Wikipedia Racial Injustice in Chicago Courts

Search results

Friday, May 31, 2019



Ald. Ed Burke charged with racketeering in sweeping indictment

The embattled alderman has been charged in a detailed 59-page indictment that significantly adds to the allegations against him. Mayor Lightfoot demanded he resign immediately.
Ald. Edward M. Burke was named as a defendant Thursday in a ongoing federal bribery case.
 Sun-Times file photo
For more than a year, powerhouse Chicago Ald. Edward M. Burke had been trying to land the developer of Chicago’s Old Main Post Office as a client for his private law firm.
By October 2017, he’d had enough. He found himself alone with Ald. Danny Solis — a secret federal informant wearing a wire. Burke’s anger boiled over. He told Solis the developers “can go f--- themselves.” Then, Solis told him the company’s TIF funding would soon land in front of Burke’s stronghold, the Finance Committee.
“Well, good luck getting it on the agenda,” Burke allegedly said.
Now, Chicago’s longest-serving alderman has been charged with racketeering and bribery in a stunning, highly anticipated 59-page federal indictment filled with detailed allegations of classic Chicago graft. It not only accuses Burke, 75, of using his position to steer legal business to his private firm, but it also alleges he used the City of Chicago as a criminal “enterprise” as part of the racketeering charge — a law first devised decades ago to combat mobsters and organized crime.
One former federal prosecutor called the indictment “a watershed.” Mayor Lori Lightfoot called on Burke to resign immediately. In his own statement, Burke called the charges “unfounded” and predicted a jury will vindicate him.
The indictment showcases for the first time the undercover work of Solis, the former 25thWard alderman whose cooperation with federal prosecutors was first reported by the Chicago Sun-Times in January. The indictment quotes several conversations between Burke and Solis about the Post Office developer, in which Burke complained, “the cash register has not rung yet.” He also asked, “did we land . . . the tuna?”
Solis, who was chairman of the City Council’s Zoning Committee, allegedly acted as a middleman in Burke’s shakedown, taking cues from law enforcement along the way.
The indictment revolves around four schemes, two of which involve iconic Chicago landmarks — the Old Post Office straddling the Eisenhower Expressway and the Field Museum. In addition to the Post Office scheme, Burke is accused of trying to block an admission fee hike at the museum, all because he wasn’t getting an answer about a museum internship for the daughter of former Ald. Terry Gabinski.
The indictment also lays out a previously charged shakedown involving a Burger King at 41st and Pulaski, as well as a scheme charged last month involving developer Charles Cui’s redevelopment project on the Northwest Side.
Charged along with Burke are his top political aide, ward worker Peter J. Andrews — accused of attempted extortion and lying to the FBI among other crimes — and developer Cui, who is accused of bribery and lying to the FBI.
Burke and Andrews are set to be arraigned Tuesday. Lawyers for Burke, Andrews and Cui either could not be reached or declined to comment. But Burke released a statement.
“For over 50 years, Ed Burke has served the citizens of the 14th Ward and the City of Chicago honorably and tirelessly,” the statement said. “His accomplishments on behalf of the community and his constituents are notable and many. Any suggestion that Ald. Burke abused his position as a public official for personal gain is simply not true. The charges are unfounded and not based on actual evidence. We welcome the opportunity to present the complete picture and all the facts to a jury. We are confident that when that happens, Ed Burke will be vindicated.”
Lightfoot called the allegations “alarming.”
“Ald. Burke must resign immediately,” Lightfoot said. “Given the serious criminal liability he faces, Ald. Burke can no longer continue to do his job honorably or effectively.”
Lightfoot also vowed to investigate whether any city employees or vendors helped Burke in his schemes and take appropriate action. The indictment alleges Burke leaned on top city employees for favors.
Burke was re-elected in February, just more than a month after he was initially charged with attempted extortion. However, the federal investigation has cost him control of the Finance Committee.
Andrews, 69, has been Burke’s top political operative for decades, helping circulate petitions for Burke’s re-election earlier this year. He is a retired Chicago Park District plumber who has an annual pension of $88,637.
Fifteen years ago, Andrews’ wife was listed as co-owner of the largest-female owned trucking company in the city’s scandal-plagued Hired Truck Program in which the administration of Mayor Richard M. Daley spent $40 million a year hiring private trucking companies that did little or no work on city projects. Base Trucking got paid more than $3.4 million between 1999 and early 2004 when a Sun-Times investigation led Daley to shut the program down as 49 people were indicted on criminal charges. No charges were filed against Base Trucking or its owners.
601W Companies, the developer of the Old Post Office allegedly targeted by Burke, released a statement referring to itself as “the victim of a corrupt solicitation by Ald. Burke.” The firm is voluntarily assisting the feds, a fact the Sun-Times first reported earlier this year. A Field Museum spokeswoman declined to comment.
The Post Office scheme dated to August 2016, when Burke allegedly first asked Solis to recommend his law firm, Klafter & Burke, to 601W Companies. Solis agreed, and the two men discussed how Solis would essentially get a kickback for any business he brought Burke. A month later, Burke allegedly told Solis he was a “believer in sharing the wealth.”
In an October 2016 meeting with the company’s representatives to discuss the Post Office project, Burke allegedly assured them there weren’t “too many people around town that we don’t know.”
The following month, Solis allegedly asked Burke how he would be paid for bringing clients to Burke’s firm. Burke suggested a payment could be made through a lawyer, or Solis could be paid as a “marketing representative.” Then, in December 2016, the feds prompted Solis to tell Burke his law firm would be hired if he helped sort out issues at the Old Post Office with Amtrak. Burke allegedly replied, “Okay, great.”
In January 2017, Burke allegedly told Solis he wouldn’t take any action benefitting 601W or its associate in connection with the Post Office project unless the associate hired his law firm. That’s when he allegedly told Solis that “the cash register has not rung yet.”
When 601W’s real estate management company had a problem that needed to be resolved with the Water Department and Amtrak in May 2017, Burke allegedly told Solis he had not heard about “getting hired to do the tax work” so Burke was not “motivated” to help. A week later, Burke allegedly asked Solis, “so, did we land the, uh, the tuna?” Then, prompted by law enforcement, Solis told Burke the company’s associate had agreed to provide future tax work to Klafter & Burke.
Burke allegedly promised Solis a “day of accounting” if his firm was retained.
However, October rolled around, and Burke’s firm still had not been hired. Burke and Solis met in Solis’ office with representatives of 601W, who explained the company needed TIF funding. Afterward, when Burke and Solis were alone, Burke “expressed anger that his law firm had not been hired,” according to the indictment.
Burke allegedly told Solis he was not “fond of the way they’ve conducted themselves up until this point, and as far as I’m concerned they can go f--- themselves.”
Finally, in August 2018, Burke apparently left Solis a voicemail in which he confirmed a 601W representative had contacted him about hiring Klafter & Burke. Solis asked Burke if he would support TIF funding for the Post Office project, and Burke allegedly replied, “absolutely.” The TIF proposal sailed through Burke’s Finance Committee on Sept. 17, 2018, and the City Council on Sept. 20, 2018.
Meanwhile, the indictment also alleges that Burke threatened in September 2017 to call the president of Chicago’s Park District Board and oppose an admission fee increase at the Field Museum because it had failed to respond to his earlier effort to land an internship for former Ald. Gabinski’s daughter. Burke received an email from a Field Museum executive giving Gabinski’s daughter a chance to apply for a full-time job.
Ultimately, Gabinski’s daughter told the museum she was “declining consideration for the position.” Neither Gabinski could not be reached Thursday.
All of this lands almost six months to the day after the FBI raided Burke’s City Hall office, rocking Chicago in the midst of an election that put Lightfoot, a former federal prosecutor, in the mayor’s office. Lightfoot has promised reform and moved to end the so-called tradition of aldermanic privilege. Just Wednesday, she tangled with Burke in her first City Council meeting since taking office, quickly dispatching him as he objected to some of her administration’s rule changes.
Former federal prosecutor Jeffrey Cramer called Thursday’s charges “a watershed indictment” that for the first time examines “the intricacies of the aldermanic power” and “how it was abused here.” Cramer is now a managing director in Chicago for Berkeley Research Group.
He said the indictment and Lightfoot’s election could be a “one-two punch” that could lead to “real reform and real change.”
“This indictment is going to help facilitate that,” he said.
Burke Indictment by jroneill on Scribd

Tuesday, May 28, 2019

HONORABLE MAYOR LORI LIGHTFOOT NEEDS TO READ AND UNDERSTAND WHY AND HOW ALDERMAN EDWARD ASCENDED TO POWER REINING TERROR AND MAYHEM ON INNOCENT MEN OF COLOR AS A COWARDLY DEMOCRAT.

ANGLO SAXON MEN FROM THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL MACHINE WITH THE ASSISTANCE FROM COLORED SPINELESS MEN AIDED AND ASSISTED IN THE GENOCIDAL OPPRESSION AND APARTHEID TREATMENT ON THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS.

READ HOW PUPPET BLACK COURT OF APPEAL JUDGE ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS WENT ALONG WITH RACIST HATEFUL ANGLO SAXON JUDGES KENNETH RIPPLE AND DIANE SYKES CONCOCTED A VICIOUS LIE AGAINST ME SAYING MY LICENSE WAS SUSPENDED WHICH WAS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

THIS IS WHY DEMOCRATS DO NOT FEAR THE FBI OR BEING INDICTED BECAUSE SO MANY JUDGES ARE FILLED WITH RACIST HATE THEY INITIATE RULINGS BASED ON TRUE HATE UPHOLDING JIM CROW LAWS OUTLAWED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

READ FOR YOURSELF HOW SO MANY UNQUALIFIED JUDGES AS ANGLO SAXONS CIRCUMVENT THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND ENFORCE  INJUSTICE IN ILLINOIS COURTS.







IN THE 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
                                                                         )                         No. 19 CV 2668
 Francoise Hightower                                      )                         Judge Thomas M. Durkin
        Petitioner                                                 )
                                                                        )                                                                              
          VS                                                         )
                                                                        )                                                                                                                                                            
 Joe Louis Lawrence                                       )
     Respondent                                                )                                          
       

                                NOTICE OF APPEAL

 To: Cook County States Attorney                Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans
         Kim Foxx                                             50 West Washington, Suite 2600
         50 West Washington, Suite 500                Chicago, Ill. 60601
         Chicago, Ill. 60601                           
                                                                       Presiding Judge Grace Dickler
       Chicago Transit Authority Legal Dept.      50 West Washington, Suite
          General Counsel                                        Chicago, Ill. 60601                                                   
       567 West Lake Street Chicago, IL. 60603
       Chicago, Ill. 60661-1498                        

Clerk of the Circuit Court                     
Dorothy Brown                                                    Attorney General   
50 West Washington, Suite 1001                            Kwame Raoul
Chicago, Ill. 60601                                              100 West Randolph, Suite 1300
                                                                 Chicago, Ill. 60601
                                              
 Asst. Gen. Counsel, Sec. of State              Amalgamated Transit Union, 241
     Terrence McConville                                   President/Vice-President
 100 West Randolph, Suite 500                              1613 S. Michigan
      Chicago, Ill. 60604                                         Chicago, Il. 60616

Francoise L.B. Hightower                              Francoise L.B. Hightower
1152 West 102nd Street                                    7709 South Cornell
Chicago, Il. 60643-2353                                  Chicago, Il. 60649-4577
  

COURTESY COPIES TO THE FOLLOWING:

Charles R. Norgle, Sr. Case 93 CV01609      Hon Mayor Lori Lightfoot
219 S. Dearborn, Room 2341                            City Hall 7th floor
Chicago, Ill. 60604                                             Chicago, IL. 60601

Dir.  FBI,
Jeffrey S. Sallet                              U.S. Atty John R. Laush, Jr.
2111 West Roosevelt Road         219 South Dearborn, Suite 500
Chicago, Ill. 60612                       Chicago, Ill. 60604

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”)

How said judges criminalized the Appellant making sure he remained oppressed and not employed with the CTA or any employer so as to keep him from possibly affording legal representation in “Blowing the Whistle” on the names of all associated participants in said “Organized Terrorist Criminal Conspiracy”

                PLEASE BE ADVISED that on May 28, 2019, A Notice of  Appeal has been filed before the Northern District of Illinois .  

                                                                            Respectfully Submitted

                                                                             Joe Louis Lawrence
                                                                             P. O. Box 490075  
                                                                      Chicago, Illinois 60649-0075
                                                312 965-6455
                                                                          Email joelouis565@yahoo.com                                                          
              
                                                                           



Dated May 28, 2019



                                                                                  _____________________          
                                                                                    Joe Louis Lawrence
                                                                                            Counsel Pro Se
                                                                                          
                       


IN THE 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
                                                                         )                         No. 19 CV 2668
 Francoise Hightower                                      )                         Judge Thomas M. Durkin
        Petitioner                                                 )
                                                                        )                                                                              
          VS                                                         )
                                                                        )                                                                                                                                                            
 Joe Louis Lawrence                                       )
     Respondent                                                )                                          
       

                                                  Jurisdictional Statement


Order entered: May 20, 2019
Notice of Appeal filed: May 28, 2019

Statutes: Democratic Judges violating United States Supreme Court Rulings Enforcing “Jim Crow Laws” “Trespassing upon the Laws” “No Jurisdiction on the Appellant” Committing Fraud, Engaging in Treason Like Offenses, Judges Committing Perjury, Judges aiding and abetting in a Criminal Conspiracy, Judge committing Unequal Protection of the Laws Violations, Judge acting outside of the Immunity provisions of his Oath, as “Private Citizens” outlawed by the United States Supreme Court  as they used their robes and jurisdiction to aid and assist Terrorist Democratic Judges and Public Officials in covering-up Criminal Civil Rights Violations, Disparate Unequal Protection of the Laws, Racial Hate Crimes, Slander and Defamation of Character, Civil Rights Violations, Racial Terrorism Conspiracy, Public, Political, Fraternal Corruption Conspiracies by Democrats, and other Un-Constitutional Lawless Violations.


   Plaintiff is appealing to the  Court of Appeals, for a Reversal Sanctions and Remand with instructions notifying Federal authorities based on the foregoing stated above:

    
  

   Plaintiff has Due-Diligently been fighting this matter before the District and  Court of Appeals for over 31 years racist political judges appointed by Alderman Edward Burke have systematically “Trespassed upon the Laws” entering Orders that are “VOID” a “NULLITY” pursuant to the laws of the United States Supreme Court as judges used their robes and unlawful authority to maintain a Democratic “Lynching” of the laws on the Appellant framing him for a paternity matter where a Police Officer father allegedly impregnated his daughters but was protected by the Democratic Machine on a “Bogus case fixed by the Democratic members of a racist hateful ethnicity, in that every Black and Brown person in the Democratic Party kept their mouths shut because they are powerless over Anglo Saxon men in the Democratic Party and they are only figureheads.

   Plaintiff has been forced to live in homelessness in lieu of being remanded behind bars unlawfully and existing on welfare not working as they profit off the unlawful injustices; moreover, keeping him from providing for himself and family as Anglo Saxon men in the Democratic party have killed black or brown men and have not been subjected to 31+ years of criminalization imposed on them as demonstrated on Appellant.

   Plaintiff is appealing to the  Court of Appeals, because Anglo Saxon judges in the Democratic party have systematically ignored that Appellant was the victim of an “Organized Conspiracy” perpetrated by Democratic judges acting as “Private Citizens” controlling the Criminal Enterprise in all of the courts controlled by Democrats.

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).

         That Gr Ex A , Ex  6 Feb. 1988 Court Transcript, Page 4 Lines 8-14, Judge Rivers stated, “Based upon the circumstances, if you have any difficulty serving the defendant in this case, you may want to file the appropriate motion to vacate the non-suit order, based upon the fact there were misrepresentations to the Court with reference to the plaintiff appearing and cooperating with the State’s Attorney’s Office”.    
                 A- That because Democrats in the Political Machine don’t honor any Equal Protection Laws of the United States Constitution, they systematically band together and enforce Jim Crow Laws corroborating the veracity the Democratic Party is just as Racist and Hateful today as they were years ago as people of color were hosed and dogs sent to attack them and lynched.

        That Gr Ex A. Ex 7 Affidavit Rock Detective Agency states, “On 2/23/88 This investigator made a second attempt to serve Mr. Lawrence. Service was executed on Mrs., Allen who stated that she was the grandmother of Mr. Lawrence and that he was not home but did reside at the address. The time was approximately 4:30 pm.”
       “Mrs. Allen is a Black female, about 70-75 years of age with white hair.”    
A-     Defendant’s Grandmother never had white hair and was 63 years old and did not look her age; furthermore, there was no 3rd floor rear apartment and she kept her gate locked, never answered her door for anyone not even family you had to call her first; otherwise, you would be sitting downstairs in the cold or rain. 

B-   To validate the verity of the above, when she passed in her 3rd floor unit the firemen had to enter the unit by entering the third-floor window they were not able to enter the unit due to the gate being padlocked.

C-   That said Exhibit within the Preponderance of the Evidence establishes   "Fraud"  that said orders entered against the Defendant were a “Nullity” pursuant to State and Federal Laws and all legal precedents.

D-    That  the court  became  a law unto  themselves  denied  said  motion  and became “Private Citizens” not having any jurisdiction over the Defendant making all Orders a “Nullity”.

              E-  To show fraud upon the court, the complaining party must establish that the alleged misconduct affected the integrity of the judicial process, either because the court itself was defrauded or because the misconduct was perpetrated by officers of the court. Alexander v. Robertson, 882, F. 2d 421,424 (9th Cir. 1989);

C-    A void judgment does not create any binding obligation. Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.

   
   Plaintiff is appealing to the  Court of Appeals, because Anglo Saxon judges in the Democratic party have systematically ignored the legal issues that has been unimpeached by any and all States Attorneys, Attorney Generals or Corporation Council Attorneys or General Counsels in every venue Plaintiff was litigation before.

   In that certain Court of Appeals Democratic Judges have demonstrated their Hate of the Appellant and overt participation in the “Organized Conspiracy” Criminal Enterprise have rendered Orders of a complete “Nullity” “Void” in its entirety, in that JUDGES KENNETH RIPPLE, DIANE SYKES ANN C. WILLIAMS HAVE DEMONSTRATED UNBELIEVABLE  CONTEMPT FOR THE LAWS as they acted as “Private Citizens” they prepared said order fabricated in its entirety, 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.
A-   Plaintiff never had his Commercial Driver’s License Suspended which can be verified by the Secretary of State.

B-   Plaintiff was never Terminated or Suspended from the Chicago Transit authority he was off work due to a work-related injury Judge Norgle is in receipt of all actual records that has been destroyed in Cook County that validates the veracity he was never ever DISCHARGED.

C-   Plaintiff was never Terminated from IBC/Wonder bread, he tore his rotator cuff falling back off the truck and had surgery repairing it he had to receive welfare and food stamps because someone was collecting his workman’s compensation, but he had Blue Cross Blue Shield medical coverage and a medical card for his then wife and children.

  
   That because the Court of Appeals is controlled by Democrats of a Terrorist nature  is all the reasons this matter should be transferred to another Circuit.

   That Appellant filed the aforementioned Petition/Complaint in that said Democrats obstructed this document from ever being investigated due to the terrorist control Democrats have over the legal venues in Illinois is all the reasons why this case should be transferred to another Circuit within the United States that honors the Laws and precedents of the United States Constitution.

    JUDICIAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL AND DISABILITY
                 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
                                 ONE COLUMBUS CIRCLE, NE
                                   WASHINGTON D. C. 20544
                                 

Joe Louis Lawrence
Petitioner

   V.
  
                                                                                                     Case # 07-16-90074
John W. Darrah, Diane P. Wood, Ann C. Williams,
Diane Sykes, Kenneth Ripple, Frank H. Easterbrook et al.
Respondents




            PETITION TO TRANSFER TO ANOTHER JUDICIAL COUNCIL                              
                        
 I Joe Louis Lawrence, Petitioner Pro se Counsel, Heterosexual Native/African American “Free Man” Born & Raised hereby petitions the Honorable Judicial Council of the aforementioned statutes of violations ignored by Judge John W. Darrah and all of his colleagues complicit in said foregoing acts to transfer said matter Pursuant to Rule 26.

Statute: Unequal Protection of the Laws Violations, Disparate Unequal Protection of the Laws, Civil Rights Violations, Housing Discrimination,  Judicial Bias, Judges Acting outside of their immunity provisions, Jim Crow Violations, Violations of the provisions of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, Judicial Abuse of  Discretion, Racial Terrorism Conspiracy, Perjury, Admission of all facts by all Defendants, No Objections by any Defendants, Public, Political, Fraternal Corruption Conspiracies, Fraud on the Courts and other Un-Constitutional Lawless Violations.

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.

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, where the issues are highly visible and a local disposition may weaken public confidence in the process, where internal tensions arising in the council as a result of the complaint render disposition by a less involved council appropriate, or where a complaint calls into question policies or governance of the home court of appeals et al.       

That the present judges in the Seventh Circuit read evidence of Cook County judges violating the RICO ACT, the 7th Cir. Held that the Cook County Courts were a Criminal enterprise. U.S. v. Murphy, 768 F. 2d 1518, 1531 where precedent was enacted by Judges Frank H. Easterbrook, Richard D. Cudahy and former Chief judge Luther Merritt Swygert;

That every judge in the Seventh Circuit closed their eyes to every complaint said Petitioner put before them on appeal in affidavits validating the verity of judges committing Treason Trespassing upon the laws of the United States Constitution engaging in “WAR” against the United States Constitution making every order rendered against the Petitioner. If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he or she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason;

That every judge in the Seventh Circuit closed their eyes to the fact Petitioner was locked up unlawfully 5 times for allegedly owing child support on a case Alderman Edward Burke and his Democratic Terrorist in the Political Machine orchestrated (88 D 079012) to unlawfully extort money, hereto attached, Gr Ex A, falsified document Monthly Billing Statement of Child Support Account from the Il Dept. of Healthcare and Family Services, against Petitioner in the name of child support where the case was dismissed September 17, 1987 85 D 068185;

That every judge in the Seventh Circuit were aware Judge Kenneth Ripple, African American Ann Claire Williams, and Diane Sykes Trespassed upon the laws and committed Treason lied on court documents saying, “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”.

That certain judges in the Seventh Circuit were aware Petitioner was homeless and the Nazi style acts perpetrated at him with a Section 8 voucher was denied access to live within the city using said voucher, due to ethnicity and complaining blowing the whistle on many of the powerfully connected judges engaging criminal terrorist acts;

That certain judges in the Seventh Circuit were aware African American Associate Political Appointed judge Franklin Ulylesses Valderrama acting as a Puppet for his white masters, “Fixed” the case Trespassed upon the Laws and committed Treason threatened the Petitioner in open court in front of many white attorneys who openly stated, “Hell naw, I don’t want no part of this shit! This judge is crazy”
That Judge Valderrama ignored the fact the 6 or 7 law firms admitted to Petitioner’s claims of Housing and Racial Discrimination regarding Source Income violations DEFAULTED on $25 Million Dollars, said judge stated, “he does not accept certified mail or an affidavit printout from the clerk’s office (Dorothy Brown) showing the parties were served and never replied timely; 

Judges Mary Lane Mikva and Neil Cohen have asked said attorneys to respond or rebut the Petitioners argument all have declined and never have any attorney ever objected or denied any of the facts Petitioner has put before any courts, so said judges have to step outside their jurisdiction and commit Treason to keep the Petitioner from having Equal Protection of the Laws from any courts where they have control. 

 That it is apparent no judge in the Seventh Circuit were aware they had become Trespassers of the laws and committed Treason pursuant to the aforementioned acts and are the new “Weapons of Mass Destruction” and a dangerous Threat to National Security due to their abuse of Power;


The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original].
Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)


I affirm the above as being true.

                                                                                            Respectfully Submitted


                                                                                             Joe Louis Lawrence

                                                                                       Appellant-Counsel Pro Se