#JudicialCorruption in Chicago, Illinois how to fix cases: September 2018

Thursday, September 27, 2018

HOW BLACK AND BROWN JUDGES "FIX" CASES IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY NOT FEARING AND RETRIBUTION FROM LAWS AND IS BENEFITING FROM THE RACIST LEGAL SYSTEM

READ THIS DOCUMENT IN IT'S ENTIRETY!

WHILE WILLIAM STEWART BOYD WAS AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING JOE LOUIS LAWRENCE IN THE BOGUS PATERNITY CASE FRANCOISE LOUISE BARBARA HIGHTOWER (WAS A CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER) V .JOSEPH LOUIS LAWRENCE WHO WAS A CTA BUS OPERATOR.

BOYD KNEW THE SCANDALS A ND FRAMEWORK A CROOKED POLICE OFFICER DID TO HIS DAUGHTERS FRANCOISE AND HER SISTER DANIELLE BY IMPREGNATING THEM AS MINORS AND HE HAD KNOWLEDGE FRANCOISE'S FATHER HAD GIVEN HER GONNORHEA DURING AND AROUND THE TIME SHE CLAIMED SHE WAS IMPREGNATED BY JOE AND THAT SHE NEVER HAD SEX WITH ANY OTHER MAN.

BOYD USED THAT INFORMATION AND NEGOTIATED A JUDGES POSITION FORM ALLEGEDLY FROM ALDERMAN EDWARD BURKE.

FRANCOISE HAS RETIRED FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN AUGUST OF THIS YEAR.

JOE IS STILL FIGHTING TO CLEAR HIS NAME HE AND FRANCOISE STARTED THEIR RESPECTIVE CAREERS IN 1987.

BLACK AND BROWN JUDGES ARE BY FAR SOME OF THE WORSE JUDGES ANY PERSON OF COLOR COULD EVER GO BEFORE BLACK MALE JUDGES NEVER RULE IN FAVOR OF THEIR ETHNIC GROUPS WHERE CORRUPT WHITE DEMOCRATS ARE INVOLVED AND GUILTY OF HEINOUS CRIMES.

IN THIS CASE JUST TO CORROBORATE THE ABOVE CAZEMBE O. KABIR DISTINGUISHING MAN AND BROTHER F.O.I N.O.I. PROMINENT ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CHICAGO POST OFFICE IS BEING SUBJECTED TO REVERSE DISCRIMINATION AND DIABOLICAL ACTS OF HIS CIVIL RIGHTS BEING VIOLATED AND IS BEING DRAINED FINANCIALLY BECAUSE OF THE TERRORIST ACTS PERPETRATED BY BOYD AND JOAN COLEN.

CAZEMBE IS BEING FORCED TO SPEND MONIES UNNECESSARILY TO DEFEND AGAINST THE UNLAWFUL ACTS BOYD HAS ENGAGED IN HELPING THIS CORRUPT WHITE ATTORNEY RECEIVE UNLAWFUL WAGES FROM HIS SOON TO BE EX-WIFE BY ENGAGING IN CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS BY USING HER SKIN COLOR GOING BEFORE BOYD BECAUSE BLACK AND BROWN JUDGES DO NOT HAVE THE INTEGRITY OR BACKBONE TO STAND UP FOR THAT WHICH IS RIGHT IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM.

CAZEMBE HAD TO PAY $60.00 TO HAVE THIS MOTION TO GO BACK BEFORE JUDGE EDWARD ARCE WHO CLOSED HIS EYES TO THE INITIAL MOTION TO DISQUALIFY BOYD SAYING HE DID NOT SEE ANYTHING BOYD DID WRONG AS A JUDGE.

AS HETEROSEXUAL MEN (LEE OTIES LOVE, JR. CAZEMBE AND MYSELF) WE ARE SUBJECTED TO OVERT SEXIST RACIST TREATMENT BY THE VERY JUDGES PRESENT ON THE BENCH, THEY HAVE BEEN DESCRIBED BY MEMBERS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AS CANDY ASSES, THE WHITE JUDGES TOLD ME PERSONALLY THIS IS HOW IT IS.

JOAN IS THREATENING TO HAVE BOYD TO LOCK UP CAZEMBE FOR NOT PAYING HIS WIFE $1700.00 A MONTH WHEN SHE HAS ADMITTED TO ISSUES OF ABUSE AND ADULTERY IN THE ORIGINAL PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION THAT SHE DEFAULTED ON BUT BOYD IGNORED THE DEFAULT AND ALLOWED HER ATTORNEY TO COMMIT PERJURY AND COMMIT "FRAUD" ON THE COURT.

TWITTER FAMILY LET'S HELP THIS BROTHER GET THIS JUDGE OFF THIS CASE BECAUSE IT IS SAD WHEN BLACK AND BROWN MEN ACT LIKE RACIST KLANS MEN RIDICULE MEMBERS OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WHEN THEY ARE WORSE THAN THE WHITES IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

UNDER THESE TERRORIST DEMOCRATS KEEP IN MIND, I WAS LOCKED UP FIVE TIMES FOR ALLEGEDLY OWING CHILD SUPPORT ON A CASE THAT WAS DISMISSED AND NOT ONE DEMOCRAT SPOKE UP IN MY FAVOR.

________________________________________________________________________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION

)

IN RE MARRIAGE OF )

)

Cazembe Oboi Kabir ) Judge Edward A. Arce

Petitioner )

) Cal 63

VS )

) No. 2018 D 003208

Bernadette Kabir )

Respondent ) Room 2002

)

________________________________________________________________________

PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE (August 27^th 2018) ORDER DUE TO ERROR “FRAUD” TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS MAKING THE ORDER A “NULLITY” “VOID” w/AFFIDAVIT

Now comes Petitioner, Cazembe O. Kabir et al. being represented Pro Se in this cause respectfully represents to this court the reasons and files herewith her Affidavit in support of Petioner’s Motion for Reconsideration et al;

1. That Plaintiffs having admitted to all facts recorded in said Petitioner’s Motion Striking & Objecting Defendant’s Counter-Petition filed et al. via affidavit;

A- Court having no jurisdiction ignored the white attorney Joan Colen and Defendant valid admissions of Fraud on the court and Defendant being in Default for failing to answer or plead it was 40 days at the time Plaintiff filed his Default, that when they appeared before Judge Boyd July 30, totaling 47 days without responding; thereby, demonstrating Prejudice and Bias behavior pursuant to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2-----1001 (a) (3); Sup. Ct. Rule 63 (C) (1).

B- 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 (9^th Cir. 1989);

C- A void judgment does not create any binding obligation. Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.

Properly alleged facts within an affidavit that are not contradicted by counter affidavit are taken as true, despite the existence of contrary averments in the adverse party’s pleadings. Professional Group Travel, Ltd. v. Professional Seminar Consultants Inc., 136 ILL App 3d 1084, 483 N.E. 2d 1291; Buzzard v. Bolger, 117 ILL App 3d 887, 453 N.E. 2d 1129 et al

A- That Joan S. Colen never filed a counter-affidavit to any of Petitioners pleadings.

2. That Judge Edward Arce became complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy” by ignoring all legal citations and precedents demonstrating Judge Boyd acted as a “Private Citizen”

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 (9^th Cir. 1980); see Abatti v. C.I.R. , 859 F 2d 115, 118 (9^th 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, (1^st 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).

4. That Judge Boyd lost jurisdiction when he denied Plaintiff’s properly plead Default making any all orders entered by any judge who received Notice and knowledge as active participants in an active “Organized Conspiracy” be advised Joe Louis Lawrence has forwarded said documents to a Federal Agent personally, an active complaint has been filed with the FBI about Judicial Corruption where judge Boyd is seemingly the alleged author of “Fixing” certain cases.

A- Motions for Reconsideration are designed to bring to the court’s attention newly discovered evidence that was unavailable at time of original hearing, changes in existing law, or errors in court’s application of law. Continental Cas. Co. v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, App. 1 Dist. 1996, 216 Ill. Dec. 314, 279 Ill. App. 3d 815, 665 N.E. 2d 374, appeal dismissed, et al.;

B- The purpose of a Motion to Vacate is to alert the trial court to errors it has made and to afford an opportunity for their correction. In re Marriage of King, App. 1 Dist. 2002, 270 Ill. Dec. 540, 336 Ill. App. 3d 83, 783 N.E. 2d 115, rehearing denied pending appeal; et al.

C- Pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-612 Counsel never Objected to the sufficiency of Petitioners pleadings, Objections to sufficiency of pleadings either in form or substance must be made In trial court, and if not so made, they will be considered waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. People ex rel. Deynes v. Harris, App. 1948, 77 N.E. 2d 439, 333 Ill. App. 280.

5. That said Motion filed before the United States District Court hereto attached as Gr Ex A, Page 3, 4 Pars D-E demonstrate how judge Boyd as an attorney deceived and misrepresented his former client (Joe Louis Lawrence) took advantage of the man not only in indigent circumstances but his children and family suffered behind the horrific “Terrorist Acts” Boyd became complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy” seemingly in order to receive an alleged judges position.

A- That Edward Arce is now aiding and abetting in a criminal “Terrorist Conspiracy” by trying to enforce a court order deemed “Void” a “Nullity” by all legal standards.

6. 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.

A- That Pursuant to the laws it states “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.

That said Judge demonstrated cognizance of his premeditated acts of Treason condoning said attorney to commit perjury never admonishing her because of her skin color being white for inconsistent perjured remarks made in court and Civil Rights violations perpetrated on the Plaintiff by Joan and the ‘Private Citizen” Boyd.

D- Judge Edward Arce exercised the same unlawful authority as in the same identical manner as Judge Boyd in ignoring all laws and criminal acts becoming a “Private Citizen” due to Plaintiffs ethnicity and being Pro Se. 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).

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.

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).

9. That Judge Arce has either corroborated his role as an active “Conspirator” with Brazen disregard for the laws challenging said FBI Agents following this case in the event this motion is Denied, that they are going to have to come and get him because Democratic judges deem themselves “untouchable” 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^th Cir.), cert denied, 409 U.S. 1037, 93 S. Ct. 512, 34 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1972).

10. That judge Arce has demonstrated an unknown interest in this matter which has blinded his objectivity in adjudicating the merits of this matter, where Boyd is concerned, 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).

Opinion: Democrats are now the party of lawlessness and anarchy, writes Donald Trump Jr. (Denver Post Sept. 21, 2018)

While it might shock Americans to see their elected officials behave this way, it’s not surprising from Democrats

In their efforts to appeal to the extreme left-wing elements in their base, the Democrats are becoming the party of lawlessness and anarchy.

Their dedication to disorder was on full display during Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings just last week.

While radical Democrat “activists” attempted to derail the proceedings — over 200 were arrested during the course of the hearing — Senate Democrats put on their own protest from the rostrum, marked by a complete disregard for law, order, and basic decency.

That Chicago’s legal system is predicated on the aforementioned facts Donald Trump, Jr. has mentioned in the very article.

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,

_______________________

Cazembe O. Kabir

9429 S. Ada St.

Chicago, IL. 60620

WHEREFORE the aforementioned reasons Plaintiff respectfully Prays for the Relief

1. For an Order Vacating the August 27, 2017 Void Court Order;

2. For an Order Substituting said Judge due to Prejudice, Bias & Overt engagement in an “Organized Conspiracy”.

3. For the entry of an Order awarding to your Petitioner for such other relief and any other relief necessary as equity may require of which this court may deem overwhelmingly just;

________________________________________________________________________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION

)

IN RE MARRIAGE OF )

)

Cazembe Oboi Kabir ) Judge Edward A. Arce

Petitioner )

) Cal 63

VS )

) No. 2018 D 003208

Bernadette Kabir )

Respondent ) Room 2002

)

________________________________________________________________________

PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE (August 27^th 2018) ORDER DUE TO ERROR “FRAUD” TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS MAKING THE ORDER A “NULLITY” “VOID” w/AFFIDAVIT

Please be advised that on September 26, 2018, Plaintiff has filed before this Circuit Court, Motion for Reconsideration et al; and will present said legally sufficient instrument before Judge Arce or any Judge in his stead Oct. 9, at 9:30 am in room 2002.

TO: Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans 50 West Washington, Room 2600 Chg IL. 60602 Cook County State’s Attorney

Kim Foxx 50 West Washington, Suite 500

Joan S. Colen FBI Dir. Chris Wray

77 West Washington, #1712 2111 West Roosevelt Road

Chicago, Il 60602 Chicago, Ill. 60612

Email jsc@joancolenlaw.com

PLEASE BE ADVISED that on Sept. 26, 2018 A Motion for Reconsideration et al., has been filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County; and will present said legally sufficient instrument before Judge Arce or any Judge in his stead Oct. 9, at 9:30 am in room 2002.

Respectfully, Submitted,

Cazembe O. Kabir

___________________________________________________________________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION

)

IN RE MARRIAGE OF )

)

Cazembe Oboi Kabir ) Judge Edward A. Arce

Petitioner )

) Cal 63

VS )

) No. 2018 D 003208

Bernadette Kabir )

Respondent ) Room 2002

)

________________________________________________________________________

AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF ILLINOIS )

)

COUNTY OF COOK )

I Cazembe O. Kabir, Pro Se 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

____________________

Cazembe O. Kabir

9429 S. Ada St.

Chicago, IL. 60620

Saturday, September 22, 2018

TAKE A LOOK AT HOW DEMOCRATS USE INFERIOR JUDGES TO ENFORCE JIM CROW LAWS ON THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS INNOCENT MEN OF COLOR AND IT IS IGNORED BY ALL BLACK DEMOCRATS

AN HON F.O.I. N.O.I. BRO IN CAZEMBE FILED HIS DIVORCE TIMELY AND HIS WIFE WAS PROPERLY SERVED AND ADMITTED TO THE COMPLAINT BY FAILING TO RESPOND IN A LEGALLY TIMELY MANNER.

JUDGE BOYD BEING THE HOUSE NIGGER HE IS FOR WHITE MACHINE DEMOCRATS IS NOT ALONE DENIED EVERYTHING LEGAL THAT BRO CAZEMBE PUT BEFORE HIM AND IS HONORING EVERYTHING JOAN COLEN A WHITE WOMAN KNOWING BLACK JUDGES DON'T HAVE ANY POWER OVER ANY WHITE ATTORNEY COMING BEFORE THEM IS USING HER SKIN COLOR ENGAGING IN ALL SORTS OF CRIMINAL ACTS TO HELP HIS SOON TO BE EX WIFE SHAKE HIM DOWN BY EXTORTING MONEY FROM WITH BOYD'S HELP.

BOYD IS USING HIS POSITION TO HELP THIS WOMAN MAKE MONEY ILLEGALLY OFF OF THE LIES HIS WIFE HAS TOLD IN AN ATTEMPT TO RECEIVE ALMOST $1800.00 A MONTH FROM HIM.

NOW THE QUESTION IS HOW MUCH MONEY IS BOYD GOING TO RECEIVE FROM THIS SHAKE DOWN CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE?

EDWARD ARCE ANOTHER PUPPET JUDGE RECEIVED THIS MOTION AND BECAME COMPLICIT IN THIS "ORGANIZED CONSPIRACY" SAID HE DID NOT SEE ANYTHING BOYD DID WRONG!

NO BLACK OR BROWN BROTHER OR SISTER INDEPENDENT CAUCASIANS OF ANY ETHNIC GROUP CAN RECEIVE ANY JUSTICE UNTIL THEY STOP VOTING DEMOCRATIC THIS IS NOT A TRUMP ISSUE.

PRESIDENT WAS NOT IN OFFICE WHEN THESE DEMOCRATS TOOK SEIZE OF THE COURTS OBAMA AND CLINTON WERE PRESIDENT AND NOBODY IN CHICAGO SAID SHIT!

I HAVE BEEN FIGHTING RACISM AND RACIAL INJUSTICE FOR 30 YEARS NEVER HAVE A DEMOCRATIC JUDGE RULED IN MY FAVOR WHERE IT MATTERED THEY SAID I WAS FRIVOLOUS, THEY HAD NO JURISDICTION OR I DID NOT PLEAD MY CASE, THEY DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT, I WAS SAYING.

IT WAS EASIER FOR A FREE SLAVE TO RECEIVE JUSTICE FROM A REPUBLICAN COURT IN THE 1800'S AWAY FROM DEMOCRATIC PLANTATION THAN IT IS FOR INNOCENT MEN (US) TO RECEIVE JUSTICE IN THIS DEMOCRATIC CITY.

RACISM AND HATE STILL HAILS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IT IS SAD IN THIS DAY OF AGE STILL YOU HAVE BLACKS NOW SOME HISPANICS STILL WANTING TO BE SLAVES UPDATED SERVANTS FOR THE WHITE RACIST DEMOCRATIC MACHINE.

Donald Trump Jr.: Democrats are now the party of lawlessness and anarchy

________________________________________________________________________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION

)

IN RE MARRIAGE OF )

)

Cazembe Oboi Kabir )

Petitioner )

) Cal C

VS )

) No. 2018 D 003208

Bernadette Kabir )

Respondent ) Room 1605

)

________________________________________________________________________

Motion for Disqualification of Judge for Cause Due to “Fraud” (Civil Rights Violations) and 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 Order is “Void” a “Nullity”

Now comes Petitioner Cazembe Oboi Kabir 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 now “Private Citizen” William S. Boyd has a Personal Bias and Prejudice against the Petitioner and has satisfied the preponderance of the evidence standards by engaging in a criminal conspiracy assisting the Respondents attorney allowing her to commit “fraud” on the court.

Said judge treated Petitioner as if he was an Illegal Immigrant or non U.S. citizen ignored all documents demonstrating the Respondent was in Default and Ignored Petitioners Motion (MOTION OBJECTING & STRIKING RESPONDENT’S COUNTER-PETITION DUE TO “FRAUDULENT” MISREPRESENTATIONS & ISSUANCE OF A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR SANCTIONS AND OR REMAND PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 137) properly filed and recorded in the computer and served upon the court as a Courtesy Copy but enforced jurisdiction on said matter where he had no jurisdiction by “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 with any integrity;

Based thereon Respondent respectfully moves that “Private Citizen” William S. Boyd proceed no further herein, and that the Honorable Timothy C. Evans Chief Judge who was properly served a copy of the (Motion to Supplement Petition for Review et al. and all related parties July 31, 2018 along with the FBI), hereto attached, Gr Ex A 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 Petitioners Affidavits and the judges’ actions in this matter.

This is Petitioners first motion and last motion Pro Se to recuse this judge or any 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;

For the Record so that every judge is aware and clear on this Petitioners disposition, he will not be wasting his time or energy fighting “Corrupt Judges” or any of their colleagues any judge not honoring this valid motion corroborating active “Treason” of now Boyd acting as a “Private Citizen” the Motion to Supplement demonstrates the number of judges Alderman Edward Burke owns, this matter will be properly presented to the FBI where a Complaint can be filed.

Furthermore, because Boyd is aware of all the judges responsible for “Fixing” Petitioner Joe Louis Lawrence’s Bogus Paternity case 88 D 079012 when it was Dismissed September 17, 1987, and CTA case makes him furthermore untouchable by any Cook County Official because of the dirt and credible knowledge he has on all parties as his former attorney not even Timothy C. Evans, Chief Judge, Kim Foxx, States Attorney et al.

That Page 9 Par 25 of Gr Ex A states, “That no African American, Latino or otherwise in authority have any real authority over Caucasians in the Democratic party this has already been admitted to throughout said pleadings prepared by the Complainant”;

Respectfully Submitted,

By: _________________

Cazembe O. Kabir

Pro Se

D- 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 (9^th Cir. 1989);

E- A void judgment does not create any binding obligation. Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.

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 “Private Citizen” Boyd 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 pursuant to Gr Ex A, Pages 1-4 validate Boyd has been criminally inclined ever since he became a judge, he deceived a former client, he “fixed” his former client’s Divorce presided over the case as a judge, trying to help the Ex-wife, this is not all see unlawful1.blogspot.com Post August 10, 2018 how he “Trespassed upon the Laws” destroying other men.

3.) That the Respondent and attorney with vexatious contempt for the laws became complicit in now an “Organized Conspiracy” ;

A- That because of Boyd’s allegiance to Alderman Burke one can easily glean from his actions, he was deemed untouchable.

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 Democratic judges to violate their oath and commit “Treason” “Trespass upon the Laws” willfully acting as Terrorist , Boyd acted outside of his lawful jurisdiction when he denied Petitioners valid Default Motion.

5.) That said judge ignored the fact he had no jurisdiction, thereby demonstrating his court is a “Criminal Enterprise” 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 his jurisdiction “Trespassing upon the Laws” not one Negroe, African American, colored person with authority in the Democratic Party admonish said judge further corroborating them as “Figureheads” as the racist “White men controlling the Democratic Machine as White Nationalist continuously enforce “Jim Crow laws” outlawed by the United States Supreme Court.

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 his role exercising Bias Prejudice conduct towards the Petitioner as he “Trespassed upon the Laws” engaging in “Treason” in that said court order was not only false and but it was in violation Sup Ct Rule 272 it was not signed;

That “Private Citizen Boyd” never had jurisdiction on the Petitioner to compel him to submit to any laws from his court when he denied said default motion, 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 he engaged in “Treason” “Trespassing upon the Laws” at the Petitioner by engaging in a plethora of criminal acts.

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 8^th grade for two years because of the racist hateful acts separating her from her children;

B- The Cook County Domestic Relations Division is truly an operating Criminal Enterprise said aforementioned pleadings validate the verity of this assertion.

C- “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)”.

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 (7^th 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.

D. That Gr Ex A validate the verity of the extent of Hate, Democratic judges are willing to stoop to in destroying a man of color taking a stand against racial injustice and Corruption in the Domestic Relations Division of Cook County.

5. Said judge demonstrated Bias and Prejudice conduct when he acted outside of his jurisdiction as he 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- That because Boyd could never be a man of integrity standing with principles is the only reason why he and others like him have been appointed as judge or any position within the Democratic Party these are the only persons the party accepts those who are willing to destroy their own ethnic groups making the Democratic Party strong destroying ethnic groups they deem inferior to them.

C- That said rebels, terrorists or gangbangers shooting up the neighborhoods getting away with their crimes as they kill the innocent and children are likened to Boyd and other Corrupt racist judges who are only on the benches to advance their own agendas as “Private Citizens” not Public Servants.

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 “Private Citizen” Boyd has satisfied the Preponderance of Evidence Standard by taking part in an “Organized Conspiracy” by interfering and unlawfully obstructing with Petitioners’ Civil liberties, in an attempt to extort his lawful earnings in the guise as legal fees 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 engaged in a plethora of Criminal Acts emulating the very Diabolical Demonic sic Acts perpetrated in the Hightower v. Lawrence matter where every judge got away as “Trespassers of the Laws”

A- That judge Boyd 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 judge has an interest in the proceeding. (Eff. April 16, 2007).

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 Petitioner 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 (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”)

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 all fees and costs for the enforcement of this matter;

4) Upon the Ordered Removal of said judge, have him as a “Private Citizen” to respond to the Rule to Show Cause along with Counsel and Respondent why they should not be Remanded into Custody for committing “Fraud” on the court

Respectfully Submitted

-------------------------------------

Cazembe O. Kabir

Chicago, IL. 60620

________________________________________________________________________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION

)

IN RE MARRIAGE OF )

)

Cazembe Oboi Kabir )

Petitioner )

) Cal C

VS )

) No. 2018 D 003208

Bernadette Kabir )

Respondent ) Room 1605

________________________________________________________________________

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” a “Nullity”

TO: Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans 50 West Washington, Room 2600 Chg IL. 60602

Joan S. Colen FBI Dir. Chris Wray

77 West Washington, #1712 2111 West Roosevelt Road

Chicago, Il 60602 Chicago, Ill. 60612

Email jsc@joancolenlaw.com

PLEASE BE ADVISED that on August , 2018 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 Boyd or any Judge in his stead August 27, at 10:30 am in room 1605.

Respectfully, Submitted,

Cazembe O. Kabir

#JudicialCorruption in Chicago, Illinois how to fix cases

Wikipedia Racial Injustice in Chicago Courts

Thursday, September 27, 2018

Saturday, September 22, 2018

About Me