Wikipedia Racial Injustice in Chicago Courts

Search results

Thursday, April 25, 2019


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.
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.

    The United States Supreme Court recently acknowledged the judicial corruption in Cook County, when it stated that Judge "Maloney was one of many dishonest judges exposed and convicted through 'Operation Greylord', a labyrinthine federal investigation of judicial corruption in Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, case No. 96-6133 (June 9, 1997).
    Since judges who do not report the criminal activities of other judges 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
                                                                                                                              

   IN THE 
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

                                                                          _________________________