RETIRED FEDERAL SEVENTH CIRCUIT JUDGE RICHARD POSNER IS A MODERN DAY FRANK SERPICO ON BLOWING THE WHISTLE ON JUDICIAL BIAS TRANSLATION JUDICIAL CORRUPTION, JUDICIAL RACISM AND TERRORISM.
FRANK SERPICO BLEW THE WHISTLE ON CORRUPT COPS IN THE LATE 1960'S EARLY 1970'S AND THE CITY OF NEW YORK'S MAYOR, JOHN V. LINDSAY APPOINTED THE LANDMARK KNAPP COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE THE NYPD.
FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES SEPT. 11, 2017
“About six months ago,” Judge Posner said, “I awoke from a slumber of 35 years.” He had suddenly realized, he said, that people without lawyers are mistreated by the legal system, and he wanted to do something about it.
The immediate reason for his retirement was less abstract, he said. He had become concerned with the plight of litigants who represented themselves in civil cases, often filing handwritten appeals. Their grievances were real, he said, but the legal system was treating them impatiently, dismissing their cases over technical matters.
“These were almost always people of poor education and often of quite low level of intelligence,” he said. “I gradually began to realize that this wasn’t right, what we were doing.”
The immediate reason for his retirement was less abstract, he said. He had become concerned with the plight of litigants who represented themselves in civil cases, often filing handwritten appeals. Their grievances were real, he said, but the legal system was treating them impatiently, dismissing their cases over technical matters.
“These were almost always people of poor education and often of quite low level of intelligence,” he said. “I gradually began to realize that this wasn’t right, what we were doing.”
In the Seventh Circuit, Judge Posner said, staff lawyers rather than judges assessed appeals from such litigants, and the court generally rubber-stamped the lawyers’ recommendations.
Judge Posner offered to help. “I wanted to review all the staff attorney memos before they went to the panel of judges,” he said. “I’d sit down with the staff attorney, go over his memo. I’d make whatever editorial suggestions — or editorial commands — that I thought necessary. It would be good education for staff attorneys, and it would be very good” for the litigants without lawyers.
“I had the approval of the director of the staff attorney program,” Judge Posner said, “but the judges, my colleagues, all 11 of them, turned it down and refused to give me any significant role. I was very frustrated by that.”
On the phone, Judge Posner said that opinion was a rare victory. “The basic thing is that most judges regard these people as kind of trash not worth the time of a federal judge,” he said.
JUDGE POSNER WOKE UP ONE DAY AND REALIZED HE COULD'NT CONTINUE KEEPING HIS EYES CLOSED AND ALLOW RACISM AND RACIAL INJUSTICE CONTINUE TO FESTER, HE ATTEMPTED TO CREATE A CHANGE AND WAS MET WITH OPPOSITION KEEP IN MIND THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT WAS AND HAS BEEN CONTROLLED BY RACIST DEMOCRATS WITH RACIST REPUBLICANS FOLLOWING THE DEMOCRATS LEAD IN HOW THEY CIRCUMVENTED THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION ENFORCING JIM CROW LAWS WHICH HAS BEEN OUTLAWED BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
HERE IS THE PROOF CORROBORATING JUDGE POSNER'S FACTUAL ASSERTIONS ABOUT HIS FORMER COLLEAGUES HOW JUDGE DIANE P. WOOD USED HER ROBE TO UPHOLD AN ASSORTMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS OF JUDGE ROBERT M. DOW, JR. FALSIFYING COURT ORDERS WITH A FEDERAL CLERK BACKDATING INFORMATION TO PREVENT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT FROM BEING GRANTED IN HIS COURT.
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK USED HIS ROBE DENYING ME AN ATTORNEY COMPARING ME TO A PRISONER BUT A CAUCASIAN WOMAN WITH MONEY IN HER BANK $750.00 AND A $235,000.00 HOME WAS GIVEN APPOINTED AN ATTORNEY.
SEE HOW DIANE SYKES, ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS AND KENNETH RIPPLE FALSIFIED A COURT ORDER SAYING MY DRIVERS LICENSE WAS SUSPENDED AND ORDERED TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT IN 1987 ALL OF WHICH IS A COMPLETE LIE!
THE JUDGES IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEALS ARE WORSE THAN COOK COUNTY JUDGES.
IN THE
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
U.S. BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, } Appeal from the
United
As TRUSTEE for
securitized Trust } States District Court for
2006-NC3, et al.
} the Northern District of
Plaintiffs
–Appellees } Illinois, Eastern Division
V }
No. 19-2040
} No. 1:16-cv-08628
}
Monzella Y.
Johnson
}
Defendant-Appellant } Judge Gary Feinerman
JOEL M. FLAUM
DIANE S. SYKES
MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DUE TO JUDICIAL “ORGANIZED
CONSPIRACY” DISPARATE APPLICATION OF THE LAWS DUE TO
DEMOCRATIC JUDGES ENGAGING IN RACIAL HATE CRIMES ENTERING ORDERS BEING “VOID” A
“NULLITY” CASE BEING “FRAUDULENT” JUDGES “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” ENGAGING
IN TREASON OFFENSES ACTING AS “PRIVATE CITIZENS” ALTERNATIVELY
DISQUALIFY JUDGES DUE TO BIAS CONFLICT OF INTEREST PURSUANT TO {28 USCA 144, 455 (b) (1)} Canon 3E (1990)
RETIRED 7TH CIRCUIT JUDGE RICHARD A POSNER STATED “MOST
JUDGES REGARD PRO SE LITIGANTS AS KIND OF TRASH NOT WORTH THE TIME”
NOW COMES the Moving Party, Monzella Y.
Johnson (“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}:
Respectfully Submitted,
_________________________
Monzella
Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside
Chicago, Il
60615
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
U.S. BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, } Appeal from the
United
As TRUSTEE for
securitized Trust }
States District Court for
2006-NC3, et al. }
the Northern District of
Plaintiffs
–Appellees, } Illinois, Eastern Division
V }
No. 19-2040
} No. 1:16-cv-08628
}
Monzella Y.
Johnson
}
Defendant-Appellant. } Judge Gary Feinerman
DIANE S. SYKES
MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER
NOW COMES the Appellant, Monzella Y.
Johnson (“Defendant”), hereby respectfully Moves this court with corroboration,
affidavits with court transcripts her Motion for Reconsideration due to “Fraud”
& Misrepresentations to the court with all attachments {Pursuant to Fed
Rules of Civil Procedures}:
1.) That said judges ignored the fact the
Appellees admitted every assertion/pleading recorded by the Appellant in their Jurisdictional
Statement.
A-
Pursuant to Federal Rule 56; but because said judges are racist and
don’t view African Americans or persons of color with a scintilla of
intelligence even though said Appellant’s is a retired School teacher and
retired Police officer; moreover, said judges not only became active “Trespassers
of the Laws” but “Private Citizens” falsifying the application of
the laws as a unlawful means of Remanding the case back to State Court trying
to protect every Anglo Saxon person complicit in this “Organized Conspiracy”
2.) FACT That judge Diane S. Sykes
entered into an “Organized Conspiracy” against an Appellant with like
many other Democratic judges have a misinterpretation of the laws when it
involves “Trespassing upon the Laws”
there is no Immunity in a criminal act.
3.) FACT Judges Diane S. Sykes,
Ann Claire Williams and Kenneth Ripple became “Trespassers of the Laws”
11-3481 falsified their court order against the Appellant
“In 1987 the State of Illinois ordered Joe Lawrence to pay
child support. He did not comply, and
consequently the state revoked his driver's license. He appealed the revocation
to the Secretary of State, but his appeal was denied. Lawrence also
unsuccessfully sued his former
employers, International Brands Corporation and the Chicago Transit Authority,
in state and federal court for embezzlement and theft.”
FACT Appellant
never ever had his Commercial Driver’s license suspended, and was never
terminated from the Chicago Transit Authority and IBC Wonder bread he was off
work with a work-related injury case #93 CV 01609 Lawrence v CTA
where judge Hogan or Maddux stated, “Plaintiff was a very bright kid in that
everything, he has said in his complaint is in fact true but up here we do
things differently, he was not supposed to be bringing these issues up here on
his own, he needed his union or a sponsor” See Page 6 Par 5C, as for
IBC Wonderbread he was off work with a
torn rotator cuff falling from a truck where surgery was required and was never
notified of any termination.
A-
That the Chicago Transit Authority Defaulted in Cook County
Court but because of the Appellant’s skin color he never received a judgment in
his favor corroborating how Democrats control and dispensate laws in Illinois
because he did not have Anglo Saxon men speaking on his behalf.
4.) FACT Judges Diane S. Sykes,
Joel Flaum and Michael Y. Scudder is exercising a Bias and Racist Hate at the
Appellant by closing their eyes to the plethora of criminal Civil Rights
violations of Democratic Judges engaging in an “Organized Criminal
Conspiracy” as they have admitted to every pleading in the Summary Judgment
that said judges have ignored.
5.) FACT Judges Diane S. Sykes,
William J. Bauer, Michael S. Kanne Sharon Johnson Coleman Negroe became
complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy”
#17-CV-05482 Plaintiff stated, Page 3, Par 14-18 from
the transcript, “And the reason why I’m
here is that me, the defendant is petitioning rule to show cause remanding
Circuit Court judge Pamela Elizabeth Loza and attorneys are trespassing upon
the law, corroboration in an organized chain conspiracy of treason, fraud of all
sorts..” Line 19 Judge Coleman stated, “I need to stop you right there”, Line 23-24, She stated, “Okay, I have read, read some of it. I read
you even though it looked like a filing” Page 4, Par 11-12, Judge
Coleman stated, “when you dealt with
them, were they – they were judges and it was in court, is that correct?”
Plaintiff’s reply Line 13, “Yes
Ma’am” Lines 14-16, Judge Coleman
stated, “All right. Well, they have
immunity. You cannot sue them for anything that happened in the case. You can’t
sue them personally” Line 18-19
she further stated, “So they cannot---I
have dismiss to them out. I have no jurisdiction over them. Do you understand?”
Judge Coleman stated, Page 6, Par 2 “You understand I
answer to the U.S. Supreme Court.”To
amplify Judge Posner’s statement about his former colleagues Lee Oties Love,
Jr. had to prepare a Brief Memorandum explaining why his Appeal should not be
dismissed and the aforementioned Democratic judges never served the Appellees
Notice to respond to the Appellant.
6.) FACT That because of the judges
acting as “Private Citizens” by dismissing the unlawful Criminal Civil Rights
Violations perpetrated at the Plaintiff made them now an accessory to
additional criminal Acts said judge Elizabeth Loza has issued a warrant against
the Plaintiff to have him remanded into custody with no means of getting out by
making bail because he has been blackballed from any means of employment for
fighting back the injustices perpetrated against him unlawfully.
7.) FACT Appellant has filed a
complaint before the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial and Disability
et al. and Petition for Review & Petition to Transfer This case to Another
Judicial Council (07-16-90079) pursuant to RULE 26 “authorizes the
transfer of a complaint proceeding to another judicial council selected by the
Chief Justice. Such transfers may be appropriate, for example, in the case of a
serious complaint where there are multiple disqualifications among the original
council et al.”
8.) That because the Democrats
controlled the Tyranny and Mayhem in said “Organized Conspiracy” in the
Seventh Circuit obstructed justice and made sure the Complaint was never acted
upon when President Obama was the sitting President.
9.) FACT Appellant Joe Louis
Lawrence filed a Notice of Removal and appealed the Order of Judge
Thomas M. Durkin who is an Alumni of Depaul
Law School of Alderman Edward Burke where the case was mysteriously
removed from Judge Robert Gettleman.
10.)
FACT Judge Durkin and Irish Brethern of Alderman Edward Burke became
complicit in an “Organized Conspiracy” Trespassed upon the Laws”
justified every racist criminal Civil Rights Violations encompassing “Hate
Crimes” justified these acts as a racist Democrat stated, “Even if the
court had jurisdiction over this case, and to the extent Mr. Lawrence alleges a
cause of action against Cook County judges, the case would be dismissed because
judges have immunity for actions taken in their judicial capacity”.
11.)
FACT Unbeknown to the aforementioned judge Irish Brethern Judge
William J. Bauer used his position and authority to “Trespass upon the Laws”
and engage in an “Organized Conspiracy” received Notice and knowledge of
Appellant’s 3rd Affidavit via Motion for Reconsideration,
Feb. 2, 2012, hereto attached, Gr Ex A, Page 7, Par 10 said
pleading articulates the vicious Hate by AnglRo Saxon judges as they sat in
unison reading the Horrific Hate perpetrated by said Democrats as they upheld
every criminal act of said Anglo Saxon persons, in said “Organized
Conspiracy”.
12.)
Hereto attached, Gr Ex B, Judge Patricia Spratt, William
J. Bauer’s wife, Corruptionpedia Page 5, Education Education: Northern Illinois University, DeKalb,
Illinois: 1967-1969 (no degree conferred) ; Loyola
University Chicago, University College: 1982-1985 (no degree conferred); National University School of Law,
San Diego, California: 1986-1987 (no degree conferred) ; Loyola University Chicago School of
Law, Chicago, Illinois: 1987-1991. J.D. (admitted to law school without an
undergraduate degree under an early admission program).
Patricia Spratt, who dropped (or failed) from two colleges was
able to obtain her law degree from Loyola Law School where her former
boss, now husband Judge William J. Bauer since 1976 was a Trustee
(or held a similar position).
Work: According to Spratt’s
online Bio,” the jobs I held include secretary to the U.S. Attorney
(1970-71); secretary to a federal district court judge (1971-1974); and
secretary to a federal appellate court judge (1974-1991). Following law school, I served
a one-year clerkship with a federal appellate court judge. My years working for one of the finest federal judges in
Chicago also provided an
invaluable experience–from which I learned what it means to be a good judge“.
13.)
That assuming arguendo that Patricia Spratt is without the
necessary credentials making her a licensed attorney to be a judge and even
worse Alderman Edward Burke making her a judge like he has done with so many
unqualified Democratic judges would explain the motives behind the judges in
the Seventh Circuit engaging in an “Organized Conspiracy” protecting
Judge Bauer and the Terrorist Democratic judges engaging in diabolical “Treason
Offenses”
A-
That Patricia Spratt works in Chancery and is responsible for allegedly
stealing homes from lawful United States Citizens in the guise as Foreclosure
and doesn’t have to fear any admonishments from anyone because Chief Judge
Timothy Calvin Evans won’t open his mouth to admonish any Anglo-Saxon
Democratic judge in the courts.
14.)
FACT Appellant filed his
Appeal before the Court of Appeals judges Frank H. Easterbrook, Diane P. Wood
and Michael Y. Scudder (case 19-2012) said judges corroborated their
involvement in an “Organized Conspiracy” by closing their eyes to the
plethora of indictable offenses that said judges have been indicted for in the
Greylord scandal that culminated in convictions.
15.)
That said judges due to their Racial Animus Bias & Hate
toward the Appellant failed to produce a court order requesting that the
Appellee shall file on or before a specific date, a response to appellant’s
filing, addressing the jurisdictional issue raised in the court’s order.
16.)
FACT That because the Appellees having failed to deny the assertions
in the Summary Judgment that judges Diane S. Sykes, Michael Y. Scudder and Joel
M. Flaum as Anglo Saxon racist individual “Private Citizens” dismissed
his Appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
A- The Circuit Court of Cook
County never ever had jurisdiction on said Appellant, he was never served to
appear in any court in spite of judge D. Adolphus Rivers a inferior Black
Democrat puppet judge who went along with former States Attorney Richard Daley’s
assistant States Attorney as they were complicit in an “Organized
Conspiracy” with Francoise Louise Barbara Hightower a Chicago Police
Officer (May 2, 1988) Richard Senar was the Assistant States Attorney;
B- That “Private Citizen”
Associate Negroe judge D. Adolphus Rivers DISMISSED case 85 D 068184 Paternity
case September 17, 1987 with an attorney Robert Anthony Egan case had two
paternity tests that excluded the Appellant but was altered to say, he was the
father.
C- That under the Democratic
Irish Brethren’s direction and control in the Political Machine Francoise’s
attorney Joseph V. Roddy had a private detective to falsify an Affidavit of the
building his grandmother lived in by stating she lived on the third floor rear
of the building 7911 S Clyde, there is no rear in that building, they falsified
a description of his grandmother saying she was 70-75 years of age with white
hair grandmother never had white hair, See Gr Ex C with the attachments Notice
of Defendant’s Original Petition for Removal et al. said record has over
4400 pages entered into the computer only after Alderman Edward Burke has been
indicted.
17.)
FACT Appellant had filed his Complaint (Petition for Review) Case # 07-16-90074, October 17, 2016 and November 23, 2017
naming all Democratic and some Republican judges acting as Democrats in said “Organized Conspiracy”, before the Judicial Council naming several Democratic judges
with some Republicans hiding behind the Terrorist Mayhem control said Democrats
have over the legal tribunals John
W. Darrah, Diane P. Wood, Ann C. Williams, Diane Sykes, Kenneth Ripple, Frank
H. Easterbrook et al.; moreover, Appellant had filed a Petition to Transfer
case to another Judicial Council; Gr Ex D and Gr Ex E
A-
That Chief Judge Diane P. Wood corroborating her
role as a racist inciting the hate orchestrated under her authority became a “Private
Citizen” as she engaged in “Treason Offenses” and denied every valid claim Appellant presented
before the Council and courts;
B-
That Appellant filed a Motion to Supplement PETITION
FOR REVIEW THAT CORROBORATES JUDICIAL EXTORTION, TREASON OFFENSES July
31, 2018 ref as Gr Ex F;
C-
That on August 1, 2018, “Private
Citizen” Diane P. Wood corroborated her role as an active Domestic Terrorist
upholding any and all acts of Democratic judges and attorneys using their
positions and authorities to act as Weapons of Mass Destruction against
Colored non- Anglo Saxons United States Citizens Born and Raised in Chicago,
Illinois, ref as Gr Ex G
D-
Diane P. Wood had Notice and knowledge of Associate
judge William Stewart Boyd using his robe to help an Anglo Saxon female
attorney to extort money from the Plaintiff and had him unlawfully remanded
into custody as the female attorney Joan S. Colen got away with a plethora of
criminal Civil Rights violations against the Plaintiff.
18.)
FACT That prior to the present Chief
Judge Appellant Diabolical Racist Hate from former Chief judge Frank H.
Easterbrook who singlehandedly DENIED every motion accompanied with an
Affidavit protecting every Democrat engaged in said “Organized Conspiracy”,
ref as Gr Ex H, in
that his hate for the Appellant was filled with so much venom he denied him
legal representation comparing him to an inmate, citing Farmer v Haas, 927 F.2d 607 a transsexual Prisoner inmate but to
prove within the Preponderance of the laws Racist Federal judges engaging in Disparate
applications of the laws, a Caucasian woman Pursuant to Gr Ex A Page 11, Par
10, case #11-cv-5517 was appointed an attorney with income of
$750.00, money in the bank and house worth $235,000.00, ref as H1 case
#16-3972 was Dismissed for failure to pay the required docketing fee because
Appellant was homeless and on welfare with no income.
19.)
FACT That Judges
Frank H. Easterbrook, Ilana Diamond Rovner, David Hamilton engaged in an “Organized
Conspiracy” as they obstructed the laws of their oath and duties to the
Federal Bench as they received Notice and knowledge of District Court Judge
Robert M. Dow, Jr. “Trespassed upon the Laws, making any court order with his
signature on it “VOID a NULLITY” ref as Gr Ex I,
Jurisdictional Memorandum filed June 18, 2018, Pursuant to Page 4, Par
8, “That said May 9, 2018 order is in fact a Nullity, “Void without
authority” Judge Dow became a “Private Citizen” by subordination of perjury
with a Federal clerk by backdating a court order for the judge for April 3,
2018 when in fact the court order was entered After April 24, 2018”.
A- That Appellant on April 24,
2018, filed before the District Court, Motion for Summary Judgment et
al; and scheduled his court date before judge Robert M. Dow’s stead May
2 , 2018, at 9:15am in room 1919, a veteran clerk checked the
computer made sure no rulings were entered on the case before accepting the
Motion.
B- No attorney appeared on
behalf of the Defendants on May 2, and the case was called Judge Dow openly
perjured himself in court saying that he had DISMISSED the case April 3, 2018.
C-
That on June 13, 2018, said judges sent Appellant a convoluted order
ref as Gr Ex J seeking to insult and undermine his intelligence saying
his Appeal was not timely, He was Ordered “That Appellant on or before
June 27, 2018, file a Brief Memorandum stating why this appeal should not be
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction” said judges never at any time
ordered the City’s Corporation counsels, CHA General Counsels, Seyfarth
& Shaw fortune 500 law firm of multiple attorneys, former District
Attorney from New York Christian T. Novay and his fortune 500 law firm or Cary
G. Schiff & Associates who happens to be the one of the largest firms
in Illinois as measured by volume of Forcible Entry and Detainer Actions filed
as attorneys for the Appellees to respond to anything Appellant filed before
this court thereby using their robes in an active “Organized Chain
Conspiracy”.
D- That Appellant attached to
his Complaints and Motions a copy of the Order that Judge Dow used as a legal
reference, ref as Gr Ex K, Page 8 of the aforementioned document is Chief
Judge Susan V. Kelley, Chief U.S. Bankruptcy Judge who endorsed and certified said
order April 24, 2018 with her signature.
E- That Appellant received in
the mail from the Clerk of the Court of Appeals ref as Gr Ex L, an Order
absent any signature for the Chief Judge Diane P. Wood, Re Complaint against
District Judge Robert M. Dow and a Memorandum from Diane P. Wood stating it was
Frivolous. Nothing in the court record establishes judicial misconduct.
F- The
Judicial Conduct and Disability Act Study Committee Section 352 directs the chief judge
to dismiss the complaint or conclude the proceeding by “written order, stating
his or her reasons” and provide the order to the complainant and subject judge
in that no where in Gr Ex L is the Chief judges signature recorded
validating the verity of said Complaint against District Judge Robert M. Dow,
Jr. being lawfully dismissed making the “Order Void a Nullity”
20.)
FACT Judges Diane P. Wood, Frank H.
Easterbrook and new Republican appointment Michael Y .Scudder further
corroborated their roles in said “Organized Conspiracy” by closing their
eyes to all of the Facts recorded in Gr Ex C by denying Appellants
Appeal ref as Gr Ex M citing the court had no jurisdiction making said
order “Void a Nullity” trying to send it back to the “Criminal
Enterprise” of Cook County and State Courts trying to save every Diabolical
Terrorist who have overturned the legal Tribunals
21.)
That
Court Orders refs as Gr Ex N and Gr Ex O corroborate how
said judges systematically condone racism, condone Jim Crow Laws outlawed by
the United States Constitution and United States Supreme Court support and
protect every participant in said “Organized Conspiracy” as they use
laws not germane to the Appellants with the Appellees admissions.
22.)
That
said Federal judges has not only corroborated their roles in said “Organized
Conspiracy” engaging in “Treason Offenses” but are the authors and manufactures
of the laws condoning any and all Criminal Civil Rights Violations of judges “Trespassing
upon the Laws” in the Democratic Political Machine (May 30, 2019) as the
judge ordered Appellant to prepare a “Jurisdictional Memorandum” explaining
why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
A- In that said judges are filled with so
much hate against persons of color they are required to adhere to laws that
many Appellees either simply don’t know or judges not having any knowledge of
the laws.
B- So Federal judges either dismiss or
criminalize Pro Se litigant or persons of color for having knowledge of the
laws many don’t have who are licensed in the laws as Anglo Saxon men and women
and this is how they use their robes as “Weapons of Mass Destruction”
committing genocidal applications of the laws in an attempt to ethnically
cleanse the City and State of purging colored people from society and from legitimate
Civil claims proving Discrimination, Racial Hate etc.
FACT Posner:
ABA Journal (September 11, 2017) ref as Gr Ex P Most judges regard pro se
litigants as 'kind of trash not worth the time' Posner, 78, told the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin last week that he decided to retire
because of conflicts with his colleagues over the treatment of pro se
litigants, who represent themselves. In a new interview with the New York Times, Posner elaborated on his concerns about the
treatment of such litigants.
“The basic thing is that most judges regard
these people as kind of trash not worth the time of a federal judge,” Posner
said.
In the 7th Circuit, staff lawyers review appeals
from pro se litigants, and their recommendations are generally rubber-stamped
by judges, he noted.
Posner wanted to give the pro se litigants a
better shake by reviewing all of the staff attorney memos before they went to
the panel of judges. Posner had approval from the director of the staff
attorney program. “But the judges, my colleagues, all 11 of them, turned it
down and refused to give me any significant role. I was very frustrated by
that,” Posner said.
Posner has written about the pro se issue in an
upcoming book, and its publication “would be particularly awkward” if he
remained on the court because it “implicitly or explicitly” criticizes the
other judges, he said.
23.)
FACT Abajournal.com September 15, 2017 Chief Judge Diane Wood of the Chicago-based 7th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is voicing her disagreement with newly retired
Judge Richard Posner.
Posner told
the New York Times and other publications that he decided to
step down from the court because of conflicts with his colleagues over the
treatment of litigants who represent themselves in appeals.
Posner told the Times that most judges regard
pro se litigants as “kind of trash not worth the time of a federal judge.”
Judges in the 7th Circuit generally rubber stamp recommendations of staff
lawyers who review pro se appeals, he said. And Posner said he was rebuffed
when he wanted to give pro se litigants a better shake by reviewing the staff
attorney memos before they were circulated to judges.
Above
the Law reached out to Wood for comment. She gave this statement to
the blog: “First, while [Judge Posner] is certainly entitled to his own views
about such matters as our Staff Attorney’s Office and the accommodations we
make for pro se litigants, it is worth noting that his views about that office
are not shared by the other judges on the court, and his assumptions about the
attitudes of the other judges toward pro se litigants are nothing more than
that—assumptions.
“In fact, the judges and our staff attorneys
take great care with pro se filings, and the unanimous view of the eleven
judges on the 7th Circuit (including actives and seniors) is that our staff
attorneys do excellent work, comparable to the work done by our chambers law
clerks. We are lucky to attract people of such high caliber for these two-year
positions.”
24.)
That retired judge Posner told the TRUTH
about his former colleagues in that he used the word trash what one would say
was a politically corrected phraseology of referencing Pro Se litigants as
Trash simply because he shares the same skin color but in actuality, a person
of color would simply call it racism, racial hatred, in order that certain
individuals with a different skin color it is necessary for a group like the
judges to demean an ethnic group with such languages so as to make them feel
superior. .
25.)
This Motion articulates and corroborates
Judge Posner’s accurate assessment of his former colleagues in the Seventh
Circuit what is even worse a judge in Diane P. Wood who happens to be the Chief
Judge lacks the fundamental understanding of the rules of law as that of a
Chief Judge and to think former President Obama was considering her for a
position as a Supreme Court Justice.
26.)
FACT Appellant filed, the request for a transfer may be made
at any stage of the proceeding before a reference to the Judicial Conference
under Rule 20 (b) (1) (C) or 20 (b) (2)
or a Petition for Review is filed under Rule 22:
Rule 26 is new; it implements
the Breyer Committee’s recommended use of transfers. Breyer Committee Report, 239 F.R.D. at 214-15. In That Chief Judge
Diane P. Wood obstructed justice used her position and authority covering-up
every egregious diabolical Terrorist Acts perpetrated by her colleagues’ judges
as “Private Citizens”.
A-
It takes an unbiased judge (Posner) to call out
judicial Bias.
27.)
That because of the Racial Hatred shared by Seventh Circuit body
of racist Democrats and some newly appointed Republicans makes it totally
impossible for any person of color to receive any iota of justice.
28.)
Appellees had three law firms Postestivo & Associates, 223
West Jackson, two multi-million dollar law firms Hinshaw & Culbertson 151
N. Franklin and Lord & Locke 111 S. Wacker and not one attorney requested
an extension of time or objected/denied any aspect of the Appellants Jurisdictional
Memorandum because the attorneys knew everything asserted was not only true
but understood the HATRED the Seventh Circuit judges had against persons
of color had nothing to fear because they knew the judges were not going to
admonish them for their Civil Rights Violations against the Appellants due to
the aforementioned.
The United State
Supreme Court Decisions
In 1986 the
United States Supreme Court issued three decisions clarifying Rule 56. Though
there was a dissent in every decision, there was also substantial agreement
among all the opinions. Justices Powell, Marshall and O'Connor joined every
majority. Only Justice Brennan dissented in every case, and even then, he
agreed in large part with the majority's analysis of Rule 56, but judges
in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals do not honor or abide by the laws of
the United States Supreme Court; due, to their Terrorist Control over the
entire legal tribunals of the State, City and Cook County and certain Federal Republican
judges, in that, only those in majority of the Corrupt Democratic Political
Machine and it’s noted conspirators are the benefactors in these tyranny
offenses while the innocent and the just people of color are suffering at the
helm of Terrorist controlling the legal tribunals.
“No one
is above the Law”, citing a 1928 decision by Supreme Court Justice Louis
Brandeis Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928),
“We must subject government officials to the same rules of conduct that
we expect of the citizen. The very existence of the government is imperiled if
it fails to observe the law scrupulously. As Brandeis puts it, "if the
government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every
man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the
administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means—to declare that
the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private
criminal—would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine
this court should resolutely set its face."
The first
case, Matsushita
Electric Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 106
S. Ct. 1348 (1986). was an antitrust claim brought by American television
manufacturers against Japanese television manufacturers? The plaintiffs alleged
that the defendants conspired to drive them from the market by maintaining
artificially high prices in Japan and artificially low prices in America. The Federal
District Court granted defendants motion for summary judgment. 513 F. Supp. 1100 (E.D. Pa. 1981). The
Third Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part. 723 F.2d 238 (3rd
Cir. 1983).The Supreme Court reversed and remanded holding that plaintiffs had
the burden of establishing a material issue as to whether the Japanese
manufacturers had entered into an illegal conspiracy which caused the
plaintiffs a cognizable injury. 106 S. Ct. at 1362.
The Supreme Court remanded to the Circuit Court for a determination
of whether there was sufficient, unambiguous evidence that the defendants had
conspired irrationally.
Similarly, in Raymond v. Ameritech Corp., 442 F.3d
600 (7th Cir. 2006), the Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s refusal
to consider a late-filed response to a summary judgment motion despite the
plaintiff’s counsel’s claimed busyness. Likewise, in Dean v. Chicago Transit
Authority, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 1510 (7th Cir. 2005), the Seventh Circuit
affirmed the district court’s order denying the plaintiff’s counsel’s request
to file a response to a summary judgment motion instanter that was filed two
weeks after the deadline. The Seventh Circuit rejected the plaintiff’s
attorney’s claimed busy schedule as an excuse. The Court chooses to rely on
these decisions, particularly the Dean decision which is especially analogous,
rather than the unpublished decision from the Northern District of Indiana upon
which Plaintiff relies. CONCLUSION Plaintiff’s counsel has failed to meet his
burden of showing that excusable neglect prevented him from timely filing the
response to the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s counsel’s alleged
busyness fails to meet the Seventh Circuit’s excusable neglect standard.
Indeed, established Seventh Circuit case law dooms the Motion. Court orders are
not musings, suggestions or aspirational goals. Court orders should be taken
seriously. When it becomes evident that a deadline will not be met, the best
practice is to timely file a motion before the deadline. The failure to take
this simple step places parties in the perilous circumstance of meeting the
heightened standard of excusable neglect. Spears, 74 F.3d at 157 (“When parties
11 Case: 3:13-cv-50374 Document #: 59 Filed: 02/09/15 Page 11 of 12 Page ID #:
wait until the last minute to comply with a deadline, they are playing with
fire.”). Accordingly, exercising its discretion, the Court denies the Motion.
29.)
That no Democratic judge or racist Federal judge in this state
will honor the laws of the United States Constitution or the aforementioned
precedent by the Seventh Circuit will admonish other Anglo Saxon men in the
Democratic Party who have violated the Civil Rights of every person of color,
in that said Judges are using their robes as “Private Citizens” to incite hate
and Disparate rulings in this “Organized
Conspiracy”.
30.)
That said Democratic judges have demonstrated and corroborated
themselves as a threat to National Security and a Menace to Society, in that
Black and Brown judges are benefitting and profiting off the racial injustices
perpetrated by those controlling the “Criminal Enterprise” in the
Democratic Political Machine are named and noted throughout this document and
affidavits are not admonished because the crimes are perpetrated on their own
ethnic groups.
31.)
That Appellant has experienced over 31 years of Racial Hate
crimes by members of the Democratic Political Machine where he was falsely
remanded into custody by racist judges best described as “Good ol Boys” Irish brethren under the authority and
leadership of Alderman Edward Burke for allegedly owing child support to
(former police officer Francoise Louise Barbara Hightower who was impregnated
by her natural biological father who was a police officer at the time.
32.)
That because of the systemic racial hate Anglo Saxon men in the
Democratic Party have towards Heterosexual men of color like the Defendant,
Judge Durkin in his bid to aid and assist other Anglo Saxon men in an attempt
to continuously cover-up said racist hate criminal acts stated, “Mr. Lawrence appears to allege in his
Notice of Removal that Cook County judges engaged in an “Organized Conspiracy”
to frame him for a paternity matter dating back to 1988. To the extent Mr.
Lawrence wishes to challenge that decision, these are issues that must be
raised on appeal in state court and over
which this court does not have jurisdiction. See Klein v. O’Brien, 884 F. 3d
754, 756 (7th Cir 2018)”
A- When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does
not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s
orders are void, of no legal force or effect.
The U.S. Supreme
Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct.
1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law
in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict
with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case
stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in
his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State
has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme
authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original].
B-
Judge Durkin realizes as a Democrat appointed by President Obama
and his Brethren controlling the Seventh Circuit could say anything unlawful
further corroborated his role in said “Organized Conspiracy” and inept
understanding of Federal laws, stated, “Even
if the court had jurisdiction over this case, and to the extent Mr. Lawrence
alleges a cause of action against Cook County judges, the case would be
dismissed because judges have immunity for actions taken in their judicial
capacity” Judges have given themselves judicial
immunity for their judicial functions. Judges have no judicial immunity for
criminal acts, aiding, assisting, or conniving with others who perform a
criminal act, or for their administrative/ ministerial duties. When a judge has a duty to act, he does not
have discretion - he is then not performing a judicial act, he is performing a
ministerial act.
Judicial
immunity does not exist for judges who engage in criminal activity, for judges
who connive with, aid and abet the criminal activity of another judge, or to a
judge for damages sustained by a person who has been harmed by the judge's
connivance with, aiding and abetting, another judge's criminal activity.
C- The Illinois Supreme Court held
that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper
presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority,
- it, had no authority to make that finding." The People v.
Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no
legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them.
They acted without any jurisdiction.
When
judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void
order (an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become
trespassers of the law, and are engaged in treason (see below).
The
Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois,
209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) held that "not every action by a judge
is in exercise of his judicial function. ... It is not a judicial function for
a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the
courthouse."
When
a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law,
the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void,
of no legal force or effect.
The
U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S.
232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts
under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he
"comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and
he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is
subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual
conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from
responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis
supplied in original].
By
law, a judge is a State Officer or Federal Officer.
33.)
The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual
(in his person).
A judge’s disrespect for the rules of court demonstrates
disrespect for the law. Judges are disciplined under Canon 2A for violating
court rules and procedures. Judge ignored mandated witness order in attempt to
accommodate witnesses’ schedules; Citing Canon 2A the court noted, “[a] court’s
indifference to clearly stated rules breeds disrespect for and discontent with
our justice system. Government cannot demand respect of the laws by its
citizens when its tribunals ignore those very same laws”)
A-
Fraud upon the court is a basis for equitable relief. Luttrell v.
United States, 644 F. 2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1980); see Abatti v.
C.I.R. , 859 F 2d 115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988) “it is beyond question
that a court may investigate a question as to whether there was fraud in the
procurement of a judgment” Universal Oil Products Co. v. Root Refining Co., 328
U.S. 575, 66 S. Ct. 1176, 90 L. Ed. 1447. The power of the court to unearth
such a fraud is the power to unearth it effectively. See Hazel-Atlas Glass Co.
v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250; Sprague v.
Ticonic National Bank, 1184 and United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. (8 Otto)
61, 25 L. Ed. 93.
B-
“A judge is an officer of the court, as are all members of the Bar. A
judge is a judicial officer, paid by the Government to act impartially and
lawfully”. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill. App 3d 477, 410 N.E. 2d 626. “A void judgment is regarded as a
nullity, and the situation is the same as it would be if there were no
judgment. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at
any place….It is not entitled to enforcement. 30A Am Judgments 43, 44,
45. Henderson v Henderson 59 S.E. 2d
227-232
C-
“A Void Judgment from
its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal
efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, of no legal force and
effect whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in
any manner or to any degree. “A void judgment, order or decree may be attacked
at any time or in any court, either directly or collaterally” Oak Park Nat Bank v.
Peoples Gas Light & Coke Col, 46 Ill. App. 2d 385, 197 N.E. 3d 73, 77, (1st
Dist. 1964)
D-
To show fraud upon the court, the complaining party must establish
that the alleged misconduct affected the integrity of the judicial process,
either because the court itself was defrauded or because the misconduct was
perpetrated by officers of the court. Alexander v. Robertson, 882, F. 2d
421,424 (9th Cir. 1989);
E-
A void judgment does not create any binding
obligation. Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.
That under 18 U.S.C. 242 and 42
U.S.C. 1985 (3) (b). A judge does not have the discretion on whether or not
to follow Supreme Ct. Rules, but a duty to follow. People v. Gersh, 135 Ill. 2d
384 (1990).
“Grounds
warranting a motion to reconsider include (1) an intervening change in the
controlling law, (2) new evidence previously unavailable, and (3) the need to
correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice.” Id. (citing Brumark Case
1:07-cv-00644-WDM-KLM Document 158 Filed 08/25/2009 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 6 1
Although the Tenth Circuit does not allow citation to unpublished opinions for
precedential value, unpublished opinions may be cited for persuasive value.
10th Cir. R. 32.1. 3 Corp. v. Samson Resources Corp., 57 F.3d 941, 948 (10th
Cir. 1995)).
MODEL CODE OF
JUDICIAL CONDUCT Canon 3E (1990) [hereinafter CODE]. Although the 1990
version of the Code of Judicial Conduct is the most recently approved version
by the American Bar Association, most states still follow the original version,
which was adopted in 1972. As of late 1993, judicial codes or canons based in
part on the 1990 ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct have been adopted in
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Rhode Island,
South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia, Wyoming, and the U.S. Judicial Conference.
2. The language of the Code leaves no doubt that, in the first instance, the
recusal process is to be self-executing, without the need for a judge to wait
for a recusal motion to be filed. [It] is intended to be used by a judge at the
start of each case as a checklist to assist in deciding whether at that point he
should disqualify himself from any participation in the proceedings. . [E]ven
before appraising participation in the case under the [Code], the judge should
first consult his own emotions and conscience, and pass an "internal test
of freedom" from disabling conflicts. LESLIE W. ABRAMSON, JUDICIAL
DISQUALIFICATION UNDER CANON 3 OF THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT 10 (2d ed.
1992). 3. Canon 3 states in part: C. Disqualification (1) A judge should
[shall] disqualify himself [or herself] in a proceeding in which his [or her]
impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to
instances where: (a) he [or she] has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a
party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the
proceeding;
The general
standard for disqualification states that a judge should be disqualified in a
proceeding in which the judge's "impartiality might reasonably be
questioned." See CODE, supra note 1. Judges and attorneys frequently
invoke this general principle when the factual circumstances underlying the
motion do not fit the specific disqualifying categories in the Code's
subsections. Thus, this general language serves as a "catch-all" or
residual provision. Motions containing allegations of an appearance of partiality
should be decided by another judge. Avoiding the appearance of impropriety is
"as important to developing public confidence in the judiciary as avoiding
impropriety itself. United States v. Hollister, 746 F.2d 420, 425-26 (8th Cir.
1984). Because this provision "asks what a reasonable person knowing all
the relevant facts would think about the impartiality of the judge, Roberts v.
Bailar, 625 F.2d 125, 129 (6th Cir. 1980). See Matter of Mason, 916 F.2d 384,
386 (7th Cir. 1990), in which Judge Easterbrook posed the dilemma of the
"appearance of partiality" standard,
the challenged judge is perhaps the last person who should rule on the
motion. The first of the Code's specific grounds is relatively general: a judge
can be disqualified for having a personal bias toward a party or personal
knowledge about disputed facts. One rationale for the discretionary view is
that the judge knows best his or her own thoughts or feelings. It has been
noted that: [e]ach judge brings to the bench a background with neighbors,
friends and acquaintances, and business and social relations. The results of
these associations and the impressions they create in the judge's mind form a
personality and philosophical disposition toward the world.... In short, a
judge is expected to act according to his values. Indeed, proof that a judge's
mind is a complete tabula rasa demonstrates lack of qualification, not lack of
bias. Abramson, supra note 2, at 24.
Fraud admissibility great
latitude is permitted in proving fraud C.J.S. Fraud 104 ET Seg. Fraud 51-57.
where a question of fraud and deceit is the issue involved in a case, great
latitude is ordinarily permitted in the introduction of evidence, and courts
allow the greatest liberality in the method of examination and in
the scope of inquiry Vigus V. O’Bannon, 1886 8 N.E 788, 118 ILL
334. Hazelton V. Carolus, 1907 132 ILL. App. 512. Respondent
provided cases attached to the exhibits 18 D 3208 and Emergency Motion filed
before Federal Judge Charles R. Norgle, Sr. regarding William Stewart
Boyd, case 2015 CH 01670 Re Franklin Ulysses
Valderrama, case 12-M-711552 Leonard Murray, case 2008 CH 33616 US Bank
et al. v Monzella Y. Johnson et al., Lee Oties Love, Jr. case 2013 D 080423
said judge Elizabeth Loza a racist Hispanic issued a unlawful writ against
the Plaintiff seeking to remand him into custody but because of his skin
color said judge was not removed or admonished from his case via Federal Negroe
Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman.
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).
“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)”.
Since judges who do not report the criminal activities of
other judges become principals in the criminal activity, 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 3
& 4, and since no judges have reported the criminal activity of the judges
who have been convicted, the other judges are as guilty as the convicted
judges.
Under Federal
law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a
court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as
nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a
recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They
constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such
judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot
v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
The Illinois
Supreme Court held that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the
jurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add
nothing to its authority, - it, had no authority to make that
finding." The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472,
483 (1928). The judges listed below had no legal authority (jurisdiction) to
hear or rule on certain matters before them. They acted without any
jurisdiction.
When judges act when they do not have
jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a judge
without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are engaged in
treason.
34.)
C- That
the Appellants properly Petitioned the Federal Court for Removal because
justice cannot be had in those courts engaging in what is clear and
convincing “Kangaroo Rulings” better known as “Jim
Crow” enforcement Laws outlawed by the United States Supreme Court but
it is clear Illinois don’t honor those laws as demonstrated in this case but
said Appellants can’t receive justice in this State or Federal Circuit, due to
the aforementioned;
Motions for
Reconsideration are designed to bring to the court’s attention newly discovered
evidence that was unavailable at time of original hearing, changes in existing
law, or errors in court’s application of law. Continental Cas. Co.
v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, App. 1 Dist. 1996, 216 Ill. Dec. 314, 279
Ill. App. 3d 815, 665 N.E. 2d 374, appeal dismissed, et al.;
A- Democratic Judges are obviously “Fixing” cases worse than in 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.
35.)
That every attorney associated in these matters have
admitted in their responses taking part
in an “Organized Conspiracy” against the Defendants trying to steal
their home using “Fraudulent Acts” surpassing human imagination, affidavits and
transcripts validate the verity every City attorney, States attorney or General
Counsels from all law firms where each named case is involved were defeated
litigiously in every venue but because every judge in the State Courts now
Federal whom this matter pended before have closed their eyes to every unlawful
act known to man because of Defendant’s skin color; further corroborates the
violation of the 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.
36.)
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
34.) That
said Democrats are so Corrupt and Nefarious and deem themselves untouchable “Trespassing upon the Laws” engaging in
“Treason Offenses” in that said
Democratic Terrorist are now in violation of the following Act, Pursuant to Section 4 of the Ku Klux
Klan Act of 1871: the law is clear, “Whenever in any State or part of a
State………unlawful combinations…….shall be organized and armed, and so numerous
and powerful et al…………and whenever, by reason of either or all of the causes
aforesaid, the conviction of such offenders and the preservation of the public
safety shall become…..Impracticable, in every such case such combinations shall
be deemed a rebellion against the Government of the United States…..”
WHEREFORE DEFENDANT PRAYS that
this Court Reconsider this Motion in its entirety and keep this matter in the
Federal Court by Notifying the United States Supreme Court to Invoke
Jurisdiction on all parties complicit in this “Organized Conspiracy” so as
to deploy military personnel to forcibly eradicate any all persons associated
in these “Treason Offenses” against the government.
2.) For an Order imposing Sanctions reimbursing to Appellant 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” that received Notice and
knowledge and didn’t initiate any investigations due to Democrats controlling
all legal venues.
4.) For an Order Enforcing said Summary judgment Instanter.
5.) For an Order having
these allegations investigated by Federal Officials
6.) For an Order
alternatively transferring this matter out of Illinois away from this District
to a State or District where judges follow and adhere to the Rules of Law and
not in accordance to one’s ethnicity, gender or political affiliations.
7.) 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,
_________________________
5217 S. Ingleside
Chicago, Il
60615
IN THE
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
EXHIBIT LIST
1.) Group Ex A Feb 2,
2012, Motion for Reconsideration Vacate Orders Extension of time Due to Bias
Civil Rights Violations.
2.) Group Ex B
Corruptionpedia regarding Patricia S. Spratt, Judge William J. Bauer’s wife.
3.) Group Ex C Notice
of Defendant’s Original Petition for Removal Civil Action from State
Jurisdiction.
4.) Group Ex D Petition
for Review filed Oct. 17, 2016 against Chief Judge Diane P. Wood et al.
5.) Group Ex E Petition
for Review naming 40 judges filed Nov. 23, 2017.
6.) Group Ex F Motion
to Supplement Petition for Review that Corroborates Judicial Extortion, Treason
Offenses.
7.) Group Ex G Court
Order from Diane P. Wood no signature for Motion to Supplement the Petition for
Review, Denying Gr Ex F.
8.) Gr Ex H Notice of Motion (August 27, 2007) Motion to Disqualify Frank
H. Easterbrook et al.
9.) Gr Ex H1 Court Order (March 16, 2017)
said order corroborates and proves said judges are Racist as Retired judge Posner
state said judge view “Pro Se litigants as Trash” Dismissed for
failure to pay required the required docketing fee.
10.)
Gr Ex I Jurisdictional Memorandum
re judge Robert M. Dow.
11.)
Gr Ex J Order from the Court of
Appeals requesting that Appellant prepare a Jurisdictional Memorandum (June 13,
2018).
12.)
Gr Ex K Memorandum Decision and
Order Granting Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (April 24, 2018) signed by
Chief judge Susan V. Kelley Bankruptcy Judge.
13.)
Gr Ex L Memorandum, Order and Notice from Court of Appeals Clerk Gino
J. Agnello by Chief Judge Diane P. Wood dismissing Complaint against Judge
Robert M. Dow absent a signature.
14.)
Gr Ex M (June 17, 2019) Order dismissing Appellant’s Notice of Removal
due to lack of jurisdiction.
15.)
Gr Ex N (June 3, 2019) Order from
Court of Appeals requesting that Appellant prepare a Jurisdictional Memorandum
why case should not be dismissed.
16.)
Gr Ex O Order Dismissing
Appellant’s Notice of Removal due to lack of jurisdiction.
17.)
Gr Ex O1 (May 30, 2019) Order from Court of Appeals requesting that
Appellant prepare a Jurisdictional Memorandum why case should not be dismissed
18.)
Gr Ex P ABA Journal Captioned
Posner: Most Judges regard pro se litigants as ‘kind of trash not worth the
time’ September 11, 2017.
19.)
Gr Ex Q (July 30, 2018) case
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
20.)
Motion for Summary Judgment et al filed June 24, 2019.
21.)
It takes an Unbiased judge to call out judicial Bias.
IN THE
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I Monzella Y. Johnson, Defendant-Appellant,
certify that I have on this day deposited said
Motion for Reconsideration et al. to all parties recorded in said Notice
via regular mail/hand delivery.
To: US Attorney
FBI
Dir. Chris Wray
John
R. Lausch, Jr. 2111
West Roosevelt Road
219 S.
Dearborn, 5th floor
Chicago,
Ill. 60612
Hon Mayor Lori Lightfoot
City
Hall 7th floor
Chicago, IL. 60601
Circuit
Court of Cook County, Dorothy
Brown
50
West Washington,
Chicago,
IL 60601 Suite 1001
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
Postestivo
& Assoc. Hinshaw
& Culbertson, LLP
223
West Jackson Blvd. Suite 610 151 N.
Franklin Street, #2500
Chicago,
Illinois 60606
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Attn: Jennifer R. Friedman
Lord
& Locke
111 South Wacker
Drive
Chicago, Illinois
60606
Attn: Simon Feng, P. Russel Perdew
Megan Crepeau
160 N. Stetson,
Chicago, Il.
60601
Said case
demonstrates within the parameter of the laws how the Illinois legal system is
under siege, as stated in earlier affidavits, the Ku Klux Klan, pursuant to the
act of 1871 Section 1 (42 U.S.C.) Remarks of Rep. Cobb) (“None but Democrats
belong or can belong to these societies”)
PLEASE BE ADVISED that
on July 18, 2019 a Motion for
Reconsideration et al. has been filed in the United States Court of Appeals,
Seventh Circuit.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside
Chicago, Il 60615
UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS
FOR
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
AFFIDAVIT
I Monzella Y. Johnson, files herewith her
affidavit as required by Title 28, United States Code:
I Monzella Y. Johnson Pro
Se being duly sworn on oath states that, I have caused the aforementioned
Notice and Motion for Reconsideration, to the noted Appellees via hand delivery
or U.S Postal service. July 18, 2019, 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
____________________
5217 S. Ingleside
Chicago, Il 60615
