PINK PANTIES A MUST READ

READ HOW BLACKS IN POWERFUL POSITIONS ARE MERE FIGURE HEADS SUPPORTING THE VERY LAWS DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. GAVE HIS LIFE SO THAT ALL PERSONS OF COLOR CAN HAVE RACIAL EQUALITY IN THEIR ENDEAVORS.

BUT HERE IN CHICAGO MANY BLACKS WHO HAPPENS TO BE DEMOCRATS IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY ARE CONDITIONED INTO BELIEVING THEY ARE STILL SLAVES IN THIS ERA OF THE 21ST CENTURY.

TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT HOW BLACK AND BROWN CITIZENS OF CHICAGO ARE BEING DESTROYED EXERCISING JIM CROW AGAINST THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUP SO AS TO PLEASE THE RACIST WHITES IN POWER.

UPDATE: OTIES WENT TO COURT ON THE 8:45 CALL AND WAS TOLD BY THE JUDGES CLERK HIS CASE HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY NOTICED AND WAS NOT ON THE JUDGES CALL SHEET.

TAKE A LOOK AT PAGE 18 IT SAYS NOTICE OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE (AUGUST 8, 2017) ORDER DUE TO ERROR TRESPASSING ET AL.

NOW IF THE JUDGE DON'T WANT THE CASE SIMPLY RECUSE HERSELF THIS ONLY PROVES FURTHER THAT BLACK JUDGES DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION ON CORRUPT WHITES MEN INVOLVED IN AN "ORGANIZED CONSPIRACY" OR OVER WHOMEVER THEY ARE SPONSORING.

UPDATE

THAT JUDGE SHARON JOHNSON COLEMAN  FIRST CLAIMED THAT OTIS DISMISSED HIS OWN CASE AND THAT THE JUDGES HAD IMMUNITY SO IT WAS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (AUGUST 8, 2017)

LEE DID NOT DISMISS OR AGREE TO ANY DISMISSAL THE COURT TRANSCRIPT PROVED THE JUDGE LIED!
                                                  FROM THE ORDER OCTOBER 3, 2017 (CASE 17-2731)
HE APPEALED TO THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES WILLIAM J. BAUER, MICHAEL S. KANNE, AND DIANE S. SYKES ALL DEMOCRATS DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.

THE DISTRICT COURT HAS NOT ISSUED A RULE 58 JUDGMENT IN THE PRESENT CASE. INSTEAD, IT ISSUED A BRIEF ORDER WHICH DISMISSED PLAINTIFF LEE OTIES LOVE, JR. ACTION "WITHOUT PREJUDICE" 

A DISMISSAL OF A CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE, HOWEVER, NORMALLY DOES NOT QUALIFY AS AN APPEALABLE FINAL JUDGMENT BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF IS FREE TO RE-FILE THE CASE. LARKEN V. GALLOWAY, 266 F. 3d 718, 721 (7 Cir. 2001). THAT APPEARS TO BE WHAT THE DISTRICT COURT INTENDED, AND WHAT THE PLAINTIFF UNDERSTOOD THE CASE TO BE HERE.

IN A COLLOQUY WITH THE DISTRICT JUDGE, PLAINTIFF ASKED THE DISTRICT JUDGE WHETHER HE COULD "COME BACK". IN RESPONSE, THE DISTRICT JUDGE STATED, "THAT'S WHY I'M DISMISSING IT [PLAINTIFF'S CASE] WITHOUT PREJUDICE." THE DISTRICT JUDGE WENT ON TO REMARK THAT SUCH A DISMISSAL "GIVES YOU A CHANCE TO COME BACK, AND YOU MAY BE ABLE TO AMEND IT [THE COMPLAINT] AND FEEL THAT I DO HAVE JURISDICTION," SUGGESTING THAT ANY DEFECT IS FIXABLE.

IF PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT LEE OTIES LOVE, JR. WANTS THIS COURT TO REVIEW THE DISTRICT COURT'S RULING(S), HE SHOULD GO BACK TO THE DISTRICT JUDGE AND GET A CLEAR DETERMINATION FROM THE DISTRICT JUDGE THAT THE CASE IS AT AN END-- IN OTHER WORDS, THAT NO AMENDMENT TO THE COMPLAINT WILL FIX THE PROBLEM THAT LED TO DISMISSAL OF LOVE'S CASE. WITH SUCH AN ORDER (AND ACCOMPANYING RULE 58 JUDGMENT) IN HAND, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT LEE OTIES LOVE, JR. MAY THEN FILE A NEW APPEAL FROM THAT RULING.   

THAT THE AFOREMENTIONED MOTION WAS FILED DETAILING THE "TRESPASSING LAWS" THAT MANY DEMOCRATIC JUDGES SEEMS TO BE CONFUSED AND IGNORANT TO THIS AREA OF THE LAW.

THE CASE WAS MOTIONED TO BE HEARD ON TUESDAY NOV. 1, AT 8:45AM, LEE APPEARED ON THAT DATE AND WAS INFORMED BY THE JUDGES LAW CLERK HIS CASE WAS NOT PLACED ON THE MOTION CALL BECAUSE HE DID NOT PROPERLY NOTICE THE DEFENDANTS, HE WAS INSTRUCTED TO GO TO THE 2OTH FLOOR.

THE JUDGES CLERK LIED BECAUSE PAGE 18 AND 19 WAS ATTACHED TO THE MOTION AND THE CLERK SAW IT IN THEIR RECORDS.

LEE HAD HIS CASE PROPERLY RE NOTICED FOR NOV. 7, 2017 AT 8:45AM.

JUDGE SHARON JOHNSON COLEMAN ALLOWED LEE TO SPEAK FOR 30 MINUTES NO OTHER PARTY SHOWED UP TRANSCRIPT COSTED  HIM ALMOST $90.00 THE JUDGE DENIED THE MOTION WITH PREJUDICE CITING SHE HAD NO JURISDICTION BUT GRANTED HIM THE RIGHT TO PROCEED INFORMA PAUPERIS.

 THIS IS HOW THE DEMOCRATS CIRCUMVENT THE LAWS AND ENFORCE JIM CROW LAWS OUTLAWED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AS THEY ENGAGE IN TREASON TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS WARRING AGAINST THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

                                                                        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 J. Coleman   

  Plaintiff                                                                       Mag. M. David Weisman

    V

Supreme Court of Illinois, Pamela E. Loza,

Luciano Panici, James P. Murphy, Joshua P. Haid      

                                      

 Defendants

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE (AUGUST 8, 2017) ORDER DUE TO ERROR TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS MAKING THE ORDER VOID A NULLITY w/AFFIDAVIT & REINSTATE COMPLAINTS

 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).

The United States Supreme Court recently acknowledged the judicial corruption in Cook County, when it stated that Judge "Maloney was one of many dishonest judges exposed and convicted through 'Operation Greylord', a labyrinthine federal investigation of judicial corruption in Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, case No. 96-6133 (June 9, 1997).

Since judges who do not report the criminal activities of other judges become principals in the criminal activity, 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 3 & 4, and since no judges have reported the criminal activity of the judges who have been convicted, the other judges are as guilty as the convicted judges.

A court exercises its law-declaring power when a ruling has an effect on “primary conduct”. See id. (Citing Hanna v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460, 475 (1965) (Harlan, J., concurring) (classifying rules affecting “primary decisions respecting human conduct”) as substantive for purposes of Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938).

The criminal activities that the Federal Courts found in the Circuit Court of Cook County still exist, and are today under the care, custody and control of Judge Timothy C. Evans (Chief Judge). The Circuit Court of Cook County remains a criminal enterprise.

JUDICIAL IMMUNITY

Judges have given themselves judicial immunity for their judicial functions. Judges have no judicial immunity for criminal acts, aiding, assisting, or conniving with others who perform a criminal act, or for their administrative/ 
ministerial duties. When a judge has a duty to act, he does not have discretion - he is then not performing a judicial act, he is performing a ministerial act.

Judicial immunity does not exist for judges who engage in criminal activity, for judges who connive with, aid and abet the criminal activity of another judge, or to a judge for damages sustained by a person who has been harmed by the judge's connivance with, aiding and abetting, another judge's criminal activity.

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). The judges listed below had no legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them. They acted without any jurisdiction.

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.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original].

By law, a judge is a state officer.

The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).

1.)  That said judge erred and violated the oath of her duties not recognizing she had jurisdiction as she “Trespassed upon the Laws” denying said Motion in spite of the foregoing statements validating the verity of judges engaging in “Treason” 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 U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original]. By law, a judge is a state officer.  The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).

2.)  Plaintiff stated, Page 3, Par 14-18 from the transcript, “And the reason why I’m here is that me, the defendant is petitioning rule to show cause remanding Circuit Court judge Pamela Elizabeth Loza and attorneys are trespassing upon the law, corroboration in an organized chain conspiracy of treason, fraud of all sorts..” Line 19 Judge Coleman stated, “I need to stop you right there”, Line 23-24, She stated, “Okay, I have read, read some of it. I read you even though it looked like a filing” Page 4, Par 11-12, Judge Coleman stated, “when you dealt with them, were they – they were judges and it was in court, is that correct?” Plaintiff’s reply Line 13, “Yes Ma’am” Lines 14-16, Judge Coleman stated, “All right. Well, they have immunity. You cannot sue them for anything that happened in the case. You can’t sue them personally” Line 18-19 she further stated, “So they cannot---I have dismiss to them out. I have no jurisdiction over them. Do you understand?”  

Judge Coleman stated, Page 6, Par 2 “You understand I answer to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

The District court closed her eyes to the “VOID ORDERS” entered against the Plaintiff and entered an order described as a nullity, and because of the court’s disposition in this matter has caused judges to engage in Acts of “Treason”, “Trespassing upon the Laws” as if this was a Ebola virus.

3.)    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.

A-     Pursuant to {28 USCA 144, 455 (B) (1)} 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^th Cir.), cert denied, 409 U.S. 1037, 93 S. Ct. 512, 34 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1972), that said District Court judge either erred by misinterpreting the laws or methodically violated her oath by stating said Plaintiff dismissed his own case when in fact Page 4, Lines 18, 19, Judge Coleman stated, “I have dismiss to them out. I have no jurisdiction over them. Do you understand?”

 

B-    That this ambiguity, pursuant to Page 2 of the order from the 7^th Cir states, “A dismissal of a case without prejudice, however, normally does not qualify as an appealable final judgment because the plaintiff is free to re-file the case. Larken v. Galloway, 266 F. 3d 718, 721 (7^th Cir. 2001). That appears to be what the district court intended, and what the plaintiff understood the case to be here.”    

C-    That Page 6, Lines 12-17, Judge stated, “You have crossed over into the Federal court, and I deal with national issues. I don’t deal with domestic relations and child support unless it’s a usually international case or maybe even people in maybe different states, but usually not someone coming to me directly from the Circuit Court of Cook County”.

D-    That Page 7, Lines 3-6, Plaintiff stated, “Which I don’t understand according to law that they denied my written mandamus. But the thing about that is it was, it was not signed by a judge”.

E-     That Page 7, Lines 7-8, 10-14 Judge stated, “I’m not the Illinois Supreme Court.” “And I don’t tell them how ----and usually if they don’t sign something, and I don’t know if they had a signature on that, sometimes they issue orders that are not opinions that they can sign. I don’t know. I’ve never been on the Illinois Supreme Court, and I don’t work for them”.

F-     That from the Complaint captioned Complaint of Civil Rights Violations, Trespassing of the Laws, Treason et al. said June 6, 2017, Ex’s 1-3 orders from the Sup. Ct. attached as exhibits corroborating said assertions not signed by any judge but cc’d to all parties.

 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;

4.)  In furtherance to the aforementioned, Plaintiff had to appear before a probationary officer August 30, 2017 where his prior caseworker Claudia Swan had taken a medical leave and Robert Eizenga was the new case worker and discovered Judge Thomas Panici had charged Plaintiff with a DUI case # 15 C 660004301 12-18-14 and 12-17-15 District 6 room 103, Plaintiff not only never appeared before this judge but he does not drink alcohol;

A-    That a relative of Judge Panici “Trespassed upon the Laws” corroborating his role engaging in “Treason” falsifying documents as a true Hateful Democrat;

B-    That Judge Loza whom many attorneys seems to fear informed the Plaintiff if he was not in court Nov. 3, 2017 at 9:30 am, she was going to have him remanded into custody for failing to report to report to court;

C-    That Plaintiff has been threatened by another judge if he did not report to criminal court Nov. 3, 2017, at 9:30 am, he was going to jail.

5.)  That on the same related case number SS16600043-00 there was a fine charge of $1200.00 Seq# 001 24 months a clerk by the name of Thomas entered this information;

a.       That as a result to the terrorist acts perpetrated at the Plaintiff by Democrats organized by powerful men and women racist in nature and spirit, hereto attached Gr Ex B Motion for Supervisory Order by Patricia Mysza, Deputy Defender, for the Office of the State Appellate Defender;

b.      Said Deputy Defender stated, Par 6, Page 3 “He should not be denied his right to an appeal due to a series of bureaucratic errors that were not his fault”

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”)

6.)  The District Court’s actions can be gleaned as acts of Improprieties in an attempt to aid and assist said Defendant’s  named in Suit, In Re Judge No. 93-154, 440 S.E.2d 169 (Ga. 1994), And Deception by falsifying reasons for preventing a legally sufficient Complaint and Motion from being served on Appellee’s, In re Ferrara, 582 N.W. 2d 817 (Mich. 1998),In re Renfer, 493 S.E. 2d 434 (N.C. 1997), In re Kroger, 702 A. 2d 64 (Vt. 1997), Gonzalez v. Commission on Judicial Performance, 33 Cal. 3d 359, 657 P. 2d 372, 377, 188 Cal. Rptr. 880 (1983).

a.       Pursuant to VOL 1, Gr Ex B Letters the Barclay Group, Judge Loza without jurisdiction and “Cause” appointed Lester Barclay as minors child rep only because Plaintiff is having successful visitations with his minor daughter;

b.      That because Judge Loza having no fear of District Court’s judge Sharon Johnson Coleman’s jurisdiction is continuously “Trespassing upon the Laws” by appointing Lester Barclay to further fabricate any admissions of Plaintiff’s character so as to keep him from his child;

c.       Said judge never appointed a child rep to investigate the allegations of sexual abuse when Plaintiff reported it to the judge as noted in the complaint;

d.      That because many are aware Chief Judge being a Negroe realized he had no real authority caused many ethnic groups to come along and “Trespass upon the Laws” destroy black and brown families, use the laws as Ropes and Water hoses as they “Lynched” innocent men or women who stood up to their Terrorist Acts of injustices in the courts;   

e.       Pursuant to VOL 2, Gr Ex C In Re The Parentage of Robert Stafford v Carlen Colbert, 2008 D 80400, (Judge Pamela E. Loza) 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” Motion Pending.

f.       That Page 5, Par. 3 of the aforementioned Motion Judge Loza unlawfully removed a minor granting the child to the Defendant’s biological brother; 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;

g.      Pursuant to VOL 3, Gr Ex D, , In Re The Parentage of Clarence Parker v. April Redeaux, 12 D 8436, (Judge Karen Bowes) 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” Judge Gregory Emmitt Ahern, Jr. ignored the Defendants unchallenged Affidavits stated, “Judge Bowes did not do anything wrong” and that the laws indicated were generalizations”. Denied the Motion.

h.      Pursuant to the Notice of Service hereto attached, are the court orders of Oct. 17, 2017 Associate Judge Karen J. Bowes did not sign the court order transferring the matter to the presiding judge in violation of Sup Ct Rule 272, Directed Evidence of Trespassing upon the Laws;

i.        Pursuant to the Presiding Judge transferring the matter to judge Ahern it was not signed in violation to Sup Ct. Rule 272, Directed Evidence of Trespassing upon the Laws;

j.        That Associate Judge Gregory Emmett Ahern, Jr. became complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy” Denied the Motion with his certified signature corroborating his role “Trespassing upon the Laws” enforcing a void order deemed a nullity;

k.      Section 1983 of U.S.C.S. contemplates the depravation of Civil Rights through the Unconstitutional Application of a Law by conspiracy or otherwise. Mansell v. Saunders (CA 5 F 1A) 372 F 573, especially if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect, where an action is for a conspiracy to interfere with Civil Rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1985 (3), or for the depravation of such rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect and plaintiff was thereby deprived of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution and Laws, the gist of the action may be treated as one for the depravation of rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, Lewis v. Brautigam (CA 5 F 1a) 227 F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505, John W. Strong, 185, 777-78 (4 th ed. 1992)

l.        That the Judge erred considerably when it received notice and knowledge of other Judges complicit in a Criminal Conspiracy failed to follow Canon Ethics Leslie W. Abramson, 25 Hofstra L. Rev. 751 (1997). The Judges Ethical Duty to Report Misconduct by Other Judges and Lawyers and its effect on Judicial Independence.

m.    That because many white nationalist have infiltrated the Democratic party and has methodically overturned the legal tribunal recruiting the necessary persons who will keep their mouths shut and continue the terrorist mayhem on innocent citizens fighting injustice in the courts;

7.)   Pursuant to VOL 4, Gr Ex E Sun Times Article, 10-25-2016, Mark Brown, “Judge thought law clerk who wore robe was a judge documents say”.

A-    Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans, seems to only allegedly support the removal of persons of color and not any others, it states, “Crawford who’d been a law clerk since 2011, was fired by Judge, Tim Evans after he learned of her alleged conduct et al.

B-    Former President Obama and his Administration have made historic strides to expand opportunities and advance equality and justice for all Americans, including Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Americans;

C-    The reality is that there are many Black Negroe/African Americans don’t see themselves as being free in accordance to the United States Constitution but has elected to accept their roles as inferior humans to the White Democrats, in that a vicious guard dog protecting a home is ineffective if he is caged up, like an enslaved man’s mind his authority or will is contained to the perils of his bondage;

“If you can control a man's thinking you do not have to worry about his action. When you determine what a man shall think you do not have to concern yourself about what he will do. If you make a man feel that he is inferior, you do not have to compel him to accept an inferior status, for he will seek it himself. If you make a man think that he is justly an outcast, you do not have to order him to the back door. He will go without being told; and if there is no back door, his very nature will demand one.” 
― Carter G. Woodson, The Mis-Education of the Negro 1933

D-    That in spite of a man can donned the wearing of pink panties and coming out of the closet or a woman wearing a jockstrap donning a man’s organs simulating being hung not one person in the Democratic party exemplified any integrity or human decency towards humanity of every individual named in each case recorded within the aforementioned, to aid or assist in any capacity; due to Domestic Democratic Terrorist having taken seize of the courts controlling how every verdict is rendered in the courts;

E-     That every Negroe, Black or African American, Hispanic and Latino judges have been able to assume the positions of judges in a racist climate that opposed persons of color via the violent demonstrations that was led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr through the Civil Rights Act of 1964;

F-     That the very judges that has benefitted from the aforementioned never believed in themselves, never believed in the United States Constitution allowed themselves to be prostituted protecting the authors of mayhem (Democratic Party) acting as Uncle Tom’s, Aunt Jane’s, in the book Alex Haley Roots these Negroes were best termed as “House Niggers”;  

G-    That in spite of everybody wanting to be what they are not and everyone in competent authority is expected to do what is morally correct, but because so many were incompetent or unqualified to assume positions of authority further amplifies the Democratic philosophy culminated into acts of Terrorism;

H-    That it is apparent blacks within the Democratic Party have limited jurisdiction over Caucasians’ in that, because Jim Crow policies are still being enforced, the Illinois Sup Ct. has closed its’ eyes to Judges and “Trespassing upon the Laws” committing “Treason offenses” on the bench;    

I-       Pursuant to   VOL 5, Gr Ex F, Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, December 12, 2016, Lauraan Wood, Court OK’s judge race for Ahmad, last Par. “Crawford – who was running unopposed for the vacancy until Ahmad threw her hat in the ring—got fired from her position in August after she donned Circuit Judge Valerie E. Turner’s robe et al. 

J-       The Attorney Registration & Disciplinarian Commission suspended Crawford’s law license prohibiting her from being sworn in as a judge, in spite of defeating the incumbent Ahmad;

K-    That Cynthia Brim alleged relative to a prominent south side activist another African American judge lost her job;

 The Illinois Courts Commission has done what Cook County voters did not: It removed Circuit Judge Cynthia Brim from the bench, saying she's unfit to preside over a courtroom.

Charged with misdemeanor battery on a sheriff's deputy, Brim was found not guilty by reason of insanity last year. She'd been arrested for shoving the officer outside the Daley Center in March 2012, a day after she interrupted her call in traffic court with a disturbing 45-minute rant about race, justice and "kahoonas." Ushered from her courtroom by a supervising judge, she was prohibited from returning without a police escort.

8.)  That VOL 6, Gr Ex G, America’s Black Holocaust Museum, Voting Rights for Blacks and Poor Whites in the Jim Crow South;

A-    Page 1 of VOL 6, Eight ways People were kept from Voting under Jim Crow Laws and doctrines;

B-    This case demonstrates how persons of color are collectively denied Equal Protection of the Laws;

C-    This case further amplifies how so many judges regardless to skin color lack the academia necessary to ascertain simple aspects of the jurisprudence even when the laws and references are put before them;

D-    In Chicago Black Negroe judges especially are appointed whom are subservient, inferior and submissive to “Organized White Nationalist” of the Democratic Party to do what they are told, and not what the laws of the United States constitution afford to all persons of color; many has “Trespassed upon the Laws” engaged in “Treason” so as to protect and uphold Jim Crow doctrines in Illinois;

E-     “African Americans were not allowed to vote in the Democratic primary elections. White Democrats said the Democratic Party was a “club” and did not allow black members.”

F-      White Nationalists controlling the Democratic Party have been able to recruit and appoint any Negroe or Hispanic willing to sell out their ethnic group to violate their Civil Rights (engaging in reverse Discrimination) by circumventing the United States Constitution Civil Rights Act;

G-     

9.)  That VOL 7, Gr Ex H, Respondent’s Response Motion Striking & Objecting Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default, Order Granting Summary Judgment, Judgment of Foreclosure, & Order Appointing Selling Officer Due to “Fraud” and Barred by 5 Year Statute of Limitation 735 ILCS 5/13-2015 w/Affidavit;.

10.)               That VOL 7, Gr Ex I Respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration Vacate (September 1, 2017) Order due to Error “Fraud” Trespassing upon the Laws Making the Order a Nullity w/Affidavit; Motion Denied

A-    African American former Alderwoman Judge ignored the merits in Respondent’s Affidavit Plaintiff never objected to any of the assertions; but corroborated her role in an “Organized Conspiracy” demonstrating Black inferior or subservient Negroe judges do not rule against whites as demonstrated in this case

B-    Judge Lyle is on record where a court reporter transcribed all of the events, “Trespassed upon the Laws” with great determination to grant the Caucasian bank attorneys whatever they were requesting, hereto attached, Oct. 23, 2017 Court Order signed whereby; Judge Lyle corroborating her role engaging in “Treason” indicated in the order, “No additional Motions can be filed without leave of the Court before Dec. 6, 2017”.   

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 supposed 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 (7^th 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 (7^th 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;

VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE

In Illinois, 705 ILCS 205/4 states "Every person admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law shall, before his name is entered upon the roll to be kept as hereinafter provided, take and subscribe an oath, substantially in the following form:

'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be), that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of attorney and counselor at law to the best of my ability.'"

In Illinois, a judge must take a second oath of office. Under 705 ILCS 35/2 states, in part, that "The several judges of the circuit courts of this State, before entering upon the duties of their office, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation, which shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State:

'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of judge of ______ court, according to the best of my ability.'"

Further, if the judge had enlisted in the U.S. military, then he has taken a third oath. Under Title 10 U.S.C. Section 502 the judge had subscribed to a lifetime oath, in pertinent part, as follows: "I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; ...".

The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.” Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).

Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason.

Having taken at least two, if not three, oaths of office to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, any judge who has acted in violation of the Constitution is engaged in an act or acts of treason (see below).

If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason. 

TREASON

Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)

What is the penalty for treason?

18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016 (2) (J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

Attorney General Sessions: Actions “from racial bigotry and hatred….cannot be tolerated an innocent 32 year old Caucasian woman was killed as white nationalist banded together seeking white supremacy in Charlottesville Virginia. In Chicago any nonwhite person who closes their eyes and jurisdiction to a person of color seeking jurisdiction and protection to the very mayhem of racial hatred is a colored version of the very hate groups that is being denounced in that city is all the reasons why “Jim Crow laws” are still being enforced in the courts of Chicago, Illinois Negroe blacks and certain Hispanic judges as Democrats keep their mouths shut and go along with racial injustice.

  FEDERAL JUDGE GETTLEMAN: stated, Tuesday March 10, 2009, where he found Superintendent of police Jody Weiss in Contempt of Court and Ordered the City to Pay $100,000.00, “No one is above the Law”, he cited a 1928 decision by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, that said, “If the Government becomes the law breaker, it breeds Contempt for the Law, It invites everyman to become a law unto himself. It invites Anarchy.”           

The Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Wednesday April 26, 2006, Page 1, Illinois Political Machines help breed corruption, Associated Press writer Deanna Bellandi states, “Illinois is apparently a Petri dish for corruption. It is a real breeding ground”.         

That Chicago is the most Corrupt City in America, Huffington Post, Internet Newspaper, February 23, 2012; University of Illinois Professor Dick Simpson, “The two worst crime zones in Illinois are the governor’s mansion…..and the City Council Chambers in Chicago.” Simpson a former Chicago Alderman told the AP “no other State can match us.”   

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.)    Order the Removal of any and all judges receiving Notice and Knowledge of judges “Trespassing upon the Laws” remaining silent’

5.)    Order the Appointment of a Federal Judge in those courts applicable where judges have engaged in “Treason” “Trespassing upon the Laws”

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

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

8.)    Order a Moratorium on all Child Support’ Custody matters ascertaining other men victimized by the same unjust matters, Order a Moratorium on all Foreclosures, due to the admissions of judge Lyle on record handling over 3000 cases acting as a Private Citizen enforcing Void Orders;

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

  

I affirm the above as being true.

                                                                                            Respectfully Submitted

                                                                                             Lee Oties Love, Jr.

                                                                                          Plaintiff-Counsel Pro Se

                                                             IN THE

                                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                         FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

                                            CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604

                                                              EXHIBIT LIST

                            

A-    Group Ex A Court Transcript Hon Sharon Johnson Coleman.

B-    Group  Motion for Supervisory Order, In the Sup Ct of Ill;

C-    June 6, 2017 In Re Love v Loza 122254, Motion Denied;

D-    May 3, 2016 In Re Joe Louis Lawrence v Hon Mary Lane Mikva, et al. 120724, Motion Allowed for leave to file informa pauperis;

E-     May 18, 2016, In Re Joe Louis Lawrence v Hon Mary Lane Mikva, et al. 120724 Motion to Supplement Motion for leave to file petition for writ of Mandamus and/or Supervisory order vacating orders recusing Judge Valderrama for “cause” due to bias and/or Prejudice conduct pursuant to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (a) (2, 3) (West 2006), and to impose sanctions pursuant to Sup Ct Rule 137 Instanter. Motion Allowed. But the entire Motion was Denied

.

F-     June 6, 2016, In Re Emmanuel Bansa et al v. Hon Michael B. Hyman, Justice of the Appellate Court First District et al. Mandamus Supervisory/Order 120801, Attorney motion Denied;

G-    VOL 1, Gr Ex B Letters the Barclay Group, PC 4 pages;

H-    VOL 2, Gr Ex C In Re The Parentage of Robert Stafford v Carlen Colbert, 2008 D 80400, (Judge Pamela E. Loza) 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” Motion Pending.

I-       VOL 3, Gr Ex D, In Re The Parentage of Clarence Parker v. April Redeaux, 12 D 8436, (Judge Karen Bowes) 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” Associate Judge Gregory Emmett Ahern, Jr. Denied Motion.

J-       VOL 4, Gr Ex E Sun Times Article, 10-25-2016, Mark Brown, Judge thought law clerk who wore robe was a judge documents say.

K-    VOL 5, Gr Ex F, Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, December 12, 2016, Lauraan Wood.

L-     VOL 6, Gr Ex G, America’s Black Holocaust Museum;

M-   VOL 7, Gr Ex H Court Orders from the Complaint, where numerous judges committed “Treason” “Trespassed upon the Laws” locked an innocent man up 5x’s for allegedly owing child support to a woman, he had not impregnated; furthermore, the order was without a judges signature and attorney information;

N-    That the September 17, 1987 court was certified with the judge’s signature but destroyed in the court files, demonstrating the matter was Dismissed.   

O-     VOL 7, Gr Ex I Respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration Vacate (September 1, 2017) Order due to Error “Fraud” Trespassing upon the Laws Making the Order a Nullity w/Affidavit; Motion Denied

                                                          IN THE

                                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                         FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

                                            CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604

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

                                                                                      Judge Sharon J. Coleman   

  Plaintiff                                                                       Mag. M. David Weisman

    V

Supreme Court of Illinois, Pamela E. Loza,

Luciano Panici, James P. Murphy, Joshua P. Haid      

                                      

 Defendants

                                                                 NOTICE OF

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE (AUGUST 8, 2017) ORDER DUE TO ERROR TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS MAKING THE ORDER VOID A NULLITY w/AFFIDAVIT & REINSTATE COMPLAINTS

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 court’s jurisdiction; {Pursuant to the provisions of the United States Constitution}

That on November 1, 2017, Plaintiff shall present this Motion at 8:45 am before Honorable Sharon Johnson-Coleman or any judge sitting in her stead in room 1425, 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, IL. 60604;

                                                     

  

                       U.S. Attorney

                       Joel R. Levin

                      219 South Dearborn Suite 500

                      Chicago, Ill 60605

        Cook County State’s Attorney            Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans

         Kim Foxx                                              50 West Washington, Suite 2600

         50 West Washington, Suite 500                Chicago, Ill. 60601

         Chicago, Ill. 60601                          

                                                                       

        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, Markham IL. 60428, Room 105;

       Joshua P. Haid Sears/Willis Tower 233 South Wacker, Chicago IL. 60606 84^th floor;   

                PLEASE BE ADVISED that on October 25, 2017, a Motion for Reconsideration et al. been filed before the United States District Court. 

                                                                                Respectfully Submitted

                                                                            _______________________  

                                                                                            Lee Oties Love, Jr.

                                                                                              8435 S. Peoria

                                                                              Chicago, IL. 60620

                                                           773 783-5691

Dated October 25, 2017