DOMESTIC TERRORISM HAS A NEW FACE COOK COUNTY ANY WOMAN WHO HAS BEEN SEXUALLY ABUSED RAPED IN ANY CAPACITY VIA INCEST ETC. NEED TO SEE HOW ALDERMAN BURKE APPOINT JUDGES AND HOW CERTAIN MEN JUDGES UNDER HIS CONTROL GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO PROTECT THE PERPETRATORS.
THIS CASE WAS ORIGINALLY ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JEAN COCOZZA SHE RECUSED HERSELF FROM THE CASE VOLUNTARILY SHE WAS A SENIOR LAW CLERK TO LODGE BROTHER MEMBER OF JACHIN PRINCE HALL 133 SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CHARLES FREEMAN FOR 15 YEARS.
THE CASE WAS THEN ASSIGNED TO JUDGE ELIZABETH LOREDO RIVERA WHO WAS NOT IN THE LEAST BIT INTIMIDATED BY ANYONE, I THOUGHT SHE WAS GOING TO BE BULLIED OR INTIMIDATED BY THE RACIST BULLY JUDGES.
ON JANUARY 21ST I SAW A MALE JUDGE SITTING ON THE BENCH IN HER STEAD, I KNEW SOME SHIT WAS IN THE GAME HE WAS SENT TO DISMISS MY CASE BECAUSE JUDGE RIVERA WAS NOT GOING ALONG WITH THE POLITICAL BULL SHIT!
WHEN THE FBI RAIDED CITY HALL AND SEIZED CERTAIN DOCUMENTS OF PERTINENCE FROM EDWARD BURKES OFFICE THAT WAS LIKENED TO THE CHESS ANALOGY OF
"STORMING THE CASTLED KING"
READ HOW POWERFUL NAMED POLITICIANS KNEW OF THE SHIT BURKE HAD DONE TO ME KEPT THEIR MOUTHS SHUT BURKE MISTOOK ME FOR THE WOMAN HE TOOK HER BABY FROM CLAIMING SHE WAS A DRUG ADDICT.
THIS VERY DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED AS A GAMBIT PAWN BECAUSE BURKE OWNS BLACK JUDGES AND THE IRISH AND POLISH JUDGES ALL MAYBE MOST BECAUSE CERTAIN JUDGES, HE OWNS TOLD ME EVERYTHING, I HAVE PREPARED AND SAID IN MY PLEADINGS ARE IN FACT TRUE, THAT IS HOW THINGS ARE DONE UP HERE.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I NEVER EXPECTED A GOOD JUDGE LIKE JUDGE RIVERA TO HAVE MY CASE OR KEEP IT BUT COULDN'T TAKE ANY CHANCES CERTAIN AREAS OF LAWS WERE DELIBERATELY WITHHELD SO THAT ONE OF BURKES CONTROLLED ASSOCIATE JUDGES COULD COME ALONG AND DENY THE MOTION.
READ HOW THE SON OF A PROMINENT JUDGE GOT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE INVOKED HIS AUTHORITY OVER HISPANIC JUDGE RIVERA'S CASE WRONGFULLY TRYING TO SAVE SOME OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED MOSTLY MEN NOW HE NEEDS SOMEONE TO SAVE HIM.
THE FBI HAS EVERY DOCUMENT ONE OF THE FIELD AGENTS STATED THEIR WAS NO WAY I SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOCKED UP FROM THE MAY 15, 1988 COURT ORDER, I WAS 5X'S FOR ALLEGEDLY OWING CHILD SUPPORT.
READ HOW BLACK JUDGES ARE THE NEW TERRORIST IN THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE WHAT THE RACIST WHITES CAN NOT DO BLATANTLY TO DESTROY AND VIOLATE THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF PERSONS OF COLOR THEY EMPLOY BLACK JUDGES TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK--READ HOW WILLIAM STEWART BOYD, FREDRENNA LYLE, FRANKLIN ULYSSES VALDERRAMA ENGAGE IN DIABOLICAL CRIMINAL ACTS ON BEHALF OF THEIR WHITE RACIST BRETHERN IN THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE.
COOK COUNTY PRESIDENT PRECKWINKLE NOW HAS COMMERCIALS AIRING HOW SHE AUTHORED THE LAQUAN MC DONALDS AUTOPSY REPORT TO BE RELEASED SHOWING, HOW MANY TIMES HE WAS SHOT IN THE BACK AS ANITA ALVAREZ RAHM EMMANUEL AND MC CARTHY TRIED COVERING IT UP---GUESS WHAT VALDERRAMA WAS THE JUDGE THIS ADMISSION PROVES THAT BLACK JUDGES ARE PUPPETS WHO DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD.
HON EDWARD JORDAN WHO TOOK OVER MY DIVORCE CASE FROM BOYD TOLD HE READ MY COURTESY COPIES AND WAS IMPRESSED, HE SAID "REMEMBER THEIR ARE MORE WITH ME THAN AGAINST ME"
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
)
Francoise
Hightower ) Judge Elizabeth Loredo Rivera
Petitioner
)
) Cal 41
VS )
) No. 88 D 079012
Joe
Louis Lawrence )
Respondent
) Room 1908
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO REINSTATE CASE
88 D 079012 & VACATE ALL JUDGMENTS DUE TO ORDERS BEING VOID A NULLITY CASE
BEING “FRAUDULENT” JUDGES “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” ENGAGING IN TREASON
OFFENSES ACTING AS “PRIVATE CITIZENS” MAKING MISREPRESENTATIONS TO THE COURT &
ISSUANCE OF A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR SANCTIONS AND REMAND PURSUANT TO SUPREME
COURT RULE 137
Now comes the Joe Louis
Lawrence, Counsel Pro Se, Heterosexual MAN BORN & RAISED a FREEMAN Promise
and Swear to this Honorable Court as follows:
1.)
That Respondent appeared before Judge Myron F. Mackoff
in leiu of Judge Rivera who was absent pursuant to Judge Rivera’s directive Respondent
provided the court order apprising them said matter were in fact continued
until Jan. 22, 2019;
2.)
That the State refused to get involved stating they
were not involved and this was not a state matter, the clerk respectively
interjected and informed the judge Respondent was in fact following the judges’
directive in notifying the States Attorney because they were the last attorneys
of record;
3.) Judge
Mackoff appeared to want to follow the clerk’s disposition on what Judge Rivera
stated, until the States attorney told the judge to read the Respondents other
motion, motion to impose sanctions et al. He began perusing the documents and
stated, “said motion made no sense and
that, I agree (he was agreeing to something the states attorney never said), he
stated, Respondent did not cite any laws that was germane to what he was
seeking”.
4.) Respondent
interjected and stated it is kinda ironic you mentioning arrears because the
clerks office have me owing almost $80,000.00 getting ready to go to collections
there were no paternity tests or DNA of any sort, the original case was
dismissed September 17, 1987 with paternity tests, there was no motion to
consolidate the prior case with this 1988 case; whereby this 88 D case never
ordered me to pay any child support but found me in default court records would
prove, I was never served and this is an incest case where a Police officer had
impregnated his biological daughters and had surprising political connections
where, I was framed protecting him numerous affidavits attesting to this in my
motions but nothing was done.
5.) Furthermore,
Judge Mackoff stated, Respondent could be
accurate and telling the truth but the court had no jurisdiction on child
support judgments or Post Trial judgments because the case is old in the 80’s
but if this was an arrears matter this would be different.”
6.) Finally,
Judge Mackoff appeared totally “discombobulated” at the Respondent’s ability to
articulate the laws in a concise coherent manner never providing much eye
contact but kept his eyes fixated thumbing through the exhibits looking at both
court orders and perusing the pages in a noticeable shocking manner.
7.) To
validate the verity of the aforementioned Par
6, Judge Mackoff had requested the judges’ clerk to provide him a blank
court order as he wrote, “The matter comes before the court on various motions
by Respondent regarding paternity, child support and other unrelated matters.
It is hereby ordered (6) This court has no authority to abate arrears and give
Respondent the relief he is apparently requesting (7) The motion is therefore
denied without prejudice.
A-
Judge Mackoff after writing the order had the audacity
to ask the Respondent had he ever tried to do anything about this case and what
did the other judges do? Respondent’s reply, “they did the same thing you did denied everything”
B- The
judge seemed to be regretting or having second thoughts for what he did tried
to express to the Respondent, he stated, “it
is not over for him, he have to stick with one court order that is the subject
to an issue and how this court has jurisdiction and cite case laws that is germane
to his pleadings”
C- What
Myron F. Mackoff didn’t know is that Hon Benjamin Mackoff signed a computer
printout attesting to court dates and records not in the court files where
someone was repeatedly deleting documents trying to cover up numerous crimes of
someone appearing in court without the Respondent’s knowledge.
D- That
Hon Mackoff knew the injustices Respondent was experiencing did what the
Respondent requested of his jurisdiction when Aurelia Pucinski was the Clerk of
Cook County something no Black person has done.
8.) Respondent
articulated the number of “fraudulent” irregularities mainly the May 18, 1988
court absent signatures of a judge or attorney, his reply “a signature was not necessary”
Rule 272.
When Judgment is Entered If at the time of announcing final judgment the judge
requires the submission of a form of written judgment to be signed by the judge
or if a circuit court rule requires the prevailing party to submit a draft
order, the clerk shall make a notation to that effect and the judgment becomes
final only when the signed judgment is filed. If no such signed written
judgment is to be filed, the judge or clerk shall forthwith make a notation of
judgment and enter the judgment of record promptly, and the judgment is entered
at the time it is entered of record.
Orders and judgments may be prepared, presented, and
signed electronically, if permitted by the Supreme Court. Amended October 25,
1990, effective November 1, 1990; amended Dec. 29, 2017, eff. Jan. 1, 2018.
The Committee’s Comments’ The purpose of this rule is to remove any doubt as to the date a
judgment is entered. It applies to both law and equity, and the distinction
stated in Freeport Motor Casualty Co. v. Tharp, 406 111. 295, 94 N.E.2d 139
(1950), as to the effective dates of a judgment at law and a decree in equity
is abolished.
In 1990 the rule was amended to provide that in those
cases in which, by circuit court rule, the prevailing party is required to
submit a draft order, a judgment becomes final only after the signed judgment
is filed. The 1990 amendment was intended to negate the ruling in Davis v.
Carbondale Elementary School District No. 95 (1988), 170 111. App. 3d 687, 525 N.E.
2d l35.
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. Respondent provided cases
attached to the exhibits 18 D 3208 and Emergency Motion filed before Federal Judge
Charles R. Norgle, Sr. regarding William Stewart Boyd, case 2015 CH 01670 Re Franklin Ulysses Valderrama,
case 12-M-711552 Leonard Murray, case 2008 CH
33616 US Bank et al. v Monzella Y. Johnson et al. Exhibits 1-11 validate the
verity in how these unrelated cases are related to the aforementioned case.
9.) The aforementioned cases describe the Black
men or women are the worse judges any educated man or woman of color can go before in Cook County
unlike so many racist judges, in case 18 D 3208 Boyd realizing he is
untouchable because his actions are against persons of color and due to his alleged
associations to Alderman Edward Burke remanded Mr. Kabir into custody
unlawfully for $6800.00 said Plaintiff was a former personal Assistant to the
Minister Louis Farrakhan in the N.O.I F.O.I, an impeccable Brother in the
Masonic Lodge overseeing many responsible Brethren and outstanding Administrator
at the Chicago Post office missed days at work being in Cook County jail as
Boyd is using his robe allowing the attorney Joan S. Colen to commit perjury as
soon to be ex-wife became complicit in an “Organized
Conspiracy” as fraudulent documents are presented as Reliance is Induced in
his court violating every aspect of Plaintiff’s Civil Rights criminalizing him
unlawfully to justify his actions.
10.)
Boyd has unlawfully DENIED every motion Plaintiff
filed in his court most importantly the DEFAULT where the Defendant failed to
answer or respond to Plaintiff’s Petition for Dissolution of marriage due to
infidelity and violence in the time allotted by the Illinois Code of Civil
procedure rules nor did she or her attorney request additional time to plead
Boyd became a law unto himself became complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy” engaging in a Criminal Enterprise.
11.)
Boyd is working with Joan S. Colen in an attempt trying
to Remand Mr. Cazembe Kabir back into custody (Feb. 8, 2019) unlawfully said
judge and attorney are now acting as Domestic Terrorists seeking to destroy the
Plaintiff in that case for not succumbing to their criminal acts of
intimidation trying to extort money from him affidavits presented showing he
did not have the money demanded or in his account; moreover, Boyd unlawfully
ordered the Exclusive Possession of Property inherited from Cazembe’s father to
the Defendant his soon to be ex wife.
12.)
Boyd committed the same crime in Respondent’s
divorce in the matter of 2008 D 010264 Lawrence v Lawrence Boyd pretended like
he didn’t know the Respondent DENIED his Default Motion knew of the mental illness
of his former wife and the effect the paternity case had on his family; also
him being displaced from the CTA, he prepared the Motion that stated “Petitioner was forced to take a low paying
job” because Judge Ronald Bartkowicz a former CTA attorney from the workman’s
compensation division, stated “if
Petitioner continued trying to be reinstated to the CTA he was going to lock
him up”
13.)
Respondent confided in to Boyd on so many levels,
he noticed his ring and asked him of his Masonic affiliation Respondent
informed him he was from Prince Hall Jachin 133 lodge when he was representing
him on the paternity case.
A-
Boyd never filed an Appearance and never withdrew from
the 88 D 079012 case;
B-
Boyd acted like a double agent of some sort
pretending to be of concern joining a Masonic lodge on the south side (seeking
the support and protection of the Brethren) but at the same time deceiving and misrepresenting
the Respondent and other Masonic men legally upright standing perpendicular in
all of their endeavors and at the same time helping Racist white Democrats as they
violate men of color Civil Rights Criminalizing us (them) any way they see fit.
C-
To amplify the veracity to the aforementioned on case
2008 D 010264 Boyd ordered the removal of his minor son from his custody, he
acted as if he was Schizophrenic or Bipolar because Respondent was the major
care taker for all of his children and had documentation from medical and other
professionals within the Department of Human Services and couldn’t fathom the
judges’ reasons Respondent asked him, “why
are you doing this to me and my family”? (in a shocking manner)
D-
Boyd Stated, “I am the judge, I don’t have to explain myself
to anybody do I Mr. Barclay”?
E-
That Honorable Edward Jordan on Respondents motion
returned his minor son back to him Boyd was in so much rage and hostility at
that time he had refused to sign the court order releasing him from the case.
14.)
Respondent articulated there were no paternity
tests nor motions to consolidate the prior case that was dismissed September
17, 1987 or was ever entered in the 1988 case.
15.)
Judge Mackoff stated, “for the Respondent to identify a specific order that Respondent deemed
a Nullity and show legal citations that supported his argument for the relief
he was seeking because he didn’t see any legal references in his motion.”
16.)
Respondent was confused because judge Mackoff kept
speaking in the first person pronoun so, “he
confusingly asked the judge are you the judge going to be taking over this case?
His reply, “was no this is judge Rivera’s
case”
17.)
Judge Mackoff surprisingly undermined the integrity of his
colleague Honorable Elizabeth Loredo- Rivera by circumventing her authority and
directives that was clearly articulated to the Respondent by providing the
court order to the States Attorney with proof of delivery when Respondent
adhered to said directive, Mackoff was forum-shopped to use his robe and
violate the oath of his duties and become complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy” by becoming a “Private Citizen” in denying Respondents motions in an attempt to
protect the judges involved and the States Attorneys.
18.)
That pursuant to a letter Par 9 from the Exhibit List
hereto attached, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Oct. 30, 2014 states, “As we understand it, the Consumer Response
team recognized that two separate cases were filed in Illinois Cook County
Circuit Court (case number 85 D 068184 and case number 88 D 079012). The Consumer
Response Team further recognized that while case 85 D068184 had been dismissed
by the Cook County Circuit Court in Illinois, they found no records of
dismissal for the separate case number 88 D 079012 that may address your credit
report issue’’.
19.)
That Respondent is the victim of a Domestic
Terrorist Network of judges in the Democratic Party exercising their robes as “Private
Citizens” in a sophisticated manner to EXTORT
money from the Respondent in the guise of child support on a Paternity matter that
was never his child or ordered to pay child support.
20.)
That Respondent received a letter from Il Dept of
Healthcare and Family Services Division of Child Support, pursuant to Par 10 from the Exhibit List, Sept. 28, 2018 states, “Our records show that as of 08/31/2018, you owe past due support in the amount of $79, 802.30”
21.)
Motion of Respondent’s (Monzella Y. Johnson) Re
Notice Motion for Disqualification of judge et al., pursuant to Par 11 from the Exhibit List, Page 2 Par 2 states, “that Judge Lyle realizing she would not be admonished or ridiculed for
violating her oath against women of color continuously demonstrated her role as
that of a “Thug” in a robe allowed a politically connected racist law firm
Potestivo & Assoc. to unlawfully corroborate with certain attorneys with
the US Bank and others to try and steal Defendant’s home disguised as an unlawful
foreclosure”.
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- 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.
22.)
That Respondent deliberately left Par 9 and 10 from the
original Motion to Reinstate Case et al. so as to trap the author orchestrating
this Mayhem knowing said Motion was going to be DENIED so that he could have
the opportunity to come back with the proper motion for reconsideration.
A-
That
all judges acted as a “Private Citizens” ( May 18, 1988) court order
entered “Fraudulently” in that Cook County judges never had jurisdiction on the
Respondent to compel him to submit to any laws from any court compelling him to
pay child support or enter any orders
finding him in Contempt of Court, 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)
B-
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)
C-
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).
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”)
D-
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.
E-
“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
F-
“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)
G-
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);
H-
A void judgment does not create any binding
obligation. Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.
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
as in this case.
The judge then acts not as a
judge, but as a private individual (in his person).
The Illinois Supreme Court held
that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper
presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority,
- it, had no authority to make that finding." The People v.
Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no
legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them.
They acted without any jurisdiction.
When judges act when they do not
have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a
judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are
engaged in treason (see below).
The Court in Yates
v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D.
Ill. 1962) held that "not every action by a judge is in exercise of his
judicial function. ... It is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an
intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse."
When a judge acts as a trespasser
of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses
subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no
legal force or effect.
Pursuant to Judge Myron T. Mackoff’s directive on Honorable
Elizabeth Loredo Rivera’s case the following Pleadings demonstrates how
Democratic judges and a plethora of political figures took part in “Treason
Offenses” “Trespassing upon the Laws”
The U.S. Supreme Court has stated
that "No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against
the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.” Cooper
v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).
Any judge who does not comply
with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that
Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land.
The judge is engaged in acts of treason.
Having taken at least two, if not
three, oaths of office to support the Constitution of the United States, and
the Constitution of the State of Illinois, any judge who has acted in violation
of the Constitution is engaged in an act or acts of treason (see below).
If a judge does not fully comply
with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer,
124 U.S. 200 (1888), he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in
an act or acts of treason.
Whenever
a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is
engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will,
449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens
v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)
1.
That case 88 D 079012 is a “FIXED CASE” absent the jurisdiction of every judge under
the alleged authority of Alderman Edward Burke.
2.
Said case
was originally DISMISSED under case 85
D 068184 September 17, 1987 before judge D. Adolphus Rivers where
Richard J. Daley was the States Attorney.
3.
That because Richard J. Daley allegedly wanted no part
to unlawfully “FIXING” said
Paternity case against the Respondent where there were allegations of William
Jenkins Hightower a Chicago Police Officer impregnating his second biological
daughter Francoise Louise Barbara Hightower, the first daughter being Danielle
Hightower as a minor.
4.
That because of Francoise’s fathers’ political
connection to Joseph V. Roddy who was allegedly a great colleague to Edward
Burke orchestrated the “Fixing” of
said case assigning certain judges of Irish descent to do what was necessary
framing the Respondent for a child that was never his.
5.
That under case 85
D 068184 Respondent DEMANDED a JURY TRIAL and was properly served had
two independent paternity tests that excluded him from paternity but was
altered to state he was the father from Cook County Hospital and American Red
Cross Hospital.
6.
That under case 88
D 079012 Respondent was never served!!! There were never any paternity
tests nor were there a Motion filed to consolidate the 85 D 068184 pursuant to the Feb 1988 court order if the Respondent
was never served.
7.
That because of the confidence in Edward Burke’s assignment
of judges being appointed to this case and because D. Adolphus Rivers being at
the time an African American his court directive was ignored.
8.
That on May 18, 1988, hereto attached, a blank court
order absent a judges’ signature or attorney information finding the Respondent
in Default on a plethora of “Fraudulent misrepresentations” made to the
court about serving him which was never true.
9.
That Respondent had retained an Attorney Robert Anthony
Egan who for years at that time aggressively represented and defended him and
was the attorney of record but was never notified of any attorney going back
before the clerks’ office refiling the matter.
10. That Respondent was a CTA Bus Operator at 69th
Ashland where Francoise appeared at the garage in her Police Officers uniform
and left a copy of the May 1988 court order, clerks and bus operators described
her perfectly’
11. That
Respondent immediately notified Robert Egan of the court order, he purportedly
went to vacate the date of Feb. 23, 1988 service of alleged service but vacated
Feb. 24, 1988.
12. That
because of the “Fraudulent admissions” the May 18, 1988 court order
demonstrating Respondent was never ORDERED to pay any child support still
legally standing to this very day.
13. That
alderman Edward Burke appointed an alcoholic Associate Irish judge who was
always drunk James T. Meehan to preside over the case where he “Trespassed upon the Laws” ordered the
Respondent to pay Francoise’s attorney Joseph V. Roddy legal fees despite of
testimony from Francoise having had gonorrhea and received medicine from her
physician prescribing medicine for her and her partner, Respondent never had
any disease from her but she had testified Respondent was the only person she
had sex with and the child was allegedly born with an infection.
A-
Respondent had a diary of the women he slept with and
the date he had sex with Francoise was the second week of March but was
pregnant in the second week of February.
B-
Judge Meehan heard testimony of John Patterson III
Francoise’s physician alter medical records to reflect the child was born
premature.
C-
Judge Meehan ordered the Respondent never to see the
child because he knew the child was not his but ordered him to pay child
support.
14. That
Alderman Burke appointed Ronald Bartkowicz a former CTA attorney to preside
over the Hightower case where he “Trespassed
upon the Laws” engaged in “Treason”
signed a Bogus Warrant against the Respondent for an Order of Protection in
favor of Francoise. Respondent had not seen or communicated with Francoise.
A-
That Ronald Bartkowicz threatened the Respondent in
open court, stated if “he ever tried to
be reinstated back to the CTA he was going to have him locked up because CTA
said you are not an employee they fired you.”
B-
That the Cook County Sheriff Deputy informed the
Respondent Fuck him and what he said he is working with the CTA he was an
attorney and should not be on this case, Respondent was shocked and scared
because he had no idea what was going on and why a warrant was ever issued.
C-
That the Respondent filed a Motion to Disqualify Ronald
Bartkowicz due to the conflict, said judge was shocked asked him how did he
know?
15. That
Alderman Burke appointed David E. Haracz a former Legal Aid attorney who “Trespassed upon the Laws” engaged in “Treason” was a Supervisor at the time
Respondent was seeking their support they had turned him down for any
representation stating because there were too many judges on the case.
A-
That Judge Haracz stated, “He realize this may not be his child he is just the bill collector, he
has to get money from him some kind of way”
B-
That the Respondent presented documents establishing
the fact he was a certified CTA employee, Haracz stated, “you know, you are an employee you were telling the truth all along,
you know, you are really smart, I mean really really smart” In a startling
dumbfounded manner.
C-
That Haracz placed the Respondent in Contempt for Allegedly
owing child support, Respondent had to pay monies from his welfare payments
and was sent to jail.
16. That
every judge Burke appointed became “Private
Citizens” as diabolical Racist White men had placed him in Contempt of
Court for Allegedly owing Child Support when the record demonstrated he owed
nothing.
17. That
Alderman Burke appointed the ultimate racist Timothy P. Murphy, he demonstrated
a personal hate because the Respondent was well versed in the laws when it was
the Respondent’s opportunity to cross-examine Russ Hinkle from Wonder Bread
human resource department, to prove he was an employee off work with a torn
rotator cuff resulting from being injured on the truck not receiving any money
(workman’s compensation), he ordered the Deputies to Remand the Respondent into
Custody for Contempt of Court, the Deputies were shocked they expressed this is
some deep bullshit, they said this is not about child support, Respondent
explained to them about the father being a Police Officer impregnated his
daughter who was a Police officer, they said, that they heard about the
Respondent and this case and was very supportive to him. Respondent never got
the opportunity to prove he was an active employee at Wonder Bread;
A-
That allegedly Moche Jacobius whom Respondent had met
prior as an Assistant Attorney General who learned of the Respondent fighting a
Bogus Paternity case long before he became a judge, told him that he heard
about that matter wished him success provided an attorney Gerald Norgren to
defend him in the Contempt matter before Murphy.
B-
That during this time never did Haracz or Murphy ever
have a court file on the Respondent it was the States Attorney always providing
documents, Respondent repeatedly refuted the allegations with numerous motions
but was ignored and Denied.
C-
Respondent was in Court because the Illinois Department
of Public Aid was representing Francoise an active Police Officer when her
daughter was a grown woman and the Respondent was on Public Aid with his
family.
D- That
Murphy had the audacity to say in front of the Respondent and Norgren “Today is your lucky day, I can’t lock you
up anymore”
E-
Respondent was on welfare with is wife and children and
the judges were forcing him to pay his welfare money to pay child support.
F-
That while everyone was falsifying and “Trespassing upon the Laws” trying to
help Francoise in this “Heinous Diabolical Nefarious Acts” she notified school
officials at Bogan High School in Chicago 79th Pulaski that “she did not know who the father was of her
daughter “
18. That
Alderman Burke had appointed Associate judge Morgan Hamilton as a permanent
judge during this time who had a self-hate for her own skin color and would do
anything to protect a corrupt white judge wrote on a court order “that Respondent left a cloud of mistrust by
the Cook County Sheriff claiming he was a CTA employee” as she was trying
to protect Ronald Bartkowicz.
19. That
Alderman Edward Burke appointed Leida J. Santiago- Gonzalez she was on the
bench cussing, I don’t know who the fuck he think he is referring to the
Respondent he will be going to jail, Respondent felt like he was about to have
a bile movement but nothing was coming out he fell to the floor, he couldn’t
see but was able to hear somebody shouted he is having an anxiety attack call
the paramedics, the judge said his ass better be having something, someone
provided something to smell and gave him some water, the Deputies comforted him
said he didn’t need to go to the hospital try to breathe and get yourself
together.
A-
Respondent never got the opportunity to stand before
the judge.
20. That
because Alderman Edward Burke is the Author of Racist hate in acquiring judges
who will abide by his rules of “Trespassing
upon the Laws” and engage in “Treason
Offenses” is why no Democratic judge of merit or any person with integrity
would assist the Respondent because the Democratic Party is the original party
of racial hatred.
A- Democratic
Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, Former Police Superintendent McCarthy, Former States
Attorney, Attorney General Lisa Madigan received Notice and knowledge of
Corruption on Police Officer et al. via email hereto attached.
B- Democratic
States Attorney Kim Foxx received Notice and Knowledge via email and Memo of
States Attorneys using their positions to assist a Police Officer (retired).
C- That
Respondent was informed by certain Caucasians that no Person Democratic of
Irish or Polish ethnicity will ever rule in his favor against the perpetrators
involved and especially none of his Bros referencing Black men fraternal or
otherwise, in that they said they are the worse persons he was to ever go
before for help because they do what they are told but there are some good white
judges who will help him.
D- To
validate the verity of
Par C
Respondent was living in an abandoned building that was
“Nigger Rigged” the terminology city officials used to
describe a said building CHA approved the respondent to move in
case 12-M-711552
where judge George Scully had vacated
order of possession in Respondent’s favor, allegedly Edward Burke had Leonard
Murray a Black judge to issue an order for the Cook County Sheriff to break
into his home 10058 S Vernon using a Battering Ram because the owner was connected
to certain City officials where he did not have to pay water bills and was
collecting section 8 monies by “Fixing” up abandon buildings not cleared by the
city inspectors by bypassing city permits.
E- That
Respondent lost 25-30 years of his possessions in the 4-bedroom home and was
informed if he attempted to enter the building because a green NO TRESPASSING Notice was Posted on the
front door.
F- That
Alderman Edward Burke allegedly orchestrated the entire conspiracy seeking to
ascertain what documents respondent in his possession Respondent had
transcripts of the entire 88 D 079012
case and the entire original court file of 85 D 068184 and credit reports
showing student loans paid off excellent credit and scores of 800+ in that
after Respondent’s home was broken into his identity was tampered with someone
went into his credit and deleted every item that was paid off in good status
and placed a number of false entries on credit report by bringing his credit
score to 500 and 600 in an attempt to blemish his credit score so as to keep
him from qualifying from moving into certain buildings with his section 8
voucher with poor credit.
21. That
every person who received Notice and Knowledge of the aforementioned
acts and did nothing have become complicit as active “Trespassers of the Laws” engaging in “Treason Offenses”
22.
That a certain person or persons of white ethnicity
allegedly connected to Edward Burke tried reaching out to him to leave the
Respondent alone let him go back to work with the CTA and give him his money,
Burkes alleged reply, “Fuck that Nigger
as long as he is the Alderman Respondent will never go back to the CTA and he
ain’t getting shit!”
A-That because Alderman Edward Burke
controls all the Niggers at the CTA and Local ATU 241 and those under his
control Respondent has never been properly reinstated to the CTA because of the
intimate nature Burke seems to have against men he seems to affectionately
hates and disparages in conversations referencing them as Niggers!
B- That
because Alderman Edward Burke allegedly controls 98% of the Black men on the
Cook County Bench allegedly authorized Franklin Ulysses Valderrama to
“FIX” case 2015 CH 01670
a Discrimination Suit Respondent filed against various units who
refused to allow him to rent into there buildings (credit score 716) with his
voucher because of his skin color they took his fucking money didn’t return it,
they DEFAULTED and Valderrama had no jurisdiction on the case because Moche
Jacobius signed a court order removing him from the case. Valderrama became a
God and law unto himself ruled on the case keeping Cecilia Gamrath from
presiding over the case, he stated he didn’t accept certified mail nor did he
except the Cook County Sheriff serving the parties.
23. There
is not a Black man in Chicago politics with any testicles to stand up to Burke
to tell him he is wrong but will remain in the closet hoping nobody will ever
discover who they are.
A-
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.
24. That
Respondent was referred to William S. Boyd by a remarkable attorney James
Montgomery who had him to sit and explain his issue for at least 30 minutes and
was impressed with Respondents presentation, a member of Trinity church Boyd is
in no way anything like Mr. Montgomery blacks like Boyd in the Cook County
courts as Democrats are sell outs destroying their own ethnic groups so as to
be accepted by the likes of Edward Burke whom has no love for persons of color
and has demonstrated in the aforementioned how he destroys men of color and the
Demonic Hate exercised as he selects and appoints judges to uphold his
doctrines circumventing the laws of the United States constitution enforcing
Jim Crow Laws.
25.
That in furtherance to the above, Respondent
asserts with authority
and based on such information and belief,
demonstrate beyond the Preponderance of the evidence standard that all
judges acted as a “Private Citizens”
and has “Trespassed upon the laws” whom this
cause has pended before, has demonstrated taking part in an “Organized Conspiracy” with said Alderman
Burke by making sure Joe Louis Lawrence remain oppressed for being a
Heterosexual “FREEMAN” standing up to the unlawful acts perpetrated at
him by racist white men engaging in Terrorist Acts in the Democratic Party. .
Conspirators
to be guilty of offense need not have entered 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;
26.
That Respondent 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. Brautigan
(CA 5 F 1a) 227 F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505, John W. Strong, 185, 777-78 (4 the ed. 1992).
A-
“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)”.
27. That
Respondent’s (former attorney William S. Boyd) has demonstrated being unfit and
should be disbarred from the practice of law for his criminal involvement
violating every aspect of Illinois Ethics by misrepresenting the Respondent to allegedly
receive an Associate Judges position.
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;
Supreme Court
Rule [137] provides in pertinent part:
If a pleading, motion, or other
paper is signed in violation of this Rule, the court, upon motion or upon its
own initiative, may impose upon the person who signed it , a represented party,
or both, an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay to the
other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses incurred because of
the filling of the pleading, motion, or other paper, including a reasonable
attorney fee. Not only will the courts consider an award of sanctions for active
false statements: failures to disclose material facts to the court can also
justify an award of sanctions. BRUBAKKEN v. Morrison, No. 1-9-1670, 1992 Ill
App. LEXIS 2144 (1st Dist. Dec. 30, 1992). Additionally, the fact
that a false statement or omission is the result of an honest mistake is no
defense to entry of a sanction. ID. To the extent that an individual lawyer has
engaged in sanction able conduct, that lawyer’s firm can also be jointly and
severally liable with the lawyer.
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 Plaintiff standing up to Racial Injustice and Terrorism!
Plaintiff’s license was
never suspended because there was never a signed court order stating he owed
any child support but was locked up 5 times for allegedly owing child support;
A.
Plaintiff Lost
his job with Sheriff Department in the Administrative capacity because of the
Bogus Paternity case;
B.
Despite scoring
in the top 5-10% on the Police Exam a Commander with the Police Department
could not bring him on the Police department because of some integrity issues
that had to be resolved with the Bogus Paternity case;
C.
Plaintiff lost
his job driving a School bus (Reliable who later went out of business) because
someone was forcing them to accept bogus court orders for wage garnishees where
Plaintiff was forced to get on Welfare because of all of the money extorted
from his salary;
D.
Plaintiff was
rear ended by drunk Police Officer standing still driving a CTA bus Officer
totaled his van, Plaintiff sustained a back injury while off work injured on
duty allegedly City hall officials and CTA personnel stole his wages and tried
to destroy said personnel records saying Plaintiff was never a CTA employee.
E.
Despite filing
a grievance the Union never acted on the matter even up to this date, but the
union Javier Perez called the Plaintiff last year telling them they never
received a letter from his physician stating he was fit to return to return to
work, if he had that letter we could do something about getting you reinstated,
what he did not realize Plaintiff had the information faxed it to him never
heard from him again;
F.
Plaintiff got
accepted to Northwestern Law School scored very high on LSAT could not attend
school because of the plethora of Racist Diabolical Obstructions no white man
have to endure living in Chicago, Illinois
G.
They have retaliated on Plaintiff’s children along with a plethora
of other “Fraudulent Acts;
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
IN RE
)
)
Francoise Hightower ) Judge Elizabeth Loredo Rivera
Petitioner
)
) Cal 41
VS
)
) No. 88 D 079012
Joe Louis Lawrence )
Respondent
) Room 1908
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO REINSTATE CASE
88 D 079012 & VACATE ALL JUDGMENTS DUE TO ORDERS BEING VOID A NULLITY CASE
BEING “FRAUDULENT” JUDGES “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” ENGAGING IN TREASON
OFFENSES ACTING AS “PRIVATE CITIZENS” MAKING MISREPRESENTATIONS TO THE COURT
& ISSUANCE OF A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR SANCTIONS AND REMAND PURSUANT TO
SUPREME COURT RULE 137
In
Accordance to all of The Cook County Circuit Court Rules
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THE
RELIEF REQUESTED
The
canons of ethic in the Rules of Professional Conduct constitute a safe guide
for professional conduct, and attorneys may be disciplined for not observing
them. In re Himmel, 125 Ill.2d 531,
533 N.E.2d 790, 127 Ill. Dec 708 (1988). Although they represent the best
thoughts of the organized bar, it has been held that these canons are
non-enforceable other than through the disciplinary proceedings. Ettinger v.
Rolewick, 140 Ill.App.3d 295, 488 N.E.2d 598, 94 Ill.Dec.599 (1st
Dist. 1986). Disciplinary proceedings and sanctions are strictly within the
province of the Supreme Court. Reed Yates
Farms, Inc. v. Yates, 172 Ill.App.3d 519, 526 N. E2d 1115, 122 Ill. Dec 576
(4th Dist.), appeal denied,
the Illinois Supreme Court, through its disciplinary arm, the Attorney
Registration and Disciplinary Commission, is the only forum for exacting
such punishment. Beale v. Edgemark
Financial Corp., 297 Ill. App. 3d 999, 697 N.E.2d 820, 232 Ill. Dec. 78 (1st
Dist. 1998). The ultimate authority to regulate and define the practice of law
rests with the Supreme Court. Perto v.
Board of Review, Illinois Department of Employment Security, 274 Ill.
App.3d 485, 654 N.E.2d 232, 210 Ill. Dec. 933 (2d Dist.), appeal denied, 164 Ill. 2d 581 (1995).
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.
Katelhut, 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 rel. 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.
False statements
Censure was recommended sanction for
attorney who engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, made statement of
material fact or law to tribunal which she knew or reasonably should have known
to be false, and failed to disclose to tribunal a material fact known to her
when disclosure was necessary to avoid assisting criminal or fraudulent at by
client, given that attorney’s misconduct was not result of dishonest or corrupt
motive, but of misguided attempt to accommodate clients. 99 Ill.Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. SH11
Three-year suspension was
recommended sanction for attorney who engaged in conduct involving dishonesty
and fraud, made statement of material fact to tribunal which he knew or
reasonably should have known was false, and offered evidence that he knew to be
false and failed to take reasonable remedial measures. 96 Ill.Atty.Reg. &
Disc.Comm. SH 358.
Disbarment was recommended sanction
for attorney who engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, made false statements
of material fact or law to tribunal which she knew were false and engaged in
conduct which tended to defeat administration of justice. 95 Ill Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. CH 877.
Censure was recommended sanction for
attorney who made statements of material fact or law known was false, and
engaged in conduct which was prejudicial to the administration of justice. 95
Ill Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. CH 504
One-year suspension was recommended sanction for attorney who made statement
of material fact which he knew was false in appearing in professional capacity
before tribunal, made a statement of material fact which he knew to be false in
course of representing client, and engaged in conduct involving dishonesty. 95 Ill Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. CH 191.
Disbarment was recommended sanction
for attorney who engaged in serious misconduct by making misrepresentation
during his divorce proceedings and who was a recidivist. 94 Ill.Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. SH469
Fraud on court
Two-year suspension, retroactive to beginning of interim
suspension, was recommended sanction for attorney who made statement of
material fact or law to tribunal which lawyer knew or reasonably should have
known to be false, instituted criminal charges as prosecutor when he knew or
reasonably should have known that charges were not supported by probable cause,
committed criminal act that reflected adversely upon lawyer ‘s honesty,
trustworthiness, or fitness as lawyer, engaged in conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, engaged in conduct prejudicial to
administration of justice, and engaged in conduct which tended to bring courts
or legal profession into disrepute. 96
Ill. Atty. Reg. & Disc. Comm. CH 118.
WHEREFORE the aforementioned reasons Respondent Respectfully prays:
i.
That the
(May 18, 1988) court order be VACATED due to it being a NULLITY 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.)
That Pursuant to Section 2 (42 U.S.C.) In the House of Representatives.
“Congressional Debate of
the second section of the Ku Klux Klan Act was more extensive and enduring than
that of Section 1; As originally presented, Sec. 2 made it a felony for any “two
or more persons” to conspire to commit certain enumerated crimes “in violation
of the rights and privileges, or immunities of any person, to which he is
entitled under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
“Throughout
the debates, supporters of the Act made repeated references to the depredations
of the Ku Klux Klan; Victims of these atrocities included not only blacks but
white Republicans as well. The crimes that were perpetrated, therefore, were
not viewed as isolated occurrences, but as part of an “Organized
Conspiracy….Political in its origin and aims”, “crimes perpetrated by concert
and agreement, by men in large numbers acting with a common purpose for the
injury of a certain class of citizens entertaining certain political principles,
id, at 457 (remarks of Rep. Coburn). See also e.g., id. At 437 (remarks of
Rep. Cobb) (“None but Democrats belong or can belong to these societies”) et
al.
“Where
these gangs of Assassins show themselves the rest of the people look on, if not
with sympathy, at least with forbearance. The boasted courage of the South is
not courage in their presence. Sheriffs, having eyes to see, see not; judges,
having ears to hear, hear not; witnesses conceal the truth or falsify it; grand
or petit juries act as if they might be accomplices. In the presence of these
gangs all the apparatus and machinery of civil government, all the processes of
justice, skulk away as if government and justice were crimes and feared
detection. Among the most dangerous things an injured party can do is to appeal
to justice. Of the uncounted scores and hundreds of atrocious mutilations and
murders it is credibly stated that not one has been punished. Cong. Globe,
supra note 2, app. At 78 (remarks of Rep. Perry). (“While murder is stalking
abroad in disguise, while whippings and lynching’s and banishment have been
visited upon unoffending American citizens, the local administrations have been
found inadequate or unwilling to apply the proper corrective”) et al., …. And
the State made no successful effort to bring the guilty to punishment or afford
protection or redress to the outraged and innocent.”)
4.) That Under Section 4 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871:
the law is clear, “Whenever in any State or part of a State………unlawful
combinations…….shall be organized and armed, and so numerous and powerful et
al…………and whenever, by reason of either or all of the causes aforesaid, the
conviction of such offenders and the preservation of the public safety shall
become…..Impracticable, in every such case such combinations shall be deemed a
rebellion against the Government of the United States…..”
5.) That this
court collaborate and transfer certain parts of these issues where they may not
have jurisdiction on parties complicit in said conspiracies be charged with
terrorist acts to the Federal tribunal;
6.) That
Cook County Sheriffs along with Federal Officials be present until this matter
is properly adjudicated.
7.) That Alderman Edward Burke be Ordered not
to proceed any further selecting any more judges Instanter;
8.) That all Judges name and implicated be
Ordered to Recuse themselves pending an investigation for their roles recorded
in this document;
9.) That the Issuance of a Rule to Show Cause for
Remand for Perjury and “Fraud” for all parties complicit in these matters.
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;
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,
____________________
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
PO Box
490075
Chicago, IL 60649-0075
IN THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
IN RE
)
)
Francoise Hightower ) Judge Elizabeth Loredo Rivera
Petitioner
)
) Cal 41
VS )
) No. 88 D 079012
Joe Louis Lawrence )
Respondent ) Room 1908
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO REINSTATE CASE
88 D 079012 & VACATE ALL JUDGMENTS DUE TO ORDERS BEING VOID A NULLITY CASE
BEING “FRAUDULENT” JUDGES “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” ENGAGING IN TREASON
OFFENSES ACTING AS “PRIVATE CITIZENS” MAKING MISREPRESENTATIONS TO THE COURT
& ISSUANCE OF A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR SANCTIONS AND REMAND PURSUANT TO
SUPREME COURT RULE 137
AFFIDAVIT
I Joe Louis Lawrence, Counsel 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
____________________
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS
DIVISION
EXHIBIT
LIST
1.)
Memo to States Attorney Kim Foxx received file stamp
Nov 30, 2018.
2.)
Email to Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, Supt of Police McCarthy,
States Atty Anita Alvarez, Atty Gen Lisa Madigan, Preckwinkle via Pamela
Cummings.
3.)
May 18, 1988 court order 2 pages no attorney
information or judges signature.
4.)
September 17, 1987 court order States Attorney
Non-Suited the matter Plaintiff has failed to cooperate in the prosecution of
this cause in that she failed to appear on today’s date and also one or more
scheduled court appearances 8-20-87, 1-30-87, 3-5-87, 6-9-87 signed by Judge D.
Adolphus Rivers.
5.)
Fax to Ill Dept of Child Support Services (Sept 6,
2018) 11 pages.
6.)
Courtesy Copy to William S. Boyd Dec 13, 2018 re case
2018 D 003208.
7.)
Courtesy Copy from Joan S. Colen attorney for Defendant
2018 D 003208.
8.)
A letter from Karyn Mehringer, MA Forensic Psychology,
Request for Investigation of Justice Anne Burke, and Alderman Ed Burke, Jan 22,
2008.
9.)
A letter from Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Oct.
30, 2014, signed by Wendy Kamenshine,, Ombudsman.
10.)
Letter from the Illinois Dept of Healthcare and Family
Services, Division of Child Support, Notice of Intent to Pursue Collections,
Sept 28, 2018 seeking $79,802.00.
11.)
Re Notice of Respondent’s Motion for Disqualification
of Judge et al. against Freddrenna Lyle with court order.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
IN RE
)
)
Francoise Hightower ) Judge Elizabeth Loredo Rivera
Petitioner
)
) Cal 41
VS
)
) No. 88 D 079012
Joe Louis Lawrence )
Respondent
) Room 1908
NOTICE OF
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO REINSTATE CASE
88 D 079012 & VACATE ALL JUDGMENTS DUE TO ORDERS BEING VOID A NULLITY CASE
BEING “FRAUDULENT” JUDGES “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” ENGAGING IN TREASON
OFFENSES ACTING AS “PRIVATE CITIZENS” MAKING MISREPRESENTATIONS TO THE COURT
& ISSUANCE OF A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR SANCTIONS AND REMAND PURSUANT TO
SUPREME COURT RULE 137
Please be
advised that on January 25, 2019, Respondent has filed before this Circuit
Court, Motion for Reconsideration to Reinstate Case 88 D 079012 et al.; and
will present said legally sufficient instrument before Judge Elizabeth L. Rivera or any Judge in her stead Feb. 26th, 2019,
at 9:30 am in room 1908.
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
Chicago
Housing Authority
Wilson
Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Office of
the General Counsel
Christian
T. Novay
Asst
Gen Counsel
55
West Monroe, Street, Suite 3800
Maria Sewell
Joseph
Chicago,
Il 60603
60 East
Van Buren
Chicago,
Ill 60605
Seyfarth
& Shaw
Jeffrey
K. Ross, Kyle A. Petersen & Anne Harris
,
Suite 2400
Chicago,
Ill. 60603
TO AAG
Tyler Roland Chief
Judge Timothy Evans, Daley Center, Chg., Ill. 60601
General
Law Bureau Presiding Judge Jacobius,
Daley Center, Chg. Ill. 60601
100
West Randolph Street Suite 1300
Chicago,
Ill. 60601 Clerk of Circuit Court Dorothy Brown, Suite
1001, Chg. Ill.
Judge Grace
Dickler Room 1901 Daley Center, Chg. Il
60601
States
Attorney, Kim Foxx, 28 N. Clark 3rd
Floor, Chg. Ill. 60601
Sec of
State
Asst
Deputy Dir Candace Cheffin
Asst
Gen Counsel Terrence McConville
60 East Van Buren, 8th floor
100 West
Randolph, Suite 500
Chicago,
Ill. 60601
Chicago,
Ill. 60601
CHA
Mobility
CHA
Mobility, HCP Counselors
Chris
Klepper, Executive Dir
Tracey
Robinson/Joann Harris
28 East
Jackson Blvd.
4859
S. Wabash, Suite 2nd Floor
Chicago,
Ill 60604
Chicago,
Ill. 60615
CHA
Mobility, Real Estate Specialist
Jessie
McDaniel
4859 S.
Wabash
Chicago,
Ill. 60615
City
of Chicago, Department of Buildings
Christopher
Lynch
121 North
LaSalle, Room 900
Chicago,
Ill. 60601
Cary
G. Schiff & Associates Gordon
& Rees LLP
Christopher
R. Johnson
Lindsay
Watson, Christian T. Novay
Yuleida
Joy
1
North Franklin, Suite 800
134 N.
LaSalle Street, Suite 1720
Chicago,
Illinois 60606
Chicago,
Ill. 60602
Courtesy
Copies:
Charles R. Norgle, Sr. Case 93
CV01609
219 S. Dearborn, Room 2341
Chicago, Ill. 60604
US
Attorney
FBI
Dir. Chris Wray
John
R. Lausch, Jr. 2111
West Roosevelt Road
219 S.
Dearborn, 5th floor
Chicago,
Ill. 60612
Chicago,
Ill. 60604
Mayor
Deputy
Regional Adm., Field Office Dir.
Rahm
Emanuel Beverly
E. Bishop
City Hall
77
West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago,
Ill. 60601 Chicago,
Ill. 60604
Hon
Dick Durbin
Judge
525 South
8th St.
Frederick
Bates
Springfield,
Ill. 62703
50
West Washington
Chicago,
Ill. 60601
Judge
Celia C. Gamrath Judge
50 West
Washington Room 2508 Neil Cohen
50
West Washington Room 2308
Alderman
David Moore
Alderman Ed Burke
Alderwoman Carrie Austin
Alderwoman Emma Mitts
Cook
County President
Cook
County Sheriff
Toni
Preckwinkle
Thomas
J. Dart
118 N.
Clark, Room 517 Richard
J. Daley Center, Room 701
Chicago,
Ill. 60602
Chicago,
Ill. 60602
PLEASE
BE ADVISED that on Jan. 25, 2019 A Motion for Reconsideration to
Reinstate Paternity case Due to “Fraud”
88 D 079012 et al, has been filed with the Circuit Court of Cook County and
said copies being served on said applicable parties via hand delivery or
regular mail;
Respectfully, Submitted,
Joe
Louis Lawrence
Counsel
Pro Se
Chicago, Ill 60649
312 965-6455
@joelouis7
