RACISM AND RACIAL HATRED WAS INSTITUTED BY THE DEMOCRATS LONG BEFORE PRESIDENT ELECT TRUMP WAS ELECTED
TAKE A LOOK AT HOW THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BRAZENLY "RIGGED" THE ILLINOIS LEGAL SYSTEM MAKING SURE REPUBLICANS, PEOPLE OF COLOR, FOREIGNERS NOT RECEIVE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS:
THE SAD REALITY NOT SINCE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN HAD THEIR BEEN AN ADMINISTRATION GOING AFTER CORRUPT JUDGES IN CHICAGO IT WAS CALLED "GREYLORD"
DEMOCRATS BELIEVE IN MASS INCARCERATION, SEPARATION OF FAMILIES USING THE CHILD SUPPORT SYSTEM TO DESTROY MEN OF COLOR, TAKE A LOOK AT HOW JUDGES TAKE PART IN STEALING INNOCENT RETIRED CIVIL SERVANTS HOMES, SO IF YOU ARE A RETIRED MEMBER OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OR BOARD OF EDUCATION THIS IS A MUST READ FOR YOU.
SO BEFORE MANY JUMP ON THE BANDWAGON AND COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW RACIST DONALD TRUMP IS TAKE A LOOK AT THE PATHETIC RACIST ACTS PERPETRATED UNDER A DEMOCRATIC REGIME WHERE NOBODY IS COMPLAINING OR PROTESTING.
MANY BLACK DEMOCRATS AND SOME BROWN PEOPLE HAVE ASSIMILATED INTO THE VERY PERSONALITIES LIKE THEIR RACIST IRISH DEMOCRATS WHO HARBOR A SERIOUS HATE FOR MEN OF COLOR ESPECIALLY THE INTELLIGENT HETEROSEXUAL MEN.
MY GREAT GRANDFATHER WAS NATIVE AMERICAN CHEROKEE A GREAT HUNTER ON MY MOM'S SIDE OF THE FAMILY NO SLAVE OR INFERIOR TO ANY MAN SO IT IS DIFFICULT COMPREHENDING HOW SO MANY MEN OF COLOR IN RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY ACCEPTING ROLES AS SUBMISSIVE OR INFERIOR MEN.
NO PARTY REPUBLICAN DEMOCRATIC OR OTHERWISE CAN RESPECT ANY ETHNIC GROUP REGARDLESS OF THEIR ETHNICITY IF THE INDIVIDUALS DON'T RESPECT THEMSELVES MAKE NO DIFFERENCE WHAT TITLES OR POSITIONS THEY MAY HOLD IN OR OUTSIDE THE PUBLIC.
EVERYBODY IS NOT LIVING IN THE CLOSET AND IS NOT HIDING OR AVOIDING THE ISSUES:
THIS POST IS DEDICATED TO EVERY MAN OR WOMAN TIRED OF BEING TIRED OF THE THE SAME OLD OKE DOKE AND MY TWITTER FRIENDS WHO HAVE BEEN TREMENDOUS IN THE RETWEETS.
WHEN WILL JUSTICE AND FREEDOM COME TO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS?
IN THE
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
U.S. BANK N.A. AS TRUSTEE FOR SECURITIZED
TRUST MASTR ASSET BACKED SECURITIES TRUST 2006-NC3; UBS REAL ESTATE
SECURITIES INC.; MORTGAGE ASSET SECURITIZATION TRANSACTIONS, INC.; WELLS
FARGO BANK, N.A.; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM; AKA “MERS” DUTTON
& DUTTON, PC, POSTESTIVO & ASSOC.,
Plaintiffs,
MONZELLA JOHNSON
Defendant. |
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) ) ) ) ) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
______________________
Hon. Samuel
Der-Yeghiayan
Magistrate M.
David
Weisman
Civil Action No.
16-cv- 08628
|
MOTION DISQUALIFICATION
OF JUDGE--PERSONAL BIAS OR PREJUDICE {28 USCA 144, 455 (B) (1)} VACATE ORDERS
OF November 9 2016 & November 2, Pursuant to Rule 60 DUE TO FRAUD/ERROR and CORRUPTION
To the Honorable Justices
of the Seventh Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals:
Complainant
a United States Citizen, Monzella Y. Johnson, hereby respectfully represents as
Pro Se shows this court with corroboration/admissions and affidavit the noted
reasons why this matter should be within this Court’s Jurisdiction; {Pursuant to Fed Rules of Civil Procedure
and LR40.1 (b) (d) (e3) most importantly Rule 60 (b) (3) (4) } with
Affidavit.
Now
comes Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se Appellant in this cause files herewith her affidavit as required by Title 28, United States Code, Section 144,
to show that the Honorable Samuel Der-Yeghiayan, has a personal bias with
compelling evidence and blatant prejudice against her because she is a woman and
skin color being non-white and where legally sufficient motions with
affidavits, stating a cause how and why this court has jurisdiction; motions
corroborating judicial corruption “fraud” “perjury” and a plethora of
“Terrorist Civil Rights Acts” put before the courts that the District Court
ignored and holding Racism Corruption in the courts.
That
said judge is demonstrating unequivocally this is how traditional Democrats of
the Political Machine in his era and beyond feels towards persons of color and
the necessary steps he and his brethren are willing to enforce keeping persons
of color like the Defendant oppressed and treated as a non- United States
Citizen; and is attempting to cover up the systemic legal applications of
racism and corruption that Appellant has diligently put before the courts,
where judges and lawyers have participated in said conspiracies and have
admitted it pursuant to all laws recorded.
Based thereon, Defendant-Appellant respectfully moves that the Honorable
Samuel Der-Yeghiayan proceed no further herein and that this Honorable Seventh
Circuit invoke jurisdiction; due to members of the Democratic Political Machine
seizing control over all courts and certain judges politically appointed
because of their racist hatred towards ethnic groups they deem inferior to them
so as to not enforce the laws in their favor pursuant to the United States
Constitution.
Additionally, Defendant-Appellant is before this Honorable Court who is
not Bias and understands how to enforce the laws in accordance to the United
States Constitution and according to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to hear
this proceeding who is not intimidated or fear reprisals from these
individuals.
Now
comes Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se Appellant in this cause files herewith her affidavit
as required by Title 28, attesting
the veracity and accuracy of all statements recorded within.
IN THE
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I
Monzella Y. Johnson, certify that I have
on this day filed said Notice of Motion for Disqualification of judge et al. Before
the Seventh Circuit United States Court of Appeals and noted parties.
To:
Dir. James Comey, FBI Washington D.C.
FBI Michael J. Anderson 2111 West
Roosevelt Road, Chicago, Ill. 60612
US Attorney, Zachary T. Fardon 219 S. Dearborn, Suite 500
Locke & Lord
Attn: Simon M. Feng Potestivo & Assoc.
111 South Wacker Drive 223 West
Jackson, Blvd. Suite 610
Chicago, Il 60606 Chicago, Ill. 60606
Circuit Court of Cook
County, Dorothy Brown
50 West Washington
Chicago, Il 60601
PLEASE BE ADVISED that on November 14, 2016, A Motion to Disqualify et al has been filed before the
United States Court of Appeals.
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217
S. Ingleside Ave.
Chicago, IL. 60615
IN THE
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
In support of Motion
To Disqualify Samuel
Der-Yeghiayan, Judge of the Northern District of Illinois for Personal Bias or
Prejudice “FRAUD” pursuant to 28 USCA 144, 455 (b) (1)
{Pursuant to the Rules of Federal
Civil Procedure 60 (b) (3) (4) & U.S. Constitution}
Section 1983 of U.S.C.S., S.H.A. Criminal Ch.
38, 33-3, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Canon 3D (1) Reporting Judicial Misconduct,
3D (2) Reporting Lawyer Misconduct;
1.)
That on September 2, 2016, Defendant filed her Petition for Removal
stating all claims why the Federal Court had jurisdiction on said matter and it
was assigned to Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan;
2.)
That said Judge stated, “Johnson has not shown that this case is overly complex or difficult
et al.” in denying the Defendant legal representation, that would later
prove was a deliberate attempt to have an International Law firm attempt to
bully them in an attempt to keep others of learning of the racist corrupt
practices exercised stealing their home the court did not want an attorney
exposing this fact;
3.)
That said errors culminated into a pattern of
consistent Bias Criminal Acts when the proper Motion for Reconsideration et al.
was filed November 4, 2016 demonstrating a pattern of systemic “Fraudulent
Criminal Acts”, hereto attached as Gr
Ex 1;
A-
That Page 3, Par. 1-3 et al. That Exhibit A of Plaintiff’s motion was presented in a Fraudulent
manner so as to Induce Reliance upon this Honorable Court, the court ignored
the facts and affidavits of the Defendant treated the merits of their documents
frivolously, condoning corruption and Terrorist Acts as a judge surpassing
human imagination;
B-
That Page
4, Par. 5, clearly unequivocally
demonstrating a violation of 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 may be
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).
C-
That the aforementioned affidavit demonstrate the
judges untouchable involvement in said conspiracy using his robe and authority
acting outside of his judicial discretion upholding criminal acts of the
Plaintiffs;
Section 1983 of USCS contemplates the
depravation of Civil Rights through the unconstitutional application of a law
by conspiracy or otherwise. Mansell V. Saunders (CA 5 FLa) 372 F 2d 573,
especially if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect and plaintiff was
thereby deprived of any rights privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution and laws, the gist of the action may be treated as one for the
depravation of rights under 42 USCS 1983 Lewis V. Brautigam (CA 5 Fla) 227 F 2d
124, 55 Alr 2d 505
4.) That Page 4, Par. 5 (A) further validate the
verity within the “Preponderance of
the Evidence” that said judge and attorneys were acting in concert in
said “Organize Conspiracy”;
A-
The court ignored the valid certified court order
demonstrating Cook County Circuit Court judge vacated the Foreclosure judgment
June 2, 2010;
5.)
That Gr Ex 2, captioned “The Trustee’s
Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration was defective
and improper; thereby, validating all assertions properly presented in Gr Ex 1;
A-
Plaintiff failed to
submit a counter-affidavit impeaching any of the facts recorded in Gr Ex 1 with an Affidavit;
B-
Plaintiff failed to Object
or Strike any of the portions of Defendant’s Motion, further demonstrating the violation
of Sup Ct. Rule 71, Sufficient for
removal conduct which does not constitute a criminal offense may be
sufficiently violative of the judicial canons to warrant removal for cause. Napolitano v. Ward, 457 F 2d 279 (7th
Cir.) cert denied, 409 U.S. 1037, 93 S. Ct. 512, 34 L. Ed 2d 486 (1972).
6.) That Plaintiff in their quest violating
Defendant’s Civil Rights misapplied the laws in Gr Ex 2, Page 2, Par 1
states, “there is no basis for this court
to reconsider its remand order in any event. Reconsideration is limited to
where the court has patently misunderstood a party, has made a decision outside
the adversarial issues, has made an error not of reasoning but of apprehension
et al.” Bank of Waunakee v. Rochester Cheese Sales, Inc., 906 F 2d 1185, 1191
(7th Cir 1990);
A- Plaintiff states, “Here, none of these grounds
apply. Further, the motion for reconsideration contains no new facts that would
support that Johnson’s petition for removal was timely filed”;
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 S. Ct. 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.
CONSPIRACY
Fraud maybe inferred from nature of acts complained of,
individual and collective interest of alleged conspirators, situation,
intimacy, and relation of parties at time of commission of acts, and generally
all circumstances preceding and attending culmination of claimed conspiracy Illinois Rockford
Corp. V. Kulp, 1968, 242 N.E. 2d 228, 41 ILL. 2d 215.
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
Vaughn 462 S. E. 2d 728
(Ga.1995), The Supreme Court of
Georgia removed a Judge from office for disregarding defendant’s Constitutional
rights; Hammel, 668 N. E. 2d 390 (N.Y. 1996) (Judge removed for
improperly jailing defendants for their alleged failure to pay fines and make
restitution which the judge had imposed, disregarding the defendants basic
constitutional rights;
7.) That the court
ignored the Defendant’s Motions accompanied with affidavits and clear
attachments described as exhibits demonstrating a plethora of Criminal Civil
Rights violations with “Fraudulent Acts surpassing human imagination signed and
entered an order stating, “This court granted Plaintiff’s motion to remand “
A-
It further
stated, “Having remanded the instant
action to state court with a certified copy of the order, this court lacks
jurisdiction over the instant matter”
B- That because of the
judges intimate ability in colluding with said attorneys clearly and
convincingly violated all Canon Ethics and his jurisdiction by expeditiously
having a certified order to be mailed remanding said matter back to state court
claiming he had no jurisdiction;
C- The aforementioned
translation to the Nov 2, 2016, court order this is normal business stealing
homes, incarcerating innocent men of color, misapplying the laws where
necessary making sure African Americans or any other persons of color ever
receive Equal Protection of the Laws making it clear Racism and Racial Hatred
is real in Chicago, Illinois and in the Federal Courts;
D- In that the Federal
Court had jurisdiction in spite of the judges actions in that, Gr Ex 1, Page 5 Par 6 in that one can infer how the FBI ascertained
indictments is of unmerited concern because a Democrat is President and said
judges is running a gamut of criminal acts which is a clear violation of Rule 60 Fed Rules of Civil Procedure (b) (2) (3) (4) making said
order void in its entirety;
8.) That said judge’s ruling is deliberately translated
to inform the Defendant’s that because of their skin color and the fact they
are elderly retired Civil Servants (senior citizens), their lives mean nothing
to him or his court, he is a law unto himself and because of his Federal
appointment, he is deemed untouchable;
A-
That Gr Ex 3, Page 4, Par 1 A, Sup Ct. Rule 272 states, “If at the time of announcing final judgment
the judge requires the submission of a form of written judgment to be signed by
the judge et al. the judgment becomes final only when the signed judgment is
filed”
B- That because the
Defendants are women and of color standing up to men in said “Organized Conspiracy” many are
Democrats and renegade Republicans feeding off the mayhem ignored by many in
proper authority, this court is reaffirming its position upholding Jim Crow
Laws and racial oppression by denying Equal Protection of the Laws in favor of
the Defendants in accordance to the United States Constitution;
C- Furthermore, the
fact Defendant asserted properly Page 6,
Par. 10 B, C demonstrating how said “Organized
Conspiracy” was able to unlawfully access the Clerk of the Circuit Court’ s
stationery unlawfully and mail out placing their property in a publication
without judicial or any type of legal authority that said property was in fact
in FORECLOSURE which was a LIE;
D- That Page 5, of Par 8 of Gr Ex 3,
demonstrates the magnitude Democratic judges are willing to exhaust not fearing
any reprisals from any Democratic Prosecutors as white men in said “Organized Conspiracy” demonstrating
their true Racial Hatred at persons of color misapplying the laws, ignoring the
laws as in this case covering up all criminal acts by the members of the
Democratic Machine ;
E- That Gr Ex 4, Page 2, Par. 1, the
message is clear, “That it is understood the normal protocol is that Defendants
be issued summons but due to the active actions of Plaintiffs engaging in a
plethora of alleged irregularities, for example, U. S. Bank and Wells Fargo
allegedly not having Registered Agents filed with the Secretary of State of
Illinois;
F- That the Judge
having jurisdiction never questioned or addressed this fact closed his eyes to
this matter and exhausted a lot of frivolous
time ignoring the Defendants valid legally certified documents of merit put
before the court;
Civil
Rights Act of 1866- first section, enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That
all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power,
excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United
States; and such citizens of every race and color, without regard to any
previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment
for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same
right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce
contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease,
sell, hold and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit
of the laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is
enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and
penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinances, regulation, or
custom, to the contrary notwithstanding, Act of April 9, 1866, Ch. 31, 1, 14
Stat. 27, 42 U.S.C.A. 1981 (a).
In the
20th century, the Supreme Court began to overturn Jim Crow laws on
constitutional grounds. In Buchanan v. Warley 245 US 60 (1917), the
court held that a Kentucky law could not require residential segregation. The Supreme Court
in 1946, in Irene Morgan v. Virginia ruled segregation in
interstate transportation to be unconstitutional, in an application of the commerce
clause of the Constitution. It was not until 1954 in Brown v. Board of
Education of Topeka 347 US 483 that the court held that separate facilities
were inherently unequal in the area of public schools, effectively overturning Plessy
v. Ferguson, and outlawing Jim Crow in other areas of society as well. This
landmark case consisted of complaints filed in the states of Delaware (Gebhart
v. Belton); South Carolina (Briggs
v. Elliott); Virginia (Davis v. County
School Board of Prince Edward County); and Washington,
D.C. (Spottswode Bolling v. C. Melvin Sharpe).
These decisions, along with other cases such as McLaurin v. Oklahoma State
Board of Regents 339 US 637 (1950), NAACP
v. Alabama 357 US 449 (1958), and Boynton v. Virginia 364 US 454 (1960),
slowly dismantled the state-sponsored segregation imposed by Jim Crow laws.
As the color
line itself solidified at the turn of the nineteenth century, Jim Crow imposed
on black people clear tactical disadvantages: restricted economic
possibilities, narrow educational opportunities, inadequate housing options,
high rates of death and disablement, persistent unemployment, and unrelenting
poverty. Inasmuch as Jim Crow represented the race problem described by Gunnar
Myrdal (1898–1987) in
his 1944 treatise The American Dilemma, it was Jim Crow that
created the race quandary; whites constructed the obstacles African Americans
confronted, while also blaming them for their conditions, denying them access
to the resources of problem solving, and daring them—under threat of violence—to complain, protest, or advance.
Finally,
protests or challenges to Jim Crow often proved futile, given law enforcement’s complicity in the structure. From
emancipation to the turn of the century, the Ku Klux Klan operated as a
paramilitary arm of the Democratic Party in the South. The Klan, nightriders,
red shirts, and other white terrorists intimidated African Americans with
personal attacks, school burnings, and lynchings. African Americans rarely
served as policemen, sheriffs, or deputies before the late 1940s. During the
1950s and 1960s, the connections between municipal and state governments, law
enforcement, and racial violence were well known by officials and citizens
alike. White officers were known to harass black people, disrupt black
neighborhoods, and assault black women. Arrested for inflated charges, denied
satisfactory counsel, and serving harsh sentences, African Americans were
further disadvantaged in the courtroom. Rarely did they receive good counsel,
nor could they serve on juries. When black lawyers could appear in the
courtroom to argue cases, white judges and juries rarely listened. All-white
juries decided against black defendants, even in the most obvious cases of
innocence, but rarely convicted white defendants, despite evidence of guilt.
African Americans—including
the innocent—suffered
the harsher punishments of extended jail time, forced farm labor, and peonage.
Even women could be placed on the chain gangs working the roads and tracks
across the South.
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.”
Turner
24 F.
Cas. 337 (No. 14247) C.C.D. Md. 1867) the “equal benefit” clause is cited in
what would appear to be the earliest reported case enforcing the section. The
plaintiff was an emancipated slave who was indentured as an apprentice to her
former master. Although both whites and blacks could be indentured as an
apprentice, under the law of Maryland, indentured blacks were not accorded the
same educational benefits as whites and, unlike whites, were subject to being
transferred to any other person in the same county. Circuit Judge Chase granted
a writ of habeas corpus upon finding that the purported apprenticeship was in
fact involuntary servitude and a denial under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 of
the “full and equal benefit of all laws.
9.) That The judge’s orders of Nov 2, and spews the
racial hatred and governmental control Democrats have in Chicago as many close
their eyes to the ills of our suffering and hard earned possessions being
stripped away from us as a people but at the same time, they seek our votes to
keep them in power so that they can continuously keep us oppressed, and
maintain racial oppression in the court system keeping the court system “Rigged”
in favor of the Democrats;
10.) That
said case demonstrates the multiple acts of systemic applications of unconstitutional
violations, in that judges, lawyers Clerk offices and State Agencies acted as
decision makers possessing final authority, Brown v. Bryan County, OKL., 67 F.
3d 1174 (1995), Stokes v. Bullins, 844 F. 2d 269, 275 (5th Cir.
1988), Wassum v. City of Bellaire, Texas, 861 F. 2d 453, 456 (5th
Cir. 1988), Benavides v. County of Wilson, 955 F. 2d 968, 972 (5th
Cir.) cert. denied,__ U.S.__, 113 S.Ct. 79, 121 L. Ed. 2d 43 (1992), “Liability
will accrue for the acts of a municipal official when the official possess
“final policymaking authority” to establish municipal policy with respect to
the conduct that resulted in a violation of constitutional rights. Pembaur v.
City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469, 483, 106 S. Ct. 1292, 1300, 89 L.Ed. 2d 452
11.)
A
judge’s disrespect for the rules of court demonstrates disrespect for the law.
Judges are disciplined under Canon 2A for violating court rules and procedures.
Judge ignored mandated witness order in attempt to accommodate witnesses’ schedules;
Citing Canon 2A the court noted, “[a] court’s indifference to clearly stated
rules breeds disrespect for and discontent with our justice system. Government
can not demand respect of the laws by its citizens when its tribunals ignore
those very same laws”)
12.)
Finally,
“An Evaluation of the United States District Court Judges in Chicago, by the
Chicago Council of Lawyers was had against Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan, states Page 10, Par.2, While a minority of
lawyers commented positively on Judge Der-Yeghiayan, the vast majority of
lawyers interviewed gave him poor marks on virtually all areas relevant to the
Council’s evaluation, and these poor marks are consistent with the ratings
given to Judge Der-Yeghiayan by respondents to the Council’s written survey”
A- That
said report truly find him unqualified and stated, “he
lacks an adequate understanding of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
suggested that the judge’s background had not prepared him to assume such an
important post.” 6
CANON 1
A judge should uphold the integrity and
independence of the judiciary.
The
integrity and independence of judges depend in turn upon their acting without fear
or favor. Although judges should be independent, they should comply with the
law, as well as provisions of this code. Public confidence in the impartiality
of the judiciary is maintained by the adherence of each judge to this
responsibility. Conversely, violation of this code diminishes public confidence
in the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government under
law.
Wherefore the Foregoing
Reasons,
Defendant Prays for the following
relief:
1.) Defendant requests that
this Honorable Court of Appeals accept Jurisdiction of this matter and Invoke
authority Instanter and reassign this matter accordingly and or due to the
unprecedented Terrorist Civil Rights said attorneys and judges are complicit
in, Order a Rule to Show Cause for Remands
and Indictments on all parties associated in said conspiracies;
2.) Impose Sanctions/Remands against and all
parties for Contempt of the United States Constitution for their crimes against
the Defendant/Government
3.) Issue an Injunction on U
S Bank and all judges presiding in the matter trying to steal Defendants home
in the unlawful application of Foreclosure;
4.) Issue an Order Nullifying
Voiding Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan’s orders due to “Fraud” and other Civil
Rights Violations;
5.) An order issuing a Moratorium
on all Foreclosures in Cook County Circuit courts, Appellate Court or Supreme
Court of Illinois where Wells Fargo and U S Bank are a party to foreclosures
where “Fraud” and not being properly registered in the State of Illinois;
Finally,
this Affidavit 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
can not demand respect of the laws by its citizens when its tribunals ignore
those very same laws”)
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.”
Respectfully
Submitted
_____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217
S. Ingleside Ave.
Chicago, IL. 60615
IN THE
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
U.S. Bank
National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling
and Servicing Agreement Dated as of
)
December
1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust
2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through
) Hon Samuel Der-Yeghiayan
Certificates,
Series 2006-NC3
)
Petitioner
) Civil Action #16-cv-08628
)
V.
)
)
)
Monzella
Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella
)
Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia )
Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration )
Systems,
Inc. Monzella Y. Johnson )
( C )
Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank; )
Unknown
Owners and Non-Record Claimants, )
)
Respondents
)
AFFIDAVIT
I Monzella Y. Johnson, files herewith her
affidavit as required by Title 28, United States Code:
I Monzella Y. Johnson Pro Se being duly sworn
on oath states the aforementioned pleadings enumerated within said Motion for
Disqualification et al, 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 believes the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted
Notary
____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside. Ave
Chicago, Il 60615
No comments:
Post a Comment