DEMOCRATIC WHITE MEN IN THE POLITICAL MACHINE ENGAGING IN HATE CRIMES SURPASSING HUMAN IMAGINATION NOT EVEN JUSSIE SMOLLET'S ALLEGED VERSION OF A HATE CRIMES CAN COMPARE TO THIS TRUTH
THIS IS NOT WHAT NO ANGLO SAXON MAN CONTROLLING THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW OR ANYONE TO READ
1.) UNDER THE AUTHORITY AND LIKES OF ALDERMAN EDWARD BURKE THE COURTS ARE STACKED WITH IRISH POLISH ANGLO SAXON MEN WHO HARBORS HATE AT PEOPLE OF COLOR AND EXHAUST INCREDIBLE MEANS OF DECEPTION CORRUPTION EQUIVALENT TO WHAT THE DEMOCRATS STAND FOR HISTORICALLY AS THEY HUNG MEN AND WOMEN OF COLOR.
2.) UNDER THE AUTHORITY AND LIKES OF ALDERMAN EDWARD BURKE THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE ON RECRUIT AND APPOINT BLACK AND BROWN MEN OR WOMEN WHOSE ON AUTHORITY IS ON PERSONS OF COLOR.
NO JUDGE OF COLOR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ADMONISH ANGLO SAXON MEN IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, IN THAT SAD TO SAY JUDGES OF COLOR ARE ONLY INSTALLED IN POSITIONS OF POWER TO CIRCUMVENT THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND THE EQUAL PROTECTION LAWS AFFORDED TO US AS UNITED STATES CITIZENS BY CONTINUALLY ENFORCING JIM CROW LAWS.
3.) BLACK AND SOME HISPANIC JUDGES AID AND ASSIST IN THE "ORGANIZED CONSPIRACY" OF HELPING COVER-UP TERRORIST CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS PERPETRATED BY ANGLO SAXON MEN IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BY CLOSING THEIR EYES OR DOING WHATEVER THEY ARE TOLD BY "TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS ENGAGING IN "TREASON" PROTECTING THESE INDIVIDUALS.
4.) CHIEF JUDGE TIMOTHY CALVIN EVANS, COOK COUNTY PRESIDENT TONI PRECKWINKLE AND CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT DOROTHY BROWN ALONG WITH RAHM EMANUEL ARE JUST SOME OF THE BLACK PEOPLE WITH TITLES KNEW, I WAS BEING RAILROADED UNJUSTLY; FURTHER AMPLIFIES THE VERACITY THEY ARE ONLY FIGUREHEADS IN THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL MACHINE.
5.) READ HOW FRANCOISE LOUISE BARBARA HIGHTOWER A FORMER POLICE OFFICER HAD SEX WITH HER FATHER AND HAD HIS BABY AND THE ENTIRE POLITICAL MACHINE DID EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO DESTROY MY LIFE SO AS TO PROTECT HER MOTHER WHO WAS WHITE BORN IN PARIS.
FUCK PUNISHING HER FATHER WHO WAS A POLICE OFFICER WHEN JOHN BURGE WAS ON THE FORCE!!!
JUDGE D. ADOLPHUS RIVERS A BLACK MAN PRESIDED OVER THIS CASE UNDER 85 D 068184 FOR 2 YEARS WHEN HE DISMISSED THE CASE SEPTEMBER 17, 1987.
I DID WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY JUDGE MADDUX SAID " I WAS TO HAVE A SPONSOR REPRESENTING ME IN COURT, IN OTHER WORDS BECAUSE OF MY SKIN COLOR ONLY A WHITE MAN IS TO SPEAK TO A WHITE MAN ABOUT ISSUES BEING ALLEGED EVEN THOUGH, I WAS TELLING THE TRUTH, HE SAID THAT IS HOW THINGS ARE DONE UP HERE. JUDGE CHARLES NORGLE, SR (93 CV 01609) HAVE THAT VERY CASE HOW CTA DID NOT PAY ME WORKMAN'S COMPENSATION FALSIFIED MY EMPLOYMENT RECORDS TO REFLECT, I WAS NOT AN EMPLOYEE AND FORCED ME ON WELFARE.
ROBERT ANTHONY EGAN WAS MY ATTORNEY EVEN THOUGH HE WAS PAID WELL, I STILL GOT FUCKED WITH RACIST INJUSTICE BECAUSE THIS VERY DOCUMENT YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ DEMONSTRATES EVEN AS A JEWISH ATTORNEY HE WAS DEFINITELY NO MATCH TO THE ANGLO SAXONS CONTROLLING THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE.
JUDGE MARY LANE MIKVA TRIED TO GET A LAW FIRM TO REPRESENT ME WHEN THE CASE WAS BEFORE HER THE LAWYER REFUSED THE CASE BECAUSE THE GOOD OL BOYS WERE INVOLVED, HE SAID THEY ARE THE WORSE WHITE MEN YOU CAN BE DEALING WITH AND WHITE PEOPLE DON'T LIKE DEALING WITH THEM, SO I ASKED HIM WHAT ARE THEY HILLBILLIES? HE SAID NO THEY ARE WORSE YOU WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A BETTER CHANCE WITH A HILLBILLY.
HE SAID LOOK AT WHAT YOU ARE DEALING WITH AND WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON WITH YOUR CASE YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE AT WINNING YOUR CASE THAN ANY ATTORNEY BEING ASSIGNED, YOU ARE WELL-VERSED IN THE LAWS, YOU HAVE EXCELLENT PLEADINGS, I EXPLAINED TO HIM, THAT I NEEDED A WHITE MAN TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUES BECAUSE OF MY SKIN COLOR NO JUDGE WANT ME TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THE WHITES HAVE DONE, HE SAID THAT, I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO BE THAT PERSON BECAUSE THEY CAN NOT TAKE MY CASE.
I EXPLAINED WHAT THE ATTORNEY SAID TO ME BEFORE JUDGE MIKVA AND WON MY CASE THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE WAS TRYING TO SUSPEND MY LICENSE SAYING, I OWED CHILD SUPPORT JUDGE MIKVA RULED IN MY FAVOR AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE NEVER EVER SUSPENDED MY CDL LICENSE AS A MATTER OF FACT, I JUST RENEWED MY CDL AFTER MY BIRTHDAY APRIL 2ND BECAUSE ON APRIL 1ST THEY REQUIRED A BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
JUDGE RIVERS HEARD TESTIMONY OF PERJURY FRAUD AND CORRUPTION IN HIS COURT WENT ALONG WITH EVERYTHING THE ANGLO SAXON IRISH ATTORNEY DID IN HIS COURT PROVING WITHIN THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE BLACK JUDGES HAVE NO AUTHORITY OVER WHITE ATTORNEYS.
IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
)
)
Francoise Hightower )
Petitioner
)
)
VS
)
)
Joe Louis Lawrence )
Respondent
)
NOTICE
DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL
PETITION
NOTICE
OF REMOVAL CIVIL ACTION
FROM
STATE JURISDICTION
NOW COMES the Removing Party, Joe Louis Lawrence Counsel Pro se
(“Defendant”), hereby properly Noticing the Plaintiff’s with this Motion and
all of its attachments to all parties Noticed in the Certificate of Service
{Pursuant to Fed Rules of Civil Procedures}:
That on April 18, 2019, Defendant has filed said Motion Notice
of Removal et al. 219 S. Dearborn
Street, Chicago, IL. 60604
Respectfully Submitted,
_________________________
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
IN THE
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
)
)
Francoise Hightower )
Petitioner
)
)
VS )
)
Joe
Louis Lawrence )
Respondent
)
NOTICE OF REMOVAL CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE JURISDICTION
{Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 1446 (a)}
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that Defendants Pro Se
appeals to the United States District Court for the Northern District
for Jurisdiction. Defendant will seek Sanctions Punitive
Damages, applicable
Remand for all criminal acts associated in said matter, due to Plaintiff engaging in an “Organized
Conspiracy” corroborating with Domestic Terrorist in the Democratic Party
framing him for a Paternity matter Extorting money from his wages destroying
his life where Defendant was Remanded into custody unlawfully 5 times for
Allegedly owing child support and is homeless forced to live on Welfare.
NOW COMES the Removing Party, Joe Louis Lawrence Counsel Pro Se ("Defendant"), hereby respectfully represents
to this Honorable
Court
with an Affidavit the noted reasons why this matter should be within this
court's jurisdiction;
{Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 1446
a}
complaining of the Plaintiff as
named
above,
and each of them, as follows:
To the Honorable Judges
of the United States
District Court
for the Northern District:
Said violations were of the Fourteenth Amendment; no judge ever had jurisdiction or authority to remand
Defendant or allow any of his personal effects from his body as a Chicago
Transit Authority employee; Plaintiff as a Police officer used her
authority in violation of the Civil
Rights Act conspired with States Attorneys and other related state court
rules;
Defendant is demonstrating how and why this Honorable Court should be within this
courts' jurisdiction {Pursuant to (A) Color (Title V11 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. 1981)
(B) Race (Title V11 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. 1981)
Racial Discrimination, Racial Retaliation, Racial Hatred,
Racial Oppression, Civil Rights Violations, Unequal
Applications of the Laws, and
Disparate Treatment on the basis of race, color
or national origin and
age
(42 U.S.C. 1981).
This court
has
.Jurisdiction over the statutory violations
alleged as conferred as follows:
over Title V11 claims by
U.S.C. {1331, 28 U.S.C.
{1343 (a) 3 and
42 U.S.C. {2000e-5
(F) (3); over 42 U.S.C. {1981 and {1983 by 42 U.S.C. {1988; over the A.D.E.A. by 42 U.S.C. {12117}.
JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT
NOTICE OF REMOVAL CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT ET AL
Order entered: March 19, 2019 and April 16, 2019 (Disqualify judge for
Racial Hate “Cause” Bias et al. Stricken)
Notice of Removal
Complaint: April 18, 2019
Statute: “Trespassing upon the Laws” “No Jurisdiction
on the Appellant” Committing Fraud, Engaging in Treason Like Offenses, Judge
Committing Perjury, Judge aiding and abetting in a Criminal Conspiracy, Judge
committing Unequal Protection of the Laws Violations, Judge acting outside of
the Immunity provisions of his Oath, Judge engaging in “Jim Crowism” Laws
outlawed by the United States Supreme Court
as he used his robe and jurisdiction to aid and assist Terrorists Judges
and Public Officials to cover-up Criminal Civil Rights Violations, Disparate
Unequal Protection of the Laws, Racial Hate Crimes, Slander and Defamation of
Character, Civil Rights Violations, Racial Terrorism Conspiracy, Public,
Political, Fraternal Corruption Conspiracies, and other Un-Constitutional
Lawless Violations.
Defendant is appealing
to the United States District Court, for jurisdiction based on the foregoing
stated above:
The United States District Court has the Jurisdiction, to correct any error, and establish any precedent in the law where deemed necessary, without
fear of reprisals from any political
organization, terrorist fraternal
orders, elected or otherwise, for the mandate
of their decision;
The United States District Court
has the Jurisdiction and Wisdom to recognize when State Courts are not enforcing
laws equitably in accordance to the United States Constitution; '
Defendant is before the United States District Court because as a "Pro Se" Heterosexual Man of Color, the admissions recorded
in this instrument demonstrates
under the Democratic Political
Machine Illinois Legal system Black and Brown lives don't matter and that Jim Crow enforcement
legal methods are still being exercised
in the courts and Defendant has been economically oppressed for attempting to rise above racial injustice
as demonstrated in this matter;
Defendant is before the United States District Court
because of the color of his skin all Plaintiff have admitted to all criminal
acts and civil rights violations via every legal representative
in the Democratic Political Machine, in that
every Democratic judge have ignored all admissions affidavits, the Laws and laws the United States Constitution and Defendant’s Civil Liberties, validating the veracity Defendant is a
nobody merely because of his skin color, in that every ruling has been issued
according to racist hate political guidelines;
Defendant is before the United States District Court because the present administration Democratic judges on the State and County levels are not about the business of judicial equality
their rulings are based on Racial, Political, Disparate, Anarchy Terrorist guidelines and not in accordance to the Laws of
the United States Constitution or any precedents established within
the Constitution.
For all of the aforementioned reasons is why Defendant is before the United States District Court for Jurisdiction and Enforcement.
I affirm the above
as being true.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
PO Box 490075
Chicago, Il 60649-0075
THE PARTIES
1. Defendant is now, and at all times relevant
to this action, a resident
of the County of
COOK, State
of ILLINOIS.
2. Plaintiff is now and at times relevant to this
action was not only a resident of the County of Cook, State of Illinois but was
an active Chicago Police Officer resigning or retiring in August or September
2018.
3. The transactions and events which
are
the subject matter of this Complaint all occurred within the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS
4. Defendant
is informed and believes,
and thereon alleges,
that at all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff
conspired
and was complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy” reaping the benefits extorting
money from the Defendant in the criminal enterprise of Cook County; whereby all
other agents, judges Public Officials, State employees and States
Attorneys and each of them, and in doing the things
alleged herein below, were
acting
within
the
course
and
scope
of
such criminal enterprise, of an “Organized Conspiracy”.
INTRODUCTORY ALLEGATIONS
5.) This is an action
brought
by Defendant for jurisdiction, injunctive and equitable relief, and for compensatory, general and punitive damages.
6.) Defendant filed RESPONDENT’S
MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE
FOR “CAUSE” RACIAL HATE BIAS PREJUDICE PURSUANT to S.H.A.
735 ILCS 5/2 ---1001 (a) (2,3) ENGAGING
IN AN ORGANIZED CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY
CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS “FRAUD” TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS ENGAGING IN
TREASON OFFENSES MAKING ALL ORDERS A NULLITY w/AFFIDAVIT pursuant to Civil
Procedure Rules and Sup Ct. Rules
of Illinois, hereto
attached,
as Gr
Ex
A no
States attorney denied
or objected to said pleadings of
"Fraud"
A- That because said
judge Myron F. Mackoff is a member of
the Democratic Political Machine and is a white man engaging in a Racial Hate
Crime Denied Defendant’s proper Motion for Reconsideration the court became a law unto themselves
and a “Private Citizen” Trespasser upon the Laws engaging in Treason offenses denied
said
motion
Ref
as
Ex 3; Court Order.
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).
7.) That Gr
Ex A , Ex 6 Feb. 1988 Court Transcript, Page 4 Lines 8-14, Judge Rivers stated, “Based upon the circumstances, if you have any difficulty serving the
defendant in this case, you may want to file the appropriate motion to vacate
the non-suit order, based upon the fact there were misrepresentations to the
Court with reference to the plaintiff appearing and cooperating with the
State’s Attorney’s Office”.
A- That because Democrats in the Political
Machine don’t honor any Equal Protection Laws of the United States
Constitution, they systematically band together and enforce Jim Crow Laws
corroborating the veracity the Democratic Party is just as Racist and Hateful
today as they were years ago as people of color were hosed and dogs sent to
attack them and lynched.
8.)
That Gr Ex A. Ex 7 Affidavit Rock Detective Agency
states, “On 2/23/88 This investigator
made a second attempt to serve Mr. Lawrence. Service was executed on Mrs.,
Allen who stated that she was the grandmother of Mr. Lawrence and that he was
not home but did reside at the address. The time was approximately 4:30 pm.”
“Mrs.
Allen is a Black female, about 70-75 years of age with white hair.”
A-
Defendant’s
Grandmother never had white hair and was 63 years old and did not look her age;
furthermore, there was no 3rd floor rear apartment and she kept her
gate locked, never answered her door for anyone not even family you had to call
her first; otherwise, you would be sitting downstairs in the cold or rain.
B-
To validate the verity of the above, when she passed in
her 3rd floor unit the firemen had to enter the unit by entering the
third-floor window they were not able to enter the unit due to the gate being
padlocked.
C-
That said Exhibit within the Preponderance of the
Evidence establishes "Fraud" that said orders entered against the Defendant
were a “Nullity” pursuant to
State and Federal Laws and all legal precedents.
D-
That the court
became
a law unto
themselves
denied
said
motion
and
became “Private Citizens” not having any jurisdiction over the Defendant making
all Orders a “Nullity”.
E- To show fraud upon
the court, the complaining party must establish that the alleged misconduct
affected the integrity of the judicial process, either because the court itself
was defrauded or because the misconduct was perpetrated by officers of the
court. Alexander v. Robertson, 882, F. 2d 421,424 (9th Cir.
1989);
C-
A void judgment does not create any binding obligation.
Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.
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.
“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
“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)
9.)
That
Gr Ex A, Ex 8, May 2, 1988 Court
Transcript, attorneys appearing in Court on behalf of Plaintiff Francoise
L.B. Hightower, Mr. George Berbas Assistant States Attorney, on behalf of
Richard J. Daley and Richard Senar on behalf of law firm of Joseph
V. Roddy, Page 2 Lines 11-14 Judge Rivers stated,
“It is not necessary to have him served
by a process server or deputy sheriff. Serve him at the address which he was
personally served with summons” Mr. Berbas, stated, Line 15, “I think substituted service was had.”
Judge
Rivers stated, Lines
16-17, “I know, you didn’t mail him a
copy of the order?”
Mr.
Berbas stated, Lines
18-19 “I didn’t show nothing in our
file to indicate that.”
Judge
Rivers stated, Lines
20-24 “Because if you had just done that it would have shown some compliance
with the order that was entered on March 21st, and if he had not
responded I would permit you today to make a motion for default order
permitting you to have a prove up”.
10.) That Ex Gr A, Ex 9, May 18, 1988
Court Transcript Joseph V. Roddy stated, Page 2 Lines 2-6 “Good
morning your Honor, Joseph Riley, on behalf of Ms. Hightower. Judge this matter
was continued last time until today, with requirement that we serve him. He was
served personally on May 15th at eight this morning, at his house personal
service”.
A- May 15, 1988 was a Sunday
Defendant lived 5950 N. Kenmore unit 201 he was renting a Condominium you had
to be buzzed in nobody ever served any documents to the Defendant papers were
slid under the door and Plaintiff left the same type of document at 69 Ashland former
CTA bus garage and left it with a CTA Clerk in her Policeman uniform.
B- Judge Rivers never questioned
the veracity of the attorney’s statement regarding service but went along with
every “Fraudulent Act” the white Irish attorney did in his court
corroborating the veracity beyond the preponderance of the evidence that as a
Negroe Black or African American whatever he wanted to call himself he had no
authority over a white man.
Page 8 Line 1 Joseph V. Roddy asked Plaintiff, “Did you also file answer interrogatories’ which were sworn to under
oath by you, on April 4, 1986?”
Line 2 Francoise’s reply “Yes, I did.”
Lines 4-6 “And that indicated, exactly, the time you
lived with Mr. Hightower and had intercourse with him, is that correct?”
Line 7 “Yes,
it did”
Lines 8-11 “And
particular interrogatory nine, did you engage in sexual intercourse with
defendant, within ten-month period immediately proceeding birth of, and you
said yes, is that correct?”
Line 12 “Yes”
C- Page 9 Lines 5-14 Judge Rivers stated, “Well, counsel, in reference to the instant case, 88 D 079012, there
has been no blood test ordered in this case. Noe your client, the plaintiff
here, has testified that the blood test results were tendered to the court.
That is not in this particular case. A previous case having been non-suited, as
you have indicated in your complaint on September 17, 1987. So, this is a new
cause of action against the defendant, although it involves the same parties
and subject matter.”
Line 15 Joseph V. Roddy replied, “Right”
11.)
That Gr Ex A Ex 10 Certified
Court Order May 18, 1988 absent a judge’s signature and attorney
information because the judge and attorney were cognizant Francoise admitted
sleeping with her father and one could infer signing the order in any capacity
would implicate them as being complicit aiding in a conspiracy with Plaintiff’s
father.
12.) That the “Fraudulent Court Order” Ref as Ex 10 states, 1. “That the defendant was served on 2/23/88….”
But Ex 11 Certified Court Order
August 3, 1988 with former attorney Robert A. Egan’s name recorded state’s “That the service of summons of Feb. 24,
1988 is hereby quashed and judgment entered on 5/18/88 is vacated.”
13.)
That Ex 12 Subpoena from
Joseph V. Roddy, June 12, 1991, going into Defendant’s Grandmother (Ruby Allen)
Northern Trust Bank account titled In Re
the Marriage of Francoise Hightower et al. Defendant was off work with the
CTA due to a work-related injury and Plaintiff was seeking to Extort money from
him by any means necessary.
14.) That Ex
13 Affidavit July 6, 1990 Wage Deduction Order sent to CTA Extorting
money for unlawful fees
15.) That Ex
14 Certified Statement of Disposition re William Jenkins Hightower
who was a Police Officer allegedly arrested for impregnating one of his
daughters as a minor.
16.) That because the
Illinois Court system is Rigged with so many Democratic Judges “Fixing” cases as “Private Citizens”
is all the reason why this case should never be Remanded back to the Circuit
Court due to the foregoing violations:
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)”.
B-
Black and Brown Democratic Judges noted in the Exhibits and the aforementioned matter do
not have jurisdiction over white attorneys they are only figureheads and active
“Trespassers of the Laws” allowing themselves to be whored out to dispensate
unlawful injustices on their own ethnic groups so as to be accepted by the
whites controlling the Democratic Political Machine.
C-
In that every
Democrat that presides over cases involving other Democrats “Trespassing upon the Laws” engaging in
“Treason Offenses” against persons
of color will automatically Dismiss the cases.
D-
Pursuant to Gr Ex A, Ex 15 Jan. 3, 2007, Notarized Affidavit Chronology of
Unlawful Contempt Charges w/Affidavit never challenged or addressed but
States Attorney Kim Foxx is being investigated for dropping charges against
Jussie Smollett but nobody investigated the Racist Civil Rights Violations
noted in the Affidavit.
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].
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)
17.) That Notice of Removal Complaint Details How Democratic Judges and States
attorneys engage in Hate Crimes in an “Organized
Conspiracy” framing an innocent man in a Paternity matter where the
Plaintiff admitted having sexual intercourse with her father Section 1983 of
USCS contemplates the depravation of Civil Rights through the unconstitutional
application of a law by conspiracy or otherwise. Mansell V. Saunders (CA 5 Fla)
372 F 2d 573, especially if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect and
plaintiff was thereby deprived of any rights privileges, or immunities secured
by the Constitution and laws, the gist of the action may be treated as one for
the depravation of rights under 42 USCS 1983 Lewis V. Brautigan (CA 5 Fla) 227
F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505. Oppressing him in unfathomable ways
corroborating Black and Brown judges have no authority over corrupt white men
especially Chief Judge Timothy Calvin Evans.
A- That said
document has court transcripts attached demonstrating how said judges and
attorneys were complicit in an “Organized
Terrorist Criminal Conspiracy” corroborating their roles as “Private
Citizens”.
B- That Judge Elizabeth Rivera heard Defendant’s
argument and concurred with him stated his Complaint was well plead, hereto
attached Court Order April 16, 2019, states “This motion is based upon the
previous judge’s ruling on 3-19-2019, 2.) As that judge has already ruled, and
as that judge is not assigned to this case, the matter is moot. 3.) Mr.
Lawrence continues to challenge the court’s jurisdiction.
The Motion is Stricken. Defendant has
been instructed to forward all matters to Francoise due to the States Attorney
saying they were not attorneys of record representing her.
C- That Defendant filed the Appeal hereto
attached, Notice of Appeal (April 18, 2019, due to his indigent status, a clerk
notified him they see his pauperis status in the computer but his supervisor
informed him, that the Defendant was to go across the hall to the Domestic
Relations Division and get a hard copy of the order in order that said record
be prepared.
A clerk looked up the case as Defendant
provided her a copy of the printout when the order was entered, which states
09-03-1991 Application to sue or defend as indigent person with the microfiche
numbers to retrieve the order 09052171 and said this case has 3 -4000 pages and
didn’t have time to look for this you have to find this yourself.
E-
That
Defendant will not record the names of said individuals because the last person
who helped the Defendant receive Court Transcripts detailing Francoise
appearing in court without the Defendant’s knowledge was Jeanne Sprietsma a
beautiful white woman very loving and helpful, she was the supervisor, she
ended up Dead somehow falling off a boat, so certain members powerful in the Cook
County Sheriff’s department requested that names not be mentioned but the
judges crooked let everybody know.
F-
That
a white Judge in the Seventh Circuit had a Clerk to dispatch to me if I wanted
to change the laws of what is going on in Cook County learn how to prepare a
brief not file a number of Motions because laws are changed with Briefs.
Jim Crow Laws are still being enacted
and enforced in Chicago, Illinois
courts Black and Brown lives simply don't matter unless
you abide by their rules and doctrines and destroy citizens of the United States
not white Irish or of Polish ethnicity;
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 o[Prince Edward County); and Washington, D.C. (Spottswode Bolling v. C. Melvin Shame). These decisions, along with other cases
such as McLaurin
v. dawma State Board o [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.
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 o[Prince Edward County); and Washington, D.C. (Spottswode Bolling v. C. Melvin Shame). These decisions, along with other cases
such as McLaurin
v. dawma State Board o [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.
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).
24.) That
in Cook County said case demonstrate how certain Black Brown judges are used to
camouflage the practice of Jim Crow laws being enforced circumventing the
United States Constitution and all of its laws corroborating the veracity
Democrats don’t honor the laws of the United States Constitution.
A- That Associate Judges abuses there discretion by
violating all Canon ethics and “Trespass
upon the Laws” and continuously violate Illinois Rules of Civil Procedure
and Defendants Civil Rights by denying the aforementioned Motions proving
beyond the Preponderance of the Evidence and Manifest weight of the Evidence,
that Democratic Associate Judges cannot and will not apply the laws in a just
and fair manner, due to how they are appointed, they don’t follow the laws of
the United States Constitution or any laws of Civility they are in the legal
system to wreak havoc on the innocent, weak, elderly or anybody disenfranchised
within the legal system for their own personal gain.
B- That
the Defendant is properly Petitioning the Federal Court for Removal because
justice cannot and will not ever be had in those courts as long as the present
administration of hateful men “Organized in this Criminal Conspiracy” in
the Democratic Political Machine remain in power.
Pursuant to 735
ILCS 5/2-612 The States Attorney Never Objected to the sufficiency
of Defendant’s pleadings, Objections to sufficiency of pleadings either in form
or substance must be made in trial court, and if not so made, they will be
considered waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. People
ex rel. Deynes v. Harris, App. 1948, 77 N.E. 2d 439, 333 Ill. App. 280.
25.) That said
members of the Democratic Political Machine are appealing to every Democrat
that receives these allegations are expecting
every Democratic judge or racist judge in this court to ignore all of the Racist
Terrorist Civil Rights violations diabolical in nature lodged at the Defendant
and deny this request for the Federal Court to invoke jurisdiction.
A- That certain Democratic judges with Racist Hate in their hearts
to continue to ignore and deny any claim where cases are being obviously “Fixed”
in Cook County Courts worse than in the Grey Lord Indictments, from the Chicago
Tribune article
Dec. 19, 1985 the allegations
ranged from fixing drunken-driving cases to more serious felony charges. One
lawyer was caught on tape bragging that "even a murder case can be fixed
if the judge is given something to hang his hat on." By the end of the
decade, nearly 100 people had been indicted, and all but a handful were
convicted. Of the 17 judges indicted, 15 were convicted. The tally of
convictions included 50 lawyers, as well as court clerks, police officers and
sheriff's deputies.
Greylord was not
the first federal investigation of public corruption in Chicago, but it was a
watershed in its use of eavesdropping devices and a mole to obtain evidence
instead of relying on wrongdoers to become government informants.
A- That
Defendant have demonstrated
due-diligence in trying to avail himself of the tyranny of racial injustice
perpetrated in the courts and by judges with so much hate in their hearts by
trying to uphold the lies by the Plaintiff to justify destroying him simply
because of the color of his skin.
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.
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.
Since
judges who do not report the criminal activities of other judges they become
principals in the criminal activity, 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 3 & 4, and since
no judges have reported the criminal activity of the judges who have been
convicted, the other judges are The criminal activities that the Federal
Courts found in the Circuit Court of Cook County still exist, and are today
under the care, custody and control of Judge Timothy C. Evans (Chief Judge).
The Circuit Court of Cook County remains a criminal enterprise.
That
in spite of the aforementioned legal precedents recorded within, the Circuit Court
politically appointed judges ignored all of Defendants pleadings arguments and
affidavits and denied every Motion against the Manifest Weight of the Evidence
demonstrating the courts are rigged against the innocent and the just, in spite
of the laws, 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
A-
." 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.
WHEREFORE,
for the foregoing reasons, defendant removes this action from the Circuit Court
of Cook County, Illinois to the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois, Eastern Division and respectfully requests that the Court
exercise jurisdiction over this action.
2.) For an Order imposing Sanctions reimbursing to Defendant all
costs and fees for the enforcement of this matter;
3.) For an Order of Sanctions Remanding any and all parties
complicit in this “Organized Conspiracy”
stealing Defendants home;
4.) For an Order Pursuant to Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30, 35 103 S. Ct.
1625, 1629, 75 L Ed 2d 632 (1983) Justice Brennen “The threshold standard for
allowing punitive damages for reckless or callous indifference applies even in
a case, such as here, where the underlying standard of liability for
compensatory damages because is also one of recklessness. There is no merit to
petitioner’s contention that actual malicious intent should be the standard for
punitive damages because the deterrent purposes of such damages would be served
only if the threshold for those damages is higher in every case than the
underlying standard for liability in the first instance. The common-law rule is
otherwise, and there is no reason to depart from the common-law rule in the
context of {1983} of $31 Million Dollars;
5.) For the
entry of an Order awarding to your Defendant for such other relief and any
other relief necessary as equity may require of which this court may deem
overwhelmingly just;
Finally, this Motion
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”)
Federal Court FEDERAL JUDGE GETTLEMAN: stated,
Tuesday March 10, 2009, where he found Superintendent of police Jody Weiss in
Contempt of Court and Ordered the City to Pay $100,000.00, “No
one is above the Law”, he cited a 1928 decision by Supreme
Court Justice Louis Brandeis, that said, “If the Government becomes the law
breaker, it breeds Contempt for the Law, It invites everyman to become a law
unto himself. It invites
Anarchy.”
The Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Wednesday April 26, 2006, Page
1, Illinois Political Machines help breed corruption, Associated Press
writer Deanna Bellandi states, “Illinois is apparently a Petri dish
for corruption. It is a real breeding ground”.
That Chicago is the most Corrupt City in America, Huffington
Post, Internet Newspaper, February 23, 2012; University of Illinois Professor
Dick Simpson, “The two worst crime zones in Illinois are the governor’s
mansion…..and the City Council Chambers in Chicago.” Simpson a former Chicago
Alderman told the AP “no other State can match us.”
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Joe Louis Lawrence
PO Box 490075
Chicago, Il 60649-0075
IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
)
)
Francoise Hightower )
Petitioner )
)
VS
)
)
Joe Louis Lawrence )
Respondent
)
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I Joe Louis Lawrence certify that on April 19, 2019 I have
caused proper service to be had on the Plaintiff and noted parties in the
Certificate of Service via personally delivery or US Mail.
To: Cook County State’s Attorney Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans
Kim Foxx 50 West Washington, Suite 2600
50 West Washington, Suite 500 Chicago, Ill. 60601
Chicago, Ill. 60601
Presiding Judge Grace
Dickler
Chicago Transit Authority Legal
Dept. 50 West Washington, Suite
General Counsel Chicago, Ill. 60601
567 West Lake Street Chicago, IL. 60603
Chicago,
Ill. 60661-1498
Clerk of the
Circuit Court
Dorothy
Brown Attorney
General
50 West
Washington, Suite 1001 Kwame
Chicago, Ill.
60601 100 West Randolph,
Suite 1300
Chicago, Ill. 60601
Asst. Gen. Counsel, Sec. of State Amalgamated Transit Union, 241
Terrence McConville
President/Vice-President
100 West Randolph, Suite 500 1613 S. Michigan
Chicago, Ill. 60604
Chicago, Il. 60616
Francoise L.B.
Hightower
Francoise L.B. Hightower
1152 West 102nd
Street
7709 South Cornell
Chicago, Il. 60643-2353 Chicago, Il.
60649-4577
COURTESY COPIES
TO THE FOLLOWING:
Dir. FBI,
Jeffrey S.
Sallet U.S.
Atty John R. Laush, Jr.
2111 West
Roosevelt Road 219 South
Dearborn, Suite 500
Chicago, Ill.
60612 Chicago, Ill.
60604
PLEASE BE ADVISED that
on April 19, 2019 a Notice of Removal et al. has been filed in the Northern
District of Illinois Federal Court.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
PO
Box 490075
Chicago, Il 60649
312 965-6455
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT
I Joe Louis
Lawrence, Counsel Pro Se files herewith his affidavit as required by Title 28,
United States Code:
I Joe Louis Lawrence Counsel Pro Se being duly sworn on oath
states that, I have caused the aforementioned Notice of Removal et al., to the
noted Plaintiff and parties noted in the Certificate of Service via U.S. Mail,
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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
EXHIBIT LIST
1.) March 19, 2019 Court Order
from Judge Rivera transferring case to Judge Arce who has been described as a
Team Lead to transfer the matter to judge Mackoff not P.J. Dickler.
2.) March 19, 2019 Court Order
from Judge Arce transferring said case to Judge Mackoff not P.J. Dickler.
3.) March 19, 2019 Court Order
from Judge Mackoff where the Assistant States Attorney acknowledges representing
Francoise on behalf of Ill. Dept of Healthcare et al.
4.) March 19, 2019 Court Order prepared
by Judge Mackoff transferring the case back to Judge Arce.
5.) March 13, 2019 Memo to Chief
Judge Timothy Evans with 2 court orders attached.
6.) February 8, 1988 Court
Transcript Certified by Anita Todd Washington Court Reporter.
7.) February 21 1988 2 pages
Affidavit falsified by Rock Detective Agency.
8.) May 2, 1988 Court Transcript
Certified by Phyllis J. Epps Court Reporter where the Assistant States Attorney
Richard Senar was in Court on behalf of Francoise.
9.) May 18, 1988 Court Transcript
Certified by Oona Campbell-Smith.
10.)
Certified May 18, 1988 Court Order (March 21, 2019) no attorney info or Judges
information.
11.)
Certified August 3, 1988 Court Order (March 21, 2019) no Judges signature and
it is not recorded on the database.
12.) June 12, 1991
Subpoena sent to Northern Trust Bank seeking financial information from
Respondent’s grandmother subpoena states In Re the Marriage of Francoise
Hightower 2 pages respondent was never married to her.
13.) July 6, 1990
Affidavit for Wage Deduction Order sent to CTA Falsified by Joseph v. Roddy
& Assoc.
14.) March 1, 1977
Certified Statement of Disposition where William Jenkins Hightower was arrested
for allegedly impregnating his minor daughter.
15.) January 3,
2007 Notarized Affidavit Chronology of Unlawful Contempt Charges w/Affidavit
never challenged or addressed.
16.) March 21,
2019 Cook County Receipt Certification fee of $18.00.
17.) April 16, 2019 Court Order Signed by Judge
Elizabeth Loredo Rivera
18.) Notice of
Appeal April 17, 2019
19.) Request for
Preparation of Record with Printout demonstrating Indigent Status April 18,
2019.
Joe Louis Lawrence
_________________________
