Cook County Judges

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

Posts Tagged ‘Anita Alvarez

No justice; no peace – police Officer Servin gets away with murder, disabled activist charged with felony battery for “touching officer’s ear”, innocent grandmother convicted of murder of officer while confused in a seizure after being battered by officer

with one comment


This blog and other blogs by Shelton are devoted to uncovering and exposing the methods  of incompetence and corruption and the systemic lawlessness of our injustice system in Illinois, particularly Cook County. Click the links on your right to see my other blogs.

UPDATE: COME TO next court date 9/27/2017 rm 506 2600 S California 10am Show SUPPORT FOR DISABLED ACTIVIST FIGHTING FOR YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS

Oppose $300,000 bail for indigent disabled defendant charged with accidentally “touching an officer’s ear”

Support argument that charge of felony battery for “touching an officer’s ear” when the officers violated the ADA in inducing PTSD flashback and balance issue by ignoring doctors’ statements, given to Court Disability Coordinator Pacelli, that defendant has balance issues and may flail arms and grab out if pushed + PTSD due to having been beaten by officers – so that when rushed by dog pack-like group of large male officers yelling at her she goes into PTSD flashback and “misperceives ongoing events” believing she is being attacked, falls to floor, cowers, loudly verbally defends self and or flails arms around head believing she is defending herself against a beating.

Oppose unlawful arrests in retaliation for civil rights advocacy – helping poor fight in divorce to keep kids, opposing unlawful evictions, advocacy against police brutality

Oppose abuse of disabled by police & judges

Fill court gallery 7/20/17 RM 506 crim court building at 10 am  Chicago and show support for activist arguing that charge aggravated battery for “accidentally touching ear” is illegal charge against activist

UPDATE: Judge denied motion and issued inadequate order to impede immediate appeal. Watch argument 12/9/16 requesting judge strike order & issue proper order that is immediately appealable on 12/9/16

COME TO COURT, view from court gallery Judge Cannon’s announcement of written decision concerning Shelton’s argument that IL battery statute is unconstitutional on 7/13/16 rm 506 2600 S California at 10 am, Chicago, IL

Until justice is served, Chicago should have no peace.

Alvarez has continued to systemically target me by prosecuting me for now nearly 40 cases of unlawful and unconstitutional arrests over the last 15 years in retaliation for being a whistle blower against corrupt judges and corrupt Sheriff staff and police officers from Chicago, Evergreen Park, and Oak Lawn.

Help me (Shelton) now by showing up to court hearings (NEXT one 7/20/17 room 506 10 AM 2600 S California – though judge hears others first and waits until gallery empty so there will be no witnesses to her illegal rulings), giving Shelton support in pending case: click here

Enough is enough!!  Vote out Clerk Brown and vote NO on every judge on judicial retention ballot!! Replace any candidate or Alderman who refuses to commit to investigation of the Cook County Court system, Cook County police including Chicago Police, Suburban Police, and especially the Cook County Sheriff including their Courtroom Services Division and Correctional Officers.

Its time for Chicagoans to stand up against police, prosecutorial, and judicial corruption in consistent, constant, recurring, protests until the Cook County Board, Chicago City Council, the FBI and U.S. Attorney, Illinois legislature, and U.S. Congress change training of police to de-escalate and not shoot unarmed or those with knives or bats, as well as judicial, oversight to remedy the following:

The killing of 22-year-old Rekia Boyd  by off duty Chicago police officer Dante Servin when he shot backward over his shoulder towards a group of people is clear murder as well as is involuntary manslaughter because he clearly meant to shoot someone in that direction although he may not have meant to shoot Boyd specifically.  So it is both a voluntary act of shooting someone without premeditation (murder) and an involuntary act of killing someone he did not specifically target. You can be sure that if he was a civilian he would have been charged with murder and there are examples of such in the Court Clerk’s records.

Cook County States Attorney Anita Alvarez knows this and purposely undercharged him in my opinion as she always favors the police and covers up for their crimes and errors. She was in charge of the division in the State’s Attorney’s office under SA Devine which was responsible for prosecuting government corruption for a decade and essentially shut down that office. She has for decades had a history of reckless disregard for the rights of citizens, which corrupt and incompetent officials have violated.

(Shelton – http://cookcountysheriffdeputies.wordpress.com and http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com , http://prosechicago.wordpress.com , http://chicagofbi.wordpress.com and http://cookcountyjail.wordpress.com)

Alvarez at the same time has continued to systemically target me by prosecuting me for now nearly 40 cases of unlawful and unconstitutional arrests over the last 15 years in retaliation for being a whistle blower against corrupt judges and corrupt Sheriff staff and police officers from Chicago, Evergreen Park, and Oak Lawn.

Help me (Shelton) now by showing up to court hearings (NEXT one 7/20/17 room 506 10 AM 2600 S California – though judge hears others first and waits until gallery empty so there will be no witnesses to her illegal rulings), giving Shelton support in pending case: click here

I mostly defended myself successfully but the two cases for which I was convicted are just unjust wrongful  convictions or meatballs that stuck when the spaghetti plate was thrown. Three contempt convictions with a summary (NO TRIAL = illegal sentence) sentence of 16 months later changed to 12 months consecutive were clearly unconstitutional and malicious by Judge McHale. See here description and case law.

One wrongful felony conviction for “bumping an officer with my wheelchair” = felony aggravated battery for “causing an abrasion” and resulting in a two year outrageous sentence was also unlawful, never happened, and due to falsification of records and perjury by Officer Anthony Salemi (see appeal here).

The denial of appeal by the Appellate Court was unlawful and based on an ad hominem attack by Appellate Justice Levin that ignored the arguments and case law in appeal brief. See outrageous opinion here where Judge Levin quotes defamatory rumors about my behavior in courts, which have no basis – here).

The misdemeanor conviction for “bumping an officer with my walker” was again perjury by Courtroom Services Deputy Sheriff  Ateca. She lied and said I was sitting and pushed my walker against her causing no injury. She actually walked in front of me when I was walking to the elevator and slowed down suddenly so I would accidentally bump into her. Her partner is aiding and abetting this perjury by not speaking up.

The judge fixed the case by not allowing me to take my medication for chronic pain, vertigo, and PTSD so that I was so distraught and unable to properly question the witness as my own attorney and too sick to testify so I chose not to that I appeared crazy to the jury and confused so they ignored me and convicted me. This was an unlawful trial as I was denied American with Disability Act required accommodations (medications) during my trial as well as access to my legal documents while jailed during the trial.

It’s a violation of civil rights to impede a self-represented person from access to her court documents, pen and paper, during a trial.

There is a pattern of under-trained officers who disregard the rights of defendants and abuse the disabled, especially the mentally ill, as well as purposely lawless judges who cover-up for criminal acts of police, retaliate against whistle blowers, and are biased against poor and minorities or uneducated.

The public defender’s budget is minuscule compared to the prosecutor’s budget so that the public defenders do not have the time or resources to properly defend anyone.  The gun (officer’s weapon) used by Robin Johnson was not checked for her fingerprints and no medical experts or doctors were called as witnesses in her defense for example.

Judge Porter is a cunning politician who never should have found Servin not guilty of involuntary manslaughter, despite the lack of the more appropriate murder charge. I suspect that Alvarez and Porter conspired to do this so that Alvarez can say she charged him, but Porter would have an excuse to find him not guilty – thus protecting the officer.

Judge Gainer wrongfully convicted Robin Johnson of murder of an officer in 2013, when Chicago police committed perjury – they shot their own man, by illegally refusing to allow testimony that Johnson was in a standing seizure (confused), had a long history of such seizures that were not controlled well and was often found wandering at night at bus stops, had a grand mal seizure in her bathroom at home that morning, that it took five years pretrial while she was in jail to mostly control her seizures, that she had been repeatedly bashed while in a head lock against a bus by her head by the deceased officer, and Johnson had no experience with guns or training in attacking others or defending herself.

So how does a 5′ tall grandmother with no criminal history disarm a 6′ tall seasoned Sargent and shoot him in the head – with a large gun that is really too large for her tiny hand to hold and handle  this weapon while in a confused state of mind due to a seizure?

She clearly could have no intent if she was in a seizure and confused so the charge is void and the public defender refused to argue this defense. The state had multiple videos but the moments where she allegedly held the gun were missing for “unknown reasons”! The gun was lost for a period of time, which per the U.S. Supreme Court decision means that the case automatically should have been dismissed due to tampering with evidence.

The state made up a baloney theory that her motive was that she was an “angry person” out to kill a cop! They didn’t let her children (including a daughter studying to be an attorney) and grandchildren, relatives and friends testify that she was not a violent, aggressive, or “angry” person.

Notably, Gainer should have recused himself because his close relative was former top cop in the U.S. – Terrance Gainer who had at retirement been Chief of the Capital police in Washington, D.C., had long record of being chief of several departments and president of the American Society of Police Chiefs!  He is often “randomly” assigned to cases involving police officers as victims or plaintiffs by “coincidence.”

She is now serving a wrongful life sentence while her husband is dying for something she didn’t do in order for Alvarez to cover-up the shooting of the officer by police. Johnson barely survived 22 wounds when officers arriving on the scene emptied their guns against her, even though by then the videos show her unarmed and down. That’s attempted murder.

robin johnson

Robin Johnson = innocent person

Serving life sentence for shooting officer

The FBI and U.S. Attorney should arrest Servin for criminal violation of civil rights under color of law and convict him in that manner.

Mayor Emmanuel should denounce this officer and criticize Alvarez but he has no guts to stand for the right.

Supt. Johnson should call the kettle black and fire Servin for official misconduct due to clear violation of his oath of office to uphold the law and control his gun.

For 20 years I have been supporting the minority populations in Cook County as a physician standing up for my patients in court when no other doctor would do so, writing these blogs to expose corruption and providing the FBI and U.S. Attorney information about corruption and abuse at the jail and in the courts. I won a suit for mandamus, in the public interest, against the Sheriff in 2004-5 for violating the freedom of information act and not giving me a copy of their compliance plan for the Americans with Disabilities Act regarding accommodating disabled at courthouses. They were forced to admit that for more than a decade they were in violation of federal law by failing to have a compliance plan.

I have been repeatedly unlawfully arrested usually for trespass, resisting arrest, or battery of ONLY officers in courthouses usually with only police witnesses (!!) for falsely alleged “bumping them with my walker or wheelchair” and personally beaten by the Chicago Police and Cook County Sheriff staff.

My mouth was covered with duct tape during an asthma attack – which could have killed me except a Sgt. ordered it removed. My pony tail was grabbed and my head banged against a wall despite major neck spine surgery – which could have caused death like with Freddie Grey, held on the floor by Correctional officers Ruiz and Levy and kicked with their boots (see pictures). I was beaten by a Chicago Police Detention Aid Shell (see picture 1 & 2) for taking my medication for severe pain and vertigo after it was handed to me while in the police station during a release from unlawful custody. I had my shoulder severely strained and mildly dislocated by Correctional officer Charles Johnson in Dec. 2006 confirmed by an orthopedic surgeon. I was body slammed when C/O Johnson grabbed by handcuffed in front hands and swung them up and slammed me down against a row of chairs with arms causing contusions on my back especially near my surgery site – resulting in temporary paralysis and shock – then slamming me onto the floor where I laid outside the jail ER mocked by officers for hrs and temporarily unable to move without medical care – then a “nurse” looked at me and said nothing was wrong while ignoring the 5″ scar on the back of my neck from surgery, passed out from cardiac arrhythmia and severe neurocardiogenic syncope in the jail Cermak ER and ignored on the floor for hrs, suffered ischemia of the heart and a brief respiratory arrest when exposed to tobacco smoke in 2001 after a false arrest even though I told them I could not tolerate tobacco smoke – then when returned from the ER the medical staff failed to do the cardiac enzyme tests needed over 24 hrs to be sure I did not suffer a heart attack (I have the medical records).

I have been in 2013-2014 jailed for one year without bail for “touching an officer’s ear” during a PTSD flashback induced by Courtroom Services Sheriff’s Officers who misused information I gave to the Court Disability Coordinator Pacelli to trigger the flashback – then they failed to back off when I began to “misperceive ongoing events” crumbled to the floor and swung my hands around my head to block misperceived blows (due to flashback which is like reliving the nightmare in a daytime dream like altered state of consciousness) as well as grabbed out involuntarily to steady myself when pushed and picked up by them (due to my neurological disease and resulting balance issues). For more information see this link here.

I have now challenged the constitutionality of the Illinois battery statutes for making touching an officer a felony crime. Come to court at 2600 S California, room 506, Chicago on 7/13/16 at 10 am and hear Judge Cannon’s decision on this motion.  For more info about this motion read here.

“This is the first time I’ve ever seen (a) judge let a criminal go because he was improperly charged,” said Frank Chapman. “I have never seen that before,” confirming the intellectual, intentional misconduct of Judge Porter in refusing to convict on involuntary manslaughter because “it was voluntary” and he should have been charged with murder.

Chapman believes the state’s attorney’s office and the police department have too close of a relationship to look at cases like these objectively.  They say Servin is the first Chicago police officer in 20 years to be charged with killing someone.

Motion to declare Illinois battery statutes unconstitutional

leave a comment »


Come to court and stand-up for Shelton’s argument that the IL battery statutes are unconstitutional and are systematically abusive to defendants. 5/9/16 rm 506 2600 S California, 10 am, Chicago, IL

Malicious charges of felony battery can be charged for touching an officer with a piece of paper, bumping an officer when one is spastic, or minor touching with no injury such as touching a pointed finger against an arm. Outrageous sentences can be give for up to 30 years for such alleged crimes.

Outrageously malicious Cook County State’s Attorney, who refuses to listen to reason or discipline her out of control prosecutors has intensely targeted Shelton to shut her up about her complaints against corrupt judges, police, and attorneys. Shelton needs the public’s support to survive these 15 years of unrelenting attacks against her as a whistle blower with false arrests and malicious prosecutions.

Please, in a short letter, write the U.S. Dept. Of Justice Division on Disabilities here and request their investigation of the Cook County courts and Sheriff’s office for malicious prosecution of whistle blowers, denial of due process and denial of equal protection, as well as failure to follow the Americans with Disabilities Act, abuse of prisoners, and discrimination against minorities, particularly Blacks and Hispanics:

U.S.Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Disability Rights- NYAV
Washington, D.C. 20530

Dr. Shelton, who is spastic, with hereditary intention tremors, severe balance problems where she reaches out and grabs anything involuntarily if pushed, and who suffers from PTSD after she was beaten by officers, is charged with felony battery for “touching an officer’s ear” resulting in no injury, because it was “insulting and provoking conduct.”

The officers purposely triggered the PTSD flashbacks during which she “misperceives ongoing events” due to the dream-like state or “altered state of consciousness” caused by the PTSD, then despite an agreement to accommodate her disabilities and “back-off” until the flashback  passed (during which she is confused, cowers, and is harmless) they jumped at her like a dog pack, picking her up off the floor and carried her to the lock-up. Next court date May 9, 2016, 10 am,  rm 506, 26th & California, Chicago, IL

One woman was recently convicted of kicking an officer in the shin with no injury, but because he claimed “insulting and provoking conduct” and because she has a prior felony conviction, she faces a MANDATORY minimum 6 year sentence! Read the news article here.

Read Dr. Galatzer-Levy’s letter about accommodations needed for Shelton’s psychiatric condition of PTSD (post-traumatic-stress disorder) here.

Shelton faces a possible minimum of 6 yrs for allegedly “touching an officer’s ear” during a court hearing, which the officer claims was “insulting and provoking conduct,” despite the fact the officers purposely triggered a PTSD flashback, for which the Court Disability Coordinator had been told and shown medical records proving Shelton is unaware of her surroundings during PTSD flashbacks and for which a letter from a psychiatrist instructed the court to prevent officers from triggering flashbacks and to back-off if they occur as Shelton would cower, cry, be confused and waive her hands around her head to protect herself against perceived blows (due to flashback symptoms of being attacked by officers-initially triggered by attacks for which she has photographic proof). This is a federal ADA violation because the court and its officers are required to accommodate disabilities and they were aware of and instructed about this PTSD disability. Under the law (court precedent) Shelton should not even be charged as the charges are invalid if caused by the victim violating the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). See: Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 533-34, 124 S. Ct. 1978, 158 L. Ed. 2d 820 (2004) and related line of cases; see also Reed v. State of Illinois, 2015 7th Circ. 14-1745.

Click here to download full motion: Motion to declare Illinois battery statute unconstitutional

This motion alleges that the Illinois battery and aggravated battery statutes are unconstitutional because:

(a) they are discriminatory and therefore violate the Americans with Disabilities Act,

(b) they suffer from overbreadth thereby making innocent contact criminal,

(c) they are vague and therefore subject to misuse and impossible to determine if an act is innocent or criminal,

(d) they deny equal protection as there is no rationality as to how they are applied to protect the public interests concerned, and

(e) they deny due process in violating the Proportionate Penalties Clause of our Illinois Constitution (they are cruel, degrading or so wholly disproportionate to the offense committed as to shock the moral sense of the community in alleging the same act and penalty for touching an officer’s ear [or even for touching an officer’s bullet proof vest with a piece of paper] as for beating an officer so bad he is in critical condition, stabbing a citizen numerous times with a knife, or making a bomb which explodes and harms a person).

These statutes also violate the separation of powers clause in that they de facto give the judiciary the power to legislate, in that the judges, not the legislature decide what conduct is a crime and what sentence a person committing that conduct should receive, out of a vast array of possible conducts, which are both unintentional and intentional, depending upon whom you believe.

Details of treasonous acts by Judges McHale, Brosnahan, Wadas, Kazmierski

with 2 comments


Do the following in order to help preserve the Constitution and help stop government corruption in Illinois.

The following is such a serious violation of our Constitution and our Laws that I respectfully ask you all to read this and ACT by reading this IN DETAIL and consider disseminating it through Twitter, Facebook, e-mails, and letters to all citizens concerned about preserving the Constitution, all investigative reporters you know, as well as consider writing letters to federal officials whose addresses are given in the following. Also consider signing the petitions written where links are provided below.

Dear Friends of the Constitution and Justice and Enemies of Government Corruption:

After reading this post please write and ask the following people to investigate this corruption:

Patrick Fitzgerald
US Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois
219 S Dearborn, 5th Floor
Chicago IL 60604

S/A Robert Grant
Director Chicago Office FBI
2111 W. Roosevelt Road
Chicago, IL 60608-1128

, and contacting the press or any law school innocence clinic possible.

Thank you for your time!

Annabelle Melongo is an honest person and Information Technology (computer) expert, who discovered that the foundation that she was working for committed fraud on the federal and several state government and obtained millions of dollars fraudulently. Numerous prominent politicians due to lack of due diligence were involved in assisting this foundation in fraudulently obtaining money.

Melongo has been in jail for a year awaiting trial without probable cause and with an outrageously excessive bail charged with remote computer tampering of this fraudulent corporation (yet the States Attorney has evidence she did not remotely access their computer!) and illegally recording a conversation she had on the phone with a Cook County court reporter without the court reporter’s permission – “eavesdropping” (bail $300,000 reduced from $500,000 and $30,000) – yet she is indigent, has no prior record, and the States Atty and IL AG General are FULLY AWARE that all charges against her are fraudulent!

Her petition for writ of habeas corpus has been ignored and the judges are ACTIVELY refusing even to hear it! – in clear violation of the Constitution’s suspension clause and the laws of the State of Illinois. Illinois law dictates that if a judge refuses to hear an habeas petition he can be fined $1000 and the fine paid to the unlawfully held defendent (735 ILCS 5/10-106). The suspension clause in the U.S. Constitution allows a person or his/her friend to petition the court to free a defendant from an unlawful incarceration. The Illinois Habeas statute does the same thing. (735 ILCS 5/10)

The most important Human Right in the Constitution is the right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus, written in U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 9 (the suspension clause – which says this right can not be suspended except in the time of war) [ Zehariah Chagee, Jr., The Most Important Human Right in the Constitution, 32 B.U. L. Rev. 143, 143, (1952)]  The ONLY time the United States Supreme Court has found a violation of the suspension clause was in their decision in 2008 regarding Boumedine v Bush.

For the full details of the treasonous acts of these judges and all the case law, statutes, codes, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions proving that the judges committed treason see these links:

Examiner.com article about: judges-commit-treason-cover-up-fraud-by-salf-suspend-constitutional-rights-including-habeas-corpus

Dailykos.com diary story: Defendant-Melongo-still-denied-right-to-question-false-arrest-with-habeas-trial-result-in-hung-jury-

Examiner.com article about Melongo’s excessive bail: alvarez-madigan-target-it-specialist-to-cover-up-massive-fraud-500-000-bail-for-eavesdropping

Cincinnatibeacon.com article about how Melongo indicted through perjury of an officer: Attorney for SALF_whistleblower says IL Cop’s fraud and perjury lead to indictment

SIGN THE PETITION HERE to ask the U.S. Attorney to investigate the Melongo case.

The Cook Co State’s Attorney’s office is fully informed that a cop’s fraud and perjury obtained a void indictment yet they are still pursuing the case. They are fully informed that the alleged victim of this fraudulent charge of computer tampering has defrauded the U.S. government out of millions of dollars. So why are Anita Alvarez and Lisa Madigan still continuing this case? PLEASE ASK THEM at:

Anita Alvarez
Cook Co States Attorney
50 W Washington, Rm 500
Chicago IL 60602

AG Lisa Madigan
Illinois Attorney General
100 W Randolph, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60601

A concerned friend (me, Linda Shelton) filed a next-friend petition for habeas corpus before the Circuit Court of Cook County per 735 ILCS Article X, the state habeas statute that lets a non-attorney file this petition. I had done this before for another person who was illegally jailed without probable cause and the judge appointed an attorney who gained her release in 2009.

Judge McHale, who was sitting in for the presiding Cook Co IL criminal court Judge Biebel, then illegally and unconstitutionally jailed the petitioner (me) for contempt claiming it was illegal for a non-attorney to file an habeas petition on behalf of another – even though IL statutes specifically allow this.

This is what happened in detail:

Shelton alleges Judge McHale (substituting for Judge Bieble – presiding judge of the Cook Co Criminal Court) illegally and in an act of treason in retaliation for Shelton’s whistle blowing about judicial corruption in the Circuit Court of Cook County summarily convicted her of 3 “cases” which should have been 3 “counts” of criminal contempt for the legal act of filing a next-friend habeas petition as a non-attorney on behalf of Annabelle Melongo, a dual Haitian/Cameroonean citizen with language difficulties and who was confusing English and Roman law, and then telling the judge that his act of ruling that a non-attorney filing was “illegal” was a violation of his oath of office to follow the law as well as a criminal act.

Shelton alleges Judge McHale’s consecutive summary sentences of 4, 6, and 6 months (total of 16 mo) in CCDOC with no good time jail credits, 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 (a nullity or invalid);

B) in violation of Habeas Statutes, 735 ILCS Art 10 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 give jurisdiction for such credits to the county sheriff and not the judge;

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 holdings which:

1) require jury trial if sentences exceed 6 mos aggregate for contempt,

2) forbid sentencing for more than one count of contempt during one trial or case,

3) require jury trial if contempt sentence is summarily imposed on a day other than the day in which the contemptuous act occurred, and

4) specifically state it is legal for a non-attorney to file a next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus, U.S. ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 76 S.Ct 1 (1955) and Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S.Ct 2229 (2008).

These sentences by Judge McHale were acts of felony treason punishable by a sentence of 20 yrs to life per previous holdings and/or dicta of the United States Supreme Court including:

1) that the judges in U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200 (1980) affirmed the statement of Chief Justice Marshall in Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821) that it is “treason on the constitution” when a judge “usurps [the jurisdiction] that which is not given”; and

2) that it is a “war on the constitution” when a judge violates his oath of office to support it [including supporting statutes of a state = due process], Cooper v. Aaron,358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401(1958).

Judge McHale’s knowing violation of the statutes concerning SOJ as a right, good conduct jail credits; violation of case law concerning right to trial if sentence is > 6 mo, right to trial if sentence for contempt is given out on day other than day of contempt incidence, ban on more than one count of contempt during one case or trial; and violation of U.S. Supreme Court holdings/dicta in U.S. ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 76 S.Ct 1 (1955) and Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S.Ct 2229 (2008) that a non-attorney may file a next-friend habeas petition prove Judge McHale illegally found Linda Shelton in contempt three times, illegally sentenced her, and knowingly did this in an act of treason violating Shelton’s constitutional rights to be free of arrest and imprisonment without due process and in violation of law.

In addition, Annabelle Melongo’s petition for writ of habeas corpus has been IGNORED by Judges McHale, Brosnahan, Wadas, Kazmierski, and Judge Biebel and she is still in jail a year later! All these judges have therefore committed treason.

This is a grotesque and extremely serious violation of the Constitution of the United States – suspension clause (Article I, section 9) which states that the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus may not be suspended except in time of war.

EVEN PRISONERS AT GUANTANEMO BAY ARE ALLOWED TO FILE HABEAS PETITIONS!

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please sign the petition, write letters, and contact the press! Send Annabelle Melongo letters of encouragement at:

Annabelle Melongo
2010-0414060
PO Box 089002
Chicago, IL 60608

You can send her a money order for up to $50 if you want to contribute to her commissary fund to ease her suffering a bit.

Sign petition – DOJ should Investigate Corrupt Officials in IL

with one comment


I started a petition to be sent to President Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
 

Free Whistle-Blower – Exposed $8 Million Fraud by Phony Foundation (SALF) – IL Officials Retaliate

It asks that the Department of Justice investigate the following:

1) a the phony Save-A-Life-Foundation that investigative reporter Chuck Goudie uncovered and exposed the fact that numerous prominent politicians, without due diligence assisted SALF fraud and CEO Carol Spizzirri with obtaining $ >8 million in government grants,

2) the cases against Annabelle Melongo who was hired as the IT person for SALF and when she discovered this fraud she took it to Special Agent Depooter in the Chicago FBI office, was fired by SALF and was fraudulently accused by SALF CEO Spizzirri and then indicted by Cook County States Attorney Alvarez’s office with the assistance of the office of the Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan of remote computer tampering (deleting financial records at SALF computers, despite the fact that the computers were disconnected from the Internet), and

3) the perjury before the grand jury by Schiller Park Detective William Martin who claimed he had evidence that Melongo, after she was fired, remotely tampered with the SALF computers, despite having evidence that the computers were disconnected from the Internet and Melongo’s computer address (IP address) was not the computer that had accessed the SALF computers on the date in question .

The cases against Melongo appear to be an effort by persons who want to cover-up the connection between Spizzirri obtaining funds fraudulently and the many prominent politicians who helped her obtain these funds.

To read about the cases click herehere, here, and here.

To read it and then if you want to sign the petition click here.


Petitions by Change.org|Start a Petition »

Judge Mary Margaret Brosnahan suspends habeas laws

with one comment


Habeas corpus is the last defense a citizen has against unlawful arrest without probable cause and wrongful conviction. This “grand writ” (or the most important kind of court order) has long historical roots from pre-colonial days in England. It means that the tables are turned and the State must justify keeping a person in custody.

Originally a feature of English law, the writ of habeas corpus has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action. When the police falsely arrest you, seize you without probable cause, jail you on charges that are not part of the penal code simply to harass and inconvenience or for political reasons, hold you in jail without charging you, refuse to release you once your sentence has been served, convict you when you are actually innocent, then this is when a person needs the “grand writ”.

The United States Constitution,  guarantees a right to habeas corpus – to be brought before the court promptly and the State forced to justify why they are holding you as legal. This was re-inforced recently in the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Guantanemo Bay detainees, Boumediene v. Bush, who had been denied the right to petition for habeas corpus. The U.S. S. Ct ruled that the grand writ cannot be suspended in their case.

The United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in the Suspension Clause, located in Article One, Section 9. It states:

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it.

The right to petition a court for a writ (order) of habeas corpus has long been celebrated as the most efficient safeguard of the liberty of the subject. It has been used to force a prison to release a person when their sentence is over, to force a person’s release after arrest when the State has failed to charge them in a timely fashion, and to protect a person from arbitrary and unjustified arrest and incarceration.

Illinois law mandates that a judge hear a petition for habeas corpus promptly. It can be filed by an attorney, by the prisoner, or by a “person appearing on behalf of another” AKA “next friend” under federal habeas law.  There is no requirement that the prisoner be incapacitated for a next friend to file a petition for habeas corpus under Illinois law.  Habeas corpus is latin and literally means “We command that you have the body [bring the person to the court]”.

The law states:

 “Unless it shall appear from the complaint itself, or from the documents thereto annexed, that the party can neither be discharged, admitted to bail nor otherwise relieved, the court shall forthwith award relief by habeas corpus.” 735 ILCS 5/10-106

This order awarding relief simply means that the Sheriff holding the person in custody must bring them to the court and the state must  provide documents, evidence, and witnesses that justify holding the person in custody. The court must “examine” the reasons for holding the  person in custody to determine if the custody is lawful.

“Upon the return of an order of habeas corpus [bringing the body also known as the defendant to the court], the court shall, without delay, proceed to examine the cause of the imprisonment or restraint, but the examination may be adjourned from time to time as circumstances require.” 735 ILCS 5/10-119

If a judge refuses to hear a petition for habeas corpus or refuses to grant the relief (order the person to be brought before the court) there is a penalty that may be obtained from the judge.

“Any judge empowered to grant relief by habeas corpus who shall corruptly refuse to grant the relief when legally applied for in a case where it may lawfully be granted, or who shall for the purpose of oppression unreasonably delay the granting of such relief shall, for every such offense, forfeit to the prisoner or party affected a sum not exceeding $1,000.” 735 ILCS 5/10-106

The Illinois Attorney General or the State’s Attorney is required by law to prosecute the judge to collect this penalty.

“All the pecuniary forfeitures incurred under this Act shall inure to the use of the party for whose benefit the order of habeas corpus was entered, and shall be sued for and recovered with costs, by the Attorney General or State’s Attorney, in the name of the State, by complaint; and the amount, when recovered, shall, without any deduction, be paid to the party entitled thereto.” 735 ILCS 5/10-133

The Cook County Circuit Court local rule 15.2 states that “a person appearing on behalf of another” who files a petition for habeas corpus must appear “before the presiding judge.” That is how the habeas petition is initiated.

Cook County Circuit Court Rule 15.2

 (c) Petitioner without funds and without attorney.

(i) If the petition states the petitioner is without funds and the petitioner is not represented by an attorney, he shall submit a verified petition to the clerk. The clerk shall docket the petition and place it on the call of the presiding judge.

(ii) If the presiding judge finds that petitioner is without an attorney and without funds, the presiding judge shall appoint an attorney to represent the petitioner.

(d) Petition on behalf of another.A person signing a petition for writ of habeas corpus on behalf of another shall appear before the presiding judge in open court and may be examined as to his interest in or relation to the person on whose behalf the petition is presented.

On April 20, 2010 Dr. Linda Shelton filed two habeas petitions on behalf of Annabel Melongo, who is being held in county jail on excessive bail without probable cause. Judge Brosnahan has refused to hear motions to quash the charges based on lack of probable cause.

The first habeas petition concerns a charge of computer tampering, where Melongo is accused of accessing the computers of Save-A-Life-Foundation (now closed) and erasing all of their financial records. Computer IP numbers are like telephone numbers and identify the computers dialed from and called. Internet provider records are like telephone company records that prove what IP (v. telephone) numbers were dialed from and called. This is an accurate record.

The forensic computer examiner, Shahna G. Monge, who supposedly worked for the Illinois Attorney General’s office has disappeared. Her report claims that Melongo had an IP address (computer address unique to Internet Service provider) from Comcast. They said that address was used to remotely access the SALF computers. Yet Melongo did not use Comcast. She had an Internet provider contract with SBC.  The Illinois Attorney General’s office and the detectives on the case claim that Monge will not testify.  How do they have a case against Melongo when their “expert” who claims she had evidence against Melongo won’t testify? Where is the evidence?  Melongo has her SBC account bills to prove what she says and Comcast claims they have no records tied to Melongo.

A subpoena to Comcast, which the forensic computer examiner said was the Internet provider which had records of the SALF computer being tampered with produced a report from Comcast that Melongo did not have an IP computer number (address) with them and there was no record she remotely accessed the SALF IP number (address). Therefore, since the police report states that SALF IP number was accessed via Comcast from an IP number registered with Comcast, there is NO possibility that Melongo was the offender. 

Melongo had a contract for Internet services through SBC.  IP addresses unlike telephone numbers are UNIQUE to the Internet provider.  Therefore, there is no probable cause and charging Melongo and keeping her in custody on an outrageous bail is illegal and unconstitutional and violates her civil rights. The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that a person cannot be seized (arrested) without probable cause, nor can they be tried without probable cause.

Melongo has been going to court monthly while out on a $10,000 personal recognizance bail for three years fighting this accusation. The State has still failed to give her discovery (evidence) of the accusation that ties her with tampering with any computer. Statutory criminal procedure has not even been followed. She was at a job interview when she was supposedly arraigned. She confronted the court reporter with this fact and asked them why they falsified the court transcript saying she was there, when the attorney would testify she was not there. The attorney was so inadequate in representation that she fired him and represented herself for the last couple years.

Judge Brosnahan is so biased against Melongo (she is a dual citizen of Cameroon and Hait and has a heavy accent and writes legal papers very professionally and accurately), that she ordered a fitness exam to simply harass her (she has been declared fit after the exam) and has refused to date to have a hearing on Melongo’s motions to dismiss for lack of probable cause and fraud upon the court by the State (in claiming they have evidence when they don’t).

Melongo made a web site that details the charges, the players, and has scanned in all the evidence they gave her and the evidence she has that  proves her innocence. She designed this web site as a professional information technology consultant. She has nothing to hide. The State has lots to hide!

On the web site she has posted the recordings and transcripts of phone conversations she had with the court reporter. She wanted to document what she suspected was their criminal conduct in falsely writing in the transcripts that she was in court when “arraigned” when she actually wasn’t there.

Illlinois has a felony eavesdropping law that makes it a crime to record someone without their permission. There is an exception in that if one thinks they are recording evidence of a crime, they cannot be prosecuted. Melongo wrote on her web site that she thought the court reporters had falsified records and recorded the conversations under this exception to the law. She even states so on her web site.

Now the State has arrested and incarcerate Melongo for an additional charge of eavesdropping, although it is clear the exception applies in this case so there is no probable cause.

On April 20, 2010 after her bail was revoked due to violation of bail (being arrested again) Melongo was brought before Judge Brosnahan. Judge Brosnahan was told that Melongo has no criminal background except for the pending computer tampering charge. She was told Melongo is a dual citizen of Cameroon and Haiti and has a legal visa. She was told that Melongo had diligently appeared in court at all hearings that she was informed about for three years.

The prosecutor claimed she was a huge “flight risk” because she might be illegal and therefore they contacted immigration which put a “hold” on her so they could investigate. The prosecutor said she is “dangerous” because she tampered with a computer.  The defense attorney J. Nicolas Albukerk said this is all ridiculous as she has proven over three years NOT to be a flight risk and having dual citizenship does not make her a danger to anyone.  Albukerk noted that having dual citizenship is not a crime and does not make anyone an illegal immigrant. He noted that none of these alleged acts were crimes of violence and the eavesdropping charge had NOTHING to do with any threats or violence.

Judge Brosnahan in an outrageous act of judicial misconduct set bail at $500,000. This violates the constitution’s requirement that bail be reasonable.  Melongo is not rich. She has almost no resourcs left as no one will hire her over the last three years with a computer tampering charge pending. 

A call has gone out to Camerooneans in America for assistance to fight this injustice. Judge Brosnahan has no jurisdiction in these cases as there is no probable cause. Without probable  cause the charges are not valid and the indictments are void. To be held in jail on a $500,000 bail without probable cause is outrageous, illegal, unconstitutional and reveals that Judge Brosnahan is not fit to be a judge. She is continually violating the constitution and Melongo’s civil rights. She should be removed from the bench.

Judge Biebel was not available to hear the habeas petitions, so the criminal clerk called the Judge filling in for him – Judge Joseph Kazmierski.  In an act of judicial misconduct Judge Kazmierski refused to hear the habeas petition and said it was “not before him” because the case was assigned to Judge Brosnahan.

Shelton went to Judge Brosnahan’s courtroom, following the clerk who brought the files to the judge.  Judge Brosnahan, in an act of judicial misconduct REFUSED to hear the habeas petitions stating “you have no standing . . . only a lawyer or the defendant has standing . . . kick her out of the courtroom.”  Shelton protested, trying to get this rogue and ignorant judge to read the law and follow the law, without success and was kicked out of the courtroom.

Shelton went to Judge Kazmierski and asked him to order Judge Brosnahan to hear the petitions. He refused saying he had no standing to do so. He was derelict in his duties as a judge in refusing to hear the petitions for habeas corpus. The habeas corpus petitions were new civil cases according to the Illinois Code of Civil Procedures and according to Circuit Court Rules he should have heard them and issued a habeas order to bring the defendant to court to determine if she was being legally held.

Both Judge Kazmierski and Judge Brosnahan therefore committed an act of knowingly violating statutory law which the U.S. Supreme Court has declared to be an act of treason.

Judicial Trespassers of the law

The Illinois Supreme Court has held that “if the magistrate has not such jurisdiction, then he and those who advise and act with him, or execute his process, are trespassers.” Von Kettler et.al. v. Johnson, 57 Ill. 109 (1870)

Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.” Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)

The Illinois Supreme Court held that if a court “could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority, – it had no authority to make that finding.” The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them. They acted without any jurisdiction.

When judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law,and are engaged in treason (see below).

The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F.Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) held that “not every action by a judge is in exercise of his judicial function. … it is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse.”

When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that “when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution”, he “comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States.” [Emphasis supplied in original].

By law, a judge is a state officer.The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).

Violation of judge’s oath of office

In Illinois, 705 ILCS 205/4 states “Every person admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law shall, before his name is entered upon the roll to be kept as hereinafter provided, take and subscribe an oath, substantially in the following form:

‘I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be), that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of attorney and counselor at law to the best of my ability.'”

In Illinois, a judge must take a second oath of office. Under 705 ILCS 35/2 states, in part, that “The several judges of the circuit courts of this State, before entering upon the duties of their office, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation, which shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State:

‘I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of judge of ______ court, according to the best of my ability.'”

Further, if the judge had enlisted in the U.S. military, then he has taken a third oath. Under Title 10 U.S.C. Section 502 the judge had subscribed to a lifetime oath, in pertinent part, as follows: “I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; …”.

The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that “No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.”. Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).

Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason.

Having taken at least two, if not three, oaths of office to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, any judge who has acted in violation of the Constitution is engaged in an act or acts of treason (see below).

If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888)

Violating the constitution includes violating the laws of the state of Illinois as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that when a criminal procedure is statutory, then it invokes the due process clause of the 5th amendment. Violation of the statute by the judge is a violation of federal due process. If this is intentional, then it is “waring” on the constitution.

When a judge violates the law, their orders are void, a nullity.

The law is well-settled that a void order or judgment is void even before reversal. “Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal.” Vallely v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co.,  254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920)

The elements of lack of jurisdiction may include [issues pertinent to case at bar are in brackets]:

  1. Defective petition [indictment in case at bar is legally insufficient, as no probable cause], Brown v. VanKeuren, 340 Ill. 118, 122 (1930).
  2. Fraud committed in the procurement of jurisdiction [detective told grand jury that Melongo had an IP address with Comcast], Fredman Brothers Furniture v. Dept. of Revenue,  109 Ill.2d 202, 486 N.E.2d 893 (1985).
  3. Fraud upon the court [perjury before the grand jury and law fraudulently presented to grand jury in case at bar], In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.3d 393 (1962).
  4. The court exceeded its statutory authority [State Statutes and constitution do not allow a judge to have jurisdiction when there is no probable cause, also violation of 4th Amendment. ], Resenstiel v. Rosenstiel, 278 Supp. 794 (S.D.N.Y. 1967).
  5. Where a complaint states no cognizable cause of action against the party [no crime as specified by statute is alleged in the fatally flawed indictment obtained through fraud as there is no probable cause], Charles v. Gore, 248 Ill.App.3d 441, 618 N.E.2d 554 (1st Dist. 1993).
  6. Where the public policy of the State of Illinois is violated [constitution is violated when a person is held for trial without probable cause], Martin-Tregona v. Roderick, 29 Ill.App.3d 553, 331 N.E.2d 100 (1st Dist. 1975).

Therefore, Judge Brosnahan has no jurisdiction to preside over a trial of Melongo for computer tampering or for eavesdropping because there is no probable cause and therefore no jurisdiction for a criminal case.

Treason by a judge

Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)

The Supreme Court has also held that if a judge wars against the Constitution, or if he acts without jurisdiction, he has engaged in treason to the Constitution.

Courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their criminal acts. No judge has immunity to engage in such acts.

The prosecutor is Cook County States Attorney Anita Alvarez with the assistance of the computer crimes division of the Illinois Attorney General, Lisa Madigan.

Of note:  Lisa Madigan was “friends” with the director of SALF, Carol Spizzirri, and assisted her in obtaining grant money from the State of Illinois through Madigan’s father, Speaker of the Illinois House Michael Madigan. They now cannot account for most of the grant money SALF received from donors including the federal grants. Spizzirri is a know liar and commits fraud. She wrote on her applications for federal grants that she is a nurse, yet she is not a nurse. She has been labeled a pathological liar by Wisconsin courts. Her ex-husband has evidence that their now deceased daughter had an order of protection against Spizzirri.

It is thought by Melongo that they are framing her to cover up the fact that the funds from government for SALF were obtained fraudulently and they do not have financial records to account for them. How convenient to blame Melongo for remotely accessing their computers and “erasing” the data. Where’s the money Spizzirra and Madigan?  The FBI has yet to arrest those involved in this fraud.

For more information see: 

SALF Exposed

Illinois Appellate Court Snubs Nose at U.S. Supreme Court and State Law

leave a comment »


I have filed a criminal appeal on a case where I as a disabled person in a wheelchair was attacked by Cook County Sheriff Sgt. Anthony Salemi, he falsified his records, accused me of attacking him, committed perjury and I was wrongfully convicted:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16301520/Appeal-of-Wrongful-Conviction-Battery-Shelton-Illinois-2009

The trial court declared me indigent and ordered the court reporter to file a free copy of the transcripts with the court for an appeal. The court reporter has refused to follow the court order. The trial judge refuses to enforce the order because he said he lost jurisdiction to the IL Appellate Court.

The IL Appellate court has six time refused to enforce the court order and compel the court reporter to file the transcripts or hold her in contempt. My appeal is therefore delayed due to the illegal and unconstitutional acts of the Illinois Appellate Court First District.

The Illinois Supreme Court also has denied a motion for supervisory order to compel the court reporter to file the transcripts and compel the IL Appellate Court to enforce the order.

 The IL Appellate Court granted the Cook County States Attorney’s motion to compel me to pay for the transcripts and file them, instead of the court reporter. This is fraud upon the court as it violates a previous court order and is contempt as it also violates the United States Supreme Court holding (precedent) in a case where they ruled that indigent defendants are entitled under the due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution to a free transcript for appeal. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 607 also mandates that indigent defendants are entitled to free transcripts filed with the court clerk by the court reporter.

Therefore both the Illinois Supreme Court and Illinois Appellate Court are committing illegal acts.

The Illinois Appellate Court has now vacated their order to compel me to file the transcripts as I moved for them to vacate order as they illegally granted the motion from the State two days too early according to IL Supreme Court rules. They also allowed me to file immediately (instanter) my response to the States Attorney’s motion to compel me to file the transcripts. This response clearly spells out the illegal acts of the IL Appellate and IL Supreme Courts in refusing to uphold previous court orders, and statutory and constitutional rights as previously decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. These are impeachable intentional acts by these corrupt and dishonorable judges. I hope the IL Appellate Court recognizes its mistakes and doesn’t just vacate the order to re-instate it several days later when the law allows them to make a decision.

It is incumbent upon the IL Appellate Court to compel the court reporter to file the transcripts and hold her in contempt if she fails to do so.

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/18285468/Response-to-State-Motion-to-Deny-Indigent-Defendant-Transcripts-for-Appeal-Illinois-Appellate-Court-2009

Judicial Misconduct of Judge Joseph Kazmierski under Review by Federal Court

leave a comment »


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

%d bloggers like this: