PLEASE READ HOW CASES ARE FIXED UNDERMINING THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT RULES AND LAWS.
THIS MANDAMUS/SUPERVISORY ORDER IS 25 PAGES BUT THIS IS THE MEAT OF IT OTHER PARTS OF IT WILL BE POSTED AT A LATER DATE.
PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE NOT AFFORDED EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS IN ACCORDANCE TO THE CONSTITUTION PEOPLE LIKE LEE OTIS LOVE, JR. +RedBilla
HAVE TO PURCHASE JUSTICE BY WAY OF DEPLETING ALL OF HIS RESOURCES IN ORDER TO RETAIN SUFFICIENT COMPETENT COUNSEL TO REPRESENT HIS LEGAL ISSUES JUST TO HAVE MEANING VISITATIONS WITH HIS NATURAL BORN DAUGHTER.
BECAUSE SO MANY JUDGES ARE WEARING THE ROBE SIMPLY TO OPPRESS AND DESTROY INNOCENT PERSONS BECAUSE OF THEIR ETHNICITY OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION ARE APPOINTED TO THE POSITIONS TO EXERCISE TERRORIST MAYHEM ON THOSE TYPE OF PEOPLE TO KEEP THE POLITICIANS CONTROLLING THEM IN POWER.
IN MY CASE JUDGES WHO ARE PART OF THE POLITICAL MACHINE DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD NOT WHAT THE LAW SAYS EVEN THOUGH THEY SEE WRONG AND KNOWS THAT AN ATTORNEY OR JUDGE IS WRONG BUT BECAUSE #JIMCROW STILL RULES IN CHICAGO IN SPITE OF ITS LAWS BEING OUTLAWED BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION-----TAKE A LOOK AT HOW ATTORNEYS FROM MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR LAW FIRMS ARE PROFITING OFF OF ONE MAN'S INNOCENCE.
JUDGE VALDERRAMA HAS ALLOWED HIMSELF TO BE USED TRYING TO PROTECT CORRUPT ATTORNEYS AND BUILDING MANAGERS WHO HAVE BLATANTLY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ME AND MY FAMILY FROM MOVING INTO OPPORTUNITY AREA WITH MY SECTION 8 VOUCHER,
A- ONE OF THE GOVERNING CRITERIA' S FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR IS TO HAVE GREAT CREDIT SCORES AND NO CRIMINAL BACKGROUNDS;
B- BECAUSE THE AFOREMENTIONED WAS MET THE BUILDING MANAGERS SIMPLY DID NOT ALLOW ME TO MOVE IN ABOUT 7 UNITS BECAUSE MY SECTION 8 VOUCHER WAS NOT PAID FOR $1000-$1500 AND BECAUSE OF MY ETHNICITY RAHM EMANUEL AND OTHER CITY PERSONNEL WANT TO KEEP CHICAGO SEGREGATED BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
SO CORRUPT OR UNQUALIFIED JUDGES HAVE BEEN APPOINTED TO THE BENCHES TO KEEP CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO, STATE OF ILLINOIS OPPRESSED OR INCARCERATED.
PEOPLE WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT TRANSGENDER PERSONS NOT HAVING THEIR BATHROOMS AT TARGET OR EQUAL RIGHTS IN NORTH CAROLINA BUT NOT A SOUL IS DISCUSSING THE RACIAL INJUSTICES PERMEATED IN CHICAGO COURTS.
IF A JUDGE IS GAY BLACK OR WHITE OR LESBIAN AND IS A RACIST NOBODY WANT TO OPEN THEIR MOUTHS OUT OF FEAR IF THEY ARE LIVING IN THE CLOSET PEOPLE WILL LEARN OF THEIR SEXUAL IDENTITY ON WHATEVER IS TAKEN PLACE ON HETEROSEXUALS LIBERALS ETC.
FACT: REGARDLESS TO WHOEVER THE JUDGE IS THEY WILL NOT ACT AGAINST AN IRISHMAN OR PERSONS OF POLISH ETHNICITY EVERYBODY ELSE IS FAIR GAME!
PURSUANT TO THE KU KLUX KLAN ACT OF 1871 REPUBLICANS AND BLACKS DID NOT STAND A CHANCE UNDER THIS TYPE OF DEMOCRACY THAT IS WHY ULYSSESS S. GRANT SIGNED THE ACT BECAUSE DEMOCRATS CLOSED THEIR EYES TO THE VIOLENCE AND INJUSTICES PERPETRATED AT THOSE GROUPS ESPECIALLY THE VIOLENT ACTS ON PERSONS OF COLOR.
IT HAS BEEN ASSERTED BY MANY WHITES IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM ASIDE FROM THE IRISH AND POLISH JUDGES THE WORSE JUDGES FOR ANY INTELLIGENT MAN OF COLOR TO GO BEFORE IS A BLACK JUDGE THEY WILL DO WHATEVER THEY ARE TOLD TO BE ACCEPTED BY THEIR OPPRESSOR TO BE ACCEPTED BY THEM.
JUDGE VALDERRAMA HAS DEFINITELY PROVED THIS ASSERTION TO BE VERY TRUE!
________________________________________________________________________
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
________________________________________________________________________
) Appeal from the Circuit
) Court of Cook County
In Re
Racial Discrimination
) Chancery Division
/Source
Income Violations
) Case No. 2015 CH 01670
Housing
Matters:
)
Joe Louis
Lawrence
)
Petitioner
)
V )
Hon Mary Lane
Mikva, F. U. Valderrama )
420 East
Ohio, Chicago Housing Authority )
345 East
Ohio, City of Chicago, )
Commission
on Human Relations, )
K2
Apartments
)
Respondents )
________________________________________________________________________
MOTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUPERVISORY ORDER VACATING
ORDERS AND RECUSING JUDGE VALDERRAMA for “CAUSE” DUE TO BIAS AND OR PREJUDICE
CONDUCT PURSUANT TO S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2—1001 (a) (2,3) (WEST 2006) TO IMPOSE
SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO SUPREME CT. RULE 137 W/AFFIDAVIT
_______________________________________________________________________
Now comes Plaintiff-Appellant, Joe
Louis Lawrence, a United States Citizen respectfully moves this Honorable Court
to enter an Order for a Writ of Mandamus /Issuance of a Supervisory Order
Vacating Order and Recusing Judge Valderrama for “Cause” due to Bias and or
Prejudice Conduct Pursuant to S.H.A. 735
ILCS 5/2—1001 (a) (2,3) (West 2006)
due to another judge making deliberate Errors not wanting to Recuse said Judge
and Impose Sanctions Pursuant to Supreme
Court Rule 137 with affidavit in the
above entitled cause.
Reasons in
support of this motion are set forth in the attached affidavit.
Respectfully Submitted,
Joe Louis Lawrence
By:____________________________
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)
COUNTY OF COOK )
AFFIDAVIT
I Joe Louis Lawrence being first duly sworn on oath depose
and states as follows:
1.)
I am Joe Louis Lawrence, Counsel Pro Se, and
Heterosexual United States Citizen.
2.)
Plaintiff never received a Notice or Phone call from
anyone establishing the fact Hon. Mary L. Mikva was the judge to hear the
Disqualification for “Cause” on Judge Valderrama whereby, Sara Eber Fowler
appeared in court March 31st on the 10:30am call;
3.)
That Defendant Sara of 420 East Ohio testified in open
court never receiving any Notice that the case was before judge Mikva and
learned about it on the computer said computer will validate the veracity of no
Notices ever were forwarded to any
of the parties to inform them the case was assigned to the aforementioned
judge;
4.)
That Plaintiff filed a Motion for Disqualification of
judge for cause Due to Bias (Civil Rights Violations) and or Prejudice pursuant
to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2---1001 (a) (2,3)
and to Vacate Feb. 25th Orders where Civil Rights were Violated,
(Filed March 9, 2016) hereto attached, Group
Ex A
Pursuant to Vigus v. O’Obannon, 1886
8 N.E 788, 118 ILL 334. Hazelton V. Carolus, 1907 132 ILL. App. 512.
A- Plaintiff
submitted an Example of “Fraud”
perpetrated by an Attorney Erna Dzafic in the Probate Division asserting
she mailed Notice to said attorney Steven M. Cloh Feb. 19, 2016;
B- That
said attorney not only was not at the address at the time of the filing but was
suspended from practicing law;
C- That
judge Aicha Mc Carthy due to Reliance being Induced due to “Fraud” granted an
Order Appointing Plaintiff’s Brother’s ex-wife over his Estate.
D- That
the Feb. 25th Transcript was attached detailing Judge Valderrama’s Prejudice & Bias Conduct at the
Plaintiff.
E- That
Ex 1 of the aforementioned Affidavit
emails and hand written notes establishing the fact if Plaintiff was making
over $100,000.00 he could live in their complex with his section 8 voucher at
345 East Ohio, due to his skin color;
F- That
a Notice of Official Complaint re Racial Discrimination in CHA Voucher
Program Violation of Hearing Officers Directive & Mobility Voucher Fraud
(August 3, 2014) forwarded to CHA and the Chairman went ignored;
G- That
Mayor Rahm Emanuel blasted the CHA voucher program as policy ‘gone awry’ Sun
Times article March 15, 2016, The Reporters have validated the veracity of
Plaintiff’s allegations ;
H- That
CHA is still today violating a federal Court Order of the aforementioned Gr Ex D, Feb 10, 1969, Fed Judg.
Richard B. Austin issued a Ruling…….
“Existing patterns of racial segregation must be reversed if there is to be a
chance of averting the desperately intensifying division of whites and Negroes
in Chicago”
5.) That
Plaintiff filed a Motion to Supplement Motion for Disqualification of judge for
cause Due to Bias (Civil Rights Violations) and or Prejudice pursuant to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2—1001 (a) (2,3) and
or Vacate Nov.2nd & Nov 13th Orders Due to “Fraud”
“Organized Conspiracy” (March 2, 2016) hereto attached as Gr Ex. B;
A- Hereto
attached Ex C Court Order Denying
Substitution of Judge for “Cause” against the Manifest Weight of the
Evidence;
6.)
That Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration
Vacate (April 1st) Order due to Error Petition for Rule to Show
Cause Failure to Comply w/Subpoena Impose Sanctions, hereto attached Gr Ex E;
A-
That attached with the Motion March 10, 2016 Court
Transcript validating Bias Prejudice
Conduct along with “Fraudulent”
other unlawful acts;
B-
That Judge Valderrama used his robe and authority
assisting Leo High School administrators keeping minor son oppressed as they
colluded retaliating upon said son in an attempt to slow him down or intimidate
him from continuously prosecuting his case before the courts as the judge
unlawfully quashed said subpoena;
C-
Plaintiff has opined that judge Valderrama may have had
something to do with his brothers murder; in that, after charges were filed
against him with (the Judicial Inquiry Board September 2, 2015, Kathy D. Twine Executive Director
& Gen. Counsel acknowledged receipt Sept. 16, 2015) the judge for
making threatening remarks to him August 31, 2015, said brother who worked for
the City of Chicago who never bothered anyone was Murdered the weekend of
September 12th 2015 in a Terrorist Fashion shot him several times
and tried to burn up his body and blew up the home, so that he would not be
recognized, no medical examiner wanted any part of the matter so another
medical examiner had to be flown to Chicago to identify him from dental
records, there was clear footage on who entered the rear home and exited the
home when the fire started but the police have no suspects!
D-
That attached with the Motion March 17th ,
2016 Court Transcript validating Bias
Prejudice Conduct along with ”Fraudulent” other unlawful acts;
E-
That attached with the Motion a Motion Objecting
Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment and
Cross-Motion to Quash Service of Process Pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2 -301 (a) Due to Fraud Judicial Bias and or Prejudice
Pursuant to Canon 3 (c) (1) and a Plethora of other Civil
Rights Violations w/Affidavit (filed March 11, 2016);
F-
That the Judge signed Court Orders ignoring areas of Perjury
“Fraud” and a plethora of Judicial Canon violations pursuant to Sup Ct, Rule 71, (Jan.7, 2016, Feb.
5, 2016, Jan. 28, 2016;
G-
Motion for Reconsideration Vacate (March 10) Order
due to Civil Rights Violations, Terrorists Acts, Bias, Prejudice Conduct pursuant
to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2 –1001 (a) (2,3)
Corroboration of Fraud, Perjury, Conspiracy Remand/Body Attachment Instanter
Impose Sanctions w/Affidavit;
H-
That attached with the Motion Court Order Quashing
Subpoena thereby validating the veracity of said judge engaging in Bias and Prejudice Conduct;
I-
That attached with the Motion the Re Notice (filed
March 11, 2016), Motion Moving for the Disqualification of judge for Cause
et al.
J-
That attached with the Motion was the April 1st 2016, Court Transcript;
7.)
That the Hon Judge Mikva deliberately denied the
aforementioned Motion by acting outside of her judicial discretion, judicial
immunity provisions within the oath of her duties and obligation admitted on
the record not reading transcripts so as to demonstrate to any reviewing body
the need to investigate said issues warranted in Plaintiff’s documents before
the court, hereto attached, Ex F
April 22, 2016 Court Order;
A-
That the Hon Judge asked the Defendant’s twice if they
had rebuttals or comments to Plaintiff’s testimony they all said No!
B-
That the Hon Judge never received Objections,
counter-affidavits or responses denying the pleadings set forth in Plaintiff’s
Motions became noticeably disgusted and agitated that Plaintiff knew the Rules
and Procedures of Law better than the Defendant attorneys said, Lines 16-19, Page 12 of the April 1st Transcript, “Right now you are just a witness so give me
the facts. I don’t need the law. You will have a chance to argue the law later.
Give me the facts. Are there any more facts”?
C-
That the Hon Judge stated, Lines 8-18 Page 16, “I have read your motion. I have read your
supplement to your motion. I have heard from you today. What you’re really
complaining about, unhappy about, asserting is this disagreement, which you are
entitled to disagree with Judge Valderrama on some of his legal rules. That is
in no way basis for a SOJ for cause. That is a basis for an Appeal. You can
appeal those. SOJ for cause is a very narrow, very limited right and it
requires you show actual prejudice”
D-
Pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-612 Counsel never
Objected to the sufficiency of Petitioners pleadings, Objections to sufficiency
of pleadings either in form or substance must be made In trial court, and if
not so made, they will be considered waived and cannot be raised for the first
time on appeal. People ex rel. Deynes v. Harris, App. 1948, 77 N.E. 2d
439, 333 Ill. App. 280.
E-
Counsel for defendants
waived any defects against Petitioner in any pleadings by failing to object,
any defects in pleadings, either of form or substance, not objected to in trial
are waived on appeal. Geleto v. Giglietti, 1976, 40 Ill.App 3d 226, 352 N.E.
2d 1; In re Leyden Fire Protection Dist., 1972, 4 Ill. App. 3d 273, 280 N.E. 2d
744; Lyon v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 1942, 315 Ill. App. 451, 43 N.E. 2d
187.
F-
Properly alleged
facts within an affidavit that are not contradicted by counter affidavit are
taken as true, despite the existence of contrary averments in the adverse party’s pleadings. Professional
Group Travel, Ltd. v. Professional Seminar Consultants Inc., 136 ILL App 3d
1084, 483 N.E. 2d 1291; Buzzard v. Bolger, 117 ILL App 3d 887, 453 N.E. 2d 1129
et al.
G-
That Plaintiff tendered to the Judge Pursuant to her
Court Directive a Witness List followed by a Subpoena, that went ignored,
hereto attached, Gr Ex G;
8.)
That Plaintiff filed a Motion for Disqualification
of judge Due to Bias (Civil Rights Violations) and or Prejudice pursuant to
Canon 3 (C) (1) and to Vacate
Orders where Civil Rights were Violated (Filed April 2, 2015), hereto
attached, Gr Ex H;
A-
That the Clerk of the Circuit Court Certified the
Computer printout establishing the fact CHA, 420 East Ohio, 345 East Ohio Village Green, Chicago Housing Authority and City of
Chicago were served Summons and
Complaint and 420 is the only person to file an Appearance;
B-
That the Cook County Sheriff effected service on K2
Management via Christopher R.
Johnson attorney Cary G. Schiff & Associates March 12, 2015;
C-
That Judge Valderrama committed Prejudice and Bias Conduct by Violating Supreme Ct Rule 71, stated, Lines 14-18, Page 13 of the Feb. 27, 2015 court Transcript, hereto attached, Gr Ex I “So the
order for today will be that your petition for Rule to Show cause, and I’m only
referring again to the one entity that did file their appearance because I
don’t have any jurisdiction to talk about anybody else, is denied without
prejudice”
9.) That
Plaintiff on April 9, 2015, Plaintiff appeared before Judge Neil Cohen who
demonstrated a great deal of integrity apologized for the plethora of injustice
lodged at the Plaintiff in the courts.
A-
CHA attorney T.B.King had a court transcript of Feb 25th
tried to introduce it in the hearing without Plaintiff’s knowledge, said judge asked if Plaintiff was
aware of the transcript, his response was no, the judge had his clerk to make
copies for everyone in the hearing;
B-
The judge was very professional had law books and rules
in front of him as he looked up 735 ILCS
5/3-101 where Service can be made on an entity with Certified Mail not the
Cook County Sheriff in an Administrative matter said he just learned something,
he said “it looks like you got one up on
them asked the attorneys you all see this rule it is clear,” they all
agreed with the judge and Plaintiffs argument;
C-
The judge Denied Plaintiff’s Motion, he applauded
Plaintiff’s Motion and argument but as a person demonstrating discretion and
integrity from the bench, give the judge a chance benefit of the doubt now that
the attorneys see and understand they were in fact served properly;
D-
Plaintiff filed a Notice
of Appeal April 30, 2015;
E-
That on June 29th 2015, the Appellate Court
ignored every Affidavit Plaintiff presented before the Court and Dismissed the
Appeal for reasons not known;
10.)In that pursuant to Vigus v. O’Bannon 1886 8 N.E 788, 118 ILL 334. Hazelton V.
Carolus, 1907 132 ILL. App. 512, hereto attached, Gr Ex J an Attorney Joseph P. Harris who have been practicing law
for probably more than 50 years complained and filed the appropriate Motion to
Chancery Court judge Michael Otto of “Fraud” being perpetrated on a
Doctor who’s wife is an International Bishop Church in the Englewood Community
of Chicago struck the very defenses from his motion as the Circuit Court judge
signed a blank court order for the attorneys;
A-
That the attorney filed Motions before the 2nd
Division April 13, 2015, they expeditiously denied said Motion in an obvious
attempt to cover up judges acting outside of their discretion and immunity
provisions as attorneys are participating in schemes stealing homes in the
guise of “Foreclosure”;
B-
That the attorney is recovering from some health issues
and made a mistake not having the exhibits attached to his motions, but cured
the defect by filing the Motion timely April 15, 2016;
C-
That the Supreme Court allows 14 days to object to a
Supervisory Order Issuance but judges seems to be a law unto themselves rules
in any way they see fit unlawfully;
D-
That the judges found his exhibits moot (April 18) when
the Motion was in fact filed timely curing said defects April 15, Amending the
Motion.
E-
That said judges ignored the fact a court order was in
fact tendered absent a judges signature violating Supreme Court Rule 272 which was Ex A;
That because of the above; Fraud admissibility great latitude is permitted in proving fraud C.J.S. Fraud
104 ET Seg. Fraud 51-57. where a question of fraud and deceit is the issue
involved in a case, great latitude is
ordinarily permitted in the introduction of evidence, and courts allow the
greatest liberality in the method of examination and in the scope of inquiry Vigus
V. O’Bannon, 1886 8 N.E 788, 118 ILL 334. Hazelton V. Carolus, 1907 132 ILL.
App. 512.
INDUCING RELIANCE
To prevail in a cause of action for
fraud, plaintiff must prove that defendant made statement of material nature
which was relied on by victim and was made for purposes of inducing reliance,
and that victim’s reliance led to his injury. Parsons V. Winter, 1986, 1 Dist., 491 N.E.
2d 1236, 96 ILL
In Carter V. Mueller 457
N.E. 2d 1335 ILL. App. 1 Dist. 1983 The Supreme
Court has held that: “The elements of a cause of action for fraudulent
misrepresentation (sometimes referred to as “fraud and deceit” or deceit) are:
(1) False statement of material fact; (2) known or believed to be false by the
party making it; (3) intent to induce the other party to act; (4) action by the
other party in reliance on the truth of the statement; and (5) damage to the
other party resulting from such reliance.
11.) That many Judges are collectively
acting outside of their discretion and is undermining the very laws installed
to make the jurisprudence of the courts operate with integrity and unbiased,
who are being controlled by the very Political Terrorists who have undermined
the academic aspect of the Illinois Supreme Court laws, Rules and United States
Constitution; in that Judge Mikva has in 2010 demonstrated a level of
remarkable integrity unlike many judges Plaintiff had been before stated,” he had a gift in the application of the
laws, he was able to tell a story using the laws” and made it clear to
Diane Moshcman an Assistant Attorney General at the time as she came into the
court requesting the judge accept her oral Motion Dismissing Plaintiff’s
Complaint, judge Mikva Denied her request, that attorney got off the case never
to return;
12.)They sent a Negroe Assistant
Attorney General (Tyler Roland) who requested the Court to Dismiss his
Complaint because he had not properly plead, Judge Mikva was not tolerating
foolishness made it clear to him that the complaint was in fact properly plead
she understood everything the Plaintiff said just because you went to law
school and was taught to plead a certain type of way does not mean how another
person pleads is less plead or not properly plead.
A-
That because certain judges are entering
orders outside of their discretion and judicial immunity provisions of the laws
where “Fraud” is apparent, the law is clear ILL. App. (1st Dist. 2000). A “VOID JUDGEMENT
OR ORDER” is one that is entered by a court lacking jurisdiction over the
parties or the subject matter, or lacking the inherent power to enter the
particular order of judgment, or where the order was procured by FRAUD- in re
Adoption of E.L., 248 ILL. Dec. 171, 733 N.E. 2d 846, 315 ILL. App. 3d 137-
Judgm 7, 16, 375.
U. S Sup Court Digest 24(1) General Conspiracy
U.S. 2003. Essence of a conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful
act.—U.S. v. Jimenez Recio, 123 SCt. 819, 537 U.S. 270, 154 L.Ed.2d 744, on
remand 371F.3d 1093
Agreement to commit an
unlawful act, which constitutes the essence of a conspiracy, is a distinct evil
that exist and be punished whether or not the substantive crime ensues.-Id.
Conspiracy poses a threat
to the public over and above the threat of the commission of the relevant
substantive crime, both because the combination in crime makes more likely the
commission of other crimes and because it decreases the part from their path of
criminality.-Id.
B-
U.S 2003.
Essence of a conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act.-U.S. v.
Jimenez Recio; 123 SCt. 819, 537 U.S. 270, 154, L. Ed.2d 744, on remand 371
F.3d 1093;
Agreement to commit an unlawful act, which
constitutes the essence of a conspiracy, is a distinct evil that exist and be
punished whether or not the substantive crime ensues,-id.
Conspiracy poses a threat to the public over
and above the threat of the commission of the relevant substantive crime, both
because the combination in crime makes more likely the commission of other
crimes and because it decreases the part from their path of criminality-id;
C-
Conspirators to be guilty of offense need not have entered into
conspiracy at same time or have taken part in all its actions. People V. Hardison,
1985, 911 Dec. 162, 108. Requisite mens rea elements of conspiracy are satisfied upon showings of
agreement of offense with intent that offense be committed; Actus reas element
is satisfied of act in furtherance of agreement People V. Mordick, 1981,
50 ILL, Dec. 63.
D-
Section
1983 of U.S.C.S. contemplates the depravation of Civil Rights through the
Unconstitutional Application of a Law by conspiracy or otherwise. Mansell v.
Saunders (CA 5 F 1A) 372 F 573, especially if the conspiracy was actually
carried into effect, where an action is for a conspiracy to interfere with
Civil Rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1985 (3), or for the depravation of such rights
under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect and
plaintiff was thereby deprived of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured
by the United States Constitution and Laws, the gist of the action maybe
treated as one for the depravation of rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, Lewis
v. Brautigam (CA 5 F 1a) 227 F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505, John W.
Strong, 185, 777-78 (4 th ed. 1992).
Finally, this document is best closed by a jurist who has stated”;
Citing Canon 2A the court noted, “[a] court’s indifference to clearly stated
rules breeds disrespect for and discontent with our justice system. Government
cannot demand respect of the laws by its citizens when its tribunals ignore
those very same laws”)
Most recently stated in Federal Court FEDERAL JUDGE GETTLEMAN:
stated, Tuesday March 10, 2009, where he found Superintendent of police Jody
Weiss in Contempt of Court and Ordered the City to Pay $100,000.00, “No
one is above the Law”, he cited a 1928 decision by Supreme Court
Justice Louis Brandeis, that said, “If the Government becomes the law
breaker, it breeds Contempt for the Law, It invites everyman to become a law
unto himself. It invites Anarchy.”
The
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Wednesday April 26, 2006, Page 1, Illinois
Political Machines help breed corruption, Associated Press writer Deanna
Bellandi states, “Illinois is apparently a Petri dish for corruption. It
is a real breeding ground”.
That Chicago
is the most Corrupt City in America, Huffington Post, Internet
Newspaper, February 23, 2012; University of Illinois Professor Dick Simpson, “The
two worst crime zones in Illinois are the governor’s mansion…..and the City
Council Chambers in Chicago.” Simpson a former Chicago Alderman told the AP “no
other State can match us.”
FURTHER AFFIANTH SAYETH NOT
Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to 735 1265 5/1
-109, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this
instrument are true and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on
information and belief and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as
aforesaid that he verily believe the same to be true.
Respectfully submitted,
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
Joe Louis Lawrence
Pro Se
(312) 927-4210
No comments:
Post a Comment