Wikipedia Racial Injustice in Chicago Courts

Search results

Thursday, August 3, 2017

DEMOCRATIC MACHINE JUDGES ARE BEFORE THE FEDERAL COURT TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS:

HOW CAN ANY DEMOCRAT IN CHICAGO COMPLAIN ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP WHEN THE JUDGES ARE ENGAGING IN TREASON TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS?

THIS CASE REVEALS HOW DEMOCRATS TRULY FEEL ABOUT PERSONS OF COLOR AND IF THEIR IS A PERSON OF COLOR IN POWER WHERE A CAUCASIAN HAS PERPETRATED A CRIME THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO IGNORE THE CRIME AND LET THEM GO FREE BUT AFRICAN AMERICANS AND HISPANICS ARE TO PUNISH MEMBERS OF THEIR RACE TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAWS AND OPPRESS AND THEIR OWN RACE IF THEY ARE TO MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED FOR LEE OTIES LOVE, JR

I WANT MY TWITTER FAMILY AND FRIENDS RETWEET THIS UNTIL @redbilla IS UNITED WITH HIS DAUGHTER. #1Loveall 

IN THE 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION


 Lee Oties Love, Jr.                                                      Civil Action 17 -CV- 05482

                                                                                      Judge: Sharon Johnson Coleman 
  Plaintiff                                                                      Mag. Judge: M. David Weisman

    V

Supreme Court of Illinois, Pamela E. Loza,
Luciano Panici, James P. Murphy, Joshua P. Haid      
                                      
 Defendants


                                                                      NOTICE OF
               PETITION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING CIRCUIT PAMELA E. LOZA et. al. & ATTORNEYS “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” CORROBORATION IN AN ORGANIZED CHAIN CONSPIRACY  “TREASON” “FRAUD OF ALL SORTS” /CONTEMPT OF  COURT OTHER IRREGULARITIES
                   REMAND/BODY ATTACHMENT INSTANTER   
        MANDATORY INJUNCTION PROHIBITING STATE AND COUNTY COURTS FROM ENTERING ANY JUDGMENTS INSTANTER AND VACATE ALL ORDERS VOID IN NATURE AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF
                                                                                   
To the most Honorable Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District:

Moving Party,  Lee Oties Love, Jr., hereby respectfully represents as Pro Se shows this court with an affidavit the noted reasons why this matter should be entertained within this courts Jurisdiction; {Pursuant to the provisions of the United States Constitution}
           
That on August 8, 2017, shall present this Motion at 8:45 am before Honorable Sharon Johnson-Coleman or any judge sitting in her stead in room 1425, 219 S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, IL. 60604;

 To:   Supreme Court of Illinois, 200 East Capital Ave. Springfield IL. 62701-1721;
   
      Pamela Elizabeth Loza 50 West Washington, Chicago, IL 60601, Room 3009;
      James P. Murphy 555 West Harrison, Chicago, IL. 60607, Room 402;
       Luciano Panici 16501 South Kedzie Parkway, Markam IL. 60428, Room 105;
       Joshua P. Haid Sears/Willis Tower 233 South Wacker, Chicago IL. 60606 84th floor;   

                PLEASE BE ADVISED that on August 4, 2017 A Petition for Rule to Show Cause et al have been filed with all attachments before the United States District Courts. 

                                     
                                                                             Respectfully Submitted

                                                                            _______________________   
                                                                                            Lee Oties Love, Jr.
                                                                                              8435 S. Peoria
                                                                              Chicago, IL. 60620
                                                           773 783-5691

























Certificate of Service
The undersigned hereby certifies that the above Petition with attachments was caused to be delivered by regular mail to the above named parties

                                                                               ______________________
                                                                                 Lee Oties Love, Jr.      

































IN THE 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION


 Lee Oties Love, Jr.                                                      Civil Action 17 -CV- 05482

                                                                                      Judge: Sharon Johnson Coleman 
  Plaintiff                                                                      Mag. Judge: M. David Weisman

    V

Supreme Court of Illinois, Pamela E. Loza,
Luciano Panici, James P. Murphy, Joshua P. Haid      
                                      
 Defendants


                                                            
                                                                     
               PETITION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING CIRCUIT JUDGE PAMELA E. LOZA et. al. & ATTORNEYS “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” CORROBORATION IN AN ORGANIZED CHAIN CONSPIRACY  “TREASON” “FRAUD OF ALL SORTS” /CONTEMPT OF  COURT OTHER IRREGULARITIES
                   REMAND/BODY ATTACHMENT INSTANTER   
        MANDATORY INJUNCTION PROHIBITING STATE AND COUNTY COURTS FROM ENTERING ANY JUDGMENTS INSTANTER AND VACATE ALL ORDERS VOID IN NATURE AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF

IN ACCORDANCE TO THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE:

    Now comes Lee Oties Love, Jr., Pro Se in this cause respectfully represents to this court his Petition for Rule to Show Cause Remanding Circuit Judge Pamela E Loza et al. & Attorneys “Trespassing upon the Laws” Corroboration in an Organized Chain Conspiracy “Treason” “Fraud of all sorts” Contempt of Court other Irregularities, Remand/Body Attachment Instanter Mandatory Injunction prohibiting State County courts from entering any judgments Instanter and Vacate all orders Void in nature against the Plaintiff.
            
     Said reasons are recorded in the attached affidavit;

                                                                                




                                                                               Respectfully Submitted

                                                                            _______________________   
                                                                                            Lee Oties Love, Jr.
                                                                                              8435 S. Peoria
                                                                              Chicago, IL. 60620
                                                           773 783-5691





























                                                AFFIDAVIT

{Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 1446 (a)}

    I  Lee Oties Love, Jr. being first duly sworn on oath depose and states in support of Petition for Rule to Show Cause Remanding Circuit Judge Pamela E Loza et al. & Attorneys “Trespassing upon the Laws” Corroboration in an Organized Chain Conspiracy “Treason” “Fraud of all sorts” Contempt of Court other Irregularities, Remand/Body Attachment Instanter Mandatory Injunction prohibiting State County courts from entering any judgments Instanter and Vacate all orders Void in nature against the Plaintiff.
            
{Pursuant to the Rules of Federal Civil Procedure & 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.)  The 7th Cir. Held that the Cook County Courts were a Criminal enterprise. U.S. v. Murphy, 768 F. 2d 1518, 1531 where precedent was enacted by Judges Frank H. Easterbrook, Richard D. Cudahy and former Chief judge Luther Merritt Swygert;
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). 

A-    In addition, 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.

That Pursuant to Sup Ct. Rule 272 “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— Judges are bound by this rule before their court orders are valid;  


Under Section 4 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871:

The President had additional power in case of rebellion within a state to suspend the writ of habeas corpus and to declare and enforce marital law. Cong. Globe, supra note 1, at 317. With respect to a definition of rebellion, Section 4 provided;

“Whenever in any State or part of a State……unlawful combinations……..shall be organized and armed, and so numerous and powerful as to be able, by violence, to either overthrow or set at defiance the constituted authorities of such State, or when the constituted authorities are in complicity with or shall connive at the unlawful purposes of such powerful and armed combinations; and whenever, by reason of either or all of the causes aforesaid, the conviction of such offenders and the preservation of the public safety shall become…. Impracticable, in every such case such combinations shall be deemed a rebellion against the Government of the United States….”   
2.)  Said Judge Loza aided and assisted attorneys and in an elaborate criminal conspiracy “Trespassing upon the Laws” using the laws unjustly in which to advance her criminal agenda;
A-   Plaintiff was Remanded into custody on a “Void Order” as judges continued “Trespassing upon the Laws” in violation of Sup Ct Rule 272, that was not signed by any judge in the Illinois Supreme Court (May 11, 2017, June 6, 2017);

B-   That Judge Loza having cognizance of the self-hate so many African Americans have towards one another and the racist disposition so many Caucasians have against men of color who is fighting against tyranny and racism as in this case was aware nobody was going to admonish her for the directed acts of “Treason” and “Trespassing upon the laws” because of his skin color;

C-   That because of the racist hate true members of the Democratic Machine have against persons of color, Judge Loza continued to violate the Plaintiff’s Civil Rights acting as a private individual not as an officer of the court. Pursuant to Par 7, Page 13 of the Complaint, said judge ordered a warrant against the Plaintiff and stated, “if Plaintiff dropped his motion against her for disqualification……””et al. “She would quash the body attachment and forfeit the bond et al.” “Otherwise, he would go to jail”

D-   That Judge Loza told the Plaintiff he could bring in his parenting agreement (July 6, 2017) that was not in her possession, this conversation was had off the record.   

3.)  Plaintiff faxed her all of the pages to her chambers because he was feeling ill and learned Judge Loza was absent Judge Regina Scannicchio allowed attorney Joshua Haid of the law firm Women’s divorce and family law to withdraw from the case on the next day of Judge Loza’s case but never informed said Plaintiff they were coming to court demonstrating ex parte communications;  
A-   Said judge Ordered the attorney to file a petition for attorney fees, but the Plaintiff is indigent lost everything expending $70,000.00 trying to be in his daughters life for the last four years and has filed all types of affidavits in the courts that was never denied or objected to and still has not to this this day been a part of his daughters life with any type of visitations;

B-   That to further validate the verity of “Jim Crow laws still being enforced and judges “Trespassing upon the Laws” in Chicago courts by members of the Democratic Machine, hereto attached, Group Ex A, compilation of news articles where Alderman Edward Burke took an African American baby in the name of adoption alleging she was on drugs, the woman never got her own baby back;

C-   That Plaintiff is the natural biological father of his daughter and is not able to ascertain a bond or relationship with his daughter because Judges like Loza et al. do not recognize a man of color as a man or father figure and has demonstrated how innocent men are terrorized in the courts keeping them oppressed and disenfranchised from society;

D-     The Law is CLEAR: 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.

That allegedly Judge Loza and other judges learned of the complaint filed in Federal court on July 26, 2017, issued a warrant against the Plaintiff in an attempt to have him incarcerated without Legal Jurisdiction and authority DENIED  every legally sufficient Motion with Affidavits filed in her court; Scott, 377 Mass. 364, 386 N.E. 2d 218, 220 (1979) See Lopez-Alexander, Unreported Order No. 85-279 (Colo. May 3, 1985) (Judge removed for, inter alia, a persistent pattern of abuse of the contempt power. The Mayor of Denver accepted the findings of the Denver County Court Judicial Qualification Commission that the judge’s conduct could not be characterized as mere mistakes or errors of law and that the conduct constituted willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute). Canon Ethics where there is a pattern of disregard or indifference, which warrant discipline.

 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 the ed. 1992).    

See that is why, the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 (was enacted) - Section 1 (42 U.S.C.) 1983.
       “Of all the Civil Rights legislation enacted in the aftermath of the Civil War, none has had a greater contemporary impact than the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871. The Act grew out of a special one-paragraph message sent to the 42d Congress on March 23, 1871, by President Ulysses S. Grant, urgently requesting the enactment of legislation”.

Section 2 (42 U.S.C.) In the House of Representatives.
        “Congressional Debate of the second section of the Ku Klux Klan Act was more extensive and enduring than that of Section 1; As originally presented, Sec. 2 made it a felony for any “two or more persons” to conspire to commit certain enumerated crimes “in violation of the rights and privileges, or immunities of any person, to which he is entitled under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
           “Throughout the debates, supporters of the Act made repeated references to the depredations of the Ku Klux Klan; Victims of these atrocities included not only blacks but white Republicans as well. The crimes that were perpetrated, therefore, were not viewed as isolated occurrences, but as part of an “Organized Conspiracy….Political in its origin and aims”, “crimes perpetrated by concert and agreement, by men in large numbers acting with a common purpose for the injury of a certain class of citizens entertaining certain political principles, id, at 457 (remarks of Rep. Coburn). See also e.g., id. At 437 (remarks of Rep. Cobb) (“None but Democrats belong or can belong to these societies”) et al.,
           “Where these gangs of Assassins show themselves the rest of the people look on, if not with sympathy, at least with forbearance. The boasted courage of the South is not courage in their presence. Sheriffs, having eyes to see, see not; judges, having ears to hear, hear not; witnesses conceal the truth or falsify it; grand or petit juries act as if they might be accomplices. In the presence of these gangs all the apparatus and machinery of civil government, all the processes of justice, skulk away as if government and justice were crimes and feared detection. Among the most dangerous things an injured party can do is to appeal to justice. Of the uncounted scores and hundreds of atrocious mutilations and murders it is credibly stated that not one has been punished. Cong. Globe, supra note 2, app. At 78 (remarks of Rep. Perry). (“While murder is stalking abroad in disguise, while whippings and lynching’s and banishment have been visited upon unoffending American citizens, the local administrations have been found inadequate or unwilling to apply the proper corrective”) et al., …. And the State made no successful effort to bring the guilty to punishment or afford protection or redress to the outraged and innocent.”)    
                  
4.)    That the Ku Klux Klan in this era are not only members of the Democratic Machine but persons of color black on black crimes on members of their race being killed or those in power and authority are no different from the white men who concealed their identities, in that all conspirators are completely identified demonstrating any ethnicity can now identify as Klansmen;

History shows that it does not matter who is in power... those who have not learned to do for themselves and have to depend solely on others never obtain any more rights or privileges in the end than they did in the beginning.
Here is a quote from the book: Carter G. Woodson, 1933.
"When you control a man's thinking you do not have to worry about his actions. You do not have to tell him not to stand here or go yonder. He will find his 'proper place' and will stay in it. You do not need to send him to the back door. He will go without being told. In fact, if there is no back door, he will cut one for his special benefit. His education makes it necessary

5.)    That said Judges in the Democratic party and the likes of their kinds cowardly prey on the helpless, the indigent, and  has legally demonstrated the extent they are willing to exhaust criminalizing innocent men of color to achieve their goals not respecting any person of color with authority;    

6.)    In Furtherance to the above, said individuals that can best be described as Organized Terrorists have used their positions and authority to oppress and destroy other persons lives recorded in said complaint by stealing homes in the guise of foreclosure, extort monies from men of color in the guise of child support, due in part to the many components of this facet of Domestic Terrorism, Exhibits 1, 2 before the Ill. Sup Ct. in violation of Sup. Ct. Rule 272 regarding judges “Trespassing upon the Laws”, Ex 3 before the Ill. Sup Ct in violation of Sup Ct. Rule 272 regarding judges stealing a Doctors and ministers home in the name of foreclosure, “Trespassing upon the Laws” where they had an attorney, Ex’s 4 and 5 a blank court order absent a judges signature or attorney information said Defendant was locked up 5 times for allegedly owing child support on a case that was dismissed as Ex 5 with a certified signature, in that said Democratic Racist in said party hate and resent persons of color with authority have bypassed and circumvented said judges court order created another case and destroyed an innocent man’s life framing him for child support as a means to extort monies from him and they were in fact successful;

7.)    In that, Judge Loza has admitted engaging in “Trespassing upon the Laws” committing stated, Page 18, (July 5th 2017) of the court transcript, Lines 20-21, “You don’t get my signature hard copy sir. No way no how”

8.)    In furtherance to the above, Judge Loza makes it clear stated, Page 19 of the court transcript, Lines 2-4, “You’re just not supposed to have my signature;

9.)     In furtherance to the Seventh Circuit held that the Cook County Courts were a Criminal enterprise to validate the verity of said precedent, Page 3, Lines 10-11, Judge Loza stated, “But you will not get a copy of my signature for many reasons. People tend to copy it. I don’t like that.”     

Supreme Court Rule [137] provides in pertinent part:

            If a pleading, motion, or other paper is signed in violation of this Rule, the court, upon motion or upon its own initiative, may impose upon the person who signed it , a represented party, or both, an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay to the other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses incurred because of the filling of the pleading, motion, or other paper, including a reasonable attorney fee. Not only will the courts consider an award of sanctions for active false statements: failures to disclose material facts to the court can also justify an award of sanctions.
BRUBAKKEN v. Morrison, No. 1-9-1670, 1992 Ill App. LEXIS 2144 (1st Dist. Dec. 30, 1992). Additionally, the fact that a false statement or omission is the result of an honest mistake is no defense to entry of a sanction. ID. To the extent that an individual lawyer has engaged in sanction able conduct, that lawyer’s firm can also be jointly and severally liable with the lawyer.

10.)     That because Judge Loza  and a plethora of other Democratic Terrorist judges in the machine are exercising laws outside of their immunity (oath) and jurisdiction and in accordance to other Political/Fraternal laws makes every Court order signed by all Judges in this matter, State levels  Void Orders due to “Treason”;    

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 Dec. 776, 142 ILL App 3d 354, Appeal Denied.
     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 Judges in the Sup Ct and Judge Loza et al. have corroborated/admitted beyond all legal standards of the law engaging in a criminal conspiracy and implicating numerous “powerful corrupt white men” in  office covering up for the Political machine operatives; and how they use inferior ethnic groups outside their ethnicity to enforce their doctrines on innocent non-white men like the Plaintiff as noted throughout all documents;
A-    That a Federal Court is suppose to view a complaint’s allegations in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, draws all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff, and takes as true all well-pleaded facts and allegations in the complaint. Reger Dev., LLC v. Nat’l City Bank, 592 F. 3d 759, 764 (7th Cir. 2010). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief” in order to provide the defendant with fair notice of the plaintiff’s claims and the grounds upon which they rest. Bell Atl. V. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (Twombly). To survive a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff’s claim must be plausible and the factual allegations of the complaint must be “enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Brooks v. Ross, 578 F. 3d 574, 581 (7th Cir. 2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).

B-    That the defendants have met and fulfilled the requirements of the aforementioned for the relief being sought;

   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;

12.)     REPORTING JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT
            CANON 3D (1)

    Under Section 3D (1), a judge who receives information that indicates “a substantial likelihood that another judge “ has violated the Code of Judicial “should take appropriate action”. The Canon does not require the judge to hold a hearing and make a definitive decision that a violation has occurred before the reporting requirement is triggered and at least one state’s judicial ethics committee has advised that the reporting requirement is triggered when the judge has “sufficient information” to conclude that a “substantial issue” has been raised that a violation has occurred, Mass. Comm. On Judicial Ethics, Op. 2002-04 (2002)

    “Appropriate action” may include direct communication with the judge who has committed the violation and reporting the violation to the appropriate or other agency or body. See Commentary to Canon 3D (1). “Appropriate authority” is the authority with responsibility for initiation of disciplinary proceedings with respect to the violation reported. Some jurisdictions’ rules specify to whom a judge must report misconduct. For instance, Massachusetts Rule 3D (1) provides that if a judge becomes aware of another judge’s unprofessional conduct he must report his knowledge to the Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Court and the court of which the judge in question is a member.

    Note that the term “knowledge”, as defined in the Terminology Section, denotes actual knowledge of the fact in question and as such, a person’s knowledge may be inferred from circumstances. In drafting Section 3D (1), the Committee rejected the suggestion that the criteria of raising substantial question as to honesty or trustworthiness be applied in the context of reporting judicial misconduct as well, on the grounds that those criteria are implicit in the present criterion of raising a substantial question as to a judge’s fitness for office.
             
 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.
 
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
         
 A judge’s disrespect for the rules of court demonstrates disrespect for the law. Judges are disciplined under Canon 2 A for violating court rules and procedures. Judged 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”)

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).

Wherefore the foregoing stated within Defendant Respectfully Prays for the Relief:

1.)    That this Most Honorable Court Remand Judge  Pamela E. Loza et al, attorneys  and all conspirators into custody Instanter for “Trespassing upon the Laws”;

2.)    Order the Grand Jury to investigate and Indict all other parties associated in said Conspiracy and the persons responsible for mailing out unsigned court orders;

3.)    Order the Removal of every Public Official named and ignored the Oath and Constitution of their duties as an elected/appointed official;

4.)    Issue an Injunction Prohibiting the County judges, City or State Officials from issuing any judgments against the Plaintiff;

5.)    Order Sanctions against all parties and have them to absorb all legal expenses and costs for the enforcement of this matter;

6.)    Order a Moratorium on all Child Support’ Custody matters ascertaining other men victimized by the same unjust matters;

7.)    Let the Gavel and Jurisdiction of this Honorable Court Invoke any other remedy this courts deems just; 

                      FURTHER AFFIANTH SAYETH NAUGHT








                                                                                                          Respectfully Submitted

                                                                              
                                                                            _______________________   
                                                                                            Lee Oties Love, Jr.
                                                                                              8435 S. Peoria
                                                                              Chicago, IL. 60620
                                                           773 783-5691




No comments:

Post a Comment