Cook County Judges

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

Archive for the ‘Judge Lawrence Fox’ Category

Pervasive incompetence, corruption, & injustice in Cook County IL courts

leave a comment »


Linda Shelton

 

July 9, 2018

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division, Disability Division, & Public Corruption Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Disability Rights – NYAV

Washington, D.C. 20530

REGARDING: Systemic violation of due process rights in Cook County Courts, including ADA rights, habeas rights, right to reasonable bail, right to compulsory process, right to present a defense, as well as abuse of disabled detainees by Judges and Cook County Sheriff Staff.

NOTE: Please refer to evidence on enclosed CDs

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this in regards to numerous persons mentioned in this document, including myself, as well as numerous unmentioned persons. The enclosed motions, petitions, complaints are just the tip of the iceberg. They include individual complaints as well as complaints concerning classes of litigants and defendants who are abused by the courts in Cook County and Illinois, not just me, but many others in our loosely associated group of citizens who are victims of court corruption (some of this evidence is not in this letter or attachments, but the people I name here have it – as well as many have already given info to the FBI or U.S. Attorney).

These issues include those who are victims of mortgage fraud, those falsely alleged to be unfit for trial and sent to secure mental health facilities without any due process whatsoever, those who are parents falsely alleged to be unfit to parent individually and forced to pay child support, without due process, out of their Social Security Disability income, or those elderly adults who are improperly placed under guardianship so that they are removed from their homes and property and their property sold, without due process, and someone else decides their property and care issues to their detriment , excluding relatives who have done nothing wrongessentially court sanctioned theft of estates by often un-needed court appointed child representatives, counselors, and guardians. If the Bill of Rights means anything, you will carefully review the enclosed and interview everyone mentioned in this document.

Checking your internal FBI database you will see they have FALSELY defamed me using a history of false arrests and lies about my mental health to prevent FBI intake workers from taking me seriously. This is NOT a joke; I am NOT mentally ill contrary to the rumors and false statements made by the Cook County Sheriff, improperly influencing the U.S. Marshals and federal judges– see attached psychiatry reports from top U.S. forensic psychiatrists; this documentary evidence proves what I say and the CD contains medical and psychiatric records proving the rumors about me are FALSE. Do not believe the sensational hearsay you have about me that is being used to defame me and cover-up what I can prove – this defamation is meant to discredit me so you do not review these documents! – As well as meant to be retaliation against me complaining about conditions at the Cook County Jail and judicial corruption – see the many complaints I have already made to your office. You need to investigate and take down the corrupt officers, attorneys, and judges in Cook County, as well as severely reprimand certain U.S. Marshals as well as investigate several federal judges. This is much larger than simply “Greylord 2”.

As you know, since I worked for Orlando Jones (Cook County Board President Stroger Sr’s Godson and major actor in corruption, when our contract group opened Provident Hospital of Cook County, which the FBI raided and confiscated documents), before he committed suicide and therefore, you could not indict him, as well as due to the evidence I gave to AUSA Joan Laser regarding violation of civil and disability rights by Sheriff Staff, I am well informed about Cook County and Illinois government corruption. In addition, over the last many years I have discovered, through insiders in the Cook County Courts, the Court Clerk’s Office, and the Chicago Department of Health, about a lot more corruption.

I document, with evidence on enclosed CD and on enclosed documents, such extensive ignorance/ incompetence and/or corruption of judges, officers, the Illinois Attorney General’s office, Cook County States Attorneys, and Public Defenders in the Cook County court system, of administrators and attorneys at Elgin Mental Health Center and the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, as to make the court system in Illinois, particularly Cook County, either so full of patronage and corruption or a criminal enterprise that on a pervasive, institutionalized basis denies civil, constitutional, and statutory rights of litigants and defendants, in many cases for monetary gain or even just for prestige.

For example:

  1. The ADA is ignored and violated on a systemic basis by Cook County Court Chief Judge, Cook County Court judges, and the Cook County Court Disability Coordinator. The Court Disability accommodation system operates in violation of recommendations of Justice Stephens in his opinion in Lane v. Tennessee (2004). Several people have suffered exacerbation of medical problems and in one case a stroke, when the courts have ignored ADA accommodation requests.
  2. Excessive unconstitutional bail is set by Cook County judges for indigent persons, in violation of Illinois’s bail statute, 725 ILCS 5/110-1, et seq. (“the Statute”), which require courts to set a monetary bail for pretrial arrestees unless there is a meaningful inquiry into the person’s ability to pay and in amounts in excess of what the person is able to pay. Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff classes in Cook County Court class action case number 16CH13587complain that this practice violates their rights under the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the United States and Illinois Constitutions, U.S. Const., amend. XIV, Ill. Const.1970, art. I, § 2, and under the Excessive Bail and Sufficient Sureties Clauses of the United States and Illinois Constitutions respectively, U.S. Const., amend VIII, Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 9. Steps have begun to make bond court come into compliance-though not very effective. YET, States Attorney Foxx is refusing to review the excessive bail already set for those out on bail or even discuss the matter– despite her claims she has fixed this problem. See Motion to Reduce Bail attached.
  3. I clearly document de facto suspension of the right to petition for writ of habeas corpus in Cook County – a violation of the Suspension Clause and Illinois Statute, 735 ILCS Article X (see 9 habeas petitions that have never been heard, – even Chief Judge Evans is refusing to remedy this issue);
  4. I clearly document bribery of Judge Riley by attorneys, so as the control of a $2 million Illinois estate was stolen by a mentally ill person living in New Jersey and converted to attorney fees under the influence of a corrupt law firm in Illinois, Peck Bloom, LLC and their accomplices including attorney Aaron Gole (this appears to be a systemic problem as due process is denied in many cases I have heard about so that estates can be stolen by conversion to widely excessive and unnecessary attorney fees) see case 10 P 6117 and the evidence of huge payment to judicial campaign committees (10% of the total campaign contributions other than from the candidate loaning his campaign money) that appear to be bribes as the judge at the time he received them ignored testimony and proof of bribery, forgery, and fraud upon the court;
  5. I clearly document a policy of denial of the right to a jury in criminal cases involving fitness, thus loss of liberty without due process, as well as denial of the right to compulsory process, the right to an attorney, as well as the right for the litigant to testify (THIS IS SYSTEMIC AND INVOLVES MOST OF THOSE COMMITTED TO ILLINOIS STATE SECURE MENTAL HEALTH FACILITIES FOR A “FINDING” OF UNFITNESS FOR TRIAL – Illinois Statute and case law require that defendants, who ask for a jury, receive a jury trial that can only be waived by the defendant and not the defendant’s attorney – See on CD Memorandum of Law – Fitness for case law and statutes);
  6. I clearly document that the courts are denying discovery of critical evidence with statements by fiat that the evidence is not relevant to the case, essentially barring legitimate defenses at trial (see case 12 CR 22504 documentation, including federal habeas petition and exhibits on CD – NOTE: this federal judge denied a federal habeas petition stating the litigant did not exhaust state remedies, DESPITE THE FACT that the IL Supreme Court denied a habeas petition in the case);
  7. I clearly document the oppressive fees charged to pay court appointed attorneys, child representatives, and psychologic evaluations, in divorce cases, as well as the federal felony funding fraud by the Illinois Department of Family and Human Services, Child Support Division, who receive money to help receive evidence to calculate child support obligations, but refuse to do this important service.
  8. I clearly document that the corruption is so extreme that it can be said that probate cases, divorce cases, and some criminal cases are being heard without a due process trial – even though this is hard to believe (witnesses stricken, important pretrial motions such as to obtain a HIPAA protective order stricken, and thus evidence barred, litigants illegally sanctioned and not allowed to file motions and memoranda of law or offers of proof – so as to prevent them preserving the record, indigent persons denied preservation of the record for appeal as there are no court reporters provided in Cook County in civil cases – thus denial of access to appeals, as w ell as the Court Clerk losing parts of court files).

Unbelievable as it may seem:

  1. I have even been forced to have the sentencing phase of a wrongful contempt charge held in the lock-up visiting room in a courthouse, thus denying viewing by the public or even friends in violation of the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial– the judge eventually came to his senses and had the conviction and allegation “purged”, but ignored motion that purge was not appropriate term and it should be corrected to say stricken (Cook County Circuit Court case no. 11 MC1 6000086-01),
  2. I have been unconstitutionally, in violation of the Suspension Clause and U.S. Supreme Court holdings[1], in violation of many Illinois statutes, sentenced to 16 months for contempt without a trial, been denied statutory good time jail sentence credits, by a judge, without legal authority to do so, who should have recused himself for the contempt trial (on 3 cases, which legally were three charges in one case per 720 ILCS 5/3-3, with the fraudulent allegation by Judge McHale that I violated law [legal act] by filing next-friend habeas petitions[2], Cook County cases nos. 10 HC 00006 & 10 HC 00007, as a NON-attorney and verbally defended my right to do so by telling the judge he was committing a criminal act (See FN 1 and transcripts on CD from 2010) – Cook County Case nos. ACC100083-01, ACC 100093-01, and ACC 100094-01);
  3. I have been fraudulently declared unfit with the state psychiatrist testifying later I was never unfit (although this was later changed to fit) in sham “trials” without any due process of law and sent to a secure mental health facility, which was not the least restrictive situation as required by law, denying me bail for the purpose of the fitness hearing IN VIOLATION OF STATE LAW, WITHOUT ANY testimony that I was unfit by any professional or person except the judge, denying my statutory right to be present for the fitness trial and to testify, and denied notice of the fitness trial. This was a PERVASIVE, GROSS VIOLATION OF STATUTE BY THE JUDGE, not even objected to by the State’s Attorney and Public Defender (thus they were both either so ignorant of law or so criminally malicious as to ignore their oath of office to uphold the law and report violations of it to the Judicial Inquiry Board and prosecuting federal authorities) – appointed over my objection again in violation of statute (See “Memorandum of Law – Fitness”, on CD, for case law and statutory authority supporting my statement & transcripts on CD),
  4. I have been denied accommodations for my disabilities including several judges refusing to hear motions for accommodations, refusing to read any medical documents I produce or discuss in detail my need for accommodations, and refusing to sign orders for accommodations in violation of the ADA, as well as refusing to sign orders for a HIPAA protective order, quashing my subpoenas involving the court disability coordinator, so as to prevent me from finding out the names of witness Sheriff Staff she informed about disability accommodations, also as required by federal HIPAA law, thus impeding my defense and in fact prohibiting my defense in violation of law. Read transcripts in 12 CR 22504 on CD – contact me and I will point out the sentences. (See Memoranda of Law – Right to Present a Defense, as well as the motion for HIPAA Protective Order and for Accommodations for Disabilities on CD, as well as court transcripts documenting court orders refusing to hear these motions or refusing to grant HIPAA protective order), and
  5. I have been repeatedly beaten , medically neglected by the guards, medical staff, and nutritional staff at the jail – DESPITE US Attorney’s 2007-8 investigations, findings, and agreements – including my pony tail grabbed and used to bang my head against a wall, my hands handcuffed to a bench and not allowed to use the bathroom so that I would have to pee on the floor, my chin forcibly pushed to my chest despite extensive cervical spine surgery that reconstructed my spine, a knee placed on my chest during an asthma attack, duct tape put on my mouth during an asthma attack, guards falsely told I have HIV and was a “spitter” so that a hood was put on me-despite difficulty breathing and claustrophobia, my asthma medication withheld, held down and kicked by guards with their boots leaving 4 X 6 “ bruising witnessed by my attorney – J. Nicolas Albukerk, and even transferred to an unlawful imprisonment without my medical records and the guards told to tell the prison that I was faking my medical problems so that when I had trouble breathing they put me on the psych unit and withheld very needed medication for cardiac, pulmonary, neurological, and PTSD disease, nearly 8 hours until the jail doctor contacted the prison and asked why they had not called him about severe unusual medical problems. I have notes about all of this so you can find the names of the guards – the worst were Charles Johnson, Ruby Jackson, and a small black female named Levi, and several un-named supervisors – Sgt. Hernandez told me in confidence that Sgt. Salemi (who committed perjury so I would be wrongfully convicted of felony battery for bumping an officer with my broken wheelchair), only attacks women, but he would not testify for me. Most of this was videotaped since 2008, as the senior supervisors at the Cook Co. Jail ordered that whenever I was moved I would be videotaped to protect them against frivolous suits – note that none of my suits were frivolous, despite District Court judge’s rulings that the cases were dismissed – most on technical details.

Due process is denied as a matter of policy and procedure in Cook County Courts and retaliation against complaints is the norm (no trial or sham trials with one party missing in divorce and probate cases, no hearing of habeas petitions in misdemeanor cases and some felony cases, no witnesses, no notice, evidence suppressed, no HIPAA protective orders, no written accommodations of disabilities by order, etc. – REGARDLESS OF WHAT IS WRITTEN ON PAPER, IN COURT WEB SITES, STATED IN NEWS SOURCES, OR STATED BY COURT REPRESENTATIVES OR JUDGES – LOOK AT WHAT THEY DO NOT WHAT THEY SAY!!)

I strongly encourage you to put together a task force who interviews other similarly situated persons and persons I have assisted as a pro bono paralegal named in this document– (follow the trail of money paid court appointees) including:

(1)DB (declared dangerous to his kids and denied unsupervised visitation based on the fact he was an ex-Marine and was therefore “dangerous” and on hearsay – denied a trial; wife CB is a drug addict and addiction counselor who steals drugs from her patients and from a disabled neighbor whose house she had a key for in case of emergency – he has an affidavit from the neighbor, which was included in his court pleadings – the judge refuses to address the addiction issue on the record), as well as ORDERED TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT DESPITE SERIOUS INJURY AT WORK, causing him to have $0 INCOME FOR A PROLONGED PERIOD AND NO SAVINGS OR ASSETS,

(2) SM who unlawfully lost custody of her boys (her son finally took pictures of his father’s drug stash to blackmail him into letting him live with his mother, without informing the court – the court had illegally without good cause taken away her custody of her children in retaliation for her whistle blowing and advocacy activities against family court corruption),

(3) JG (the court took away his custody without good cause simply because he is ill with a repaired aortic dissection in violation of his ADA rights, denied a continuance when he became ill resulting in a stroke),

(4)KM (the court extorted huge sums of money from her to pay unnecessary fees from court appointed persons – see slide show presented to IL legislative committee on CD),

(5) SP (court illegally ordered large child support amount from Sandra “because she is a doctor” – despite the fact that she took a leave from her residency to raise the kids while her husband finished an anesthesiology residency – so she is not licensed and he is not just licensed as a physician, but is making a huge income she is now homeless; Sandra has evidence of mortgage fraud by her ex-husband and the court is refusing to consider it and no one is investigating it – court is actually covering it up; she lost custody of kids illegally because now rich ex-husband was able to hire an attorney who snowed and manipulated the court) ,

(6) GB who lost custody of her kids to the really bad father (who helps runs Sexpo Conventions and encourages his daughters to prostitute – per rumor, he has lots of money that he used to obtain a lawyer to fix the case – her kids are seeing her on the sly because the courts won’t let her see them),

(7) CS, and so many others whose names and contact information these persons can give to you to pay outrageous court fees to court appointed unneeded counselors and child representatives ($400-$500 per hr. and sometimes for multiple attorneys at the same time – IL Rep. Lou Lang told me to my face that he will never allow the state to pass a law limiting attorney fees although the state had limited death penalty defense fees to $150 per hr.) who totally disregard the best interest of the children, but do regard the best interest of their wallets in excessive fees and unnecessary prolonging of their services – assisted by donations to judges campaign funds so that their every wish is granted without regard to law. (See slide show on CD “M******* Presentation” – about Cottage Industry corrupting family court and extorting money from families) [NOTE: that the IL House of Representatives is run dictatorially by the Speaker Madigan and a handful of his powerful lieutenants that prevent any bill from reaching the floor without his permission – subverting democracy.]

(8) Non-custodial parents are consistently ordered to pay more child support than allowed by federal law, especially if disabled and receiving social security disability (child support is illegally taken from their social security income or from the children’s college funds)(talk with JG and DB).

(9) With the prosecutor failing to explain why a significant portion of the video tapes were missing, Tiny (5 ft. tall with very tiny hands) grandmother Robin Johnson (who is now very fat in prison due to depression and poor diet, consuming huge quantities of bread and cookies) was wrongfully convicted of wrestling a large gun from an officer (> 6 ft. tall and large), killing him and sentenced to life in prison (during a fugue-like epileptic seizure where the officer grabbed her neck and banged her head against a bus that the court refused to allow her to talk about or present her long-term treating physicians or medical evidence) who was very large and experienced, but HER HAND IS TOO SMALL TO HAVE HANDLED THE GUN, she has no understanding of the working of gun safety switches, and she has no experience or training in self-defense or aggressive physical attack methods that would have allowed her to grab a gun from an officer, remove the safety, and fire it so as to shoot him in the head, while her head was being bashed against a bus by the officer and then she was thrown to the ground by him as testimony verified, in the middle of a fugue like seizure which she had a very long history of suffering from – YOU REALLY NEED TO INVESTIGATE THIS ONE – there is no evidence she held a gun (mysteriously minutes of the videotape are missing) and the gun mysteriously disappeared & reappeared so fingerprints not examined !! –

this was another case of an INNOCENT BLACK PERSON being shot full of holes (Robin was wounded 22 times) by white officers, falsely defamed as an “angry person”, when she’s just an average but very poor nice grandmother – she had 22 bullet wounds (received as she was trying to protect herself by sliding under a car and holding her hands in front of her) and barely survived nearly having an arm amputated – by overzealous officers who likely killed their own officer (I personally examined her hand and asked her non-leading questions about guns – which proved she is extremely naïve and inexperienced and have some experience in forensic pathology about these things as I rotated in forensic pathology as a graduate student for six months and in psychiatry as I was medical director of a psychiatry group practice, in addition to receiving training in psychiatry during my pediatric residency)!

Enclosed is a CD and documents containing a lot of evidence supporting the above statements pertaining to my cases and the case of DB

but this is only the tip of the iceberg.

I have not enclosed evidence concerning most of the other persons mentioned above. Many of them have provided to the Chicago FBI office evidence that appears to be ignored.

Please investigate this information thoroughly.

I am asking under the presentment clause for you

to present as much of this as possible to a grand jury for prosecution.

I believe the information I have sent you and the others I mention have sent you or could provide to you would make this case much bigger than Greylord and if investigated would make a big dent in correcting the corruption in Cook County, by forcing the judges, attorneys, and police to be better educated and supervised, as well as to FOLLOW THE LAW.

If you read my Internet blogs:

https://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com

http://chicagofbi.wordpress.com,

http://prosechicago.wordpress.com,

http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com,

http://cookcountysheriffdeputies.wordpress.com

http://7thcircitcourts.wordpress.com

you will realize that I have no confidence in the FBI or U.S. Attorney in Chicago, who appears to be knowingly covering up the above. I am just writing this letter and sending you this evidence and these complaints to document that you have been fully informed. Should you surprise me and actually investigate, I thank you for your time. Eric Holder pledged to fight government corruption. He clearly has failed to do so. I, along with a dozen of my acquaintances, have been waiting for over eight years to discuss all this personally with high up officials in your office and we and our complaints have been ignored. THE FBI office in Chicago continually refuses to discuss the above with me in detail and refuses to accept my evidence – now several times when I went personally to their office to complain! I complained to the U.S. Marshal inspector general (or similar unit) and was ignored, never receiving a report despite FOIA requests. Why has the Chicago FBI decided to refuse to accept evidence or complaints of federal crimes and misconduct for federal Marshals?

Sincerely,

Linda Shelton

PLEASE contact me directly at picepil@aol.com if you want copies of evidence

Attachment: CDs containing evidence and Numerous documents

Motion to Declare IL Battery Statutes Partially Unconstitutional

Proof Felony Federal Funding Fraud by IL State Police condoned by IL AG Lisa Madigan

[1] A person, including a non-attorney, may file an habeas petition on “behalf of another”. 735 ILCS 5/10-103, U.S. ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 76 S.Ct 1 (1955) and Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S.Ct 2229 (2008)

A judge may not order denial of statutory good time jail credits. Jurisdiction for removing Good Time Jail Allowance (credits) lies with the Department of Corrections – or persons appointed by the county sheriff and NOT the court or judge, 730 ILCS 130, 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).

It is forbidden to sentence for more than one count of contempt representing same motive or state of mind during one trial or case. Illinois sentencing statutes require concurrent sentences for the same conduct or acts occurring during the same state of mind in the course of one act or one series of acts – 720 ILCS 5/3-3. You may NOT order separate contempt cases and sentences for each repeated similar act during one trial even on different days or if one hearing is continued over several days. People v Brown, 235 Ill.App.3d 945 (1992)

Sentences exceeding 6 months individually or aggregate for contempt require a jury trial as a constitutional right. You may not sentence a person for contempt several times in one trial and then make the sentences concurrent for more than six months without a trial. A contempt sentence more than six months requires a jury trial. Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194 (1968); Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968); The Court held that in a contempt case it required a jury trial when the trial judge awaits the conclusion of the proceeding and then imposes separate sentences in which the total aggregated more than six months. Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, 418 U.S. 506 (1974); It was held that when the punishment in a criminal contempt case in federal court is more than the sentence for a petty offense, the Court drew the traditional line at six months, a defendant is entitled to trial by jury. Cheff v. Schnackenberg, 384 U.S. 373 (1966)

A jury trial is a constitutional right 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)

Defending a contempt charge by vigorously quoting law is not contemptuously insulting the court, “[T]his Court, if its aid be needed, will unhesitatingly protect counsel in fearless, vigorous and effective performance of every duty pertaining to the office of the advocate on behalf of any person whatsoever.” 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,

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), See also Johnson v. Mississippi, 403 U.S. 212 (1971); Holt v. Virginia, 381 U.S. 131 (1965). [Even in the absence of a personal attack on a judge that would tend to impair his detachment, the judge may still be required to excuse himself and turn a citation for contempt over to another judge if the response to the alleged misconduct in his courtroom partakes of the character of ”marked personal feelings” being abraded on both sides, so that it is likely the judge has felt a ”sting” sufficient to impair his objectivity. Taylor v. Hayes, 418 U.S. 488 (1974).]; Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11 (1954) [In a situation in which the record revealed that the contumacious conduct was the product of both lack of self-restraint on the part of the contemnor and a reaction to the excessive zeal and personal animosity of the trial judge, the majority felt that any contempt trial must be held before another judge.]; A judge called upon to act in a case of contempt by personal attack upon him, may, without flinching from his duty, properly ask that one of his fellow judges take his place.Cornish v. United States, 299 F. 283, 285 and Toledo Newspaper Co. v. United States, 237 F. 986, 988;

[2] The petitions were on behalf of Annabel Melongo who at the time was at the beginning of being jailed for two years on an eavesdropping case, later declared unconstitutional, Cook County Circuit Court no. 10 CR 8092, and remote computer tampering – false allegation by criminal CEO of Save-a-Life Foundation, Carol Spirrizzi, after Melongo was fired from this company, Circuit Court of Cook County case no. 08 CR 10502-01, which Ms. Melongo won, and which had been fraudulently brought against her to cover-up the criminal acts of funding fraud by Save-a-Life Foundation and several politicians who failed to use due diligence in donating public funds to this phony foundation, suggesting money laundering, including Lisa Madigan, Arne Duncan, Jan Shankowski (sp?) and many others, which has been exposed extensively in the news by Emmy award winning reporter, Chuck Goudie, and on the Internet. It is shocking that the U.S. Attorney has not yet indicted Ms. Spirrizzi. FBI Special Agent Depooter testified at Melongo’s eavesdropping trial, which ended in a hung jury, prior to the case being called unconstitutional and dismissed, that Melongo did present some evidence about SALF to the FBI.

Advertisements

Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr Violates Supreme Court Denies Appeal

leave a comment »


Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr. has again violated stare decisis in snubbing his nose at previous United States Supreme Court Rulings and the United States Constitution.

I filed a Notice of Appeal in case no. 04 CR 17571-03 regarding the issue of personal and subject-matter jurisdiction. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE COURT NEVER HAD JURISDICTION. See: 

http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2008/10/criminal-scheme-of-il-attorney-general.html

http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2009/02/judge-jorge-alonso-overturns-federal.html

The trial court under the following judges in succession violated my rights by holding court without jurisdiction and failing to dismiss and vacate the case ab initio based on lack of jurisdiction: Judges Crooks, Fox, Pantle, and Alonso. All these judges are intellectual midgets who need guidance by studying case law. They all make baseless knee-jerk decisions violating higher court rulings and are unable to handle making decisions of law except for basic common variety criminal case issues. They should be barred from any case with complex federal laws or unusual questions of law.

I went to trial on February 17, 2009 and was found not guilty by the jury on Febrary 24, 2009. I am NOT appealing the verdict. I am appealing the jurisdictional pretrial rulings where Judges Fox, Pantle, and Alonso claimed that “Federal Law does Not Apply in this Case” [Judge Alonso] despite the fact that Medicaid is a joint federal state program; that “I don’t care” [Judge Pantle] in response to my complaint and request to argue the jurisdictional issues; and denials of motions to dismiss for insufficient indictment [see:

http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/search/label/Indictment ], and for

violation of statute of limitations, for illegally impaneled grand jury, for misstatement of the law to the grand jury, for extensive perjury of the State witness to the grand jury, for violation of speedy trial statutes, for violation of the Supremacy clause, for failure to state a valid charge, and for lack of personal and subject-matter jurisdiction because the sham prosecutor IL Attorney General Lisa Madigan has no legal authority in Illinois to independently appear before a grand jury, obtain an indictment, or prosecute a case without the invitation, review of evidence and decision of charges, consent, and at least minimual participation of the County State’s Attorney – which was never done in this or similar cases.

I filed a Notice of Appeal per IL Supreme Court Rules on March 9, 2009 stating I was appealing the jurisdictional issues and not the verdict. By IL Supreme Court rules the Clerk is REQUIRED to transmit the Notice of Appeal to the IL Appellate Court, and the Circuit Court loses jurisdiction once the Notice of Appeal is filed.

The Clerk of the Circuit Court has in violation of her oath of office to follow the law refused to transmit the Notice of Appeal to the IL Appellate Court because she was ordered by Presiding Criminal Court Judge Paul Biebel Jr (not trial judge) not to transmit the Notice of Appeal or prepare the Record on Appeal.

Therefore, Judge Biebel’s order is null and void as he had no jurisdiction to make it and the Clerk MAY NOT follow it. I spoke with Dorothy Brown, Clerk of the Circuit Court today and she promised to look into this and get back to me.

In addition, stare decisis due to United States Supreme Court opinions specifically allows appeals in criminal cases where there have been not guilty court findings IF 1. there is a controversy and 2. if the double jeaopardy clause is not invoked by a new trial being required upon reversal of the trial court rulings. See United States v. Wilson, 420 U.S. 332, 95 S.Ct. 1013, (1975); and United States v. Ceccolini, 435 U.S. 268, 98 S.Ct. 1054 (1978); and King v DeDonker, 17 Ill.App.3d 1064, 309 N.E.2d 598 (1974).

In my case there are three controversies that survive the not guilty verdict: 1. jurisdiction, 2. clerk retaining 10 % of the bond would be illegal if the bail orders are declared void when the court is declared to have had no jurisdiction, and 3. pending civil rights suits against AG Madigan and J Pantle for malicious prosecution, wrongful pretrial incarceration, and other torts are only valid if these persons lose absolute prosecutorial or judicial immunity. The only time they lose immunity is if the case is totally void and there is proven to be no jurisdiction – which is the case in this instance.
Double jeopardy is NOT INVOKED if I should lose the appeal of the jurisdictional issues as this would only mean that the case was valid and the not guilty verdict would stand. If I win the appeal and it is declared that there never was jurisdiction of the court or the prosecutor, then Clerk Dorothy Brown must return the $1100 she retained as 10 % of the bond because the bond orders would become void and the case against AG Madigan and Judge Pantle would proceed.

I have not decided between several options as to how to cause Dorothy Brown to prepare the record on appeal and transmit my notice of appeal. The right thing for her to do is to inform Judge Biebel that she refuses to violate Supreme Court Rules, United States Supreme Court rulings, and her oath of office and that she would not honor his illegal and void order, but was transmitting the Notice of Appeal to the IL Appellate Court and was preparing the record on appeal.

I could also make a motion to the IL Appellate Court requesting that they order Dorothy Brown to transmit the Notice of Appeal and prepare the record on appeal, as well as voiding Judge Biebel’s illegal order. I could also ask for the Illinois Supreme Court to do the same under a Motion for Supervisory Order or Motion for Mandamus.

Judge Biebel’s conduct is a violation of his oath of office, an illegal penalty on the exercise of my constitutional rights, official judicial misconduct, a violation of IL Supreme Court Rules, a violation of the United States Supreme Court Opinions (stare decisis or precedent), unethical, immoral, discriminatory, retaliatory, and criminal.

Illegal Political Trials (Hits) – Alive and Well in Illinois

leave a comment »


Protecting Defendants Charged for Political Reasons

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE DOUGLAS IN 1970 – “Does the answer to the problem of political trials involve defining the procedure for conducting political trials or does it involve the designing of constitutional methods for putting an end to them? . . . . It will be time enough to resolve those weighty problems when a political trial reaches this Court for review.”

THE TIME MAY BE NOW!

The State of Illinois through first Attorney General Jim Ryan and now Attorney General Lisa Madigan along with incompetent, ignorant, and/or corrupt officials in Illinois Medicaid including Bill Bradley, Investigator Reibel in the State Police, and Patrick Keenan in the State Police Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, with tacit approval by many other corrupt officials in the State of Illinois, have perpetrated a scheme for ten years to deny mental health services for persons on Medicaid in violation of the Federal Medicaid Code. See my other posts on Medicaid at:
http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2008/10/criminal-scheme-of-il-attorney-general.html.

In order to falsely advertise that she is “tough on fraud” so that she can advance her personal political ambitions, Lisa Madigan continues to fraudulently and without legal authorization indict outstanding providers of mental health services to Medicaid patients. Judges Schultz, Fox, Pantle, Alonso, and others have participated in these void and illegal prosecutions and done great harm to the citizens of Illinois in their illegal acts of violation the United States Constitution, in aiding and abetting this violation of federal law and civil rights.

I have been one of the persons illegally indicted and defamed, presently awaiting trial over a period of four long years. The harm to me, my patients, and my family is immeasurable and painful. I have persistly legally and appropriately through the legal process of at first representing myself and filing scholarly motions proving that higher court precedence (stare decisis) does NOT PERMIT this kind of persecution for political gain, and that my case is null and void ab initio (from the start).

I have been punished for vigorously advocating for my constitutional rights to redress of grievances and due process (including the right not to be tried for something that is not a crime) for four years with four incarcerations for contempt (two thrown out by the Illinois Appellate Court – pepetrated by Dishonorable Judge Pantle), one presently before Hon. Judge Coar in federal district court on a habeas corpus petition (asking the court to vacate and expunge the conviction on the basis of violation of constitutional rights and voidness – pepetrated by Dishonorable Judge Pantle), and one in limbo – dismissed for want of prosecution, but potentially can reinvigorate the appeal later (perpetrated by Dishonorable Judge Alonso).

I have been beaten, tortured, and medically neglected during these incarcerations and when I protested, a correctional officer, Sgt. Anthony Salemi, came into my cell and committed assault and battery against me. He falsified his records and I was charged and convicted of aggravated battery to an officer for allegedly “ramming him with my wheelchair” causing a skinned shin, and “kicking him in the chest with my RIGHT leg” causing soreness. This was impossible for me to do do to a partial RIGHT hemiparesis and extreme weakness secondary to dehydration caused by mendical neglect. I was sentenced to two years despite no criminal record and was released from Dwight penitentiary after being tortured on March 31, 2008. I was punished and placed in solitary confinement for 6 months because I refused to walk (I was unable to due to my disability) and forced to swim in my diarrhea on a 2 inch mattress with no sheets or clothes for days, except for a roughly quilted velcro smock and blanket, without toilet paper, without water (I was too week to get myself up to the water fountain at the sink or the toilet). The United States Attorney has been informed and so far has done NOTHING! My weight dropped from 171 lbs to 127 lbs and by the time I was released I couldn’t even sit up because of severe dehydration, and electrolyte imbalance. I was immediately taken to an emergency room and treated. The incompetent and barbaric sadists and psychopaths in Dwight’s medical department had insisted I was faking my medical problems.

Due to my protests, all reasonable and responsible and polite, I have been illegally and immoraly denied self-representation by Judges Pantle and now Alonso without legal authority in violation of my constitutional rights. I am being prosecuted for political reasons as a whistle blower. I testified against now convict and ex-Governor George Ryan in a class action suit for illegally denying 73 million dollars in funds for the care of handicapped children. I have won suits against Sheriff Sheahan in C[r]ook County for violating the American with Disabilities Act. I have won suits against the State of Illinois for failing to investigate barbaric and illegal abuse of mental health patients/inmates at Cook County Jail, and I have numerous pro se civil rights, mandamus, and injuctive suits pending in federal and state court against these corrupt officials. I am a target of the corrupt cabal in Illinois and C[r]ook County.

Justice Douglas in Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S.337 wrote the following in a concurring opinion, which is very much on point. My case is ripe for Hon. Juge Coar to address in this manner in the federal district court. It is a political case! This quote, by Justice Douglas in his opinion, about Penn is fascinating and you everyone should enjoy it!.

HOWEVER IT IS SAD THAT IN THE 21ST CENTURY IN ILLINOIS, CITIZENS WHO ARE DOING NOTHING BUT PROVIDING MUCH NEEDED MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES TO THE NEEDY, WHO HAVE DEVOTED THEIR LIVES TO SERVICE, AND WHO VALUE OUR CONSTITUTION, ARE STILL THE TARGET OF POLITICAL ATTACKS IN A MOST VICIOUS AND BRUTAL MANNER!

THIS IS WHY I ASK FOR THE HELP OF THE PUBLIC TO FUND MY DEFENSE AND TO HELP ME CONTINUE TO HELP OTHERS DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION. See link at the right on this blog if you wish to help.
________________________________________________________________________
QUOTED FROM CONCURRING OPINTION BY JUSTICE DOUGLAS IN ILLINOIS V. ALLEN, 397 U.S. 337 (1970):

Our real problems of this type lie not with this case, but with other kinds of trials. First are the political trials. They frequently recur in our history, [Footnote 2/2] and, insofar as they take place in federal courts, we have broad supervisory powers over them. That is one setting where the question arises whether the accused has rights of confrontation that the law invades at its peril.

In Anglo-American law, great injustices have at times been done to unpopular minorities by judges, as well as by prosecutors. I refer to London in 1670, when William Penn, the gentle Quaker, was tried for causing a riot when all that he did was to preach a sermon on Grace Church Street, his church having been closed under the Conventicle Act:

“Penn. I affirm I have broken no law, nor am I Guilty of the indictment that is laid to my charge, and to the end the bench, the jury, and myself, with these that hear us, may have a more direct understanding of this procedure, I desire you would let me know by what law it is you prosecute me, and upon what law you ground my indictment.”

“Rec. Upon the common law.”

“Penn. Where is that common law?”

“Rec. You must not think that I am able to run up so many years, and over so many adjudged cases, which we call common law, to answer your curiosity.”

“Penn. This answer I am sure is very short of my question, for if it be common, it should not be so hard to produce.”

“Rec. Sir, will you plead to your indictment?”

“Penn. Shall I plead to an Indictment that hath no foundation in law? If it contain that law you say I have broken, why should you decline to produce that law, since it will be impossible for the jury to determine, or agree to bring in their verdict, who have not the law produced by which they should measure the truth of this indictment, and the guilt, or contrary of my fact? ”

“Rec. You are a saucy fellow; speak to the Indictment.”

“Penn. I say, it is my place to speak to matter of law; I am arraigned a prisoner; my liberty, which is next to life itself, is now concerned: you are many mouths and ears against me, and if I must not be allowed to make the best of my case, it is hard, I say again, unless you shew me, and the people, the law you ground your indictment upon, I shall take it for granted your proceedings are merely arbitrary.”

“Rec. The question is whether you are Guilty of this Indictment?”

“Penn. The question is not whether I am Guilty of this Indictment, but whether this Indictment be legal. It is too general and imperfect an answer, to say it is the common law unless we knew both where and what it is. For where there is no law, there is no transgression, and that law which is not in being is so far from being common that it is no law at all.”

“Rec. You are an impertinent fellow, will you teach the court what law is? It is ‘Lex non scripta,’ that which many have studied 30 or 40 years to know, and would you have me to tell you in a moment?”

“Penn. Certainly, if the common law be so hard to be understood, it is far from being very common; but if the lord Coke in his Institutes be of any consideration, he tells us, That Common Law is common right, and that Common Right is the Great Charter-Privileges”

“Rec. Sir, you are a troublesome fellow, and it is not for the honour of the court to suffer you to go on. ”

“Penn. I have asked but one question, and you have not answered me; though the rights and privileges of every Englishman be concerned in it.”

“Rec. If I should suffer you to ask questions till tomorrow morning, you would be never the wiser.”

“Penn. That is according as the answers are.”

“Rec. Sir, we must not stand to hear you talk all night.”

“Penn. I design no affront to the court, but to be heard in my just plea: and I must plainly tell you that, if you will deny me Oyer of that law, which you suggest I have broken, you do at once deny me an acknowledged right, and evidence to the whole world your resolution to sacrifice the privileges of Englishmen to your sinister and arbitrary designs.”

“Rec. Take him away. My lord, if you take not some course with this pestilent fellow to stop his mouth, we shall not be able to do anything tonight.”

“Mayor. Take him away, take him away, turn him into the bale-dock. [Footnote 2/3]”

The Trial of William Penn, 3 How.St.Tr. 951, 958-959.

The panel of judges who tried William Penn were sincere, law-and-order men of their day. Though Penn was acquitted by the jury, he was jailed by the court for his contemptuous conduct. Would we tolerate removal of a defendant from the courtroom during a trial because he was insisting on his constitutional rights, albeit vociferously, no matter how obnoxious his philosophy might have been to the bench that tried him? Would we uphold contempt in that situation?

Problems of political indictments and of political judges raise profound questions going to the heart of the social compact. For that compact is two-sided: majorities undertake to press their grievances within limits of the Constitution and in accord with its procedures; minorities agree to abide by constitutional procedures in resisting those claims.

Does the answer to that problem involve defining the procedure for conducting political trials or does it involve the designing of constitutional methods for putting an end to them? This record is singularly inadequate to answer those questions. It will be time enough to resolve those weighty problems when a political trial reaches this Court for review.
_______________________________________________
[Footnote 2/2]
From Spies v. People, 122 Ill. 1, 12 N.E. 865, involving the Haymarket riot; In re Debs, 158 U. S. 564, involving the Pullman strike; Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U. S. 103, involving the copper strikes of 1917; Commonwealth v. Sacco, 255 Mass. 369, 151 N.E. 839, 259 Mass. 128, 156 N.E. 57, 261 Mass. 12, 158 N.E. 167, involving the Red scare of the 20’s; to Dennis v. United States, 341 U. S. 494, involving an agreement to teach Marxism.

As to the Haymarket riot resulting in the Spies case, see 2 J. Commons and Associates, History of Labour in the United States 386 et seq. (1918); W. Swindler, Court and Constitution in the Twentieth Century, cc. 3 and 4 (1969).

As to the Pullman strike and the Debs case, see L. Pfeffer, This Honorable Court 215-216 (1965); A. Lindsey, The Pullman Strike, cc. XII and XIII (1942); Commons, supra, at 502-508.

As to the Mooney case, see the January 18, 1922, issue of The New Republic; R. Frost, The Mooney Case (1968).

As to the Sacco-Vanzetti case, see Fraenkel, The Sacco-Vanzetti Case; F. Frankfurter, The Case of Sacco and Vanzetti (1927).

As to the repression of teaching involved in the Dennis case, see O. Kirchheimer, Political Justice 132-158 (1961).

[Footnote 2/3]
At Old Bailey, where the William Penn trial was held, the baledock (or baildock) was “a small room taken from one of the corners of the court, and left open at the top, in which, during the trials, are put some of the malefactors.”

Oxford Eng. Dict.

%d bloggers like this: