Cook County Judges

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

Posts Tagged ‘Unlawful Arrest

Cook County Circuit Court Judge Chiampas suspends 6th Amendment right to compulsory process and speedy trial, violates Illinois Statutes for Substitution of Judge – in acts of treason

with 2 comments


Shelton has filed an United States Supreme Court Petition for Writ of Mandamus against Circuit Court of Cook County Judge Peggy Chiampas for ordering denial of compulsory process, denial of speedy trial, and violation of statutes for substitution of judge for cause.

Judge Chiampas even issued a warrant on a case that Shelton won a year ago and set bail for this misdemeanor of $25,000. She also arrested Shelton for going out into the hall when she was ill, violating the U.S. Americans with Disabilities Act. In addition, she issued two bails on one case and has issued excessive bails.  Judge Chiampas is not fit to be a judge as she has no understanding of basic constitutional rights.

Judge Chiampas is incompetent, narcissitic, rude, and dangerous to the public. She needs to be immediately removed from the bench and subjected to mental health evaluation. Presiding Judge Wright and Chief Judge Evans should be held accountable for allowing this nut case to remain on the bench. She is only concerned about railroading people through her court in a rush to judgment so she can clear the calender that has been loaded up with so many cases due to misconduct of other judges. The chief and presiding judges have placed her on this call to clear the calender and have paid no attention to her incompetence and misconduct. Her courtroom is nothing more than a Salem Witch trial. Please help get this nutcase off the bench.

Judge Peggy Chiampas is so ignorant of the law that she doesn’t  understand that she cannot strike a motion for substitution of judge for cause.  She had the gall to tell Shelton that she was considering allowing her to refile the motion. Shelton on June 13th, 2012, told Chiampas in court that she had not jurisdiction, that she lost it when Shelton had her courier file a Motion for SOJ Chiampas for Cause.  Shelton said she didn’t need her leave to refile it as Chiampas’ order to strike it was VOID ab initio according to higher court case law.  Chiampas then said she was granting leave to file. Shelton said she no longer recognized Chiampas as the judge on the case and every order she makes is VOID and without jurisdiction.

See Shelton’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus to U.S. Supreme Court here and her petitions for writ of habeas corpus here (will be scanned in shortly).

See Shelton’s 1st Supplement to Petition for Writ of Mandamus to U.S. Supreme Court here.

See Shelton’s Motion for Stay of Cook County Court Proceedings in 09 MC1 223774 pending U.S. Supreme Court rulings here.

_____________

UPDATE:

Shelton made a motion for Substitution of Judge for Cause, because of Judge Chiampas history of lawlessness, and it was filed by a courier on May 29, 2012.  Judge Chiampas said it was stricken on May 29, 2012, a day Shelton did not come to court because Chiampas refused to transfer the case to the presiding judge and had ordered Shelton to come to court on May 29, 2012 and submit to a trial that day, but Chiampas had ordered that Shelton could not have witnesses (Chiampas had stricken motions to compel Clerk Brown and Sheriff Dart to produce evidence – names of witnesses. Both Brown and Dart are deliberately ignoring the subpoenas, which is a criminal act). On June 13, 2012 Shelton was in court, in custody after she had surrendered at the FBI buildling on June 8, 2012. Shelton had taken this extra time and not shown up in court so she could write a Petiton for Writ of mandamus to the US Supreme Court and file Petitions for Writs of Habeas Corpus to have these bogus cases dismissed and to order a fair trial – force the judge to be replaced and force compliance with subpoenas as well as force the court to follow speedy trial laws and the constitution  concerning compulsory process of witnesses and other laws.

The jail staff have purposely and maliciously in the past when Shelton was illegally incarcerated prevented her from having paper and pen and access to the courts, so that she had to make sure any motions were written before she surrendered.  These legal filings by Shelton apparently were noticed by Presiding Muncipal 1 Judge Wright who ordered that Judge Harmeling would hear the SOJ for Cause Motion, despite Judge Chiampas striking it.  Judge Chiampas on June 13, 2010 also ordered the states attorney to meet with Shelton who showed them that two of the case numbers were the same case and Clerk Brown had made one of her numerous clerical errors – so the state dropped one of the cases. Then Chiampas ordered Dart and Brown to have their lawyers in court on June 20 and ordered them on June 20th to comply with the subpoenas.  This is AFTER Judge Chiampas had stricken with prejudice (can’t be reinstated), on March 21, 2012, Shelton’s motion to compel Dart and Brown to comply with subpoenas. Chiampas must have read the US Supreme Court Motion which asked the court to compel Chiampas to follow the Bill of Rights and compel witnesses to comply with subpoenas.

On June 28, 2012 Shelton informed the court through an attorney that she could not appear to hear Judge Harmeling’s ruling on the Motion for SOJ Chiapas for cause that Shelton argued on June 20, 2012, because Shelton was ill and due to her multiple chronic illnesses and the extreme heat index, as well as a stomach flu with fever, she could not appear in court.  The next hearing was postponed until July 2, 2012 as a result.

Shelton, on June 13, 2012 told Judge Chiampas that it was illegal for her to strike the motion for Substitution of Judge for Cause.  Judge Chiampas said that presiding Judge Wright had ordered another Judge to hear the motion and that she was allowing the motion to be re-instated (she had no power to strike or re-instate as the only power she has after a motion for substitution of Judge is written and filed is to transfer the case to the presiding Judge).  Judge Harmeling was assigned to hear the motion and he appeared in court on June 20, 2012.

Judge Harmeling heard the Motion for SOJ for Cause against Judge Chiampas on July 2, 2012 and totally igored the higher court precedent on the topic that Shelton had written in her Motion for SOJ for Cause (see it here), as well as the law, fraudulently stating that Shelton was just angry at Judge Chiampas’ rulings and that was not a reason to substitute judge. He then denied the motion and transferred it back to Judge Chiampas. Judge Chiampas then ordered a status hearing on August 3, 2012 to check on whether discovery was complete from the subpoenas issued to Clerk Dorothy Brown and Sheriff Dart.

Shelton on July 2, 2012 filed several motions including a motion 2nd Motion for SOJ for cause

Advertisements

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

Corrupt Judges Jorge Alonso and Kathleen Pantle kill innocent defendant Vernon Glass

with one comment


Corrupt Judges Jorge Alonso & Kathleen Pantle cause death of innocent defendant Psychological Counselor Vernon Glass. Read about it here.

Judge Colleen A. Hyland Arrogant Temper-Tantrum

with one comment


Update:  Charges against Shelton on both the trespass charge and the battery of  Ofc. Stanislavski have been dropped (nolle prosequi) by the State’s Attorney.  Apparently they don’t want it to become  public record that the judges are incompetent, arrogant, idiots and malicious who violate the law with impunity, or that the officers, as a matter of practice and custom, violated the law and the arrests were bogus, unlawful, unconstitutional and malicious in nature.

On October 21, Dr. Shelton went for a first appearance on an unlawful arrest for trespass to real property (720 ILCS 5/21-3(a)(2)) before Judge Colleen A. Hyland. Dr. Shelton stated to Judge Hyland she would represent herself and had successfully done so more than 24 times, including winning mandamus and injunctive actions against the State of Illinois (represented by AG Lisa Madigan) and against the Cook County Sheriff (represented by SA Richard Divine).  Dr. Shelton said she was representing herself in federal court in civil rights suits against several judges, police, and Lisa Madigan, and was quite knowledgeable  about the law.  Judge Hyland appeared perturbed about this statement, but stated she would let Dr. Shelton represent herself. Judges often are irrational concerning pro se defendants, assuming they are nuts (despite the fact they win cases as often as attorneys) having an unconscious bias that colors their actions with these defendants, called confirmatory bias.

Dr. Shelton stated she would demand a jury trial.  Then Judge Hyland proceeded to appropriately as required by law admonish Dr. Shelton that pro se counsel were expected to know the same things as an attorney and would be held to the standards of an attorney. Judge Hyland then stated to Dr. Shelton that trespass to real property was a class A misdemeanor.

Generally defendants may not talk in court and are represented by an attorney. The attorneys speak up if the judge mis-states a matter of law or fact and generally provide the judge information about details of the law from the statutes.

Courtroom deputies quickly and rudely tell the defendants to shut up if they attempt to ask questions and judges tell the defendants they cannot speak and must let their attorney speak up. They need to be taught to be more polite and less nasty.

However, Dr. Shelton represents herself (pro se). Those representing themselves are “pro se counsel” and have the same right to speak up and be heard in court as an attorney.

Judges and courtroom deputies are used to being nasty to defendants and biased against defendants, who try to ask a question or speak up in court, often have a hard time conducting themselves properly and letting the pro se defendant speak up as is appropriate. Afterall, they represent themselves. The judge or courtroom deputy will often inappropriately tell the pro se defendant to “shut up” or even assault the defendant and grab them, while yelling at them, in order to threaten them into not talking. Courtroom deputies, who are quite ignorant of the law and pro se counsel rights, assume the defendants are guilty and are taught to treat defendants with total disrespect as scumbags to be beaten and verbally abused, despite the Constitution guaranteeing that a person is considered innocent until proven guilty and despite the fact that abuse of a defendant is unconstitutional. Judges have inadequate training concerning pro se counsel and often use knee-jerk and inappropriate, often unconstitutional, statements against pro se counsel rights, to cover-up their ignorance.

Dr. Shelton politely spoke up, as pro se counsel, and told Judge Hyland that trespass to real property is a class B misdemeanor.  Judge Hyland in an arrogant, nasty, and inappropriate manner quickly yelled at Dr. Shelton, that she was the judge and what she said was right and it was contempt for Dr. Shelton to speak up and that if she spoke up again she would jail her for contempt.

This is a typical example of judicial misconduct in Cook County courtrooms.  Contempt is when someone in court purposely disrupts the courtroom, insults the judge, or becomes violent in the courtroom bringing the proceedings into disrepute. Telling the judge she legally mis-spoke is clearly NOT contempt.

Dr. Shelton politely spoke up and said “Judge please read the statute book.” Judge Hyland then had a temper-tantrum and told the deputies to remove Dr. Shelton from the courtroom, that if Dr. Shelton said another word, she would hold her in contempt,  and she would recall the case later.

Dr. Shelton left the courtroom, went to the court library and Xeroxed a copy of the statute that says trespass to real property is a class B misdemeanor.

When the case was recalled, Dr. Shelton immediately held up the paper and stated: “Judge here is a copy of the statute. You were wrong. I was right. It is a class B misdemeanor. You owe me an apology for your inappropriate conduct. Under the circumstances, I am compelled to ask for substitution of judge as a right”. Shelton feared that since Judge Hyland was clearly ignorant, incompetent, arrogant, rude, and biased against her as pro se counsel,  so she decided she should use her right to substitute a judge, which cannot be questioned by law. Judge Hyland arrogantly stated: “I don’t apologize to anyone in my courtroom.” Her demeanor was that of a bitchy witch.

Deputy M. Norris, badge 10425, then forcefully grabbed Dr. Shelton by the right arm and yelled at her to “shut up” and “listen to the judge”. This was clearly an assault and battery of Dr. Shelton by Deputy Norris. Dr. Shelton loudly spoke up and staring Norris in the face stated: “Stop assaulting me, I have the right to speak as pro se counsel.”

Judge Hyland then started viciously orally defaming Dr. Shelton making false statements that Dr. Shelton’s conduct was inappropriate and she had to be kicked out of the courtroom. Many deputies started surrounding Dr. Shelton in a very threatening assault on her with Deputy Walter R Stanislavski, badge 10395, placing himself right in front of Dr. Shelton’s walker, actually pushing up against it. Dr. Shelton said she did not appreciate the officers threatening her and she was going to press charges against Deputy Norris for assault.

Dr. Shelton said to the judge, here let me give you a copy of the statute to prove what I am saying. Then Deputy Walter R. Stanislavski nudged up against Dr. Shelton’s walker and stated falsely: “you bumped me”, while looking at Deputy Norris and also stating “if you say she [Deputy Norris] assaulted you, then I’ll charge you with battery.”

Dr. Shelton then stated as attorneys generally do when there is a disagreement with a judge’s ruling and they want their objection on the record: “I wish to make a record,” which means she wishes to make a statement on the record so it is recorded by the court reporter. Shelton then began to state that Judge Hyland was acting with misconduct in abusing her with inappropriate threats and failing to acknowledge she made a mistake about the law, as well as that Judge Hyland made false statements on the record about Shelton’s conduct. That Shelton’s conduct was completely appropriate for a pro se counsel.

Judge Hyland ordered the court reporter not to record these statements which is an agregious act of judicial misconduct and ordered Shelton out of the courtroom. Shelton protested and said this was inappropriate conduct and she had a legal right to make a record.

The prosecutor then asked for special conditions of bond stating she was not to go on the property of the Kaminski family or talk or contact  Jeryl, Keith, or Donny Kaminski at 2829 w 98th Street in Evergreen Park. She also stated that Dr. Shelton was not to contact her son, Thomas Shelton who had become estranged from the family and moved in with the Kaminski family – he had coerced his senile grandfather to sign a rental agreement on an apartment, vacated the apartment without paying his bill and writer was trying to deliver the notice of a suit against his grandfather (her father) and the bill to him at this address. Of note, Dr. Shelton has NEVER met or spoken to Jeryl or Keith Kaminski and has not spoken to Donny Kaminski for at least 3 years. Donny used to come visit Tom at the Shelton’s condo and Tom at that time was hanging out with Donny and other “friends”. The purpose of this special condition is therefore unknown and simply must be a purposeful attempt to harass Dr. Shelton and defame her character. There is now no case and therefore no prohibition of going to this property again.

Finally, Judge Hyland agreed to transfer the case to another judge, trying to save face and not admit her mistake and misconduct, she said she was transferring the case to the “jury room” with a different judge.

Dr. Shelton’s son is in need of psychological counseling on due to extreme stresses and instability during childhood of death, illness, defamation, exposure to fumes in an environmental accident, sudden loss of home several times, abuse by a teacher at a young age, abandonment by his father a disturbed Vietnam era veteran, witnessing the results of his mother physically callapsing in near-death experiences in front of him several times or her sudden hospitalization for congenital illness, witnessing the poor and battered physical condition of his mother after abuse by police, and the deterioration of his grandfather. Tom suffers from passive- aggressive personality traits, chronic depression, low self-esteem, and is easily manipulated by others. He has a brilliant analytic mind and knowledge beyond his years, an endearing personality with patience, but great irrational fears and some difficulty with coping skills due to the incredible stresses he has been under for a decade despite his mother’s and grandfather’s best efforts to protect him, provide him a stable, loving environment, and attempts to find male mentors.

Donny Kaminski is a con artist who was kicked out of Evergreen Park high school for manipulating the high school computers. Donny then refused to work or get a high school equivalency degree for the next at least 3-4 years, mooching off his parents. He tried to attach himself to others and take advantage of others’ talents. For example he hung around with musician Ben Huenecke and said that he could handle the sound system for the band. Ben has broken up with Donny.

Tom during this time was taught by his “friends” and I presume Donny to lie to his grandfather and essentially extort money from his grandfather to use to chauffeur his “friends” around, buy them meals, and to Dr. Shelton’s dismay have an underage drunken party with his friends at their condo on Halloween 2006, when whe was not home. These “friends”, Ben Huenecke, Chris Pomorski, Kyle Corbin, Tim Madsen, Donny Kaminski, and other unknown persons have allowed Tom to continue this misconduct and hide it from his mother for a long time. All the “friends” have cut off their relationship with Tom per rumor due to his inappropriate behaviors and untrustworthiness due to psychological issues related to his fears and lying, except for Donny and Tim who have engaged in other allegedly illegal activities.

Dr. Shelton had told Tom that when he was 18 (he is now 24 and was 19 at the time of this misconduct before he estranged himself from his mother for the past five years) he had to either have a job or go to school in order to remain living in her household. Dr. Shelton told Tom he had to show responsibility and concern for his family as an adult.  Tom chose instead to try to mooch off his grandfather with lies, dropped his college courses so that he no longer qualified for student aid and refused to get a job even part time for a few hours, ended up extorting money from is grandfather, and he has also stolen his mother’s retirement money and lied to the police to get rid of her. He needed counseling and support from school staff and simply didn’t get it. He took out all his anger and frustration about his bad luck while growing out on his mother, rebelling against her and blaming her for every stressful event. He participated in some counseling arranged by his mother as a teenager, but cut it off as he became an adult. The counseling staff at Roosevelt University and Moraine Valley Junior College have refused to discuss this with writer because Tom is an adult. They have refused to mediate a meeting between mother and son. Tom has pulled the wool over their eyes and those of others with his lies about his mother.

As a result, when Dr. Shelton discovered Tom was extorting money from his grandfather, lying, dropping courses, and manipulating, she kicked him out of her condo in November 2006 and told him to go live with his friends, get a job, and find a place of his own. She told him that as a good mother she had to take this heart wrenching action in order to force Tom to be responsible, that she loved him, and that she would help him in any way she could if he would just get a job or go to school, stop lying and manipulating his grandfather, and get mental health counseling to deal with the decade of stress.  Like enabling a drunk, if a family member condones a young adult’s poor choices and  misconduct they can not progress and get succeed well.

Tom, then with the help of his “friends”, and Dr. Shelton suspects primarily Donny Kaminski, when Dr. Shelton was not home, broke into Dr. Shelton’s condo, changed the locks including dead bolt and door knob, stole several items, and then Tom went to the Verizon store and in an act of ID theft told the representative that he had his mother’s permission to change the contract, terminate the family plan early, take his cell phone off the contract and open a new contract with a different company. He illegally and without Dr. Shelton’s permission used her social security number. Dr. Shelton’s Verizon bill then revealed a several hundred dollar early termination fee. Dr. Shelton had to hire a locksmith to get into her own home and change the lock again.

Tom then disappeared and refused to reveal where he was living or what he was doing for most of the next three years. During that time he several times when Dr. Shelton, who had moved in with her severely ill and disabled father to care for him, when Dr. Shelton was not home, came to his grandfather and again lied to him demanding money. Grandfather gave Tom money fearing if he didn’t he would lose his love.  This is abuse of an elder and extortion as the grandfather is very vulnerable. The grandfather even co-signed as guarantor of an apartment Tom rented for $1000 without even having a roommate. Tom’s mother had urged Tom to go to school and live in a dormitory with people his age to learn to socialize better. Tom’s tendency to isolate himself is not healthy.

Dr. Shelton then discovered that Tom was shacking up with a woman 15 years his senior, Mia Palmer. Dr. Shelton suspected Mia was taking advantage of Tom’s tendency to generosity and his grandfather’s money. Dr. Shelton also discovered Tom had obtained a part-time job at White Sox Park selling T-shirts but was fired because he was such an “a**” according to his friend and his boss.

Dr. Shelton then found Tom and confronted him and told him his grandfather would only pay bills directly to school or for food or rent or utilities if Tom gave them the bills and he would not get any more cash. One of the conditions was that Tom must obtain mental health counseling to deal with his irrational fears and the decade of unusual stresses.

Tom never made good on this promise so grandfather and Dr. Shelton informed Tom the rent would no longer be paid after June 2009. The grandfather felt so stressed by Tom that he instructed Dr. Shelton to handle all of Tom’s requests for money.

Without telling his grandfather or mother, Tom moved out of the apartment and in with the Kaminski family. Tom failed to forward the bills for cleaning out the apartment from the apartment owner to his grandfather and Tom failed to pay the several hundred dollar bill.

Tom’s grandfather received a collection notice for this unpaid bill on October 1, 2009. Dr. Shelton called the apartment owner and obtained Tom’s forwarding address – the Kaminski home. Tom’s grandfather is very ill and becoming more so. Dr. Shelton is worried that her father’s life is fading much more quickly now. Tom’s grandfather had taken them in when Tom’s father, a mentally ill Vietnam veteran had abandoned them and Tom was a year old. Tom’s grandfather has been acting as his father as best he could. Dr. Shelton has seen her father go into great despair over Tom’s acts and disregard for his grandfather.

Dr. Shelton went to the Kaminski home on October 2, 2009 and knocked on the door to try to speak to Tom, plead with him to have the respect and concern for his grandfather to at least come and tell him he loved him and wish him well, and to tell him to please get some mental health treatment and that not telling his grandfather about the bill was inappropriate.  She was hoping he would accept a little guidance.  No one answered the door and Dr. Shelton, feeling in great despair, disabled and weak, briefly collapsed onto a chair on the Kaminski porch crying and then left.

On October 3, 2009 Dr. Shelton again attempted to contact Tom at the Kaminski house by knocking at the door. Again no one answered. Dr. Shelton noticed a neighbor and asked walked over and asked if they knew when the Kaminskis would be home. The neighbor said she didn’t know because the Kaminski family was “very secretive”.

Then Dr. Shelton briefly walked up the Kaminski driveway to see if Tom was in the backyard, but no one was there. She went to her car to write a note to leave for Tom at the door.

Then Evergreen Police came and arrested Dr. Shelton for trespass stating that Donny Kaminski had told Dr. Shelton not to come on the property – a total lie as Dr. Shelton had not spoken or seen Donny for years.  Dr. Shelton protested and the officer said that Donny had come to the police station the night before and made a complaint against her for trespass.

Dr. Shelton pleaded with the police to ask the Kaminski parents, Jeryl and Keith to come out and speak with her because she was so concerned about her son’s mental health and his relationship with his grandfather. She had never spoken to them and wanted to inform them of the situation. The police stated they spoke with them and the Kaminskis refused to have the common decency to even speak with Dr. Shelton. One has to question the decency of a family who interferes with and refuses to help another family remain intact.

In response to Dr. Shelton stating that Donny never told her to not come on the property and that the day before was the first time that she had ever knocked on the door, and that no one answered so it could not be trespass, as simply ringing a doorbell is not trespass, the officer said that a detective had called Dr. Shelton and spoke to her the night before and said not to come on the property. Dr. Shelton protested and said she received no such phone call. Then the officer said, “well he left a message on your answering machine.”  Dr. Shelton said this was impossible because her answering machine was full and she had not deleted messages for days. Dr. Shelton later obtained documents that prove the police called the wrong Linda Shelton, as there are several in the Chicago area. This other Linda Shelton told the police that she did not have a son named Thomas and was not at that property, and wondered how the police got her number. A subpoena of the Evergreen Park Police phone records of the telephone number they called when contacting this other “Linda Shelton” will prove how incompetent they are and abusive of Dr. Shelton they were.

Then the the Evergreen Park Police unlawfully arrested Dr. Shelton for trespass. It is unlawful because she was never told by the property owner or occupant not to come on the property at 2829 W. 98th St. in Evergreen Park. Simply ringing a doorbell is not criminal trespass.

Dr. Shelton immediately hired a private detective who examined her cell phone and will testify there were no messages form the police and that it had been full for days, so clearly the Evergreen Park police lied. This arrest is fraud upon the court by Donny Kaminski and the Evergreen Park Police, besides incredible incompetence and stupidity of the Evergreen Park Police.

Dr. Shelton is very concerned about her son, particularly worried that he has become trained by Donny and others to commit fraud, deceit, and extortion.  Tom last year made a fraudulent elder abuse report stating that Dr. Shelton was extorting money from her father and verbally abusing him. This was investigated and found to be “unfounded”. The grandfather has a substantial retirement account or estate, but it is all needed to care for him and for other members of the family with catastrophic illness, including Toms’ uncle and aunt. The family is plagued by catastrophic illness. Dr. Shelton is trying to help her father manage it well to preserve the funds as long as possible. Tom apparently is trying to defame and discredit his mother so he can take control of his grandfather’s money.

Tom has now filed a false complaint for order of protection against his mother, falsely stating she is mentally ill, violent, abused him as a child, and is threatening him. Dr. Shelton’s doctors, neighbors, friends and family will testify this is false. Dr. Shelton will subpoena Tom’s “friends” if necessary. Dr. Shelton had Tom in counseling with professionals since the age of 15 to about 17, but Tom was only partially cooperative. These psychiatrists and psychologists will testify that there was never any history of family violence or abuse of Tom. These false statements by Tom are again criminal fraud upon the court.  Dr. Shelton is praying that the court and Tom’s “friends” will open their eyes and force Tom into counseling and supervision to treat his mental state. Dr. Shelton is praying that the Kaminski parents will open their eyes to the fact they are being manipulated and praying that the Kaminski parents, Jeryl and Keith, are not crooks who are using Tom.

Dr. Shelton is extremely saddened and in despair over the failure of his “friends”, Jeryl and Keith Kaminski, and the court to help Tom and she fears Tom is headed for a life of committing manipulation and fraud which can only lead to prison. Tom is a very intelligent and endearing man with great potential for success in life, if he will let others help him.  Dr. Shelton fears that the Kaminski family are either suckers under the influence of their son who clearly has a history of cunning manipulation and fraud, or they are some kind of criminals who have taken Tom in to assist in their illegal activities. The unethical conduct of the Kaminski family in abusing Dr. Shelton and Tom’s grandfather by refusing to talk to them is incredible. If they believe they are “helping” Tom, they are sorely mistaken. They are harming him.

After being told that there were special conditions of bond that she could not contact her son, Dr. Shelton became very despondent and tried to re-enter the courtroom, crying that she wanted clarification to know if she could inform Tom when his grandfather died or if this would be a violation of the order. She is despondent over the fact that her father is being so mentally stressed and abused by her son, and that Tom’s conduct is 180 degrees opposite to the family values of honesty and empathy that she had tried so hard to teach to him. [UPDATE – Dr. Shelton’s father, Tom’s grandfather was seen by a doctor today 10/25 due to sudden deterioration and plans are being made for increased medical assistance and assistance as Dr. Shelton is too weak and now exhausted to have sole responsibility to physically help her father – his illness is untreatable and advanced]

Dr. Shelton is barred from contacting Tom or asking anyone to contact him about this situation. She is barred from telling Tom when his grandfather dies or is placed in a hospital. Judge Hyland – YOU ARE AN IGNORANT, IMMORAL, WITCH! YOU DON’T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT AN OLD MAN WHO CARED FOR AND LOVED HIS GRANDSON; A GRANDSON WHO IS IN GREAT NEED OF MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING! YOU SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE BENCH.

The deputies blocked her entrance into the courtroom even though as pro se counsel she had the legal right to recall the case for clarification. They then grabbed her and dragged her off under arrest for “battery” using the fabricated charge against her.

Dr. Shelton tried to ask persons sitting in the courtroom gallery and a lawyer if they would give her their names as witnesses to this police and judicial misconduct, but they all stood back and refused to assist a fellow citizen under attack by the corrupt. Evil prospers when good men fail to act. This is a sad state of affairs. This is why our State and County is so rife with corruption. The people in the gallery, the attorneys present, the prosecutors, Judge Hyland, and the deputies present know what is said here is the absolute truth.

Dr. Shelton is requesting that any one who has knowledge about the Kaminski family or her son in the past three years please contact her, especially if you are able to testify as to Tom’s behavior and any fraud perpetrated by Tom or Donny Kaminski. She would also appreciate donations to her legal defense fund at:  Shelton defense fund, C/O Albukerk and Associates, 3025 W 26th Street, Chicago, IL 60625. Dr. Shelton is disabled, on food stamps, and hoping for a little humanity, justice, and fairness to surface. She loves her son and is frantic with worry about him to the point it is effecting her health.

Judge James L. Rhodes Finds Deputies Not Credible

with one comment


SHERIFF DEPUTIES COMMIT PERJURY

Cook County Sheriff Deputies Rebecca Doran and Maureen Caliendo, with the full encouragement of Assistant Chief Lyons and the Cook County State’s Attorney falsely arrested Dr. Shelton, maliciously prosecuted Dr. Shelton, for aggravated battery, but Dr. Shelton was found not guilty by a responsible and honest, intelligent judge, Honorable Judge James L. Rhodes, who found the deputies’ testimony “not credible”.

http://cookcountysheriffdeputies.wordpress.com/2009/06/06/deputy-rebecca-doran-deputy-maureen-caliendo-sergeant-patricia-mccollum-assistant-chief-kevin-lyons/

During trial, Hon. Judge Rhodes was fair, listened intently to both sides, weighed the evidence carefully, was intellectually honest, exhibited an impressive ability to see the whole picture, displayed an excellent fund of knowledge about the law, had a calm and reassuring demeanor, kept excellent control of the trial and his courtroom, and asked appropriate questions of the witnesses even when the State or defense failed to ask such questions, in order to clarify the facts. His instructions and speech were clear, polite, and easy to understand.
I highly recommend him as a judge and believe he should be promoted to a position of authority. I believe it is unlikely that he would become corrupt.

Judge Maddux Runs Law Division Cook County Court as Criminal Enterprise – Dr Linda Shelton Unlawfully Arrested

leave a comment »


Circuit Court of Cook County Law Division Presiding Judge William Maddux blatantly violates constitutional rights of litigants and runs the Circuit Court of Cook County Law Division as a criminal enterprise to enrich the County of Cook Circuit Court Clerk’s Office and Sheriff’s Office. He requires indigent plaintiffs to pay-to-play in regards to enforcing their rights to redress of grievances by filing a suit. He illegally denies indigency petitions. He illegally orders his clerks to refuse to give the litigant a copy of the order granting or denying the indigency petition.

Chief Judge Timothy Evans, Sheriff Dart, and Cook County Circuit Court Clerk Dorothy Brown participate in and condone this scheme.  It appears that this scheme meets the definition of a criminal enterprise used in racketeering. This is a felony RICO violation.

Dr. Linda Shelton unlawfully arrested by A/C Nolan of the Cook County Sheriff’s Office when she tried to get Sheriff to enforce her right to sue as an indigent person. Sheriff Dart and Court Clerk Dorothy Brown aiding and abetting, or participating in this RICO crime. This is racketeering to enrich a criminal enterprise – the Circuit Court of Cook County and the Cook County Sheriff’s Office. This also illegally denies the right of citizens in Illinois to sue corrupt officials and police in C[r]ook County Illinois and Chicago.

For details see the following link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/15575803/Cook-County-Circuit-Court-a-Criminal-Enterprise-Judge-Maddux-2009

If you wish to help fight this corruption please donate to Dr Linda Shelton’s legal fund:

Make checks payable to J. Nicolas Albukerk & Associates

Write on them – “for Dr. Linda Shelton legal fund

C/O J. Nicolas Albukerk and Associates

Dr. Linda Shelton legal fund

3025 W. 26th Street, 2nd floor

Chicago, IL 60623

Judge Angela Munari Petrone

leave a comment »


I’ve only had one experience with this judge who says the following about herself:

”I’m detail oriented,” Petrone said, when asked about her strengths. ”I think I can listen well, take good notes, try to have a good temperament, yet keep control of the courtroom and stay abreast of the law.”

I strongly disagree with her statements. She is unfair and immoral in my book. She is high on her horse and needs to be brought down a few notches and given a piece of humble pie.

On October 10, 2007 I was unlawfully arrested by Sheriff staff including Sgt. Rachel E. Wright at the entrance to the Clerk’s office at 555 W Harrison courthouse, when I had gone there to simply pick up a paper from the Clerk for a pending case.

I successfully went through the magnetometer without it beeping or lighting up. The officer at the scanner looked in my bag and saw my hand-held nebulizer with battery pack and back-up cord, the liquid medication I carry for it, an EpiPen I inject myself with (auto-epinephrine injector for medical emergencies) and she took it out and eyeballed it. I had an order from another judge in another courthouse allowing me to bring in this critical medical equipment. I cannot use regular “nebs” because I have a chemical sensitivity to the gas propellant in them.

I noticed a plain clothed middle aged black gentlman of medium build looking at the monitor as I was passing through the security entrance. After the deputy put the electrical cord back into my emergency medical bag (which I have had to use several times in courthouses before an ambulance arrived) he yelled that a person can’t bring a cord into the courthouse. I thought he was a nut case and yelled that this was none of his business and that the cord was medical equipment and I had always been permitted to bring it into courthouses, and that this medical bag never leaves my side.

He confronted me at the Clerk’s door with a male deputy and then Sgt. Wright who had NOT seen me go through the security entrance successfully. I actually have obtained a video showing the magnetometer DID NOT light up and that the deputy handed my medical equipment back to me and didn’t stop me from leaving the security entrance and entering the courthouse.

Sgt. Wright arrested me for trespass to state-supported land which is a facially invalid complaint as they had no statement on the complaint about the REQUIRED second element of such a charge  – that the person was interrupting someone’s use of the building – and the video showed I wasn’t interrupting anyone, but simply was being harrassed and illegally arrested by Sgt. Wright – who had seen me MANY times bring the medical bag into the courthouse. During the arrest the plain-clothed man identified himself as the Asst. Chief Sheriff in charge of the courthouse – A/C Gary Allens.

Sgt. Wright committed perjury in another case saying that the magnetometer beeped and that I tried to sneak in a cord. My bail was revoked on the other case because of this testimony! I clearly tried to sneak in NOTHING – as the video shows the deputy handling the cord and giving it back to me. I also showed the judge in the other case the medical bag, back up electrical cord, equipment in it, and the order form another judge allowing me to bring in this equipment! Judge Joseph Kazmierski in a grotesque act of judicial misconduct refused to view the video – that I got from the Sheriff’s office by court order! He should be removed from the bench.

Judge Petrone a short time later set bail at an obscene $25,000, and ordered me held without bond until brought the next day before Judge Kazmierski on the additional charge resulting from this of violation of bail, without stating a reason for giving a handicapped 53 yr old woman with no criminal record except for a recent wrongful conviction for battery of an officer (I was convicted of kicking a larger male officer from my wheelchair with my partially paralyzed right leg like a ninja – a physical impossibility for me – see:

http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2008/10/my-remarks-to-corrupt-judge-prosecutor.html

) and refused to view the medical equipment, or order form another judge allowing it in the courthouse, or allow me to talk about it.

Judge Petrone was impatient, rude, arrogant, and simply rubber-stamps the prosecutor no matter how ridiculous the lies with total disregard of the defendant.

I will be filing a petition for adjudication of criminal contempt against Sgt. Wright and civil rights suits for false arrest and malicious prosecution.

As an indigent and handicapped person who is a whistle blower against corrupt judges and police, it is clear that Judge Petrone has no independent or impartial and fair bone in her body. She has ten years experience as a prosecutor and clearly intends to rubber-stamp their wishes without question.

She simply aided and abetted the illegal arrest and malicious prosecution in retaliation for my whistle blower activities against her buddies. She should be held accountable for this judicial misconduct – characterized by this excessive bail for a misdemeanor – for a person who had PERMISSION to bring the alleged “cord” into the building, was ill, has strong ties to the community, and assists in the care of an elderly parent, and has no convictions except for one bogus felony where I was convicted of the impossible – attacking a larger male from a wheelchair and causing “soreness” to the chest.

Judge Petrone owes me an apology and should throw the book at the State and Sgt. Wright for this prosecutorial and police criminal misconduct.

I find it obscene and highly inappropriate to put Judge Petrone in felony court and allow her to set bail and rubber-stamp more prosecutor’s cases with bias, arrogant, and misconduct.

%d bloggers like this: