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
OF
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
27th 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
(9th 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 (9th Cir. 1980); see Abatti v.
C.I.R. , 859 F 2d 115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988) “it is beyond question
that a court may investigate a question as to whether there was fraud in the
procurement of a judgment” Universal Oil Products Co. v. Root Refining Co., 328
U.S. 575, 66 S. Ct. 1176, 90 L. Ed. 1447. The power of the court to unearth
such a fraud is the power to unearth it effectively. See Hazel-Atlas Glass Co.
v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250; Sprague v.
Ticonic National Bank, 1184 and United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. (8 Otto)
61, 25 L. Ed. 93.
B-
“A judge is an officer of the court, as are all members of the Bar. A
judge is a judicial officer, paid by the Government to act impartially and
lawfully”. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill. App 3d 477, 410 N.E. 2d 626. “A void judgment is regarded as a
nullity, and the situation is the same as it would be if there were no
judgment. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at
any place….It is not entitled to enforcement. 30A Am Judgments 43, 44,
45. Henderson v Henderson 59 S.E. 2d
227-232
C-
“A Void Judgment from
its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal
efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, of no legal force and
effect whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in
any manner or to any degree. “A void judgment, order or decree may be attacked
at any time or in any court, either directly or collaterally” Oak Park Nat Bank v.
Peoples Gas Light & Coke Col, 46 Ill. App. 2d 385, 197 N.E. 3d 73, 77, (1st
Dist. 1964)
- That
under 18 U.S.C. 242 and 42 U.S.C. 1985 (3) (b). A judge does not
have the discretion on whether or not to follow Supreme Ct. Rules, but a
duty to follow. People v. Gersh, 135 Ill. 2d 384 (1990).
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.
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).
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 (7th 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).
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”)
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
OF
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 27th 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
OF
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
No comments:
Post a Comment