UPDATE! FEDERAL CLERKS AND ALLEGED WHITE NATIONALISTS JUDGES CHALLENGING THE FBI TO COME GET THEM SET AN UNSIGNED COURT ORDER DENYING THIS MOTION.
UNSIGNED COURT ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 STATES "UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE MOTION TO RECALL THE MANDATE FILED ON SEPTEMBER 3, 2019, BY THE PRO SE APPELLANT MONZELLA JOHNSON,
IT IS ORDERED THAT THE MOTION TO RECALL THE MANDATE IS DENIED.
IT APPEARS THE DOMESTIC TERRORISTS WHO HAS TAKEN SEIZED OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM WITH DEMOCRATS LEADING THE ASSAULT WITH SOME RENEGADE REPUBLICANS FOLLOWING THEM, WITH THE IMPRESSION THEY HAVE SUCCESSFULLY OUTSMARTED THE FBI AND OTHER RESPECTED LEGAL ENTITIES BY SUCCESSFULLY TRESPASSING UPON ALL LEGAL ENTITIES AT WILL DOING AS THEY PLEASE RUNNING ALL COURTS AS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.
TERROR TERROR TERROR THIS IS HOW CORRUPT RACIST MEN IN POWER COMMIT GENOCIDE AND ETHNIC CLEANSING USING THEIR ROBES TO MASS DESTROY PEOPLE OF COLOR OR ANY ETHNIC GROUP THAT DON'T ABIDE BY THEIR DEMOCRATIC RACIST DOCTRINES.
CERTAIN WHITE NATIONALIST JUDGES HAVE INSURGENT FEDERAL CLERKS IN POSITION TO UNDERMINE THE INTEGRITY OF THE PUBLIC AND FEDERAL OFFICIALS BY ALLEGEDLY MAILING OUT UNLAWFUL COURT ORDERS NEVER SIGNED SO AS TO PROTECT JUDGES WHO HAVE BECOME "PRIVATE CITIZENS" VIOLATING THEIR OATHS COMMITTING HEINOUS CRIMES ON THE BENCH SIMILAR TO THE COWARDLY MEN MASS SHOOTING UP SCHOOLS CHURCHES MALLS BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE OR APPROVE OF CERTAIN ETHNIC GROUPS BEING IN AMERICA.
WHAT ABOUT THE CITIZENS BORN AND RAISED AS AMERICAN CITIZENS BEING SUBJECTED TO DOMESTIC TERRORISM IF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES CAN BE INVESTIGATED HOW COME THESE SORRY AS PRIVATE CITIZENS SWORN AND APPOINTED AS JUDGES ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY INVESTIGATIONS OR INDICTED FOR THEIR INFAMOUS CRIMES?
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
NOTICE OF
MOTION TO RECALL
THE MANDATE - REVIEW OF
JUDGMENTS AFTER REHEARING AND APPEAL PERIODS EXPIRE DUETO CORROBORATION OF ALLEGED
WHITE NATIONALISTS IN THE SEVENTH ENGAGING IN HATE CRIMES & FRAUD AGAINST
PERSONS OF COLOR AND RETIRED JUDGE RICHARD A. POSNER ON RECORD “THE BASIC THING
IS THAT MOST JUDGES REGARD THESE PEOPLE 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,
Ill. 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
JOEL M. FLAUM
DIANE S. SYKES
MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER
MOTION
TO RECALL THE MANDATE - REVIEW OF
JUDGMENTS AFTER REHEARING AND APPEAL PERIODS EXPIRE DUE TO CORROBORATION OF ALLEGED
WHITE NATIONALISTS IN THE SEVENTH ENGAGING IN HATE CRIMES & FRAUD AGAINST
PERSONS OF COLOR AND RETIRED JUDGE RICHARD A. POSNER ON RECORD “THE BASIC THING
IS THAT MOST JUDGES REGARD THESE PEOPLE AS KIND OF TRASH NOT WORTH THE TIME”
NOW COMES the Appellant, Monzella Y.
Johnson (“Defendant”), hereby respectfully Moves this court with corroboration,
affidavits with court transcripts her Motion to Recall the Mandate due to
Corroboration of Alleged White Nationalists in the Seventh Circuit engaging in
Hate Crimes “Fraud” &
Misrepresentations to the court with all attachments {Pursuant to Fed Rules of
Civil Procedures}:
Monzell Y.Johnson
_____________________
The United State
Supreme Court Decisions
“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."
1.) FED. R. Civ. P. 60(b). This rule provides in pertinent part: On motion and
upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal
representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following
reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered
evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move
for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud . . . , misrepresentation, or other
misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has
been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is
based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that
the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason
justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.
No statute, however, has been enacted to aid courts
of appeals in balancing these interests when they are requested to recall their
mandates, See Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 244
(1944); Greater Boston Television Corp. v. FCC, 463 F.2d 263, 277-78 (D.C. Cir.
1971), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 950 (1972); Hines v. Royal Indem. Co., 253 F.2d
111, 114 (6th Cir. 1958).
Id. All motions must be made within a reasonable
time. Id. Motions based upon mistake, newly discovered evidence, or fraud must
be made within one year of the entry of the judgment. Id. Moreover, this one
year limit may not be varied in the trial court's discretion. FED. R. Civ. P.
6(b).
2.)
That Judge Charles R. Norgle, Sr. has signed a Court
Order of August 20, 2019 GRANTING the Motion Corroborating
him as an alleged White Nationalist Engaging in Hate Crimes of an Active “Organized
Conspiracy” w /Affidavit whereby warranting the Jurisdiction of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation/United States Attorney Instanter;
3.)
That Judge Norgle has admitted pursuant to Page 1 Par
1 of the Motion to Supplement Motion with Transcript of July 26, 2019 et al
states, “That said Transcript unequivocally corroborate without a scintilla of
falsity that judge Norgle’s ruling against the Plaintiff is predicated on
Racism, Racial Hatred because of Plaintiff’s skin color.
A-
Clerk of the Seventh
Circuit returned Motion to Vacate Court Orders Without signatures et al.
(filed August 20, 2019) which caused this Motion to be filed.
5.)
That Pars 10 and
11 corroborate and demonstrate the methodologies employed by Alleged White
Nationalist in the Seventh Circuit as they diabolically closed their eyes to
mail fraud, perjury, Terrorist Acts as said insurgents committed “Treason
Offenses” denying Plaintiff’s Equal Protection of the Laws due to his skin color.
Offenses” denying Plaintiff’s Equal Protection of the Laws due to his skin color.
6.)
That because Defendant-Appellant
never received any Court Orders from any judge in the Seventh Circuit warrants
the mandate to be recalled and further investigated to ascertain what other
Federal Personnel and judges have used their racial influence to act as “Private
Citizens” by invoking Terrorist Mayhem on innocent persons of color by DENYING
every legally valid document without any signatures of certification.
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-
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.
By
law, a judge is a State Officer or Federal Officer.
The
judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).
7.) That
Judge Posner left the Seventh Circuit and became the Whistleblower on the
horrific details of how racist Federal Judges dispensate the laws in accordance
to one’s skin color.
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).
Wherefore
Defendant-Appellant Prays that this Circuit Recall the Mandate Instanter and
Transfer any and all other Matters to Federal Officials for Investigation of
all Alleged White Nationalist judges in the Seventh and Northern District of
Illinois Circuits.
1.)
Order the acceptance
of Motion to Vacate Court Orders without signatures and to Certify Court Orders
with signatures pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Invoke the
Jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigations/United States Attorney
Instanter (filed August 29, 2019).
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,
_________________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
Chicago, IL. 60615
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I Monzella Y. Johnson,
certify that on September, 3, 2019 I have caused proper service to be had on
all Plaintiff’s via personally delivery or US Mail.
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
Hon Mayor Lori Lightfoot
City Hall 7th floor
Chicago, IL. 60601
Postestivo
& Assoc. Hinshaw
& Culbertson, LLP
223
West Jackson Blvd. Suite 610 151 N.
Franklin Street, #2500
Chicago,
Illinois 60606
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Lord & Locke
111 S. Wacker Dr.
#4100
Chicago, Il.
60606
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Dorothy
Brown Attorney General
50 West
Washington, Suite 1001 Kwame Raoul
Chicago, Ill.
60601 100 West
Randolph, Suite 1300
Chicago, Ill. 60601
Chicago Tribune Contact Reporter
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 September 3, 2019 a Motion to Recall of Mandate et al. has been filed in
the United States Court of Appeals
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Monzella Y.
Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside Ave.
Chicago, IL. 60615
773 835-5849
IN THE
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 Plaintiffs via hand
delivery or U.S. Sept. 3, 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
____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside Ave.
Chicago,
IL. 60615
No comments:
Post a Comment