require supervised visitation, which certainly is NOT in the best interests of the child. The judges violate the law and hold hearings on changes in child support post dissolution of marriage when they have no jurisdiction to do so when the parents, even if not on public aid, by federal and state law must petition the Illinois Public Aid department administrative law court to change child support when they are in the State Disbursement Unit for payment of child support.
See: http://prosechicago.wordpress.com/2011/10/03/the-big-divorce-book-little-known-illinois-and-federal-divorce-laws/ – this table of contents from a pro se filing gives all the state and federal laws and summarizes them regarding changes in child support.
It appears as if there is a conspiracy involving the courts and lawyers to retaliate against persons who exercise their constitutional rights, to keep the details of this scheme which blatantly violates law hidden from the public, and to assassinate the characters of anyone who tries to stop it.
The following is an appeal which describes in detail this scheme and how it has tragically affected one family:
This is just the tip of the iceberg and our loosely associated activist group has dozens of examples similar to this and worse where families are being destroyed without due process in open violatio of law by the lawyers and judges.
When is the ISBA [County, City, US Attorney’s Office] going to clean itself up and start fighting to change this corrupt system, start working with David Bambic, Gwendolyn Shavers, Gloria Sykes, Sheila Mannix, Karyn Mehringer and others to hold the criminals accountable, preserve families, look after the best interests of children, and make the actions of the family courts transparent to the public?
Written by Linda Shelton
October 21, 2011 at 7:58 pm
Posted in child protective service, Child representative, Cook County Courts, David Wessel, elder abuse and exploitation, family court, Fraud upon the court, Guardian ad litem, Guardians, Illinois Appellate Court, Jaquiline Birnbaum, Judge David E. Haracz, Judge Timothy C. Evans, Judicial Misconduct, probate court, Self-Representation (Pro Se), Uncategorized, Veterans
Tagged with child custody, child representatives, Cook County, Corrupt Courts, Corrupt Judges, crook county courts, David Wessel, divorce, family court, Government Corruption, Jacquilline Birnbaum, Judge Haracz, parent alienation syndrome, PAS, Rahm Emanual, Tony Preckwinkle
DCFS in Illinois = Child Protective Services (CPS)
Child representatives from family courts (divorce courts) often act like social workers depicted in this video.
It is a sad fact that CPS workers, child representatives and court appointed guardians of elderly person act in the manner depicted in this video.
Protect yourself and learn from this video.
Stand tall and fight back – see govabuse.org and other posts on this web site about family courts and elder guardians.
What are the motives, incentives and financial reasons why the family and probate courts are corrupt and use Title IV Social Security money to enrich court appointed lawyers, guardians, child representatives, counselors, and child protection and adoption agencies to destroy families, cause parental alientation, legally kidnap and adopt out children from loving parents, and kidnap the elderly, falsely label them mentally incompetent, appoint a guardian and ban their families from visiting them when illegally detained in a nursing home why they rape the elderly person’s estate – see this video:
Written by Linda Shelton
August 25, 2011 at 2:28 am
Posted in child protective service, Child representative, Cook County Courts, David Wessel, elder abuse and exploitation, family court, Fraud upon the court, Guardian ad litem, Guardians, Judge David E. Haracz, Judge Edward Arce, Judge Moshe Jacobius, Judge Pamela E Loza, Judge Regina Scannicchio, Judge Veronicz B Mathein, probate court, Self-Representation (Pro Se)