Cook County Judges

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

Archive for the ‘Judge Dennis J. Porter’ Category

Complaint for mandamus and/or federal civil rights injunction regarding pervasive, extensive violations of civil rights in Cook County courts – Judge Cannon and others

leave a comment »


This complaint was filed in August 2017.

It exposes incompetence and corruption of. cook County Judges, court clerks, Asst. states Attorneys & Sheriff staff regarding:

Civil rights

Bail

Americans with Disabilities Act rights

Fitness and insanity issues

Due Process

It started with an unconstitutional felony charge of aggravated battery of an officer against a disabled activist who was in a PTSD flashback induced by courtroom deputies because she allegedly “touched an officer’s ear.” Altho indigent bail was set at an putrageous and unconstitutional $300,000.

Come to next court date Dec 1st, 2017 room 506 2600 S California, Chicago IL at 10 am 4 pre-trial hearing battery case.

The fact that Judge Cannon has been assigned on the Laquan McDonald murder case against police officers in Chicago has been the impetence for me to post this early before it is actually filed. The public MUST BE INFORMED!

Full nearly 100 page 30 count complaint can be found here.

This complaint documents why Judge Dianne Gordon Cannon should be removed as a judge due to mental incapacity and incompetence. This is why she should NOT be the judge for the officers charged with aiding and abetting the murder of Laquan McDonald! Read the full complaint for all the details.  I will be happy to forward to anyone interested in the details all of the exhibits and transcripts.

Plaintiff, Linda Shelton respectfully complains for writ of mandamus regarding the following pervasive and extensive unconstitutional acts, over a four and one half year period, which preclude or precluded fair pre-trial hearings and trial in case no. 12-CR-22504, including:

  1. Defendant Cook County Circuit Court Clerk Brown’s refusal to give a civil habeas number, properly file, and schedule for hearing petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Exhibits AA-C) and/or in the alternative U.S. Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §1983 (“§1983”)Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, regarding her and from her non-compliance with U.S. Constitution and its Amendments and Illinois Constitution’s Suspension, Due Process and Equal Protection  Clauses as represented by her non-compliance with the Circuit Court of Cook County Rule 15.2 – Habeas Corpus (“R15.2”) and the Illinois Clerks of Courts Act, 705 ILCS 105/0.01 et seq. (“COCA”);
  2. Defendant Cook County Criminal Division Presiding (Chief Supervisory) Judges Biebel’s, Martin’s, and Porter’s refusal to hear with due process previously filed into criminal file Habeas Petitions, one heard, by Defendant Judge Porter, without due process and two ignored Petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus in case 12-CR-22504 (Exhibits A-C), and/or in the alternative §1983 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief respectively regarding their and from their non-compliance with (i) the United States Constitution and its IV, V, VI, VIII and XIV Amendments’ Suspension and Probable Cause, Due Process, Compulsory Process, Speedy Trial, Assistance of Counsel and Reasonable Bail Clauses (including Liberty and equal protection rights), (ii) the Illinois Constitution’s Article One, §§ 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, and 9 (Liberty, Due Process, Probable Cause, Indictment, Compulsory Process, Assistance of Counsel, Speedy Trial, Bail, and Habeas Clauses), (iii) the Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq., and § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act(“RA”), 29 U.S.C. § 794, disability discrimination 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.160(a)(1), (b)(1)Codes, (iv) the Illinois Habeas Statutes, 735 ILCS §5/10-101 et seq.(“ILHab”), (v) the Illinois Bail Statutes (“ILBail”), 725 ILCS 5/110-1, et seq., (vi) the Illinois Fitness Statutes (“ILFit statute”), 720 ILCS 5/104-1 et seq., and (vii) precedent from higher courts as described herein in the following;
  3. Defendant Judge Evan’s refusal to follow U.S. Supreme Court ADA recommended guidelines and U.S. and Illinois Constitutions and Statutory habeas rights and usual standards for administrators and supervisors in training and supervising judges and writing court rules and directives pertaining to habeas rights and/or in the alternative §1983 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief from by (i) his non-compliance with standards related to the administrative judge’s role in granting ADA accommodations and (ii) his non-compliance with standards related to his role in defining court rules, as well as educational and supervisory role in training and supervising judges for compliance with the United States Constitution, its Suspension Clause, and its Amendments’ Probable Cause, Due Process, Compulsory Process, Speedy Trial, Assistance of Counsel and Reasonable Bail Clauses (including Liberty and equal protection rights), the Illinois Constitution’s Liberty, Due Process, Probable Cause, Indictment, Compulsory Process, Assistance of Counsel, Speedy Trial, Bail, and Habeas Clauses, the ADA and RA , the ILHab, the ILFit, and the ILBail Statutes, and precedent from higher courts, as described herein;
  4. Refusal of named Defendant Public Defenders (“PD”), Abishi C. Cunningham and Amy Campanelli to follow standard of care of effectiveness and their oath of office in Shelton’s defense and refusal to properly train and supervise the APDs to follow the laws described herein, and/or in the alternative §1983 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, from their refusal to train and supervise their staff to comply with (i) the United States Constitution and its Amendments’ Suspension, Probable Cause, Due Process, Compulsory Process, Speedy Trial, Assistance of Counsel and Reasonable Bail Clauses (including Liberty and equal protection rights), (ii) the Illinois Constitution’s Liberty, Due Process, Probable Cause, Indictment, Compulsory Process, Assistance of Counsel, Speedy Trial, Bail, and Habeas Clauses, (iii) ADA and RA, (iv) ILHab Statutes, (v) ILFit Statutes, and (vi) ILBail Statutes, and (vii) precedent from higher courts, as described herein;
  5. Refusal of named Defendant Assistant Public Defenders (“APD”), Debra Smith, David Gunn, Dawn Sheikh, Erica Soderdahl, Tiana Blakely, Debra E. Gassman, and Richard Paull to follow standard of care of effectiveness and their oath of office in Shelton’s defense, and/or in the alternative §1983 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, from their non-compliance, during Shelton’s representation with (i) the United States Constitution and its Amendments’ Suspension, Probable Cause, Due Process, Compulsory Process, Speedy Trial, Assistance of Counsel and Reasonable Bail Clauses (including Liberty and equal protection rights), (ii) the Illinois Constitution’s Liberty, Due Process, Probable Cause, Indictment, Compulsory Process, Assistance of Counsel, Speedy Trial, Bail, and Habeas Clauses, (iii) ADA and RA, (iv) ILHab Statutes, (v) ILFit Statutes, and (vi) ILBail Statutes, and (vii) precedent from higher courts, as described herein;
  6. Refusal of named Defendant State’s Attorneys (“SA”), Anita Alvarez and Kim Foxx, to follow standards of fairness and ILSC Rule 3.8(a),(b), and (c) (Attorney Rules of Conduct) requiring them to seek justice, obtain indictment only if probable cause is present, and disclose exculpatory evidence, and their oath of office  and refusal to properly train and supervise the ASAs regarding the laws as described below and/or in the alternative §1983 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, from their refusal to train and supervise their staff to comply with (i) the United States Constitution and its Amendments’ Suspension, Probable Cause, Due Process, Compulsory Process, Speedy Trial, Assistance of Counsel and Reasonable Bail Clauses (including Liberty and equal protection rights), (ii) the Illinois Constitution’s Liberty, Due Process, Probable Cause, Indictment, Compulsory Process, Assistance of Counsel, Speedy Trial, Bail, and Habeas Clauses, (iii) ADA and RA, (iv) ILHab Statutes, (v) ILFit Statutes, and (vi) ILBail Statutes, and (vii) precedent from higher courts, as described herein; and
  7. Refusal of named Defendant Assistant State’s Attorneys (“ASA”), Erin Antonietti, James Comroe, Jennifer M Hamelly, Joseph Hodal, John Maher, James V Murphy Iii, Mariano Reyna, Sylvie Manaster, Frank Lamas, Jobll Zahr, and Lorraine Murphy, to follow standards of fairness and ILSC Rule 3.8(a),(b), and (c) (Attorney Rules of Conduct)  requiring them to seek justice, obtain indictment only if probable cause is present, and disclose exculpatory evidence, and their oath of office and/or in the alternative  1983 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, from their non-compliance with (i) the United States Constitution and its Amendments’ Suspension, Probable Cause, Due Process, Compulsory Process, Speedy Trial, Assistance of Counsel and Reasonable Bail Clauses (including Liberty and equal protection rights), (ii) the Illinois Constitution’s Liberty, Due Process, Probable Cause, Indictment, Compulsory Process, Assistance of Counsel, Speedy Trial, Bail, and Habeas Clauses, (iii) ADA and RA, (iv) ILHab Statutes, (v) ILFit Statutes, and (vi) ILBail Statutes, and (vii) precedent from higher courts as described herein; and
  8. Refusal of named Defendant Judges Israel Desierto, Diane Gordon Cannon,  Erica L. Reddick, Sheila McGinnis,  and Dennis J. Porter, to follow their oath of offices’ requirement to follow the law as described herein and/or in the alternative §1983 complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief from their non-compliance with (i) the United States Constitution and its Amendments’ Suspension, Probable Cause, Due Process, Compulsory Process, Speedy Trial, Assistance of Counsel and Reasonable Bail Clauses (including Liberty and equal protection rights), (ii) the Illinois Constitution’s Liberty, Due Process, Probable Cause, Indictment, Compulsory Process, Assistance of Counsel, Speedy Trial, Bail, and Habeas Clauses, (iii) ADA and RA, (iv) ILHab Statutes, (v) ILFit Statutes, and (vi) ILBail Statutes, and (vii) precedent from higher courts, as described herein.

 

Advertisements

IL courts, Lisa Madigan & State Police officials caught in scheme defrauding federal government of millions

with 4 comments


UPDATE 10-15-14  The IL eavesdropping statute was declared unconstitutional and charges then  had to be dropped against Melongo. Melongo was also found not guilty of the computer tampering charges.

LISA MADIGAN HAS DONE NOTHING ABOUT INVESTIGATING THE CORRUPTION IN THE COURTS WHERE UNNECESSARY COURT APPOINTED EVALUATORS AND CHILD REPS ARE GRANTED HUGE HOURLY FEES OF >$300/HR, RAPING FAMILY ESTATES INCLUDING CHILDREN’S COLLEGE FUNDS, ELDERLY PERSONS’ ESTATES ARE ROBBED BY COURT APPOINTED GUARDIANS,  “NO BAIL” IS ROUTINELY AND UNCONSTITUTIONALLY ORDERED IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION FOR MINOR CRIMES AND DEFENDANTS ARE DECLARED UNFIT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS (IN ADDITION WASTING GOVERNMENT FUNDS COMMITTING NONVIOLENT ALLEGED OFFENDERS TO A SECURE MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY WITHOUT BASIS), THE CORRUPTION OF SAVE-A-LIFE FOUNDATION THAT HAS ILLEGALLY OBTAINED MONEY THROUGH FRAUD FROM THE CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES, INCLUDING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE AND CLEARLY WAS USING FRAUD TO OBTAIN HUGE AMOUNTS OF PUBLIC FUNDS. LISA MADIGAN COVERS UP GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION INSTEAD OF INVESTIGATING IT OR REFERRING IT TO THE U.S. ATTORNEY. READ THE DETAILS ABOUT THE EXTENSIVE CORRUPTION OF THE COURTS IN ILLINOIS HERE AND THROUGHOUT THIS BLOG.

I am calling for an investigation by the Department of Justice of the illegal acts, done willingly and knowingly by the Illinois Supreme and Appellate Court judges as well as the Circuit Court of Cook County judges described as follows, which violate the Constitution, the law, and holdings of the United States Supreme Court.  In addition the Illinois Attorney General and Director of the Illinois State Police were involved in this scheme to discredit whistle blowers against government corruption.

Clearly, when a judge purposely violates law (statutes, U.S. Supreme Court rulings, constitution) he is violating his oath of office and according to the U.S. Supreme Court in Cooper v. Aaron (1958) “waring on the constitution.” This causes his orders to be null and void as a judge has no jurisdiction to make up law, invalidate law without declaring it unconstitutional, or overturn U.S. Supreme Court holdings. To do so willingly is an act of treason per U.S. Chief Justice Marshall in Cohens v. Virginia(1921) [“We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given, than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution.”] An order without jurisdiction is void, a nullity and must be disregarded, United States v. United Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S. 258 (1947).

DETAILS OF CORRUPT ACTS, MANY OF WHICH ARE ACTS OF FELONY FEDERAL TREASON, BY COOK COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES

MCHALE, KAZMIERSKI, BROSNAHAN, WADAS, PORTER, AND BEIBEL – WHICH HAVE DE FACTO SUSPENDED THE RIGHT TO PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN ILLINOIS – A VIOLATION OF THE HIGHEST RIGHT THAT THE CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES UNITED STATES CITIZENS

 

Written on April 25, 2011 by Dr Linda Lorincz Shelton:

We have a Judicial Crisis in Cook County because the level of judicial ignorance, incompetence, and blatant disregard for basic constitutional rights including due process is so extreme that one can only say that our courts in Cook County are in a state of lawlessness, where they are destructive of American Ideals and Constitutional rights.

I’m going to relate to you right now the details of a group of cases that illustrate this fact, but remember this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Legal scholars say our highest Constitutional right is the right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Suspension Clause found in Article I Section 9 of United States Constitution preventing suspension of this right except in time of war.

Habeas corpus is where you ask a judge to review the reason for your incarceration. The constitution guarantees in the Bill of Rights that you will not be incarcerated without probable cause. If you are despite other safeguards, then the last remedy you have if all others fail is to file for a writ of habeas corpus and schedule a hearing before the presiding criminal court judge. Cook County Circuit Court Rule 15.2 requires that the  presiding criminal court judge must hear any habeas petitions. Our local Cook County Circuit Court rules and the Illinois Habeas Statute combined mandate that when a non-attorney next-friend of the illegally held person files a habeas petition that the presiding criminal court judge must bring the defendant to court and appoint them a lawyer for the habeas  proceedings.

The right to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus has been illegally suspended in Illinois.  I was jailed last year illegally for six (6) months for exercising this Constitutional right on behalf of another person who is being held illegally, now for a year, in Cook County Jail, without probable.

Here is a summary of the two cases against Annabel Melongo, the person being held allegedly without probable cause, and the criminal contempt cases against me for filing a next-friend habeas petition, that demonstrate outrageous judicial and prosecutorial misconduct. Melongo has a web site with documents and lots of details: http://illinoiscorruption.net .

Annabel Melongo is a Cameroonian citizen, and resident of the United States, who is an computer expert. She took a job with a foundation called Save-A-Life  Foundation to manage their computers. Melongo noticed during her work on their computers that SALF applications to the federal government for millions in grants contained fraudulent information. She turned this over to FBI Agent Depooter as a report of fraud upon the government.

At the same time, this foundation was in the middle of being investigated by Chuck Goudie, an Emmy award-winning investigative reporter. In Goudie’s television exposés he interviewed CPS CEO Arne Duncan, who confirmed to Goudie that SALF received $50,000 from the CPS per year but no services training school children in CPR were actually ever provided to the CPS. In total, Goudie documented that SALF obtained greater than $ 8 million from Homeland security, the Illinois Attorney General’s office, and other agencies, but has not provided documentation that this money was actually used to train children and first responders in CPR.

Goudie interviewed the SALF CEO Spizzirri to ask her to provide documentation as to how SALF actually used the grants for CPR training. SALF CEO Spizzirri  literally stopped the interview and ran off.  To this day SALF has not accounted for millions from the federal and state government in grants to train children and other “first responders” in CPR.

Around the time Goudie was interviewing CEO Spizzirri, Spizzirri fired Melongo and went to the police claiming all SALF financial records were accessed by remote computer and erased. She accused Melongo of doing this. Melongo was then indicted for remote computer tampering and the indictment said the SALF financial records were permanently erased, through a criminal act of remote computer tampering by Melongo. How convenient to divert attention from Spizzirri’s inability to account for how she used government grant money, instead to Melongo for alleged computer tampering.

Melongo’s attorney filed a Motion to Dismiss the charges claiming that Schiller Park Det. Martin committed fraud and perjury before the grand jury in obtaining the indictment.  Martin testified to the grand jury that Melongo had remotely changed the passwords to the SALF computers and initiated a cascade that deleted the computer financial files.

This was contrary to Det. Martin’s police reports where he verified that a SALF employee had changed the computer passwords AFTER Melongo left, that the computers were disconnected from the servers so that their connection with the Internet was severed, and that the data was never lost, just was temporarily inaccessible. Det. Martin wrote in his reports that a SALF employee changed the passwords, not Melongo, and in so doing accidentally disabled the computers.

Det Martin also testified that an IL Attorney General’s office computer crime expert assisted the states attorney and in her written report stated Comcast computer IP address was used by Melongo to access the SALF computers, but Martin withheld the fact that Comcast had no record of Melongo being a customer, because she used SBC computer services.

Albukerk alleged that Det. Martin committed perjury and fraud in obtaining the indictment, that the indictment was therefore invalid, and that the case should be dismissed. He presented this motion to the court and Judge Brosnahan summarily denied it without an evidentiary hearing.

So the Illinois Attorney General’s office and the State’s Attorney of Cook County has absolute proof that Melongo never engaged in this alleged computer tampering and that no computer tampering crime was ever committed. Yet they still refuse to dismiss the charges and Melongo has remained in jail awaiting trial for the past year on a $300,000 bail, reduced from $500,000.

Judge Brosnahan set this extremely high and excessive bail on Melongo who has no criminal history because the State’s Attorney insisted that she was a flight risk because she held dual citizenship in Haiti and Cameroon. I have found no law that states that a person is a flight risk because they are a dual citizen. This bail alone was outrageous judicial mis-conduct.

Spizzirri to this day has never released the financial data to Goudie or the public and there has been no public comment by the FBI about SALF or Carol Spizzirri.

I was an acquaintance of Melongo, so like I did for another person who was being held without probable cause in 2009, I filed a next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus with the Cook County Circuit Court Presiding Criminal Court Judge Biebel.

In 2009 I filed a habeas petition on behalf of this other person utilizing the Illinois Habeas Statute, 735 ILCS Article 10. Presiding Judge Biebel granted it by ordering the defendant brought into court and assigning her an attorney for the habeas petition, as required by Cook County Circuit Court Rule 15.2 – which resulted in the defendant’s later release from jail.

Last April and May, when I filed a next friend habeas petition on behalf of Melongo, Biebel was not available so the Court Clerk sent me to Judge Kazmierski who assigned the case to Judge Brosnahan.

In Illinois the IL Habeas Statute, 735 ILCS 5/10-103, says that a non-attorney can file a petition for writ of habeas corpus “on behalf of another.”

Judge Brosnahan refused to hear the habeas petition saying that non-attorneys can never file any pleadings on behalf of another. Then I went to Judge Kazmierski and he said the same thing. Then I tried again a few days later and a different judge, Judge Wadas, was filling in for Judge Biebel. He said the same thing and refused to hear the habeas petition!

All these judges therefore violated CLEAR Illinois Statutes and Constitutional rights. This is judicial misconduct! The statute even says that if a judge refuses to hear a habeas petition he can be fined $1000 which must be paid to the defendant.

Then I tried a fourth time. This time the petition for writ of habeas corpus was assigned to Judge McHale, sitting in for Judge Biebel. However, Judge Biebel appeared in his chambers half-way through the proceedings.

Judge McHale illegally overturned the IL Habeas Statute from the bench, ruling that filing a habeas petition as a non-attorney was an illegal act. When I stated in open court, in my defense that the suspension clause in the Constitution, Article I section 9, states that habeas cannot be suspended except in time of war, and that the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in Boumedine v Bush in 2008, that even prisoners at Guantanamo Bay had a right to have their father’s file habeas petitions, Judge McHale found me in contempt of court for “interrupting him.”

Defending oneself in court using quotes from the law is not an “interruption”; it is a right.

Judge McHale, without a trial, summarily ruled that I committed three separate acts of contempt by stating this argument three times and found me in contempt of court on these three, what he called, separate contempt cases. He then summarily sentenced me to consecutive jail terms of four (4) months, six (6) months, and six (6) months, a total of 16 months in jail for doing a legal act and then informing him about the law! He then made several related rulings that denied me good time statutory jail credits to ensure that I would suffer from the entire 16 month jail term.

In jail I was denied paper for three months. I was denied access to the law library – they said all those who are in the infirmary cannot go to the law library. The law librarian said she was unable to do any legal research and would only bring me case law or statutes if I give her a complete citation. I had to rely on friends I write to  in order to obtain legal research and case law – which took months. In late July after being sentenced on May 11, 2010, a physician finally gave me some  paper, but I didn’t get any stamps to mail my court pleadings to get them filed with the court for another month and didn’t get a hearing until Oct. 1, 2010. Then the 2nd and 3rd “cases” of contempt were made concurrent and the judge agreed that he had no jurisdiction to deny statutory good time jail credits, thus allowing me to be released after 6 months on Nov. 6, 2010 instead of having to serve the entire 16 months.

I filed motions to overturn this and he eventually granted some of them reducing the jail term to six months by granting some of the good time jail credits and I was released in November after this blatantly unlawful and unconstitutional conviction and wrongful six-month long incarceration for alleged criminal contempt of court. Of course I am appealing this injustice.

Judge McHale knowingly and blatantly violated the Constitution’s suspension clause, rulings of the United States Supreme Court, and the Illinois Habeas statutes and other Illinois Statutes including Good Time Jail Credits and Sentencing statutes that prohibit consecutive sentences for the same act during one case, as well as that require a jury trial for sentences > six (6) months.

The United States Supreme Court in three other cases including a ruling by Chief Justice Marshal held that when a judge knowingly and purposely violates law, and that can include violating the constitution, violating statutes, or violating U.S. Supreme Court rulings, then the judge is “waring on the constitution” in violating his oath of office. Judge Marshal declared that “waring on the constitution” is an act of treason against the United States, punishable by 20 years to life.

The story gets even more exciting because Melongo, prior to her bail being raised to $500,000, read the law and discovered that to be indicted a person must have the charges in a case read against them in open court. She did not remember any of the charges ever being read to her. She thought the court reporter had falsified the court transcript of the alleged arraignment by stating on the transcript that Melongo had been arraigned. Melongo also read the Illinois eavesdropping statutes that said it was a felony crime in Illinois to record a conversation without the other person’s permission. She also read that the law said that if a person has a reasonable suspicion that the person they were recording had committed a crime then it was not illegal to record them, as this was an exception to the law.

Melongo then recorded a conversation with the court reporter’s office staff, where she thought it was probable that they would admit that she was not arraigned, and that they had falsified the transcript which is a crime. Melongo thought this would be reason to throw out the case quickly as arraignment is a requirement and a right before a person can be tried. Melongo then put this recording on her web site which she had posted describing the alleged false arrest for computer tampering.

The States Attorney then arrested Melongo for eavesdropping and now wants to try her and convict her of a felony for recording her conversation with the court reporter without the court reporter’s permission. This is insanity! Where is this a crime? Where is the probable cause?

Judge Brosnahan set Melongo’s bail at $30,000 for felony eavesdropping, and because she was a flight risk due to the fact she holds dual passports, Brosnahan raised the bail on the computer tampering charge for violation of bail from a personal recognizance bond to a $500,000 bail, which Albukerk was able to get later reduced to the present $300,000, clearly outrageous in amount for this case, which should have been dismissed. Who ever heard of raising a bail from a personal recognizance bail to a $1/2 million bail for a non-violent crime without a victim!

This entire situation is out of control and can only be described as lawlessness due to police and judicial misconduct, in total violation of the law.

If four (4) judges, including three (3) senior criminal court judges can so blatantly deny Melongo’s and my most important Constitutional right to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus, as well as deny our constitutional rights to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment to be free of arrest without probable cause and jail Melongo without probable cause for a year so far and me for six months after initially sentencing me without a trial to 16 months in jail, then the judges can get away with violating ANY law. The acts of these judges are impeachable. This lawlessness must stop NOW!

I call for an investigation by the FBI and U.S. Attorney into our cases and pray for legal assistance from legal scholars, as well as financial assistance from the public. Finally, I ask the press to investigate this story and bring the details to the light of day.

Shelton has filed a notice of appeal with the Illinois Appellate Court, but the court has issued an order denying her motion for indigency status and waiver of fees. Despite the fact that the U.S. government has declared her indigent and granted her SSI as a disabled person for several years, despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an indigent person must have the fees waived for criminal appeals, Burns v. State of Ohio, 360 U.S. 252 (1959); Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956); and Smith v. Bennett, 365 U.S. 708 (1961); as well as despite the fact that Illinois Supreme Court rule 298 mandates that fees be waived for indigent litigants receiving government benefits, the Illinois Appellate Court Clerk has been ordered not to accept any court filings from Shelton until she pays all fees. Therefore, Shelton’s constitutionally guaranteed right to appeal, or Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights has been denied. Appeal is on hold until she can pay, which at the moment she cannot. No reason was given by the Illinois Appellate Court to refuse to grant her indigency status.

The same is true for the Illinois Supreme Court which has also ordered that the Clerk not accept any filings from Shelton, thus denying her a right to appeal these wrongful and unconstitutional convictions. Again, no reason has been given for them to violate their own rule 298, the Constitution, or state statutes regarding waiving indigent’s court fees.

Shelton is now filing a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court asking them to issue a supervisory order to the Illinois courts to enforce their previous holdings which mandate that fees are waived for criminal appeals, as well as asking the U.S. Supreme Court to view the above as exhaustion of state remedies and hear the case as a direct appeal.

Shelton from jail was allowed to mail one document to the federal court and she filed a multipurpose letter in her two civil rights cases that are pending in the District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, 1:09-cv-02353 and 1:09-cv-06413, which are civil rights suits against Cook County Sheriff staff for excessive force, malicious prosecution, willful indifference to medical needs, etc. They have passed the state of motions to dismiss and have a good chance of succeeding. This letter stated that Shelton was denied access to the courts while in jail from May 2010 to November 2010 in that the law librarian refused to do any legal research and because Shelton was denied paper for 4 months, as well as denied access to the law library as the Sheriff has a policy that all prisoners held in the infirmary may not  go to the law library, Shelton was unable to write proper motions. This letter asked Judge Hart and Judge Dow to consider the letter a petition for federal writ of habeas corpus. Judge Hart denied it stating that Shelton had not exhausted state remedies, which is a false statement. Shelton has now written a motion to reconsider this (to be filed), but it is also requested in a motion for enlargement of the discovery period, which Shelton has written is a factual document that for purposes of judicial economy will not be repeated but will be incorporated in all her other motions including the one to vacate dismissal of request for letter to serve as petition for writ of habeas corpus and motion for leave to amend and resubmit petition for writ of habeas corpus.

The above is sufficient cause to impeach these judges, at least, without question, Judge McHale.

The purpose of these illegal acts is to defame Dr. Linda Shelton, Dr. Maisha Hamilton, Naomi Jennings and Vernon Glass so as to discredit them as witnesses to corruption as well as to cover-up the criminal acts by public officials like Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan who has committed fraud upon the courts and her staff along with the Illinois State Police’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (IL MFCU) and their administrators in the State Police have defrauded the United States Government and specifically the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services by fraudulently obtaining millions of dollars in funds for illegal use by the IL MFCU. The fraud was that they had made false statements on their application for recertification and funding of the IL MFCU and used these funds to illegally prosecute cases of Medicaid fraud, when there was no Medicaid fraud. The State Police, specifically Investigator William Reibel, even fabricated false billing invoices in order to falsely imprison a whistle blower against government corruption, as well as knowingly prosecuted me without probable cause having in their possession evidence that someone forged my name in order to illegally bill Medicaid. They did this to defame me and discredit me as a witness against corrupt officials, police, and judges.

The applications for federal funding for the IL MFCU were signed by the Director of the Illinois State Police, Sam W. Nolen, through his employee, Don Thorpe, Director of the IL MFCU in 2001. They admit that the IL Attorney General by law has NO JURISDICTION or authority to prosecute Medicaid Fraud and that they must refer such cases to the U.S. Attorney. Yet they prosecuted at least three groups, all of which were innocent of fraud, convicting two, one with invoices fabricated by the Illinois State Police Investigator William Reibel. Legitimate cases of Medicaid Fraud are prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney. Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephan A. Kubiatowski is the head of the Chicago U.S. Attorney task force on Medicaid and Medicare fraud, yet his sister, Illinois Department of Professional Regulation Administrative Law Judge Lucia Kubiatowski was personally involved in making illegal rulings against me in order to suspend my medical license.

For further details see: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/17/936975/-Defendant-Melongo-still-denied-right-to-question-false-arrest-with-habeas-trial-result-in-hung-jury-
________________
Linda Lorincz Shelton, PhD, MD is a civil rights activist, retired physician and retired medical researcher. She specialized in helping multiple disabled children and her patients are in the Guinness Book of World Records, 1997 Ed., as the “lightest set of triplets,” as well as advocating for the poor, the mentally ill, the disabled, and other victims of injustice in our county. She is disabled herself. Shelton has been working to assist the wrongfully convicted over a number of years, even putting herself in harm’s way in order to help, and has been documenting judicial and police incompetence and corruption in Cook County. She is a victim of wrongful conviction and is fighting every day to counter the defamation against her.

She blogs about this corruption, giving details with names, dates and evidence at the following blogs:

https://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com

http://cookcountysheriffdeputies.wordpress.com

http://chicagofbi.wordpress.com

http://prosechicago.wordpress.com

http://illinoispolice.wordpress.com

http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com

http://drlindashelton.wordpress.com

COMMENTS FOR FORUM SPONSORED BY COALITION FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUSTICE

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT including:

Violation of Illinois Statutes ] ALL Acts of

Violation of U.S. Supreme Court Rulings ] = Treason

Violation of Oath of Office ] Under Federal Law

Aiding Perjury by Police Officer
____________________________
The case law supporting the above includes:

Shelton alleges Judge McHale’s May 11, 2010 consecutive summary sentences on three separate criminal contempt convictions of 4, 6, and 6 months (total of 16 months) in CCDOC with no good time jail credits, modified on October 1, 2010, to 4 and 6 mo concurrent on cases 1 and 2 and 6 months consecutive on case 3, with good time jail credits granted, were null and void, illegal, unconstitutional as they 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 (Shelton asked for SOJ at the beginning of the hearing and McHale refused – so this means that McHale’s orders after this refusal are void per statute);

B) in violation of Habeas Statutes, 735 ILCS 5/10-103 which allow a person to file an habeas petition on “behalf of another”;

C) in violation of  Good Time Jail Allowance statute, 730 ILCS 130, which gives jurisdiction for such credits to the county sheriff and not the judge, People v. Russel, 237 Ill.Epp.3d 310 (1992); People v. Prater, 158 Ill.App.3d 330 (1987); Kaeding v. Collins, 281 Ill.App.3d 919 (1996),

D) in 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) in violation of the U.S. Supreme Court as well as Illinois Appellate and Supreme Court holdings which:

1) require jury trial if sentences exceed 6 months aggregate for contempt, Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194 (1968); Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968);

2) forbid sentencing for more than one count of contempt representing same motive or state of mind during one trial or case,  People v Brown, 235 Ill.App.3d 945 (1992);

3) require jury trial if contempt sentence is summarily imposed on a day other than the day in which the contemptuous act occurred, In re Marriage Betts, 200 Ill.App.3d 26 (1990); Winning Moves,Inc., v. Hi! Baby, Inc. 238 Ill.App.3d 834 (1992); Kaeding v. Collins, 281 Ill.App.3d 919 (1996), 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 (2008);

5) state that defending a contempt charge by vigorously quoting law is not contemptuously insulting the court, Sacher v United States, 343 U.S.1 (1952); People v. Siegel, 68 Ill.Dec. 118; People v. Powell, 187 Ill.Dec. 774; United States v. Oberhellmann, 946 F.2d 50,

6) state that when a judge is embroiled in controversy with litigant he must recuse himself for a contempt trial and be replaced by another judge, Mayberry v. Pennsylvania, 400 U.S. 455 (1971); Kaeding v. Collins, 281 Ill.App.3d 919 (1996);

7) state that a judge may not order denial of statutory good time jail credits, People v. Russel, 237 Ill.App.3d 310 (1992); People v. Prater, 158 Ill.App.3d 330 (1987); Kaeding v. Collins, 281 Ill.App.3d 919 (1996),

8) state that a judge’s orders are void when the orders are made without jurisdiction, United States v. United Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S. 258 (1947).

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 and were in retaliation for Shelton’s whistle blowing against corrupt judges, police, and State officials, 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” – referring to acting outside the law or violating the law including statutes and higher court holdings; 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).

___________________________

Note: The IL MFCU application for recertification from 2001 that I received in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, admits that the IL MFCU is federally funded and that the IL AG has NO JURISDICTION to prosecute Medicaid Fraud and that they refer all such cases to the U.S. Attorney or County State’s Attorney can be seen here. You can read the application, the indictment against me and see the forged signatures on documents allowing billing Medicaid under my name (not my signature and therefore  proof of ID theft and proof they knew there was no probable cause to charge me – I got these documents from AG Madigan in discovery before trial) can be seen here.

Links to articles about Melongo’s cases and the links to evidence proving there is no probable cause against her can be found here.

Judge jailed Shelton illegally for filing next-friend habeas petition

with 2 comments


I will be writing much more and scanning into computer and providing links to court documents later. I just want to get this on the record quickly so here is the short version.

Due to really gross judicial misconduct essentially removing the right to file a next-friend habeas petition in Cook County, just got out of 6 mo in jail wrongfully convicted of contempt of court by Judge Michael B. McHale, for filing a next-friend habeas petition as a non-attorney even though IL law specifically allows this. Then when the judge said it was illegal I said the US Supreme Court had declared in Boumedine v Bush in 2008 that even prisoners at Guantanamo Bay had a right for a next-friend (father – see Justice Souter’s footnote) to file a habeas petition and in 1980 in U.S. v Will quoting Chief Justice Marshall’s 1821 statement that violating US Supreme Court decisions and law blatently, for a judge was treason, several times, he illegally sentenced me summarily to 120 days + 180 days + 180 days consecutive sentences on three contempt charges (16) mo in jail, later reduced on my motions to 8 mo with two of the sentences concurrent so got out in 6 mo. on Nov. 6, 2010.

This sentence violated numerous U.S. Supreme Court & State higher court opinions and laws, that state that non-attorneys may file next-friend habeas petitions; cumulative contempt sentences in one trial require a jury trial if greater than 6 months summary sentence; sentences for one state of mind must be concurrent; cannot convict for same act more than once, etc. This was also done after I asked for substitution of judge as a right and Judge McHale refused – which also voids all subsequent orders and is a violation of state laws.

I filed a habeas petition pro se (for myself on this conviction in the local Cook County Circuit Court, which was illegally denied, when Judge Porter said that even if Judge McHale illegally said that filing next-friend habeas petition was illegal, this did not make him lose jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court and state case law have ruled that when a judge knowingly violates the law, he violates his oath of office, commits treason and his rulings become void.

Since there is no appeal of habeas petition in IL, am in the process of getting filed a petition for certiorari with US Supreme Court.

Their clerks keep messing up and sending it back to me stating I have to go to the IL Supreme Court first. But I have sent them now twice the US Supreme Court ruling in Loftus case 334 U.S. 408 related to IL Supreme Court reply in People v Loftus 400 Ill. 432 (1948) and in Woods v Niersheimer (1926) 328 U.S. 211 where the U.S. Supreme Court held that appeal of habeas in Cook County Circuit Court, due to unique IL law, must go directly to U.S. Supreme Court, as under IL law the local court is considered the highest court in the state concerning a habeas petition if filed in the local court (habeas can also be filed in the IL Supreme Court if NO evidentiary issues and only issues of law, but not appealed to IL Supreme court).

Please encourage all to donate money to me as the legal seige against me by corrupt judges and officials is becoming impossible to defend against without money. Donations can be sent, with checks written to Albukerk & Associates, to C/O Albukerk & Associates, Shelton defense fund, 111 E Wacker Drive, Suite 111, Chicago, IL 60601. I am in DESPERATE need of financial and legal assistance. If any lawyer on the US Supreme Court bar concerned about the de facto denial of habeas in Cook County, civil rights and retaliation against whistle blowers wants to help, please contact Mr. Albukerk at 773 847-2600. PLEASE HELP ME SEND THIS MESSAGE AROUND THE COUNTRY AND WORLD AS IL IS SO EXTREMELY CORRUPT AND THEREFORE THE CONSTITUTION IN IL IS UNDER SIEGE AND WHISTLE BLOWERS AGAINST GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION ARE IN GREAT PERSONAL JEOPARDY!

%d bloggers like this: