EMERGENCY HELP NO JUSTICE IN FEDERAL COURT US BANK HAS STOLEN AN INNOCENT RETIRED POLICE OFFICERS AND RETIED PUBLIC-SCHOOL TEACHERS HOME AND EVERY RACIST CLERK AND JUDGE IN THE FEDERAL BUILDING HAS COVERED IT UP AND THEY ARE GIVEN 3 DAYS TO REMOVE 64 YEARS OF PERSONAL EFFECTS FROM THEIR OWN HOME.
READ HOW RACIST FEDERAL JUDGES AND CLERKS COVER-UP THEIR CRIMES AND PROTECT CRIMINALS AT BANKS AND LAW FIRMS STEAL HOMES OF BLACK PEOPLE AND SENIOR CITIZENS
CAN WE GET IMMEDIATE MEDIA EXPOSURE TO THESE TERRORIST ACTS?
BEGGING AND PLEADING IS NOT WORKING THESE PSYCHOTIC SOCIOPATHS ARE LAUGHING AT THE LAW BECAUSE THEY HAVE INFILTRATED THE LAWS AND COURTS THE REAL INSURRECTIONISTS ARE HERE IN CHICAGO COURTS.
URGENT
| Marcia Johnson | Fri, Feb 21, 10:09 AM (3 days ago) | ||
| Fri, Feb 21, 1:15 PM (3 days ago) |  | ||
| ||||
Hi,
We have not removed anything from the property yet. Please confirm if you would like to retrieve the items.
If yes, kindly provide the date and time for personal retrieval. I can coordinate for the removal of personal items by next week.
Pradeep Kumar | Manager | Utility and Expense Management, Property Registration and REO Property Preservation
Pradeep.sudhaman@altisource.
Direct Dial +14708703721
Altisource®
7730 Market Center Suite 100 A
El Paso, Texas 79912
From: Marcia Johnson <frogishtwo65@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2025 9:39 PM
To: M, Pradeep K <Pradeep.Sudhaman@altisource.
Subject: URGENT
CAUTION: This email originated outside of the organization. Do not click on any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If you have the slightest of doubts, click the Hox button to report this email.
Please Call
We have not received any information since communicating that we are in court awaiting a ruling, are you aware they are removing our furniture from our house?
773 835-2454
| Marcia Johnson | Fri, Feb 21, 8:36 PM (3 days ago) | ||
| Marcia Johnson | 12:30 PM (11 hours ago) | ||
| M, Pradeep K | 1:23 PM (10 hours ago) | ||
| 3:16 PM (8 hours ago) | | ||
| ||||
JUDICIAL RIDER SUPPORTING THE JUDICIAL COMPLAINT (FILED 2/24//25 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL)
1.)
That pursuant to Injustice Watch Article, Ex A, April 4, 2017, Emily Hoerner and Rick Tulsky,
Journalists, Law Professor Albert Alschuler stated Albert W. Alschuler, himself a highly respected
law professor, wrote in a law review, “Judge Easterbrook persistently presents
wildly inaccurate, made-up statements as unquestionable statements of fact,”
adding, “The truth is not in him.”
A- Injustice
Watch documented a pattern of misrepresented facts in Easterbrook’s
opinions. Injustice Watch uncovered 17 cases since 2010 in which opinions
authored by Easterbrook misstated the facts, omitted facts, or made assumptions
that were contrary to the trial record.
B-
In a third case, Easterbrook wrote in an
opinion that there was not sufficient evidence to support holding two
members of the Chicago police department responsible for events that led to the
highly publicized rape of a mentally disturbed woman. The federal judge hearing
the case, however, recited a cascade of evidence in the record before the panel
that sharply contradicted the Seventh Circuit’s decision.
C-
“The Ultimate Injustice: When a Court Misstates
the Facts,” which contends that the panel opinion, authored by Easterbrook,
misstated the record in a way that led to the ultimate horror: A “man was
condemned by law to remain in prison for a crime he did not commit and could
not possibly have committed.”
2.)
“In the Branion case, Judge Easterbrook rose to the intellectual
challenge of the facts,” wrote D’Amato. “He was able to write an opinion
rationalizing his conclusion that Dr. Branion probably killed Donna Branion
despite conclusive factual evidence that Dr. Branion could not possibly have
committed the crime.”
A-
Branion remained in
prison until 1990, when he developed a brain tumor and heart ailment. Citing
his illness, Governor James R. Thompson commuted the sentence in August 1990;
Branion died in the following month.
B-
In 1994, the Chicago Council of Lawyers published its first and
last effort to evaluate Chicago-area federal court judges. While crediting
Easterbrook’s intellect and writing skills, the council wrote that at times
Easterbrook “acts like the worst of judges” when he disregards law and facts.
The legal group added that Easterbrook “appears less concerned about the actual
facts and issues presented in the appeals before him than about advancing his
own philosophy.”
C-
Petitions seeking reconsideration were filed in
21.6 percent of opinions signed by all the other judges of the Seventh Circuit,
on average, fewer than one in every four. Easterbrook was the only judge in the
circuit whose opinions prompted reconsideration motions in more than 30 percent
of the cases; the petitions were filed in 31.3 percent of cases he authored.
D- Several
judges on the circuit did not respond to requests to discuss the
opinion-writing process. One exception was Judge Posner, who described his
approach to concurring with opinions written by another member of the panel:
“If I agree with the result I’m not going to make a fuss about how the judge
articulated the result…unless what seem to me to be clear errors.” Posner
later added, “I’m a little surprised they are factual errors because, that’s
the sort of thing that the other judges or the law clerks or the authoring
judge will notice.”
3.)
That the Seventh Circuit has Ex B a
Preappeal Program that unequivocally violates 18 U.S.C. 1983 and the Civil
Rights Act of 1866 further violating every area of the 14th
Amendment by making sure no member of the Seventh Circuit ever involve Pro se
litigants in the program, that Page 2, Par 2, 3 of the Seventh
Circuit Preappeal Program: An Evaluation, Jerry Goldman, Dept of Pol. Sci, Northwestern
University, Evanston, Illinois May 1982; The court was unconvinced that
staff intervention through prehearing conferences could encourage iryforma1
dispute resolution on appeal, an oft-repeated claim of proponents of the pre
appeal conference. Although the court recognized that such dispute resolution
might be encouraged by its program, the court's main objective for the program
was to achieve substantial reductions in the workloads of the circuit judges
independent of the settlement or withdrawal of appeals. All civil appeal
notices filed from February 1978 through March 1979 (excluding pro se and 28
U.S.C. § 2255 applications) were reviewed by the court's senior staff attorney
and sorted into two mutually exclusive categories.
A-
Pro se litigants would benefit a great deal from any
type of Preappeal but attorneys who have spent years in law school are given an
unfair advantage and treated favorably in spite of so many of them have
admitted being complicit in an “Organized Criminal Conspiracy, The purpose of
the evaluation was to determine whether and to what extent prehearing
conferences conducted by a senior staff attorney, or by a senior staff attorney
in collaboration with a circuit judge, are effective in reducing the workloads
of Seventh Circuit judges. The reduction in workloads was expected to result
from a reduction in the length and frequency of submission of materials (for
example, motions or briefs) submitted to the court.
4.)
That the
Seventh Circuit Judges have a racist disparate expectation against Pro se or
prisoners regardless to them being innocent and can not afford an attorney, in
that said judges in Frank Easterbrook systematically denies any claim they
present due to skin color and Pro se status demonstrating a modern-day lynching
within the judiciary upholding Jim Crow Laws.
5.)
Hereto
attached, a MEMORANDUM AND ORDER systematically DENIED by chief judge Diane S.
Sykes signed by a Christopher G. Conway (a Clerk) sent to 5217 S Ingleside et
al. nobody has read anything put before this court with so many egregious acts
of corruption it’s not unfathomable to glean that a Clerk created all of this
making it look like a judge acted on this matter.
6.)
7.)
Appellant filed the following (Feb. 18, 2025) MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
OF COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO CIRCUIT RULE 28 (j) & RECONSIDERATION PURSUANT
TO FED RULE OF CIVIL P 59(e) ALSO RULE 60 RELIEF FROM A JUDGMENT OR ORDER w/AFFIDAVIT WARRANTING THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE TO INVOKE JURISDICTION BECAUSE Under Section 4 of the Ku
Klux Klan Act of 1871: the law is clear, “Whenever in any State or part of a
State………unlawful combinations…….shall be organized and armed, and so numerous
and powerful et al…………and whenever, by reason of either or all of the causes
aforesaid, the conviction of such offenders and the preservation of the public
safety shall become…..Impracticable, in every such case such combinations shall
be deemed a rebellion against the Government of the United States…..” RACISM 18 U.S.C. 1983 (DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER THE COLOR OF
LAW) JUDICIAL CORRUPTION HAVE BEEN ADMITTED TO BY ALL APPELLEES AND EVERYONE
INVOLVED WHERE ONLY A NON-RACIST HETEROSEXUAL CAUCASIAN DOJ GOVERNMENT ATTORNEY
CAN PUT THE APPELLANTS BACK IN THEIR HOME & PROSECUTE/PURGE LAW CLERKS/FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES DELETEING COURT RECORDS, LAW CLERKS/ATTORNEYS FALSIFYING DOCUMENTS FRAUDULENTLY,
DUE TO RACISM & EGREGIOUS HATE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS OR HETEROSEXUAL BLACK OR
BROWN MEN AS PRO SE LITIGANTS WHO ARE HELD AT DISPARATE LEGAL STANDARDS THAN
ANY CORRUPT LICENSED BOARD ATTORNEY The U.S. Supreme Court has stated
that "No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against
the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.” Cooper
v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 (1958).
8.)
No judge sent Notice of an Order being issued to the Defendant, so
US Bank had certain people going through Defendant’s home stealing their TV’s
and monitors and put their Queen mattresses outside, the Police was called and
dispatched and was informed via Police Officer that the Cook County Sheriff verified
that they were evicted.
9.)
That because of the court’s racist bias and hateful retaliation of
Defendants due-diligently trying to save their home the court via Pro se Clerk
#2 stated on the phone 313 435-5850 3 mins 31 secs in trying to ascertain the
follow-up stated the court denied the motion and sent it certified and was
asked how was it sent certified when there is no address they have been
illegally evicted and everything was to be emailed and they was able to see the
email and recited if frogishtwo65@gmail.com
was correct?
10.)
It was acknowledged as being correct, he stated he was going to
email the order, Defendant-Appellant has never received any court orders from
the Seventh Circuit but they are communicating to the Appellees and alleged
criminals complicit in this illegal eviction and illegal foreclosure that is
being covered-up.
Any judge who does not comply
with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that
Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land.
The judge is engaged in acts of treason.
No comments:
Post a Comment