Cook County Judges

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

Posts Tagged ‘Circuit Court of Cook County Judges

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 12/1/2017 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 12/1/17 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 Judge granted motion to correct order but refused to sign it & threatens Shelton if she tries to ask judge.

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.

Advertisements

Judge William D. Maddux

leave a comment »


COOK COUNTY PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE LAW DIVISION WILLIAM D. MADDUX CONSISTENTLY AND PUPOSELY VIOLATES ILLINOIS STATUTES AND HIS OATH OF OFFICE IN DENYING PRO SE LITIGANTS’ INDIGENT PETITIONS (IN FORMA PAUPERIS PETITIONS).
HE SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE FOR HIS ARROGANT, TYRANICAL, ILLEGAL, UNETHICAL, AND ATROCIOUS CONDUCT THAT VIOLATES CITIZENS’ FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES AND FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS.
Pro se litigants in Chicago who are indigent and file petitions for indigent status to waive filing and copying fees are routinely denied this status illegally by Presiding Law Division Judge Maddux because Judge Maddux wants to inhibit access to courts to whistle blowers, civil rights activists, those filing multiple legitimate suits pro se, and those who have spoken out against corruption in the courts, police, and among elected officials. The courts in C[r]ook County are extremely corrupt.

He never reads the pleadings. His law clerk simply writes “denied due to inability to sue in good faith”.

Dorothy Brown, the court clerk refuses to accept complaints unless the judge approves an indigent petition or the plaintiff pays the filing fee.

The law REQUIRES that indigent status be granted if you can prove your assets are less than 125% of the poverty level and your complaint if not frivolous.

735 ILCS 5/5-105 [ILCS = Illinois Compiled Statutes]
“The clerk of the court shall not refuse to accept any complaint, appearance, or other paper presented by the applicant if accompanied by an application to sue or defend in forma pauperis, and those papers shall be considered filed on the date the application is presented.”

There is no requirement that the complaint must be approved by the Judge as legitimate. Courts however do have the power to issue sanctions for frivolous repeated suits.

The actions of Judge Maddux and Dorothy Brown in denying access to the courts are clearly illegal.

I invite others to inform me of their similar difficulties and join in a mandamus complaint against Judge Maddux and Clerk Brown to force them to comply with the statutes and IL Supreme Court Rule 298.

Written by Linda Shelton

December 6, 2008 at 1:38 pm

Judge Marie Kuriakos Ciesil

leave a comment »


On September 26, 2007 Judge Ciesil issued an arrest warrant for Linda Shelton at 9:05 a.m. for being late to a 10:00 a.m. court hearing. She was temporarily removed from her courtroom for this misconduct by Presiding Judge Wright, but is back at it again, acting incompetent. For more infor see:

     http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/search/label/Judge%20Kuriakos%20Ciesil

On December 3, 2008 J. Ciesil illegally and unconstitutionally barred all non parties from the courtroom in a trial of Jose Rivas at her courtroom at 555 Harrison in Chicago. The people who wanted to enter the gallery were not disorderly in any way. This denial of a public trial is unconstitutional. She should be impeached for her pattern of unconstitutional acts. For more info see:

    ** in preparation**

Judge Thomas More Donnelly

leave a comment »


Judge Donnelly on September 25, 2008 charged Robert J. More with indirect criminal contempt for “practicing law without a license.” J. Donnelly claimed that Mr. More’s use of the “attorney code” 99500 on his pleadings was an act of impersonating a lawyer. The “attorney code” 99500 is the code the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County requires pro se litigants to use on the pleadings in the same way attorneys use their ARDC numbers on their pleadings. It is used 100s of times a month by pro se litigants in the court. Judge Donnelly is an idiot. The code 99500 is listed on the attorney appearance form provided by the clerk after the words “pro se.”

Judge Donnelly also granted the States motion to charge Mr. More with contempt for practicing law without a license because he filed an amicus curiae brief in a case of a friend. J. Donnelly stupidly states that only lawyers can file such briefs. Amicus Curiae means friend of the court. Apparently J. Donnelly does not understand that there are U.S. Supreme Court rules on how citizens (non-lawyers) must file amicus briefs including filing a motion for leave to file. It would be news to John E. Thorne a non-attorney that this is practicing law without a license. He filed an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in Faretta v. California in 1975, the landmark decision that affirmed that a person has a right to self-representation in the courts (i.e. Faretta rights).

Judge Donnelly is openly and grossly violating his oath of office in denying constitutional rights and in charging Mr. More with something that is NOT A CRIME! He should be removed form the bench or at least made to take a long leave of absence and read up on the law, as well as watch another judge for six months, and then be supervised for another six months. J. Donnelly is an example of why new judges should undergo a year of training and studying case law before they come on the bench. Ignorance in the face of power are a disasterous combination. One would never allow a new graduate of a medical school who is a licensed physician to perform brain surgery without many years of additional training as a brain surgeon!  How is being a judge any different?

I give judge Donnelly credit that upon a motion to dismiss the criminal contempt charges for failure to state a crime he acknowledged that Mr. More showed no intent to denigrate or interfere with the court by filing an amicus brief. J. Donnelly acknowledge that the charging instrument, the petition for adjudication of criminal contempt was devoid of any suggestion there was intent by Mr. More to insult the court, denigrate the court, show disrespect to the court, or interfere with the court. Criminal contempt is an intent crime and therefore, the complaint is void if no intent is alleged. Judge Donnelly then granted the motion to dismiss for failure to state a crime.

Judge Donnelly also acknowledged that he had ordered a BCX (fitness exam) on Mr. More and then rescinded this order. Mr. More’s attorney, recently hired because the court refused to let Mr. More represent himself in violation of Faretta (self-representation rights) and the public defender just didn’t have time to do a proper job on this case, made a motion to vacate a recent order irrationally raising bail when Mr. More refused to answer questions at the BCX exam without having it recorded in some fashion. J. Donnelly had in violation of statutes said this was a violation of bail and issued an arrest warrent for Mr. More, which was executed and he ended up briefly in jail. The statutes state that the judge SHALL inform a defendant, when the court orders a BCX, that the defendant has the RIGHT to refuse to answer questions at the exam. It also says the court may not alter bail orders to accomplish a BCX exam. Therefore, J. Donnelly’s arrest warrant and order to raise bail were a violation of statute and a violation of his oath of office to uphold the law. Statutory construction laws state that no word in a statute is superfluous. The word SHALL attaches to the law a statutory right. Although J. Donnelly made a proper ruling in vacating his illegal orders in this regard, he rambled excessively in trying to save face stating falsely that this was not a statutory right and that he was only vacating the order because he had previously vacated the order for the BCX. Properly he also ordered the entire bail to be returned to Mr. More which prevents the clerk from retaining her usual 10 % fee (the reason bails are so excessively high in Cook County – the court uses this in a racket to fund the clerk’s office – high bails increase the clerk’s 10% fees – which I believe should be declared unconstitutional just like the feds saying that tying services to a hospital to fees for patients by charging by % of the doctor’s or hospital’s revenues instead of by the number of services provided [no of bills processed or number of sheets cleaned for example] is Medicaid fraud – why should the biller get $5,000 to process one neurosurgical bill, but $10 to process one pediatrician’s bill?).

Judge Donnelly also presided over the trial of Robert More on a charge of criminal trespass to state supported land (a class A misdemeanor) illegally amended as ordered by J. Donnelly to trespass to real property (a class B misdemeanor). Mr. More was arrested about six months ago when he went to the Daley Center for a hearing on a lawsuit which he filed. He went to court at the appropriate time at about 10 a.m. The judge had left the bench and no one was in the courtroom except for the court clerk and the Sheriff’s deputy. Mr. More asked the court clerk when his case was being heard, as he was surprised to see no one in the courtroom and the judge NOT on the bench. Generally courtrooms at the Daley Center are open during normal business hours and attorneys will go in and leave courtesy copies of motions or solve schedule conflicts with the clerks. When a case is over and an attorney realizes something wasn’t addressed they may go to the clerk and ask for the case to be “recalled”. Then the clerk goes to the judges chambers and requests the judge to recall the case. The judge comes on the bench and attends to the pending legal issue or the request by the attorney to “reconsider” a matter that may have already been ruled upon. The judge MAY tell the attorney to file a motion to reconsider and schedule it up with the clerk’s office.

Mr. More simply requested the clerk to recall the case and the deputy and clerk told him that the court was “down” for the day. Perhaps county taxpayers should therefore only pay this judge for a 1/2 of a day’s work! Mr. More politely and repeatedly stated that he wanted to hear from the judge as the deputy and clerk had no authority to dismiss the case and he wanted the judge to hear him and reconsider the issue. The clerk should have gone and told the judge Mr. More was requesting the case recalled. The judge, if he wasn’t corrupt, incompetent, or unethical, should have merely come on the bench told Mr. More he made a sue sponte decision and if he wanted it reconsidered he should file a written formal motion and schedule it with the clerk to be heard. The judge also could have written such an order and after he signed it delivered it to Mr. More. It is INAPPROPRIATE and DISCIMINATORY to treat Mr. More as a pro se counsel different than the way a licensed attorney is treated by the Clerk. If the judge feels that Mr. More’s lawsuits are duplicative, abusive, frivolous, or otherwise, the judge can issue sanctions that his suits have to be approved by the chief judge or something like that or eliminated his indigent standing.

The deputy asked Mr. More to leave and said he should go to another floor to the clerk’s office and ask his questions as the court was “down.” Mr. More knew his constitutional rights to access the courts. The court should have been open during normal business hours. The judge should have issued an order or come on the bench concerning Mr. More’s request to recall the case. Mr. More’s constitutional rights were vioalted.

The Deputy, Datullo, a short busty young meek white female, testified that Mr. More was sitting in the back bench quietly waiting to be heard. She said she told him the court was “down”, but that he kept approaching the clerk and trying to hand her papers (presumably pleadings of some kind to get the case recalled). She said she called her supervisor who came and arrested Mr. More for trespass to state supported land.

Deputy Datullo clearly lied when she said that Mr. More said “I’m not leaving unless I’m arrested.” Sgt. Griffith’s (black female, obese sgt.) had written an incident report which stated that Mr. More said that if the sgt. told him he would be arrested if he didn’t leave, then he would leave. Obviously, he was trying to preserve his right to access to the courts and documents the officers’ interference with his access to the courts as well as the clerk’s interference with his access to the courts.

Deputy Datullo testified that she had 14 weeks training as a deputy and 1 week a year. She testified that she was NOT trained in what constitutes the elements of the crime trespass. She also admitted that she never TOLD Mr. More to leave, but just asked him to leave by telling him the court was “down”. Her incident report contained NO STATEMENT that she told Mr. More to leave. She admitted she never COMMANDED him to leave.

Deputy Datullo sounded unsure and confused on the stand, spoke in a shy and tentative voice and kept waffling about what she said to Mr. More.

Sgt. Griffith’s incident report contained NO language that she TOLD Mr. More to leave. It stated that she told him that he should go to the clerk’s office to handle his affairs. It said that Mr. More wanted to see the judge. She said “there’s nothing that can be done.”

The deputies are NOT trained judges or court clerks and have no right in telling citizens what are legal procedures. She admitted that when Mr. More stated that he would leave if she said “you will be arrested if you dont’ leave”, she told him to stand up and arrested him.

Sgt. Griffith falsely stated that there was no clerk and no other lawyers in the courtroom. Even Datullo testified that the clerk was present. Mr. More maintains two other lawyers were in the courtroom at one time – perhaps before Sgt. Griffith arrived?

Sgt. Griffith stated that she had 14 weeks training at the academy and was trained in general aspects of criminal law, but was not trained in the elements of trespass or in the crime of trespass.

During cross-examination she changed much of what she had testified in direct examination by stating that now she “doesn’t recall.” Sgt. Griffith was firm and authoritative on the stand, although her story changed while she was testifying. She even had an annoying arrogant demeanor where she tended to smirk about the incident.

Sgt. Griffith at first falsely testified that she arrested Mr. More immediately after he told her he “wouldn’t leave unless he was arrested.” She was impeached by her own incident report. Then she falsely testified that she “gave him time to leave before she arrested him.”

Unfortunately, it is likely that Sgt. Griffith will not be charged with perjury, although it is clear that is what she knowingly committed. Perhaps her only saving grace is that because of blistering cross examination by attorney J. Nicolas Albukerk, she finally admitted that she “didn’t recall” the events alleged.

Judge Donnelly is grossly ignorant of law and unable to interpret case law and statutory law properly. Although his decision on Mr. More being not guilty with a directed verdict was correct, he should have dismissed the case as failure to state a crime and NOT allowed this illegal amendment changing the charge to criminal trespass to real property for the following reasons:

Legislative intent did not mean to allow officers to arrest people on public property for trespass to real property. Citizens should be allowed to come into public buildings not just to obtain services but to observe the functioning of government including being spectators at public trials (a constitutional right under the Sixth Amendment). The crime trespass to real property requires that a person be told to leave the property by the “owner or occupant” but refuses to leave. The crime trespass to state supported land required the person be told to leave the property by the “State or its representative” and that the person “interferes with a persons use or lawful enjoyment of the building or land.” A State or its representative IS NOT an owner or occupant. Therefore the elements of the crime and facts of these two crimes are different.

720 ILCS 5/21‑3
Sec. 21‑3. Criminal trespass to real property.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (a‑5), whoever:
(1) knowingly and without lawful authority enters or remains
within or on a building; or
(2) enters upon the land of another, after receiving, prior to such
entry, notice from the owner or occupant that such entry is forbidden;
or
(3) remains upon the land of another, after receiving notice from the
owner or occupant to depart; or
. . .
For purposes of item (1) of this subsection, this Section shall not
apply to being in a building which is open to the public while the building
is open to the public during its normal hours of operation; nor shall this
Section apply to a person who enters a public building under the
reasonable belief that the building is still open to the public.

720 ILCS 5/21‑5) (from Ch. 38, par. 21‑5)
Sec. 21‑5. Criminal Trespass to State Supported Land.
(a) Whoever enters upon land supported in whole or in part with State
funds, or Federal funds administered or granted through State agencies or
any building on such land, after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from
the State or its representative that such entry is forbidden, or remains
upon such land or in such building after receiving notice from the State or
its representative to depart, and who thereby interferes with another
person’s lawful use or enjoyment of such building or land, commits a Class
A misdemeanor.

The law does not allow a charge with different elements to be amended to a different charge. Statutes only allow certain kinds of amendments of charges and amending a charge of trespass to state supported land to a charge of trespass to real property is not allowed!

Also, all charges due to one incident must be brought (joined) at the same time. Charges cannot be added after 160 days. In Mr. More’s case the charge of trespass to state supported land was void for failure to state a crime. The charging instrument – the complaint – failed to state the second element that he interrupted someone’s use of the building. Therefore the charge was void and should have been dismissed by the judge on the defense motion to dismiss for failure to state a charge.

Instead J. Donnelly through his ignorance and incompetence allowed the state to illegally “amend” the complaint, changing the facts and the elements, to the charge of trespass to real property. If the trespass to state supported land was dismissed, then the state had 160 days to decide to bring the new charge of trespass to real property. As it was over 160 days when they chose to amend the complaint illegally, it technically was illegal for them to bring this new charge. The judge should NOT have allowed the amendment. The case should have been over at that point and there should have been NO trial. J. Donnelly wasted county funds by holding a trial and wasted the juror’s time.

Delays caused by defendant on original charges cannot be applied to new charges brought at a date later than date original charges brought. Speedy trial for new charges for same offense are required to be joined to original charges by 720 ILCS 5/3-3 (West 2004). Speedy trial statute 725 5/103-5 (a) (West 2004). New charges home invasion dismissed on speedy trial grounds even though new charges brought within 120 days (in custody) on day 116 after arrest, when trial occurred 149 days after arrest. To allow new charges in violation of speedy trial statute would “allow trial by ambush” per the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Williams, 204 Ill.2d 191 (2003) “The State could lull the defendant into acquiescing to pretrial delays on pending charges, while it prepared for a trial on more serious, not-yet-pending charges We cannot presume that a defendant would have agreed to a continuance if he had faced both charges. As Justice Kuehn presciently observed, ‘All choices about requests that would delay proceedings would be made under a false understanding as a result of this deception.’ When the State filed the more serious charges, the defendant would face a Hobson’s choice between a trial without adequate preparation and further pretrial detention to prepare for trial. Today, we do not create a loophole for criminal defendants. Instead, we close a loophole which would allow the State to circumvent a statutorily implemented constitutional right.” Williams, 204 Ill.2d at 207, quoting People v. Williams, No 5-99-0452 (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23 (Kuehn, J, dissenting). People v. [Jimmy] Boyd, _______________________ 2nd Dist IL App

It simply was illegal for the judge to allow an amendment from trespass to state supported land to trespass to real property.

725 ILCS 5/111‑5
Sec. 111‑5. Formal defects in a charge.
An indictment, information or complaint which charges the commission of an offense in accordance with Section 111‑‑3 of this Code shall not be dismissed and may be amended on motion by the State’s Attorney or defendant at any time because of formal defects, including:
(a) Any miswriting, misspelling or grammatical error;
(b) Any misjoinder of the parties defendant;
(c) Any misjoinder of the offense charged;
(d) The presence of any unnecessary allegation;
(e) The failure to negative any exception, any excuse or proviso contained in the statute defining the offense; or
(f) The use of alternative or disjunctive allegations as to the acts, means, intents or results charged.

Mr. More obtained the right result – acquittal, but he actually should have had the case dismissed due to failure to state a crime, which therefore renders the case null and void ab initio. Only J. Donnelly’s ignorance and arrogance prevented this earlier outcome.

I hate to criticize judges without stating observations about their talents and skills. I do want to complement J. Donnelly on his statements to the jury. He is patient, calm, humerous, and respectful with the jury. His voice is easy to understand. His statements are clear. He has the potential to be a very good judge.  However his understanding and interpretation of case law is marginal at best.  He needs to do a lot more studying in this regard and needs supervision in this regard by a senior judge. I wish him well and really hope he reads this blog.

Judge Kathleen Pantle

leave a comment »


On December 8, 2005 Judge Kathleen Pantle issued an arrest warrant for Linda Shelton for not showing up for a court date on a case where Shelton is fraudulently alleged to have committed Medicaid Vendor Fraud. Shelton had informed J. Pantle in writing that she was in federal court before Judge Filip arguing her habeas corpus petition where J. Pantle was the respondent on that day. J. Filip had told Shelton through his courtroom deputy that when a judge schedules a court date that conflicts with another court date, that the defendant will not be arrested if the judge is informed in writing. Shelton was taken into custody on December 15, 2005 and wrongfully incarcerated until December 30, 2005 with an unconstitutional and excessive NO BAIL order, raised form a $10,000 personal recognizance bail. She was released on December 30, 2005 after the Illinois Appellate Court reduced her bail to a $10,000 personal recognizance bond. For further info see:

     **post in preparation**

On January 6, 2005, Judge Panatle raised bail on Linda Shelton in above case to an excessive bail of $500,000 from a $10,000 personal recognizance bond set by the Illinois Appellate Court with a false statement that Shelton had “lied” to the Illinois Appellate Court to have her bail reduced. The Illinois Appellate Court then again reduced the bail on January 20, 2005 to $100,000 and Shelton was released on bail. The Illinois Appellate Court and Judicial Inquiry Board have FAILED to reprimand or discipline in any manner J. Pantle’s unconstitional, vindictive, illegal, and unethical orders that violate her oath of office and bring the cout into disrepute for ignoring orders of the Illinois Appellate Court. This was also an unconstitutional incarceration as it was done without formal charge of violation of bail and only on the word of the J. Pantle without counsel or presence of Shelton in the courtroom that Shelton had “lied” to the Appellate Court and refused to answer questions at a fitness exam (a statutory right). This was an illegal penalty on Shelton’s exercise of her constitutional right to seek a habeas corpus writ and her right to refuse to answer questions at a fitness exam because she considered the order void and the underlying case void ab initio. Judge Coar in federal court is  presently considering the issue of voidness of the underlying case which has yet to go to trial in federal court in a renewed habeas corpus petition. J. Pantle was removed from the criminal court and transferred to Chancery Court.

Pro Se litigants now routinely request substitution of the judge as a right whenever they are assigned to Judge Pantle due to the above reputation.

Judge Pantle is unethical, violates the constitution and statutes of this state, violates her oath of office, is arrogant and incompetent, as well as vindictive and retaliatory when a pro se litigant informs her of the law, and should be impeached for her continuing and blatant misconduct on the bench. She has virtually no or very little understanding of the fitness statutes, speedy trial statutes, Faretta rights and its line of cases, or rights to subpoena evidence and present a defense without interference from the bench. The defendant not the judge decides defenses, defense strategy and what evidence is required for the defense.

Judge Pantle in 2006 was moved from her assignment at the 26th & California main felony criminal court building in Cook County to the Daley Center downtown Chancery Division. Her reputation among several pro se litigants is that she has a very poor fund of knowledge concerning procedures related to civil litigation in the Chancery Division of the courts.

This past week Chief Judge Evans has re-assigned Judge Pantle to the 26th & California criminal court building again, but this time as a bond judge for felony cases. I find this an outrage to put a judge that blatantly violated the Illinois Constitution in the past who placed extremely excessive bails on me including an unconstitutional no bail order and then DEFIED and SNUBBED HER NOSE AT an Appellate Court ORDER and raised my bail again illegally from a $1000 personal recognizance bail to an extremely excessive and vindictive $500,000 D-Bond (requiring 10% payment for release). Judge Timothy Evans apparently, along with Presiding Criminal Court Judge Biebel apparently feel that a judge without the necessary demeanor and control of her irrationality and vindictiveness should be the one judge assigned to set bonds on the most serious felony cases in Cook County. The community should work hard to remove this dangerous, outrageous, vindictive, arrogant, and irrational judge from the bench for good!

Written by Linda Shelton

December 5, 2008 at 4:54 pm

%d bloggers like this: