MANY OF YOU HAVE READ HOW LEE OTIES LOVE, JR. @Redbilla HAVE SPENT O VER $75,000.00 HAD AT LEAST 4 OR 5 ATTORNEYS RETAINED ONE OF HIS ATTORNEYS AFRICAN AMERICAN WAS PROMOTED TO THE POSITION AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE:
HE HAD BEEN FIGHTING FOR 4 YEARS SEEKING VISITATION OF HIS BEAUTIFUL DAUGHTER NOT ONE ATTORNEY HELPED HIM TO BE REUNITED WITH HIS DAUGHTER.
JUDGE LOZA A RACIST HISPANIC JUDGE USED HER POWER AND UNLAWFUL INFLUENCE BY TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS ENGAGING IN TREASON EXERCISING HER HATE FOR PERSONS OF COLOR BY DESTROYING THEIR FAMILIES IN ANY MANNER NECESSARY PROVING TO THE WHITE NATIONALIST CONTROLLING THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE HER WORTH ON THE BENCH BY DESTROYING BLACK FAMILIES:
JUDGE LOZA REALIZING NO AFRICAN AMERICAN IN POWER OR AUTHORITY WITHIN THE JUDICIAL CIRCUIT HAD ANY REAL AUTHORITY OVER WHITE MEN OR THE WHITE NATIONALIST IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WOULD NEVER ADMONISH HER BECAUSE OF THE REAL HATE FOR PERSONS OF COLOR;
JUDGE LOZA HAD MRS. CARLEN'S MINOR SON UNLAWFULLY ABDUCTED AND GIVEN TO HER BIOLOGICAL BROTHER ---THIS IS LIKENED TO AN ALFRED HITCHOCK THRILLER OR A STEPHEN KING EPISODE;
BECAUSE OF MRS. CARLEN'S BROTHERS WIFE NOT BEING ABLE TO NATURALLY CONCEIVE A CHILD OF THEIR OWN STOLE HIS SISTERS OLDEST SON AND JUDGE LOZA SOLICITED A FORMER JUDGE AS AN ATTORNEY MICHAEL I. BENDER TO ASSIST IN THIS DIABOLICAL SICK SCHEME.
THIS MOTHER HAS BEEN UNDERSTANDABLY DEVASTATED BY THESE EVENTS IT HAS BEEN 2 YEARS SHE HAS NOT SEEN HER CHILD AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND HIS EIGHTH GRADE GRADUATION DUE TO JUDGE LOZAS COURT ORDER.
MY TWITTER FAMILY AND FRIENDS IT WAS YOUR RESOUNDING SUPPORT AND RE TWEETS THAT MADE IT POSSIBLE FOR @redbilla BE WITH HIS DAUGHTER, I NEED YOUR SUPPORT ONCE AGAIN TO GET THE WORD OUT SO THIS MOTHER CAN BE REUNITED WITH HER CHILD UNTIL THE PROPER ADMINISTRATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS INVESTIGATE THESE MATTERS THANK YOU.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
COOK COUNTY,
ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
)
In Re: The Parentage of ) 2008 D 80400
)
Robert Stafford ) Hon. Pamela E.
Loza
Petitioner ) Room 3009
)
)
v )
Carlen Colbert )
Respondent )
)
)
Motion for Disqualification
of Judge for Cause Due to “Fraud" (Civil Rights Violations) and or Prejudice pursuant to
S.H.A. 735
ILCS 5/2 ---1001 (a) (2,3)
and to Vacate all Orders due
to "Trespassing upon the Laws" Court
never had Jurisdiction Orders are "Void" a
"Nullity"
Now comes
Respondent, Carlen Colbert
Pro Se in this cause, files herewith her affidavit, factually
establishing the Bias "Fraud" (Civil Rights Violations) Prejudice alleged herein,
with exhibits, in accordance to Supreme Court of Illinois and Canon rules in accordance
to the American Jurisprudence and pleadings (rev.) to show that the Honorable Pamela Loza has a Personal
Bias and or Prejudice against the Respondent and has satisfied
the preponderance of
the evidence standards
by engaging in a criminal
conspiracy assisting the Petitioner allowing
him to kidnap said minor;
Said judge treated Respondent as if she was a Deportee, Illegal Immigrant or non
U.S. citizen ignored
all documents demonstrating the Petitioner was committing perjury
but enforced an order absent her jurisdiction due to her "Trespassing upon the Laws" and engaged in overt "Fraud Bias and Prejudice" acting as a private
individual on the bench
not as a Honorable judge;
Based thereon
Respondent respectfully moves that the Honorable Pamela E. Loza proceed no further herein,
and that the Honorable Timothy
C. Evans Chief Judge or Presiding
Judge of Domestic
Relations of the Circuit Court of
Cook
County assigns this matter accordingly
and notifies Federal
Officials to ascertain other violations of the laws pursuant
to Respondents Affidavits and the judges'
actions in this matter.
This is the first motion
to recuse this judge for cause Pursuant to S.H.A.
735
ILCS 5/2---1001 (a) (3) in this cause made by the movant, the party seeking substitution must establish, by a preponderance of
the evidence, actual prejudice
and must demonstrate, through specific allegations supported by affidavit, facts that if true, constitute actual Prejudice;
Respectfully
Submitted, By:
Carlen Colbert
Pro se
1805 Jamestown
Cir. Hoffman Estates, II 60169 (708)
200-9437
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 cannot demand respect of the laws by its citizens
when its tribunals
ignore those very same laws")
A- Fraud upon the court is a basis for equitable
relief. Luttrell
v. United
States, 644 F. 2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1980); see Abatti v. C.I.R. , 859 F 2d
115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988) "it is beyond question that
a court may investigate a question as to whether there
was fraud in the procurement of
a
Judgment" Universal
Oil Products Co.
v. Root Refining Co., 328 U.S. 575,
66 S. Ct. 1176, 90 L. Ed. 1447. The power of the court to unearth such a fraud is the power to unearth it effectively. See Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250; Sprague
v. Ticonic National Bank, 1184 and United States v. Throckmorton, 98
U.S. (8 Otto) 61, 25 L. Ed. 93.
B- "A judge is an officer
of the court, as are all members
of the Bar. A
Judge is a judicial
officer. Paid by the Government to act impartially and
lawfully". People v. Zajic, 88 Ill. App 3d 477, 410 N.E. 2d 626. "A
void judgment is regarded as
a nullity, and the situation is
the same as it would be if there was no judgment. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or
at any place ....It is not entitled to enforcement. 30A Am Judgments
43, 44, 45. Henderson v Henderson 59
S.E. 2d 227-232
C- "A Void Judgment
from its inception
is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right. Of no legal
force and effect whatever, and incapable of
confirmation, ratification. or enforcement in any manner or to any degree. "A
void judgment, order or decree may be attacked
at any time or in any court. either directly or collaterally''
Oak Park Nat Bank v. Peoples
Gas
Light & Coke Col, 46 Ill. App. 2d 385, 197 N.E. 3d 73, 77, (151 Dist. 1964)
That under 18 U.S.C.
242 and 42 U.S.C. 1985
(3) (b). A judge does not have the discretion on whether or not to follow Supreme
Ct. Rules,
but a duty to follow. People v. Gersh, 135 Ill. 2d 384 (1990).
1.) I am informed and believe and based on such information and belief, demonstrate beyond the Preponderance of the evidence standard that Judge Loza is BIAS, Prejudiced
and has "Trespassed upon the laws" whom this cause has pended before, has demonstrated taking part in an "Organized
Conspiracy" with an attorney
whom I later learned was a former judge in the Circuit Court of Cook
County;
2.) Respondent lived in a "Gang" infested
area of Central
& Potomac, where she allowed her brother to have temporary
guardianship of her minor son so
that he could be enrolled
in Oak Park School District and attend school safely without
any
problems;
3.) That during the month of Dec 2014 is when the agreement
was initiated on June 6, 2015 Respondent
terminated said arrangement that was agreed upon because
she had moved in Hoffman Estates
and registered said minor in the school district;
4.) That brother Anton Colbert returned
the minor to the
Petitioner every weekend without
any problems;
5.) That Respondent initiated
temporary guardianship papers notarized at the currency
exchange but never filed in Circuit Court because her brother
stated, he was being followed
by someone at Oak Park school district, so that he would not
get in trouble is why said papers
were drafted;
6.) That said guardianship papers were only valid for 365 days and had to be renewed every December, but said agreement
was terminated if Respondent removed
her son with the condition that he was able to complete fifth grade but in
September he was being transferred to Hoffman Estates
in June 2015;
7.) That Respondent had paid all fees of the minor for the enrollment of him entering sixth grade;
In the wake of extensive investigations by Federal Law enforcement authorities
revealing widespread corruption in the Illinois court system ("Operation Greylord") and elsewhere, indicating not only that significant professional misconduct was
occurring but
also that the requirement
to report misconduct
was frequently ignored, particularly in the cases of judges
with regard to the conduct of other judges.
1. That because it is an norm for judges
to violate their oath and commit "Treason" "Trespass upon the Laws willfully acting as Terrorist , judge Loza allowed
fabricated admissions
full of inconsistencies from Respondents brother and colleague judge/attorney(Michael I Bender) she appointed
as child rep
which corroborates these very criminal acts as active collusion, and demonstrates Bias
and Prejudiced conduct surpassing the Preponderance of
Evidence legal
standard required in this matter where
"Fraud" is concerned;
A- Hereto attached, Ex A, DCFS
(June 20, 2012)
Investigation of Suspected
Child Abuse or Neglect-No Action;
B-
That said DCFS Administrator
(Rosa Friaz) informed the Respondent, "she informed her brother if he report any more allegations of abuse against
his sister, she was going to bring him up on charges";
2. That
Petitioner (Robert Stafford) appeared before judge Loza June 15, 2015, hereto attached, Ex B, said court order was not only false but it was in violation Sup
Ct Rule 272 it was not signed;
3. That former judge
(Michael I Bender) filed
a "Fraudulent Emergency Ex
Parte
Motion et al., hereto
attached as Gr Ex C;
A- That Par
4 states "In May of 2012 DCFS opened an investigation et a!"., this is an egregious falsehood, in
that there was never an investigation opened
against the Respondent for any reason;
Ethics
All Illinois lawyers
must be familiar with the Illinois Rules of Professional
Conduct, and trail lawyers must be particularly familiar with the rules that apply
specially to them.
RPC 3.3, entitled "Conduct Before a Tribunal,"
sets forth the standards to be followed by the trial lawyer
during "battle." Section (a) of that rule states:
(a) In appearing in a professional capacity before
a tribunal, a lawyer shall not:
(1) make a statement
of material fact or law to a tribunal which the lawyer
knows or reasonably should know is false;
(2) fail to disclose
to a tribunal a material fact known to the lawyer when
disclosure is necessary
to avoid assisting a criminal
or fraudulent act by the client;
(3) fail to disclose
to the tribunal legal authority
in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly
adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel;
(4) Offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material
evidence and comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures;
(5) participate in the creation
or preservation of evidence when the lawyer
knows or reasonably should know the evidence is false ;
(6) counsel
or assist the client in conduct the lawyer knows to be illegal of fraudulent;
(7)
engage in other illegal conduct
or conduct in violation of these
Rules;
(8) fail to disclose
the identities of the clients
represented and of the persons who employed the lawyer unless
such information is privileged or irrelevant;
(9) Intentionally degrade a witness
or other person by stating
or alluding to personal
facts concerning that person which
are not relevant to the case;
(10) in trial, allude to any matter
that the lawyer
does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as a witness,
or state a personal opinion
as to the justness
of a cause, the credibility of a witness,
the culpability of a civil litigant or the guilt or innocence
of and accused, but a lawyer may argue, on analysis of evidence, for any position
or conclusion with respect to the matter stated herein;
Acts constituting direct, criminal contempt
A wide variety of acts may constitute a direct, criminal
contempt. And act may be criminal contempt
even though it is also an indictable crime. Beattie v. People, 33
Ill. App 651, 1889 WL 2373 (1st Dist. 1889). As is making
false representations to the court. People v. Kate/hut, 322 Ill. App. 693, 54 N.E.2d 590 (1st Dist. 1944).
Misconduct of an officer of the court is punishable as contempt. People ex ref. Rusch v. Levin,
305 Ill. App. 142, 26 N.E. 2d 895 (1st Dist. 1939).
Official misconduct is a criminal offense; and a public officer or employee commits misconduct, punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both, when, in his official capacity, he intentionally or recklessly fails to perform any
mandatory duty as required by law; or knowingly performs an act
which he knows he is forbidden by
law to perform; or
with intent to obtain a personal advantage for himself or another,
he performs an act in excess
of his lawful authority ....S.H.A. Ch 38 33*3.
B- That Ex A
further amplifies the verity of said former judge using his influence and name by defaming the Respondent by whatever
means necessary because
the Judge supported and corroborated his every move by engaging in Bias
Prejudiced conduct "Trespassing upon the Laws" engaging in "Treason"
In 2008, the Illinois Supreme Court appointed Bender as a judge for the Circuit Court of Cook County where he was assigned to the Domestic Relations Division, Parentage and Child Support Section. During this
time, he heard matters
involving child abuse, custody, support, parentage, visitation, and college contribution.
Bender stepped down from the
bench in 201 3 to reopen his private
practice
and concentrate exclusively on family law, and to protect the rights
of children.
Pamela E. Loza is a judge of the Cook County 12th Sub circuit
in Illinois. She
was
elected to the bench in 2008.
4. That Pursuant
to Ex D, hereto attached,
Respondent and sons father appeared
before the judge September 3, 2015 of the minor; filed a Motion stating,
"RS was removed
from my custody with an Emergency Order,
I was not served with any paperwork"
A- That Judge Pamela E. Loza stated to the parties in a venomous
arrogant tone "Get out of her courtroom and that custody
had been granted to Anton Colbert"
5. That Judge Pamela E. Loza never had jurisdiction on the Respondent 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 Kett
er et.a . 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. Pierso, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
B- That
said act further
demonstrates the judges Bias and Prejudice disposition as she engaged
in "Treason" "Trespassing upon the Laws" at the Respondent and natural father who happens
to be a foreman at the
Chicago Transit Authority
C-
That said judge continuously entered a "Void Order" by signing a No Show Order
indicating both
parties present, September 3,
2015, " This
matter is stricken from the call", order previously entered on 8- 31-15, hereto attached, Ex E;
D- That Judge Pamela E. Loza demonstrated Perjury Bias and Prejudiced contemptuous behavior
in her continuous acts "Trespassing upon
the Laws" never entered
any order on 8-31-15;
6. That
on September 1, 2015,
Judge Pamela E. Loza accepted the hearsay "Fraudulent" testimony of Respondent's brother and slanderous accusations
recorded by her colleague Michael I. Bender granting him unlawful
authority
to kidnap her minor
son, states "Mr. Anton Colbert is to immediately retrieve RS from Eisenhower Junior School, the court finds that Mr. Anton Colbert has standing because he had possession of the minor child"
A- Said judge further
stated, "Mr. Anton Colbert is granted immediate
physical possession of the minor child, RS. He is to immediately enroll RS in the school district
97 in Oak Park. Carlen Colbert
is to have no contact with RS. The court finds
that these orders are needed due to the serious endangerment to the minor child by Carlen Colbert"
7. To show fraud upon the court, the complaining party must establish that the alleged misconduct affected
the integrity of the judicial
process, either because the court itself was defrauded
or because the misconduct was perpetrated by officers of the court. Alexander v. Robertson, 882, F. 2d
421,424 (9th Cir. 1989);
a. A void judgment
does not create any binding obligation. Kalb v.
Feuerstein (1940)
308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.
b. Fraud upon the court is a basis for equitable
relief. Luttrell v. United
States, 644 F. 2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1980);
see Abatti v. C.l.R., 859 F 2d
115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988)
"it is beyond
question that
a court may investigate a question as to whether there
was fraud in the procurement of
a
judgment" Universal
Oil Products Co. v. Root Refining Co., 328 U.S. 575,
66 S. Ct. 1176, 90 L. Ed. 1447. The power of the court to unearth such a
fraud is the power to unearth it effectively. See Hazel-Atlas
Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250; Sprague
v. Ticonic National Bank, 1184 and United
States v. Throckmorton, 98
U.S. (8 Otto) 61, 25 L. Ed. 93.
c. "A judge
is an officer of the court, as are all members of the Bar. A judge is a judicial officer, paid
by the Government to
act impartially and lawfully". People v. Zajic, 88 Ill. App 3d 477, 410 N.E. 2d 626. "A void judgment is regarded as
a nullity, and
the situation is the same as it would
be if there was no judgment. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place ....It is not entitled
to
enforcement. 30A Am Judgments 43, 44, 45. Henderson v
Henderson 59
S.E. 2d 227-232
d. "A Void Judgment
from its inception
is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties
or support a right, ofno legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of
confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in any manner or to any degree.
"A void iudgment,
order or decree may be attacked at any time or in any court.
either directly or collaterally"
Oak Park Nat Bank v. Peoples Gas Light & Coke Col, 46 Ill. App. 2d 385, 197 N.E. 3d 73, 77, (1st Dist.
1964)
8. That under 18 U.S.C.
242 and 42 U.S.C. 1985
(3) (b). A judge does not have the discretion on
whether or not to follow Supreme
Ct. Rules, but a duty to follow. People v. Gersh, 135 Ill. 2d 384 (1990).
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
N.E 788, 118 ILL 334. Hazelton
V. Carolus, 1907 132 ILL.App. 512.
A- In the matter
of Lee Oties Love, Jr. v. Natasha
Broomfield, Mr. Lee
experienced the same plethora of Civil Rights violations
where said
matter is pending before the United States
Court of Appeals, he has complained to
everyone in authority
but nobody
stood up for him against judge Loza, in that a post was generated on unlawful1.blogspot.com describing the heinous acts experienced by this judge keeping him
from seeing his child;
see the Dec. 29, 2015 post.
In Re Marriage of O'Brien 912 N.E. 2d 729 (Ill App. 2 Dist. 2009), When a party moves for substitution of the trial judge for cause based
upon an alleged violation of rule setting
forth mandatory bases for recusal, the movant need only show the existence of that factor
and that an objective, reasonable person would conclude
that the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, and need not
show actual prejudice. S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2-----1001 (a) (3);
Sup.
Ct. Rule 63 (C) (1).
735 IlCS 5/2-1001{a)(3) {West 2006). Although the statute does not define
"cause", Illinois courts
have held that in such circumstances, actual prejudice has been required
to FORCE REMOVAL of
a judge from a case, that is, either prejudicial trial conduct or personal bias. Rosewood Corp. n Transamerica Insurance
Co., 57 Ill 2d 247, 311 N.E. 2d 673 (1974; In
re Marriage of Kozloff,
101Ill 2d
526,
532, 79 Ill. Dec 165 463 N.E. 2d
719 (1984); see also
People v. Vance, 76 Ill. 2d 171, 181, 28
:m. Dec.
508, 390 N.E. 2d 867 {1979). Moreover, in construing the term "cause" for
purposes of a substitution once a substantial ruling has been made in a case,
Illinois courts have consistently required
actual prejudice to be established, not just under the current
statute, but under every former
version of the statute
The facts and reasons
for the belief that such Bias and or Prejudice conduct with incredible corroboration and Civil Rights Violations exists, are that, the following laws were noticeably
maliciously violated, said Judge having
complete knowledge and was aware of all "fraudulent" acts perpetrated at the Plaintiff but ignored them and engaged
in the same conspiracy, either
ignored Petitioners Motions or Petitions accompanied with affidavits but granted every frivolous motion defendants filed without any affidavits;
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 because the judge has committed a series of "Fraudulent Acts" demonstrates
deliberate "Anarchy" in her rulings acting
as the Hispanic Hitler
trying to destroy any family
of color by whatever means necessary;
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.
lO. 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.
B. That due to the judges Bias and directed evidence of Prejudice conduct "Trespassing upon the Laws" engaging
in "Treason" pursuant
to 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).
c. Said Judge violated all Rules of law Canon Ethics. Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 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.
11. Said judge demonstrated Bias and Prejudice conduct
as she continuously "Trespassed upon the Laws" engaging in "Treason" when she acted outside
of her jurisdiction; The judge became venomously agitated
and angry when she told the
Respondent and sons father to get out of her court room pursuant
to Ex D, "Judges, of course are presumed
impartial, and the burden of overcoming the presumption by showing prejudicial trial conduct or personal bias rests on the
party making the charge. Eychaner v. Gross, 202111. 2d 228, 280, 269 Ill. Dec.
80, 779 N. E. 2d 1115 (2002).
A- Judge Pamela E. Loza used her robe and unlawful authority
in the same identical manner
as other judges in the Democratic Party "Fixing cases
Fraudulently" violating their oaths systematically Trespassing upon the Laws" as a norm committing "Treason";
735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(3) (West 2006). Although the statute does not define "cause", Illinois courts have held that in such circumstances, actual
Prejudice has been required
to FORCE REMOVAL of
a judge from a case, that is, either prejudicial trial conduct or personal bias. Rosewood Corp. n Transamerica Insurance Co., 57 Ill 2d
247, 311 N.E. 2d
673
(1974; In re Marriage of Kozloff,
101
Ill 2d 526, 532, 79 Ill. Dec 165 463
N.E. 2d 719 (1984); see
also People v. Vance, 76 Ill. 2d 171, 181, 28 Ill. Dec. 508,
390 N.E. 2d 867 (1979).
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
Despite the
United States Constitution and Civil Rights Act Plaintiff
has not been treated
as a citizen of the United States
in that whites under this Political
System
has been able to circumvent
the laws and commit treason
like offenses because they
are the majority in control
in Chicago, Ill. Political
system; Pursuant to Vigus v. O'Bannon is an example
of the "Fraudulent" Racist Acts perpetrated against persons
like the Plaintiff
standing up to Racial
Injustice and Terrorism!
CANON 1
A Judge should uphold the INTEGRITY and independence of the JUDICIARY.
The integrity and independence of iudges depend in turn upon their acting
without fear
or favor. Although judges
should be independent. they should comply with the law, as well as the 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.
12.That judge
Pamela E. Loza satisfied
the Preponderance of Evidence
Standard by taking part in an "Organized Conspiracy" by signing all of the court orders
with her signature; thereby, validating the veracity of colluding with said parties in said conspiracy where "Fraud" and "Perjury"
was apparent in reference
to all attachments;
A. That judge Loza has demonstrated an unknown interest in this matter which has blinded his objectivity
in adjudicating the merits of this matter, due to the aforementioned; Sup Ct. Rule 63 (c) (1) (d) mandates
disqualification where the iudge has an interest
in the proceeding. (eff. April 16, 2007).
A judge's disrespect for the rules of court demonstrates disrespect for the Jaw. 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 cannot demand respect of the laws by its citizens
when its tribunals
ignore those very same laws")
"The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Circuit Court of Cook
County
is a criminal enterprise. U.S. v. Murphy, 768 F. 2d
1518, 1531 (7th Cir.
1985)".
13.
Jim Crow
Laws are still
being enacted and enforced
in Chicago, Illinois
courts Black and Brown lives simply don't
matter unless you give your soul to Terrorists and abide by their rules and doctrines;
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 o[Prince
Edward
County); and Washington, D.C. (Spottswode Bolling
v. C. Melvin
Shame). 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.
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.-ld.
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.-ld.
CONSPIRACY
Fraud mal]be inferred from nature of ads 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- That due to the judges Bias and or Prejudice conduct pursuant to 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 (7'' Cir.), cert denied, 409 U.S. 1037,
93 S. Ct. 512, 34 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1972).
14. That said judge loza has demonstrated beyond the Preponderance of
how this legal precedent
fits her crime 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 Air 2d 505, John W. Strong,
185, 777-78 (4the 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 mas' 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. " -
RespectfulllJ Submitted
Carlen Colbert
W1iEREFORE the aforementioned reasons Defendant respectfully prays that said Judge be recused and all orders VACATED pursuant to them being "VOID" based upon the reasons cited in this document and noted in the Affidavits and appropriate
Sanctions be imposed pursuant to
Supreme Court Rule 137:
2.) That the Chief Judge or Presiding Judge summons Federal
authorities to ascertain the criminal allegations noted to determine
what prosecutorial remedies
are afforded in this matter;
3.) That this matter
be reassigned
per
computer generation to
a judge competent of
the laws and can rule in accordance to
his oath and laws of the United States Constitution.
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 believes the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted
Carlen
Colbert
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF
COOK COUNTY, ILLNOIS DOMESTIC RELATIONS
DIVISION
)
In Re: The Parentage
of ) 2008 D 80400
)
Robert Stafford
) Hon. Pamela
E. Loza
Petitioner ) Room 3009
)
)
v )
Carlen Colbert
)
Respondent )
)
)
Notice of
Motion for Disqualification of
Judge for
Cause Due to "Fraud" (Civil Rights Violations) and or Prejudice pursuant to S.H.A. 735
ILCS 5/2 ---1001
(a) (2,3) and to Vacate all Orders due to "Trespassing upon the Laws" Court
never had Jurisdiction Orders are "Void"
TO: U.S. Attorney Joel R. Levin, 219 South Dearborn
Suites 500, Chg 60605
Chief Judge Timothy Evans, Room 2600 Daley Center, Chg., Ill. 60601
Presiding Judge
Jacobius, Room Daley Center,
Chg. Ill. 60601
States
Attorney, Kim Foxx, Suite 500 Daley Center,
Chg. Ill. 60601
Anton Colbert, 140 Percy Julian Sq, Oak Park, lll. 60302-2619
Michael I. Bender 70 West Madison,
Suite 2222, Chg. Ill. 60602
PLEASE BE ADVISED
that
on
Oct 10th, 2017 A Motion for Disqualification of judge et al., has been filed in the Circuit Court of
Cook County; and will present said legally sufficient
instrument before Judge Loza or any
Judge in her stead October, at am in room 3009.
Respectfully, Submitted,
1805 Jamestown Cir. Hoffman Estates,
1160169 (708) 200-9437
Carlen Colbert
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that the above notice and all attachments were caused to be personally delivered, to the above parties at the addresses
provided before 5:00pm on October 10, 2017.
Carlen
Colbert
Respectfully Submitted,
IN THE CIRCUIT
COURT
OF
COOK COUNTY, ILLNOIS DOMESTIC RELATIONS
DIVISION
)
In Re: The Parentage
of ) 2008 D 80400
)
Robert Stafford
) Hon. Pamela E. Loza
Petitioner ) Room
)
)
v )
Carlen Colbert
)
Respondent )
)
)
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF ILLINOIS)
)
COUNTY OF COOK )
I Carlen Colbert being duly sworn on oath states
the aforementioned pleadings enumerated within said motion 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 believes
the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted Notary
Carlen Colbert
1805 Jamestown
Cir. Hoffman Estates,
II 60169
No comments:
Post a Comment