15918RE: [tips_and_tricks] Illinois- Pro Se- Continuance- Narcotic Use
- Feb 19, 2008Diancecht wrote:
> The judge cited in court that he was denying my request for aYou need a doctor as an expert witness.
> continuance because he had functioned repeatedly as a judge and as an
> attorney while under this medication.
> He has already in the past disregarded Illinois law regarding theAnd how did you react, with appeals and writs? We have a whole state
> amounts set for child support, dismissed several show causes because
> she "obviously didn't understand the law" (she has an attorney).
full of people out here who don't understand the law, but that seldom is
helpful to them. Maybe I overlooked some of Illinois' good points when
I decided to leave for good. Imagine if some day comes when NOBODY in
Illinois understands the law!! Wow! It'll be like California - GAME
OVER! It may not be long before most states realize it's over for them
as well. The people putting the NAU together are pretty confident
that's the way of the future too. When they take away the FRNs, will
you work and give property for Ameros? Not me!
> The man seems to have a total disregard for Illinois law and laterAt least you need a note from a doctor for that trial. How come when
> I said I couldn't understand him and was in the start of a panic
> (drug reaction) that resulted in me being carried out of the
> by paramedics he fined me 100 dollars for contempt of court.
you don't understand it doesn't work the same way??
> However there was one other thing that upset me as I was having theYes, but then one has to ask, when is the best time to disqualify judges
> attack, the attorney for the other side asked the judge to make a
> decision based on how long they had known each other, this judge and
> attorney's wife both serve on several boards together, if the attorney
> feels comfortable enough to ask the judge to serve as a character
> witness isn't that a conflict of interest?
and attorneys? Is it BEFORE or AFTER they act against our best
interests? I believe it is BEFORE they can act officially, so as a
matter of course, I try to disqualify all warm-bodied human beings who
speak in any case in which I become involuntarily embroiled. I don't
know how to do that in Illinois, but I'm sure there has to be a process.
Maybe a keyword search using "disqualification", "peremptory challenge",
"challenge for cause", "conflict of interest", "practicing law without a
license", "ethics violation", etc. might turn up useful info for you.
> If anyone knows any case law it would be appreciated I have tried toIn my experience, case law and statutes and even constitutions are not
> some researc on these topics on Lexis Nexus but quite honestly I
> that I am approaching this from the wrong direction and as such I am
> the opinion that much of the research I have found in this particular
> matter is relatively worthless.
enough to stop abuses against today's victims of government by today's
criminal in-fill-traitors, because they will say you always had remedies
that you either waived or can take advantage of in the future if you
don't like what they are doing to you today. You cannot expect mercy
from enemies. I think what might be more valuable than cases and laws
would be a self-assertiveness class or martial arts or something that
will get you to voice strenuous objections earlier and more often.
Court fights are fights for sure. You get nowhere being nice anymore.
Soon any kids you have will be adults and you will be able to fill them
in on how their lives got screwed up and how to avoid it for their kids.
Most troubles can be traced back to lies "everyone" believes, and the
Lemming Principle, where people act in ways they do just because they
see others do it. This includes joining the military, marriage
licenses, income taxes, driver's licenses, using Fed debt and credit,
etc. etc. ad nauseum.
- << Previous post in topic