RACIAL HATE PART 2 HERE IN CHICAGO THE JUDGES ARE COMMITTING ACTS WORSE THAN ANY NFL PLAYER KNEELING THEY ARE WARRING AGAINST THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION ENGAGING IN TREASON----THEY HAVE GIVEN THE UNITED STATES FLAG THE MIDDLE FINGER WHEN THEY TRESPASSED UPON THE LAWS VIOLATING THEIR SWORN OATH TO UPHOLD THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
ON OCTOBER 17, 2017 ON THE 2 PM CALL APRIL APPEARED BEFORE JUDGE BOWES HER CASE WAS REASSIGNED TO ALLEGEDLY TO GRACE DICKLER FOR ALLEGEDLY COMPUTER GENERATION OF ANOTHER JUDGE IT TOOK MORE THAN AN HOUR THE CASE WAS GIVEN TO JUDGE JUDGE GREGORY ABBOTT AHERN, JR.
JUDGE AHERN UPHELD THE HEINOUS RACIST ACTS AND CIVIL RIGHTS TREATMENT OF APRIL TOLD HER THE MOTION IS NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF GENERALIZATIONS JUDGE BOWES DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG, THE JUDGE WAS EGREGIOUSLY ARROGANT AND DEMONSTRATED RACIAL HATE FROM THE BENCH MAKING APRIL FEEL INTIMIDATED.
APRIL REQUESTED HER CASE BE TRANSFERRED TO DUPAGE ILLINOIS WHERE SHE LIVES THEY REFUSED!
IT IS CLEAR "FIXING" CASES IN CHICAGO IS A METHOD OF HOW DEMOCRATS REALLY FEEL TOWARDS THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AS IT RELATES TO EQUALITY FOR PERSONS OF COLOR MAINTAINING JIM CROW DOCTRINES IN CHICAGO ILLINOIS.
IT IS BECOMING INCREASINGLY APPARENT JUDGES WEARING BLACK ROBES IN THE COURTS IN THIS STATE IS LIKENED TO WEARING A HALLOWEEN COSTUME FOR EXAMPLE JUDGE WALKER ORDERED THE PLAINTIFF IN THIS CASE TO RETURN THE CHILD TO HIS MOTHER BY JULY 31ST, 2017, NOT SURE WHAT TYPE OF TRICK OR TREAT WAS PROVIDED, JUDGE BOWES WHO IS FROM MISSISSIPPI RECEIVED HER UNDERGRAD AND LAW DEGREE FROM THE SAME STATE WAS ASSIGNED TO THE CASE.
JUDGE BOWES WHO UNDERSTANDS JIM CROW BETTER THAN ANY JUDGE DOWNTOWN USED HER WIT TO UNDERMINE WHAT JUDGE WALKER ORDERED THE PLAINTIFF TO RETURN THE MINOR HOME TO HIS MOM.
JUDGE WALKER'S ORDER WAS SIGNED JUNE 11, 2017, JUDGE BOWES NOT VERY ARTICULATE IN LEGAL PROCEDURES UNDER JIM CROW AND WHEN YOU TRESPASS UPON THE LAWS KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAWS AND IT'S RULES DO NOT APPLY TO RACIST WHITES IN THE LAW.
JUDGE BOWES OVER TURNED JUDGE WALKER'S ORDER JULY 31, 2017; NO CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE HAS ANY AUTHORITY TO OVERTURN OR MODIFY ANY EXISTING ORDER THAT HAS MADE IT PAST THE 30 DAYS IT BECOMES FINAL, NOT ONLY THAT THE JUDGE DID NOT SIGN THE ORDER VIOLATING SUP CT RULE 272.
THIS IS HOW BLACK FAMILIES ARE DESTROYED CHICAGO COURTS ARE LIKE THE NEW PLANTATIONS DEMOCRATS THAT SO MANY HAVE VOTED INTO OFFICE HAVE FOUND A WAY TO EXTORT MONEY FROM HARD WORKING PARENTS SIDING WITH CORRUPTION OR THE WRONG DOERS.
PRESIDENT TRUMP AND MANY OTHERS ARE COMPLAINING THAT THE NFL PLAYERS ARE KNEELING DUE TO RACIAL INJUSTICE UNLAWFUL SHOOTINGS OF UNARMED BLACK AND BROWN MEN NOT AS A DISRESPECT TO THE FLAG.
.
________________________________________________________________________
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT
OF
COOK
COUNTY, ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC
RELATIONS DIVISION
)
In Re: The
Parentage of )
2008
D 80400
)
Clarence
Parker ) Hon. Karen Bowes
Petitioner )
Room 1902
)
)
V
)
April
Redeaux )
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”
Now comes Respondent, April
Redeaux 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 Karen J. Bowes 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 take said minor unlawfully bypassing
court order signed by judge Debra Walker ordering Petitioner to return minor to
the State of Illinois;
Said judge treated Respondent as if she was an Illegal Immigrant
or non U.S. citizen ignored all documents demonstrating the Petitioner was
responsible for minors unstable issues 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 Karen J. Bowes 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 assign this matter accordingly
and notify Federal Officials to ascertain other violations of the laws pursuant
to Respondents Affidavits and the judges’ actions in this matter.
This is Respondents first
motion Pro Se 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:
_________________
April
Redeaux
Pro Se
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 were 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, (1st
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 Bowes is BIAS, Prejudiced and has “Trespassed
upon the laws” whom this cause has pended before, has demonstrated taking
part in an “Organized Conspiracy”
with said attorney;
2.) That on June 11, 2017, judge Debra B. Walker certified
said court order, ordering the “That A.
shall remain in North Carolina with the Petitioner until July 31, 2017, where
he shall be returned to Illinois ---at the expense of Mr. Parker”
3.) That the Petitioner with
vexatious contempt for the judges court order had his attorney to circumvent
said directive by filing a frivolous untimely motion, hereto attached Ex A, file stamped July 28, 2017;
A- That attorney Gordon
Nelson Induced Reliance upon the court engaging in “Fraudulent Acts” filed an
Emergency Motion to Vacate July 10, 2017 Order in Part;
B- That attorney Gordon Nelson
methodically had his client to submit an affidavit hereto attached, as Ex C not notarized;
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.
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.
4.)
That because it is an
norm for judges to violate their oath and commit “Treason” “Trespass
upon the Laws” willfully acting
as Terrorist , judge Bowes
acted outside of her lawful jurisdiction and allowed a untimely motion into her
court, hereto attached Gr Ex B, Emergency Motion to Vacate et al.,
5.)
That said judge ignored the fact she had no jurisdiction, stated “That the July 10, 2017 order is stayed in
part, as it relates to Petitioner returning AP to the State of Illinois, AP shall
remain in the care of Petitioner” 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;
6.)
Not only is the fact
said judge acting outside of her jurisdiction but the time period to attack the
merits of the court order was within 30 days but is was 17 days outside the
timeline;
Ethics
All Illinois lawyers
must be familiar with the Illinois Rules of Professional
Conduct,
and trial 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
2.
That said judge corroborated her role exercising Bias Prejudice
conduct towards the Defendant as she “Trespassed upon the Laws”
engaging in “Treason” in that said court order was not only false
but it was in violation Sup Ct Rule 272 it was not signed;
- That Judge Karen J. Bowes
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 Kettler et.al. v. Johnson,
57 Ill. 109 (1870)
A-
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)
B-
That said act further demonstrates
the judges Bias and Prejudice disposition as she engaged in “Treason”
“Trespassing upon the Laws” at the Respondent by engaging in criminal acts after
only being appointed to the bench April 2014 as an Associate judge; whereby,
judge Debra B. Walker was elected to her judgeship in 2008;
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.
- Judge
Loza in the matter of Lee Oties Love, Jr. 13 D 80423, he had to go to the
Ill Sup Ct and District Court and Court of Appeals on the judge just to
see and have visitation with his daughter surrounded by “Fraudulent Acts”
because nobody in the State addressed the unlawful allegations, in that
said judge demonstrated a personal hate towards him used her robe (keeping
Mr. Love from having any visitation or custody of his minor child for four
years) and authority obstructing any success, he had being with his
daughter; due to the systemic “Hate” Democrats have towards persons
of color;
A-
Judge Loza again in the matter of Carlen Colbert 08 D
80400 mother had her child taken from her based on allegations of “Fraud” and was given to her brother
unlawfully, she never got the opportunity to see her son graduate from 8th
grade for two years because of the racist hateful acts separating her from her
children;
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, 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). 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
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
B. 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 (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.
5.
Said judge
demonstrated Bias and Prejudice
conduct when she acted outside of her jurisdiction as she engaged
in “Treason” “Trespassing upon the Laws”; “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, 202 Ill. 2d 228, 280, 269 Ill. Dec. 80, 779 N. E. 2d 1115 (2002).
794
S.W. 2d 692 (Mo. App. 1990) “No system of justice can function at its best or
maintain broad public confidence if a litigant can be compelled to submit his
case in a court where the litigant sincerely believes the judge is incompetent
or prejudicial ………… {T}hat is the price to be paid for a judicial system that
seeks to free a litigant from a feeling of oppression”. State ex Rel. McNary V.
Jones, 472 S. W. 2d 637, 639-640 (Mo. App. 1971) Indeed, the right to
disqualify a judge is “one of the keystones of our legal administration
edifice” State ex Rel. Campbell V. Cohn, 606 S.W. 2d 399-401 (Mo. App. 1980).
It is vital to public confidence in the legal system that the decisions of the
court are not only fair, but also appear fair.
Thus whether the disqualification of a judge hinges on a statute
or rule in favor of the right to disqualify. A liberal construction is
necessary if we wish to promote and maintain public confidence in the judicial
system. Kohn, 606 S.W. at 401; State ex Rel. Ford Motor Co. V. Hess S.W. 2d
147, 148 (Mo. App1987).
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 Respondent standing up to Racial Injustice and Terrorism in
the courts because the number of judges perpetrating said acts of “Treason” are demonstrating just
how Democrats really feel about African Americans and other persons of color
they are not deemed citizens of Equal Protection of the Laws in Chicago,
Illinois courts;
A-
Democratic judges in
Illinois are still enforcing Jim Crow laws outlawed by the United States
Supreme Court;
B-
This case had several
judges that has the appearance of being forum-shopped
until the Petitioner and his attorney
allegedly found the right judge that would provide him favor, in that the
following judges were on this matter (MATHEIN, VERONICA B., KATZ NANCY J.,
DICKLER, GRACE G., WALKER, DEBRA B., SCHLEIFER, ANDREA M.,)
C-
That this matter
demonstrates the mindset of many white women on African American woman, in that,
they are not capable of making rational family decisions for their children, a
white person in authority have to tell them what to do or how to do when it
involves their children as if this is Mississippi or other part of the city
that views persons of color less than them;
D-
That Judge Bowes on
many occasions heard Respondents issues on said Petitioner, in that, the judge
stated, in open court “that 90% of the minor’s issues is attributed to the
Petitioner” but the most disturbing statement judge Walker stated on the June
11, 2017 court was “Neither M. nor A.
shall provide child care for Respondent’s other children from a different
relationship”
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 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.
10.
That judge Karen J. Bowes satisfied the Preponderance of Evidence
Standard by taking part in an “Organized Conspiracy” by interfering
and unlawfully obstructing with Respondents parental responsibility keeping her
from having custody per judge Walker’s order, in an attempt to keep black
families stressed oppressed exercising terrorist tactics thereby, validating
the veracity of colluding with said parties in said conspiracy where “Fraud”
and “Perjury” was apparent in reference to all attachments;
11.
That said judge unlawfully circumvented Judge Walker’s order and
ordered said minor to stay with said Petitioner arrested in a “Prostitution
Sting” (sic) hereto attached, Ex B
A- That judge Bowes has
demonstrated an unknown interest in this matter which has blinded her
objectivity in adjudicating the merits of this matter, due to the
aforementioned; Sup Ct. Rule 63 (c) (1) (d) mandates disqualification
where the judge has an interest in the proceeding. (eff. April 16, 2007).
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”)
12.
Jim Crow Laws are still being enacted and enforced in Chicago,
Illinois courts Black and Brown lives simply don’t matter, in that said racial
injustice in Illinois Courts by said Democrats is how they really feel about
persons of color, they hate them but make empty false promises using other
blacks and Hispanics who are willing to sell out their ethnicity seeking their
votes, so as to keep persons of color oppressed and keep families divided and
in a disarray;
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.
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;
13. That Plaintiff has
demonstrated beyond the Preponderance of Evidence that said acts demonstrates
how 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 the 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”)
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.”
WHEREFORE the aforementioned
reasons Defendant respectfully prays that said Judge be recused and all orders
VACATED 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) Order the reimbursement of any and fees and costs for the
enforcement of this matter;
4.)
Order that all past and future legal costs be absorbed by the Petitioner
who has hidden all of assets so as to keep from paying child support.
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
-------------------------------------
April Redeaux
1414 W. Welland Court
Roselle, IL 60172
________________________________________________________________________
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT
OF
COOK
COUNTY, ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC
RELATIONS DIVISION
)
In Re: The
Parentage of )
2008
D 80400
)
Clarence
Parker ) Hon. Karen Bowes
Petitioner )
Room 1900
)
)
V
)
April
Redeaux )
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: Gordon Nelson Steve Wasko
CN Law, PC Steponate & Wasko
100 N. LaSalle St. Suite 800 1440 Renaissance Dr, Suite 230.
Chicago, IL. 60602 Park Ridge, IL. 60068
PLEASE BE ADVISED that on Oct 12th, 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 Bowes or any Judge in her stead October 17, at 2:00 pm in room 1902.
Respectfully, Submitted,
April
Redeaux
April Redeaux
1414
W. Welland Court
Roselle, IL 60172
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 by US mail October 12th, 2017.
April
Redeaux
No comments:
Post a Comment