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
OF
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
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)
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 (9th 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 8th
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 (7th Cir.), cert denied,
409 U.S. 1037, 93 S. Ct. 512, 34 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1972).
C. Said Judge violated all Rules
of law Canon Ethics, Code of Judicial Conduct Rule Scott, 377 Mass. 364, 386
N.E. 2d 218, 220 (1979) See Lopez-Alexander, Unreported Order No. 85-279 (Colo.
May 3, 1985) (Judge removed for, inter alia, a persistent pattern of abuse of
the contempt power. The Mayor of Denver accepted the findings of the Denver
County Court Judicial Qualification Commission that the judge’s conduct could
not be characterized as mere mistakes or errors of law and that the conduct
constituted willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute).
Canon Ethics where there is a pattern of disregard or indifference, which
warrant discipline.
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 (4 the ed.
1992).
Finally, this document
is best closed by a jurist who has stated”; Citing Canon 2A the court
noted, “[a] court’s indifference to clearly stated rules breeds disrespect for
and discontent with our justice system. Government cannot demand respect of the
laws by its citizens when its tribunals ignore those very same laws”)
The
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Wednesday April 26, 2006, Page 1, Illinois
Political Machines help breed corruption, Associated Press writer Deanna
Bellandi states, “Illinois is apparently a Petri dish for corruption. It
is a real breeding ground”.
That Chicago
is the most Corrupt City in America, Huffington Post, Internet
Newspaper, February 23, 2012; University of Illinois Professor Dick Simpson, “The
two worst crime zones in Illinois are the governor’s mansion…..and the City
Council Chambers in Chicago.” Simpson a former Chicago Alderman told the AP “no
other State can match us.”
WHEREFORE the aforementioned
reasons Defendant respectfully prays that said Judge be recused and all orders
VACATED based upon the reasons cited in this document and noted in the
Affidavits and appropriate Sanctions be imposed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule
137:
2.) That the Chief Judge or Presiding Judge summons
Federal authorities to ascertain the criminal allegations noted to determine
what prosecutorial remedies are afforded in this matter;
3) Order the reimbursement of any and 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
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
Chicago, IL. 60620
________________________________________________________________________
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT
OF
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
No comments:
Post a Comment