Many of you know, about 4 years ago I got pulled over by a Palatine cop, by the name of Mark Wenrich The Police report and testimony was deliberately deceitful, a lie and fraudulent. Under oath, instead of saying “I made a few mistakes in the report and that I would like to take the opportunity to correct them”, he stuck to his guns and gave premeditated, intentional, perjured testimony. At the time of my arrest, this police officer was intoxicated, high on drugs, just following the protocol of a corrupted village or dumber than a stump. There were other police officers present during this arrest.
I mentioned this and provided enough evidence to all of the attorneys to put all doubts to rest. I also told and asked Tatooles to get a copy of the video tape of the arrest and get a copy of the gps location of the police car and that will give added confirmation and verification as to lies in the field and at the station.
I am sad that many people who draw paychecks from the Village of Palatine and other locale government agencies, just didn’t and don’t care about integrity, professional conduct, code of ethic, truthfulness and honesty.
I was hoping that during the past 4 years that, at some time some one would have the balls, guts or decency to make some attempt to correct some lies that were told of me. But nobody felt it important, didn’t want to rock the boat, waist their time, get involved, did not want to give 2 cents worth of effort, lift a finger, to correct a wrong. I asked for help to write this letter, but nobody would touch this matter with a 10 foot pole. Rather the entire village would prefer to have a corrupt mad man (got to be more than one) maybe on drugs, with a badge and gun running around 24 hours a day, doing what he pleases.
I could never figure out why people in the employment of the Village of Palatine and related government bodies could, would and have protected corruption. If the reason is because I have a wife and kids to support............I could be fired, this is up to you, it still don’t make it right. What are you telling your kids? The next generation of Americans? It is ok to lie, when you see a crime, just turn away, ignore it, don’t bother stopping to help some one?
You cannot beat what the church has to offer; 1 hour a week, 5 bucks in the kitty and your sole gets blessed. What a bargain. Just think if we did not have this sole cleansing service every week, things might be a lot worse. So maybe, some people put 10 bucks in and get a double blessing, so they can be double crooked for the week.
My defense team started with James Tatooles (lawyer number 1) (the brother of the mayor of Inverness (very small neighboring community that recently purchased its first police car). I pointed out to Tatooles , that some entries in the police report were way off wall, knowingly false and that it makes one wonder what this cop was on, when he made the arrest.
One particular observation and entry in the police report was a “mother of all, of his bumbling observations or lack of, or what he hallucinated to”. I don’t see how a cop in their right mind would make such a entry, unless, maybe, and also, cops knows they have judges and prosecutors in their pocket and can twist em as they please.
Besides the fact, that Wenrich did not know the color of the car he was following / pulled over.
Besides the fact, that Wenrich did not know which side of the road he pulled the car over.
Besides the fact, that Wenrich did not know the direction he or I were traveling.
Wenrich did not know what road he pulled me over on. Officer Wenrich said “ Rand North of Hicks. The posted speed limit for that stretch of road is 40 mph”. When in fact Rand North of Hicks, had 2 posted speed limit signs for that stretch of road that read 35 mph. Actually Rand has a Northwest or Southeast direction. So there for, he did not know exactly, sort of, maybe, kind of, or where about, he pulled me over. Maybe Wenrich meant Rand South of Hicks, or Hicks North of Rand or Hicks South of Rand.
I simply don’t know what Wenrich was on. I provided Tatooles with a tow receipt.
I would think that the states attorney could not allow this report or testimony in a court of law.
Tatooles might have realized that there is a severe problem with Mark Wenrich’s report, which could possibly point to a Wenrich’s on the job intoxication or something, at the time of the arrest, which would be a dui, for a cop who issued a dui, which might open the doors as to the other state of minds of the officers involved in the arrest, which might open the door as to where was the shift commander during this, and open the door as to the competence of the police chief (as to not knowing what is going on), then that might open the door as to why the village council are keeping these people on the city payroll which might bring to attention other shady activities that village members do not want known.
Mr. Tatooles as a member and past president of the Northwest Suburban Bar Association, officer of the court, is required to have this police officer arrested for making a false police report and if testimony would follow, he is obligated to add addition felony charges for perjured testimony.
I suspect;
James Tatooles, knowing about the gravity of the situation, and that his brother is the Mayor of the next town (Inverness), which relies on Palatine Police, Fire and public works departments for 24 hour service, might have asked his brother for his thoughts on the matter.
In which John Tatooles, might have talked to his village board and or maybe talked to the mayor of Palatine Rita Mullans, who may have talked to her village board about this issue.
The Palatine police has been know for problems in the past and there might be some ill feelings with the Palatine Police, Fire and public works departments, not with standing the Palatine Park District if any thing might rock the boat again.
As a long time, president of the Northwest Suburban Bar Association, one of the largest Bar Association in Illinois so he commanded the obedience and loyalty of his fellow brothers in law, which include, politicians, attorneys, judges and prosecutors. And as it turned out, after the trial, James Tatooles has made a run for judgeship he had the endorsement of many prestigious groups. After failure of that venture, he is now trying for republican state representative.
So I think the stage was then set:
The jest of the private pretrial conference in the Judge Scotillo’s chambers with assistant state’s attorney Shari Chandra and Michael Andre and James Tatooles went something like this, please note, I am assuming that the judge was present and that Tatooles discussed the evidence (that is what lawyers are suppose to do);
Hi judge, we have a problem here, the police officer that arrested my client, I think was intoxicated him self or just to dumb to be a police officer. Look at this police report,
forget about Wenrich not knowing the correct color of the car he was following & pulled over
the fact Wenrich did not know which side of the road he pulled the my clients car over on,
nor did Wenrich know what road he was on during the pursuit and arrest of my client.
Wenrich says it was Rand, but what is worst, Wenrich’s report says that “The posted speed limit for that stretch of road is 40 miles per hour”. There is no posted 40 mile per hour speed limit for that stretch of Rand. Your honor, Wenrich has written thousands of speeding tickets on that stretch of Rand saying that the posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour. Here judge look at these photos. The assistant states attorney Shari Chandra and Michael Andre, then agreed and added Tatooles is right, Wenrich’s report and testimony would be in direct contradiction to previous testimony and judicial rulings in this court house. The IDOT, the Cook County State attorneys office, fellow Judges have established that Wenrich’s observations report is false and testimony would be false. We have no idea where or what was on his mind at the time of arrest. Also as a matter of fact judge, you have probably ruled as a fact, in a previous case or 2 in which the testimony of that stretch of road was established as 35 miles per hour, so any ruling other than, will contradict and not support your own previous rulings. We would put Wenrich the arresting officer, in further jeopardy, than he is now.
Tatooles also might have said, If I have to argue about the breath test, my client was exposed to and breathing acetone and keyatone all day, PVC glue and primer and had open cans next to him at the time of the arrest. A expert witness will cancel out breath test.
Shari Chandra said something like darn, I am looking forward to my first trial and to start with a winner would be a good thing.
Then Tatooles’s added, there is another problem, as you know your honor, my brother is the Mayor Inverness, and is concerned about the friction that this may cause and there is the point of a conflict of interest.
Maybe Scotillo was not present in the pre trial hearing. Maybe the Assistant State’s Attorney Chandra and Andre and Tatooles planed this all on their own, but let’s assume he was present (who else could order 4 defense lawyers, and the entire States Attorney’s office of Cook County, a police departments and who ever else might pop in.
As it turns out a retired supreme court justice called me after the trial, (I let more than a few people know of my story and that I will no longer be available or next to impossible, for plumbing work on their properties. They might as well find another plumber. Well one of my customers always had several supreme court justices at his Christmas parties)
I assume Judge Scotillo was present in the pre trail hearing, took charge.
“Ok, now Shari, watch and learn, this is how we play these games, don’t forget I am the judge, I am the law, if you want to practice law, in this state, you better keep your mouth shut ears open or your law degree wont be worth the paper it was printed on.
There will be no talk of any sort of, miss conduct, a cover up, tampering with evidence, a false police report, conspiracy, deception, or a intoxicated cop during his arrest. Nobody needs to know this.
We will not mention anything about this exculpatory evidence in trial, we will keep it away from the court recorder ears, that way all of this nonsense is nothing, nobodies the wiser.
I will sentence him so that by the time he gets out of the courts control, the statue of limitations would have reached its limit on all matters. If he complains before then, I will sight him with contempt and throw his ass in jail.
(However, I think that both criminal and civil conspiracy is valid, simply for one reason (but not limited to), the fact that Palatine police (and or Wenrich) and the Cook County States Attorneys office (and or Shari, Michael) have subsequently agreed that the posted speed limit sign is 35 miles per hour, which is
“Shari can get her first win and another feather in Michael’s cap”
“Jim, your brother wont have to worry, I see no conflict of interest”,
“Shari, make sure the cop knows he is off the hook, every thing is ok and have him, just stick to the report, Tatooles will not bring any of this up, if he does, I’ll stop him before he gets there”
“Jim are you ready for trial? There was no grand jury which was good, get Mars to wave a trail by jury, which will be even better yet, and since we are going this route, this will be a walk in the park done by lunch”.
Then I suspect Scotillo would have asked Tatooles “You paid up? Tatooles said “yep”.
“Jim, since your going to run for Judge, you don’t need to bash a cop, not with this case, to close to home, you don’t need mothers against drunk drivers knocking on your door. You can make some frivolous arguments about not being prepared, the field sobriety test or something. Since you don’t have a expert witness present to contradict the breath test, just don’t bring up the presents of the chemicals that would trigger a false reading on the breath analyzer, that, your client was exposed to that day and up the time of arrest. Put your client on the stand, don’t prep him and then we will let Shari have fun ripping him apart. I will make sure on your examination of the Wenrich you don’t go where we don’t want to go”.
Then the judge said “so there, lets go, get this over with and have some fun”
So during the trial, the only thing I could get Tatooles to say or that he was scripted not to say, was that Wenrich got the color of the car wrong. After Tatooles examination was over with Wenrich, I was going to say stop, I have a few questions, but I just wanted to see how this game that was being played , was going to be play out.
So at the end of trial I was guilty and every one praised them self’s of such a out standing job. It was a club, at the end of a hunt.
I had trial transcripts made. I paid about a dozen lawyers close to $20,000.00 for a review of the trial. Some attorney’s saw major problems with the trial, others were apparently in the same bar association of Jim Tatooles or were concerned about intimidation from the judge, so they praised actions of the court and said there is nothing they can do.
I hired attorney number 2, for $5,000.00 to argue some post trial views that I thought were important and missed. Such as but not limited to; accessory, facilitating perjury, conspiracy, obstruction of justice, a lack of truth. letting him know about a cover up, fabrications, gross dereliction of duty, willfully perpetuated a perjury, subverted testimony, attorney and judicial misconduct hoping he would correct the errors that made a dirty cop go free. He argued about this and that, but not about my main concern.
Some one, some how lawyer number 2 must have become informed of what the game plan is and he fell in place or Scotillo would make sure he would never practice law again. So lawyer number 2, also decided to knowingly and willfully aided and abetted and furthered the obstruction of justice.
I am sure this action gave Scotillo, Chandra Andres and Tatooles a little kick, because this was not apart of the original game plan. But I am sure Scotillo was pleased that another lawyer without a backbone would submit to his will.
I was teary eyed in my last statement, knowing that the entire justice system failed, corruption prevail and I was just a piece of trash. Why was I the only one that wanted the truth to be told. I was getting a fair trial and nobody cared.
I paid another two lawyers for a appeal (lawyer number 3, lawyer number 4), hoping one last chance some one could tell a judge that, there is major corruption in my trial. I was still not sure what power prevented a simple truth from come out. One day I got a call from one of my customers, he was pretty choked up also. (I let my grievance to known to a lot of people, friends, other plumbers, inspectors, some guys in the Chicago and County and Springfield governments, lets not forget about the MWRSD and customers, letting the customers know that most likely they will have to find another plumber, I won’t be doing plumbing for a while). He said he had a friend that, will be calling me, a retired supreme court judge. He called, asked me a bunch of questions, didn’t know the answers to. To me it was just another voice on the other end of the line, so I said I will have lawyer number 3, get back with him. Lawyer number 3 was very impressed, little ole me have such contact ability. I did not want to contact another friend of mine, a retired appellate court judge for help. He had a stroke, long time ago, can read, limited vocabulary. I hope and maybe he is much better these years, I just didn’t want to go over to the house and bother him and his wife with this non sense. I can stand on my own 2 feet.
Lawyer number 3 talked to the retired supreme court judge. Lawyer number 3 was the contact person for lawyer number 4, who wrote the appeal. Because lawyer number 3 was witness to much of the court room proceedings, and because his neighbor happens to be the other associate judge, right next to Scotillo, he probably was advised to make sure the appeal was frivolous, worthless, a no nothing appeal that will go no place, mean nothing to anybody. So that was a waste of another $9,000 or so. What are you going to do if a judge tells a lawyer play ball, my ball or else, I will make sure you will never practice law again.
This was just 2 more lawyers with no balls or guts, willfully, knowingly aided in a cover up, a successful cover up. Now we have;
* Scotillo,
* Tatooles (lawyer number1), his brother? with or without his trustees?
* Assistant State’s attorney Chandra & Andre (agents of Cook County State’s Attorney Richard Devine)
* Cook County State’s attorney’s office of Richard Devine
* Mark Wenrich of the Palatine Police Department, and his fellow brothers in various departments, public works, township agencies and districts, the mayor and her village trustees.
* Lawyer number 2, 3 and 4 and possible a retired supreme court justice now all on board
Well the Appellate Court First Judicial District made their ruling. The appellate judges McNulty, PJ, Tully, O’Malley and JJ decided to join the party and have a ball. They praised Scotillo, Chandra and Andre and gave overwhelming praise and support to Palatine Police Officer Mark Wenrich.
The appellate court, most likely, assumed the facts that Scotillo allowed to be put into this case were correct, above board and honorable. But now, we must add the appellate court accountable also, with this mess also (I think this is a mess and up to now, apparently, I am the only one to thin).
I let the many Cook county probation officers that were assigned to me know about this, the treatment centers know about this, the Maricopa county (AZ) probation know about this and nothing. I let some people I knew in the Palatine fire department, public works departments, building departments, Village consul, township departments, customers, business owners, people in various school districts, societies and others that work within the government of other local municipalities. They are all on this game plan of sticking together and or there is nothing any one can do.
So by now;
The Appellate court added their 2 cents. We still have the original set of lies. After all this cover up with all the combined years of education, diplomas, degrees and training to uphold the law and law enforcement involved and potential combined in jail time that all participants of this party should be subject to is staggering.
Every right that I think I should have been entitled to, was denied me. I ask my team of lawyers “how come this exculpatory evidence and letting a dirty cop to continue doing what dirty cops do did not come out” and they just shrug their shoulders, “I don’t know”
During the testimony we discovered that Mark Wenrich’s only job experience prior to becoming a Police officer was a bar bouncer during college. I bet, I know what and where that bar was also. It is amazing in a small town what people know about each other.
Now lets get back to the “mother of all of his bumbling observations or lack of, or what he hallucinated to” lies, told by Mark Wenrich. Based upon what McNulty, PJ, Tully, O’Malley and JJ said and ruled is now law.
I think that McNulty, PJ, Tully, O’Malley and JJ, will now have to clarify;
Is this ruling recto active or does it start from the date of the ruling?
Since this ruling has praised and gave credit to Wenrich’s perjured testimony and to become case law, will all further perjured testimony by Wenrich, be given praise, credit and held harmless?
Since this ruling has praised and gave credit to Wenrich’s perjured testimony and to become case law, will all further perjured testimony by any body, be given praise, credit and held harmless?
Since this ruling has praised and gave credit to Wenrich’s perjured testimony and to become case law, will the IDOT not be following the courts ruling by not changing the posted speed limit?
The appellate court ruling has set a precedent that can now be used to go after all traffic citations that state 35 mile per hour is the posted speed limit on that stretch of Rand. "With this case law, the IDOT 35 mile per hour posted speed limit on that stretch of Rand is not valid
That since Wenrich said “that posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour”, it is so, and the law
That since Illinois Department of Transportation says it is posted at 35 miles per hour, cannot be creditable, nor law.
All traffic citations and or any court testimony previous, during and after the McNulty, Pj, Tully, O’Malley and JJ’s ruling that involves any thing that would contradict the 40 miles per hour statement, which is false by reality, but true by the newly established fact of law, would be a violation of the higher courts decision.
All traffic citations and or any court testimony previous, during and after the McNulty, Pj, Tully, O’Malley and JJ’s ruling that involves any thing that would contradict the 40 miles per hour statement would be a violation of the higher courts decision and that all Judges, police officers and prosecutors who have ruled other wise are and will be violation of the higher courts order.
All traffic citations and or any court testimony previous, during and after the McNulty, Pj, Tully, O’Malley and JJ’s ruling that involves any thing that would contradict the 40 miles per hour statement would be a violation of the higher courts decision.
That Mark Wenrich of and including the Palatine Police department still issuing citations against and in direct contradiction of the McNulty, Pj, Tully, O’Malley and JJ’s ruling that involves any thing that would contradict the 40 miles per hour statement would be a violation of the higher courts decision.
That Cook Count State’s attorney’s office of Richard Devine and lower court judges are still prosecuting, passing judgment on traffic citations and or giving court testimony previous, contrary to the McNulty, Pj, Tully, O’Malley and JJ’s ruling that involves any thing that would contradict the 40 miles per hour statement would be a violation of the higher courts decision.
Since Mark Wenrich constantly testifies in other court rooms and the Cook County State’s attorneys agree, that the speed limit is 35 miles per hour, I consider this a on going conspiracy of a multitude of crimes against all parties that is still within its statue of limitations.
All to protect a crooked cop, in a crooked city of Palatine, Cook County, Illinois
A old saying comes to mind “garbage in, garbage out”
My team of lawyers starting with James Tatooles (the brother of the mayor of Inverness), lawyer number 2, lawyer number 3, and lawyer number 4 and the State’s Attorney of Cook County, Richard Devine, Assistant States Attorney of Cook County Shari Chandra, Michael Andre, Judge John J Scotillo, all went to extreme measures and violated every law, principal and oath, to protect a dirty cop who was probably intoxicated during the arrest and cover it up, while knowingly, becoming just as guilty or dirty as a crooked cop. All the schooling, education, knowledge of right and wrong, good and bad, just disappeared. I personally, think honesty is a good thing. I think there was a retired supreme court justice who talked to one of my lawyers about this case. Every one knew or now knows that this cop lied under oath, provided a false police report. The Appellate Court of Illinois, knowingly or not, have not seem to have dirt on them selves also. The old saying garbage in garbage out is what we have. I know for a fact that over half the cases the higher courts rule are based on lies presented to them. Point in case is a is my 2nd dui in which the Appellate court ruled that the crooked Illinois State Police officer testimony was creditable.
Tattoles again in that case did nothing to let the court that the cop was committing perjury. I had photos, showing the cop could not see what he saw, but this went on death ears. I complained to the State police and showed them photos, but nothing was done. So this dirty state trooper, continued to lie, cheat, corrupt the court systems (like Drew Peterson) until a ripe old age, then collect a nice retirement package. A honest cop or lawyer are far and few in-between.
and because of 1 of his lies, is in such fashion, it effects about every other ticket he has written and that he
On the surface every right that you would think a person is entitled was not granted me, code of ethics, and professional conduct are absent, you name it, it was not here. But under the surface, this behavior has become the standard and acceptable practice. This case is so corrupt, from every concept, from start to end. All I wanted is the truth told in my case. I have sent this to hollywood, this would make a good movie. Also I think this would be a good review in law school as to training future lawyers, politicians and judges.
People in the police and fire departments, building departments. Public works, Township departments, historical society, the park and school districts, and some people who work at the library seem to think I should be lucky I did not go to jail, Many businesses people, in town, out of town, residents, are aware of my case. But go to church every week for a hour, toss in 5 bucks, and you get you sole cleansed.
Now there is another thing,
There is this other cop that you hired to target selected trucks and trailers, then I heard he was picking on landscaper trailers. Also as many know, he offered a discount for cash for something like $1100. He also said something like “it would be higher if he had to take us in”. You would have to ask my brother how he took it. Well my brother who was driving asked if he would get a receipt or something like than and this cop went nuts. As a result my brother was arrested, who just out of the military after serving 20 years for this country was now is going to cook county jail unless we came up with a $1300 something fine. I can add other stories of intimation about this cop that I have heard, from many people who have been doing business in Palatine far before this cop was even a twinkle. Maybe this is village policy, cash payments on pull overs other wise this seems like a old fashion, run of the mill, standard, bribe..
If it is not the policy of the Palatine Police Department to offer discounts for cash on site for a road side pull over, I want this police officer arrested.
I wonder if this was the cop, or another in a marked squad car that I, saw parked at a cash station one Saturday morning at about 5:30 am and he was doing a transaction. I mean what does a cop need to do at a cash station at this hour.
After watching a few village board meetings in which Palatine residents came to the meetings and complained about board members, lying, trickery, then hearing you guys saying, this is not on the agenda, we will not discuss it, sit down or get out. The mayor and the rest of the board members have displayed lack of honesty, respect and good government.
I heard that the mayor sold her house for twice what it was worth, and that certain people or companies directly related to this seems to have privileges, not available to others (a few of us have a good idea what some of these perks are) . But that real estate deal sounds like what use to go around about the Park District and certain properties they purchased.
I know and we know that Village inspectors and others are forced to look the other way or face the consequences of termination.
and at the same time, just like Bollingbrook, the cops know the dirt on the Village Board and the Village Board knows the dirt on the cops, so every one is staying put.
If I had some help, in as little as a few months I could find enough corruption to put most of the palatine police, village board and others in jail for a long time.
Also like BollingBrook, what can a person do, make a report on a dirty cop to another dirty cop?
I just wanted honesty at my trial and I don’t care what the crime is.
I did not get it, Tatooles had his own twisted agenda, once again.
Monday, October 13, 2008
in the past 4 years, i have composed ideas
>appellate court first judicial dist. McNulty, Pj, Tully, Omalley, JJ - associate judge John Scotillo- state's attorney of cook county, richard devine, assistant states attorney shari chandra, michael andre- defense lawyer tatooles, glasgo, breslin.
Please forgive me if this description of “what the lawyer did or failed to do that you believe may have been improper” is a little lengthy, redundant or uncomfortable. No body wanted to help me or touch this letter with a 10 foot pole. I am all by my self in this letter. I tried to be fair and objective, but I feel this letter has a subjective tone just by nature. I there for, apologize for what ever subjectivity may be within.When judges abuse their power, the people are obliged - it is their duty - to correct that injury, for the benefit of themselves and their posterity. In order to ensure judicial accountability and domestic tranquility
No immunity shielding a judge shall be construed to extend to any deliberate violation of law, fraud or conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material facts, judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the Constitution
When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost. Rankin v. Howard, (1980) 633 F.2d 844, cert den. Zeller v. Rankin, 101 S.Ct. 2020, 451
Please forgive me if this description of “what the lawyer did or failed to do that you believe may have been improper” is a little lengthy, redundant or uncomfortable. No body wanted to help me or touch this letter with a 10 foot pole. I am all by my self in this letter. I tried to be fair and objective, but I feel this letter has a subjective tone just by nature. I there for, apologize for what ever subjectivity may be within.
I am a plumber not a lawyer or law student. One complaint, it seems to me that no one in this case knows the law, they are all bumbling idiots. I think at the end, the jest of my complaint will be known.
No one in this case is worthy of believing of being a member of law.
Arresting Palatine Police Officer Mark Wenrich testimony, but we do know what part of his testimony was perjury.
Perjury is black and white, clear as day. Perjury is a crime. Perjury is throughout my trial.
I believe the “Black robe disease” has affected these courts.
I just wanted the truth told in may case. In my dui 15 years ago, the Illinois State Police trooper committed perjury under oath. I was convicted with untruthful, testimony that purposely deceived the court. Once again the court made its ruling on a crooked state trooper. I wrote a letter to the state police about this and nothing ever happened (ask a fox to guard the hen house). If any one ever cared or investigated, that police officer should be arrested. But instead he spent the rest of his career, telling more lies, tampering with evidence, and who knows what else. Then he retired and gets a nice pension for the rest of his life and educated people wonder what is wrong with
I believe a police officer that gives false statements and commits perjury is not creditable regardless how many judges say he is. If a person under oath tells judges for 8 years, in thousand of under oath testimonies one thing, then tells one judge another thing (in my trial). What creditability is this? To make things worse, the prosecutors and defense lawyers and possibly the trial judge knew about this also. I discovered after the fact words like exculpatory evidence.
The premeditated conduct and or unwilling conduct from the police officer, the appellate court, trial judge, prosecuting lawyers, defense lawyers I feel are, unprofessional and definitely re define honest, truthfulness, behavior and conduct.
Palatine Police officers Mark Wenrich perjured repeatedly and blatantly about matters at the heart of the traffic stop thus totally removing any creditability and respect of him self and the courts. He and the courts have shown no regret for his actions, which significantly impeded the trial.
This case/trial and appeal is and was full of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct, abuse and oppression. There was a failure to disclose favorable evidence and falsifying evidence. False statements were partly caused by the intentional, reckless and/or negligent acts of the prosecutions office. The State Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine and the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra and Michael Andre intentionally, maliciously and/or . . . recklessly investigated and prosecuted. To this date there has been no oops, I made a mistake to anyone, by anyone. No one in this case will take responsibility but me, a convicted felon. No one in this case of mine has the guts to say the truth. Now I will say it and nobody will like it. The Illinois Supreme Court should be happy, that I ran out of money and or just gave up on a truthful and honest judges, prosecutors and lawyers. Other wise I would have appealed the appellate court decision. The United States Supreme court should be happy also because if I would have taken this case to there court also. All and all these other courts would end up praising the corruption of the trial court and thus becoming corrupt them self’s. So we will just stick to a corrupt circuit court, appellate court, Cook County States attorneys, assistant states attorney’s office and let’s not forget to add, a crooked Illinois State Police department.
This police officer was rated as highly professional and creditable by the State Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine, the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra, and Michael Andre, associate Judge John J Scotillo, the appellate judges McNulty, P.J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ.
The States Attorneys office of
The State Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine, the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra, and Michael Andre, associate Judge John J Scotillo, the appellate judges McNulty, P.J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ, may have conduct of; aiding and abetting, Accessory, facilitating perjury, malfeasance, conspiracy, obstruction of justice. All were willing or unwilling participants, participating in a crime. This is disturbing and against the law. These actions violates just about every code conduct that, every reasonable person knows.
The States Attorney office of
The prosecutor’s office is liable for knowingly supervise, participate and assisting Officer Mark Wenrich in his perjured testimony. Perhaps Officer Mark Wenrich wanted to correct his police report and testimony, but was not allowed to do so.
This indictment against or other criminal proceedings based on prosecutorial, police and judicial misconduct, abuse and oppression should not have taken place.
Prosecutorial misconduct of perjury, threatening (the entire legal system) and coercing a witness to make perjured testimony, concealing, falsifying evidence and oppression was a pattern through out this trial. As a result the associate Judge John J Scotillo, the appellate judges McNulty, P.J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ have now praised, gave honor, creditability and encourage perjury, dishonesty and corruption. I don’t think this is good.
________________________________________________________________________
Exculpatory evidence is the evidence favorable to the defendant in a criminal trial, which clears or tends to clear the defendant of guilt. In many countries such as the United States, if the police or prosecutor has found such evidence, he/she must disclose it to the defendant. The prosecution's failure to disclose exculpatory evidence can result in the dismissal of a case. The opposite is inculpatory evidence, which tends to prove a person's guilt.
[edit] Example
A victim is murdered by stabbing and an accused person is arrested for the murder. Evidence includes a knife covered with blood near the victim and the accused found covered in blood at the murder scene by the police. During the investigation, the police interview a witness claiming to have watched the stabbing occur. The witness makes a statement to the police claiming the stabbing was by another unknown person, not the accused.
The police officers statement, testimony and report are exculpatory evidence, since it could introduce reasonable doubt as to the creditability of the police officer. The police officer knew the evidence, report and testimony is not, was not and would be not and never would be accurate.
________________________________________________________________________
The State's Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine, the
The States Attorney’s office knew by running the plates that the color of the car was not the color of the car on the police report. The color was gold not silver.
The review and investigation by the States Attorney’s office of
The State's Attorney of Cook County office and the
Here we have the maybe 8,000 prosecuted speeding tickets written by Officer Mark Wenrich before, during and after my incident. These tickets have been ruled on / judged by other judges. This, contradicting evidence which was ignored, is what Judge Scotillo and the Appellate courts based their ruling on. Palatine police officer Mark Wenrich’s testimony in my trial and the arrest report I feel was not creditable.
The States Attorney office of Cook County and the Assistant States Attorneys have prosecuted the maybe 8,000 speeding tickets written by officer Mark Wenrich, who has sworn under oath the speed limit is 35 mph. But the police report and testimony in my case / trial, state that the speed limit is 40 mph. This is in direct contradiction to the maybe 8,000 plus maybe another 200,000 convictions in other court rooms, other citations, and other judges. Maybe Judge Scotillo participated in some of these rulings. I think this would mean another conflict. Surely the States Attorney office of
Who is right the appellate court, associate court, traffic court, the judge in room 101 or the judge in room 202? They all judge diametrically opposite on the same undisputed facts.
Associate Judge John J Scotillo, the Appellate Judges McNulty, P.J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ judge John J Scotillo, Palatine police officer Mark Wenrich, the State Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine and the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra and Michael Andre all seem to have no problem with this conflict of testimony, while in other court rooms, in front of other judges the State Attorney office of Cook County and the Assistant States Attorneys prosecute and other judges convict on facts which were contrary to this police report. Other judges have ruled that the posted speed limit on that road is 35mph not 40 mph as given in Mark Wenrich’s testimony at trial.
So now in my case the Appellate Judges McNulty, P.J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ judge, Associate Judge John J Scotillo have judged and ruled contrary to other court rulings on a simple speed limit sign. Since the appellate court, over rules or agrees with lower judges ruling, then every speeding ticket that was a conviction based upon police officer Mark Wenrich’s testimony that the speed limit is 35 mph, should be overturned and how about all other tickets past present and future by who ever wrote the ticket. Some one should tell the Illinois Department of Transportation and the Secretary of State of Illinois that the courts make up their mind as to what the law is or, the law is what ever officer Mark Wenrich says it is, so forget about any posted speed limit sign, or for get about every thing else.
Are the judges that judge on truthful facts correct or the judges who ruled on false facts / corrupt testimony such as in my case, correct? Regardless, judges that rule favorably on corrupt testimony may no longer seem creditable.
The Appellate Judges McNulty, P.J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ judge, Associate Judge John J Scotillo, Palatine police officer Mark Wenrich, the State Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine and the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra and Michael Andre all seem to think they have the right to contradict the 50 thousand or so other court rulings from other judges and the Illinois Department Of Transportation who place the 35mph signs in place to begin with.
The States Attorney office of Cook County and the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra and Michael Andre, all of my defense lawyers and perhaps Judge John J Scotillo knowingly accepted that the police officer report was false, inaccurate, misrepresented facts, a lie and unethical and did nothing about it and what followed.
This was Shari Chandra first trial (talked about after trial when the judge, defense lawyer and prosecuting attorneys were praising them self’s).
Her zealous prosecution and perpetrating a fraud upon the court could be what is taught and the way law schools are training lawyers these days.
The State Attorney of Cook County office and the Assistant State Attorneys interest in the prosecution was to win, and for the unscrupulous, unethical practice to win regardless of the guilt or innocence of the testimony.
The Assistant States Attorneys career path could be injured by failing to win, showing the lack of skill as a prosecutor for a lost criminal case, or poor professional judgment in obtaining an indictment which later was dismissed.
The prosecutor's career path is enhanced by being, and being known as "winner", which enables the prosecutor to get more visible cases, and to obtain higher position and compensation in the prosecutor's office. Also, the career path for the successful prosecutor, as we have seen from the past, can go right up to the White House or to the position as Attorney General or as a federal judge at any of the 3 levels (District Court, Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court).
The loss of a criminal case once commenced through obtaining an indictment can cause a major reversal in a prosecutor's planned career, and with such pressure to succeed, what difference (the prosecutor argues to himself) does it make if the prosecutor cuts a few corners here and there. The defendant is probably guilty, of something, if not the crime for which he/she has been indicted.
I hired additional lawyers to review this case most were appalled by the trial actions. Others had further praise for the parties involved. Perhaps because my defense lawyer was a past president of the Northwest Suburban Bar Association and the old saying, don’t rat on people you work with, applies and nothing got said.
I used several Attorneys to argue further in post trial motions and for appeal. But again and again there was praise from the trial judge, Appellate judges and Assistant States Attorney’s office of Cook County on Palatine Police officer Mark Wenrich, which by now, they (the judge and states attorney could and be considered less than honorable and certainly not creditable them selves).
None of my lawyers made mention as to false evidence, perjury, Exculpatory evidence but just used the word not creditable. The reason may be because my defense trial lawyer was the president of the Northwest Suburban bar Association;
The Northwest Suburban Bar Association (NWSBA) is a group of over 650 attorneys who live or practice in the north-northwest area of
The NWSBA works year round to provide the community with information. We also sponsor a myriad of programs including Judicial Screening, High School Mock Trial Programs, Speakers' Bureau, Law Day, and Senior Celebration Day.
So if James Tatooles thought his actions were ok, probably every one in the Northwest Suburban Association may thinks so also or get kicked out. I would assume these members vote for their president.
Just like Palatine Police officer Mark Wenrich. During the trial, I think we found out that his only job before be coming a cop was a bouncer at a bar in college. But I am sure the watch commander or Police chief or some one in the police department knew that the police report was in error. Some one has to review the documents of the arresting officer from
Also there is another potential problem
In the pre trial conference (in private), assistant states attorney Chandra, Andre, defense lawyer Tatooles and judge Scotillo reviewed the evidence and clarified the issues in dispute. At that point, knowingly knew that any omission of these facts would have been misleading the court and may seem to encourage perjury, an unlawful activity. I submit that they all decided to conceal this truthfulness from the court room arguments. Chandra will get her first slam dunk winning case. Tatooles does his brother a favor (mayor of the neighboring town Inverness) by not slamming the police officers creditability (which would ruffle some feathers and cause a drift in some of the police and fire protection that
Due Process Defined
First, decide how we want the case to go. Second, formulate a legal logic to support our decision. Third, manipulate, dissect or eliminate the facts and evidence to support our decision. Then the rubber stamp doctrine of "judicial discretion" will prevent most decisions from being overturned
We may bend, stretch or reshape the law to say what fits our purpose.
The "letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law" are two different legal standards of Justice and the Law. We may choose the standard that suits our fancy.
I do not think an investigation of this close door meeting will reveal any thing. Evidence of this perjury and lawlessness is perfectly clear. The case is over, done, gone, why come clean now? Mike Mars a nobody and who will ever know what happened and who cares? There are big stakes here (judicial, prosecutor, attorney and police misconduct, if ever caught there would be major repercussions and consequences) If this ever comes to light, every one can play the blame game, or continue to skirt around the truth. Non accountability has come to be, the American way, especially up the food chain.
The police report was riddled with false information and Exculpatory evidence. The states attorney’s office and defense attorneys knowingly knew this was a fraud. The fact that during the trial there was a total absence of this information is suspicious. The judge, states attorney’s office vigorously praised this cop and my trial lawyer and subsequent attorneys said nothing, kept silent about this deception in the trial.
During this trial, some real facts are different then the facts presented in the court, the lawyers in the case went out of their way to conceal the truth.
How can you call a judge creditable when he praises a cope that lied in front of him and my have been apart of it?
Or how can you call a judge your honor when activities are less than honorable questionable?
Or the states attorney office that gives credit to a untruthful cop?
Or how can you call a defense attorney creditable when he knew a deception of the court is or was taking place?
Or how can u call appellate court justices creditable, when they credit a judge, which gives credit to perjured testimony.
Actions by the police, my lawyers, prosecutors and judges seem to have violated loads of rules and regulations by which they are sworn to uphold. This was not the first time the courts violated me but this time it made me a felon.
No body complains because they are afraid of the consequences, employment, social circle, or something, again they use only laws that they want to use.
It appears that the courts, judges and prosecutors have paid tribute to corruption, dishonesty, lawlessness (That is what the courts have ruled in my case).
Or this was my case only and in other trials the letter of law is followed?
Or on Mondays and Wednesdays the letter of the law is followed and on Tuesday, Thursday and Friday it is any thing goes?
None the less, this behavior is an embarrassment.
Is this the best the criminal justice system has to offer?
________________________________________________________________________
All lawyer's first duty is to the COURT. [This includes law however it is receipted, procedures however selectively followed, policies, whims, current practices and appeasing Judges] Many lawyers second duty is to their incomes. The client comes at some point after that.
We are no longer a country of laws, we are a country of creative interpretations of laws!
Due Process as defined by most Judges: "First, decide how we want the case to go. Second, formulate a legal logic to support our decision. Third, manipulate, dissect or eliminate the facts and evidence to support our decision. Then the rubber stamp doctrine of "judicial discretion" will prevent most decisions from being overturned."
Truth as defined by most Judges: "Whatever lawyers say. After all, they have taken an oath when becoming members of the bar. Therefore it is acceptable to assume that the unrepresented may not be saying the truth since they have taken no such oath."
Truth as defined by most Lawyers: "Whatever works."
________________________________________________________________________
It seems that the courts have given encouragement to Palatine Police Officer Mark Wenrich and others who continue to mislead the court while being praised for creditability. It seems that the courts think that a lie and dishonesty is the best policy.
Then if they can do it others can do it. An endless cycle of a self destruction of a society. No wonder why most Americans believe this country is headed in a wrong direction.
I do not, nor does any one understand why the judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and the police play these games with the truth. What purpose does it serve? But this is exactly what they do. Maybe other judges take their job more seriously.
Trust Us, We're Judges – not a good idea
Judges that rule perjury, fraud, conspiracy, accessory, adding and abetting is creditable have serious problems and I do not think they are good people.
The legal profession to enjoy almost absolute power over our courts invites the arrogance and greed we currently experience.
When judges abuse their power, the people are obliged - it is their duty - to correct that injury, for the benefit of themselves and their posterity. In order to ensure judicial accountability and domestic tranquility
No immunity shielding a judge shall be construed to extend to any deliberate violation of law, fraud or conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material facts, judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the Constitution
When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost. Rankin v. Howard, (1980) 633 F.2d 844, cert den. Zeller v. Rankin, 101 S.Ct. 2020, 451 U.S.
I believe, before the trial, during the trial, after the trial the lawyers and up to this date and until the end of time, the States Attorney office of Cook County and the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra and Michael Andre, The Appellate Judges McNulty, P.J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ judge, Associate Judge John J Scotillo are guilty of one or more of the following but not limited to; (please note some of these may be repetitive);
Facilitating a ongoing felony – yep Justice is granted if a procedure is followed - my case it was the procedure of the court
Violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity
Judge’s possible bias or partiality Intent to commit crime – this did happen
Criminal intent – this did happen
Cover up – no body has a problem keeping this a secrete
Have violated their oath of office – every one
Gross injustice, and unethical conduct – every one
Withholding evidence and procuring perjury, or at least not correcting what it knows is false seems to be the status quo – every one
The court habitually looks the other way - yep
Unequivocally documented corruption in my trial - yep
Deliberately made false findings of facts to cover up governmental corruption - yep
Quick cover up - yep
Fabrications – throughout my case
No one here wants to here the truth - yep
Public trust must be maintained regardless – another unlikely
Gross dereliction of duty and misconduct – this happened also
Admit guilt and take responsibility – no one is man enough
Willfully perpetuated the perjury by continuing the lies in the appellate court – of course
Willfully sabotaging our right - yep
Subverted testimony – yes
Tampering with evidence – this did happen
Intent to perpetrate fraud – this did happen
Knowledge of attorney misconduct – this did happen
Precious and proper administration of law – did not happen
Defending against the suggestion of a accusation of wrongful conduct- this did happen
Scope of attorney's duty to disclose- this did happen
Attorney misconduct, duty to report false testimony- this did happen
Disclosure of false statement by police – this did happen
Knowingly supplied a expert witnesses with a false accounting of facts- this did happen
In post-judgment proceedings further deception of the court – this did happen
Duty to report false statements – this did happen
Ethical obligations – non here
Disciplinary complaints – I’m the only one complaining
Disclosure – none here
ARDC, failure to report of attorney malpractice – no one was interested but me
Attorney’s duty to disclose fraud upon the court fraud – no one was interested but me
Permissive disclosure – non in trial
Scope of attorney's duty to disclose – not in this trial
Vicarious disqualification – not here
Post-judgment proceedings, continued to perpetrate this fraud – yes it did
Scope of representation – a miss representation of facts
Appearance of impropriety – you bet
Duty to adequately represent the people of
Duty to report attorney misconduct, see Attorney misconduct – not here
Duty to report professional misconduct, see Attorney misconduct – not here
False statements – all over this case
Misleading the public – all over this case
Impropriety, appearance of, sees Appearance of impropriety – I think so
Incriminating information – the whole case was a fraud
Duty to report misconduct – only me
Lawyer misconduct, see Attorney misconduct
Advocated by attorney but opposed by client – my lawyer knew all the facts, knew about the incorrect police report and the false perjured testimony by the police officer, during the trial I kept asking him about this but nothing was said
Unauthorized practice of law – every one participated in this,
Misleading statements - many
Misrepresentation of fact or law, duty of lawyer to avoid – no one cared
Material changes in document, duty to advise opposing counsel – well no one told me the game plan, I picked it up at the end that something went wrong, that is why I tried to correct it by further litigation
Adequate representation – not in my case
Continuance – my lawyer was not prepared, he even admitted it
Misleading or deceptive use – my trial was a free for all
Conflict of interests – my lawyer’s brother is mayor of neighboring town that relies on
Fairness to, negotiations – not in my case
Perjury, see false statements – throughout the trial
Preparation of, inadequate representation – yep my legal team
Scopes of representation – lawyers are club members, defendants are nothing but income
Adequate Preparation by attorney inadequate representation - absolutely
Rules of professional conduct – were non hereGHG0I
Scope of duty to disclose – what duty
Professional judgment – a joke
Obstruction of justice - interference with the administration of the courts, judicial system and hiding evidence did take place
Willfully obstructing or impeding proceedings – I think so
Aiding and Abetting / Accessory – helping and assisting in the commission of a crime
Conspiracy - two or more people agree to commit an unlawful act, and then take some action toward its completion, knew of the plan and intended to break the law
Testifying untruthfully or suborning untruthful testimony concerning a material fact, . . . during a preliminary or grand jury proceeding, trial, sentencing proceeding, or any other judicial proceeding – yep
The court acted without regard to the truth or made an erroneous finding of falsity – I think so
Malfeasance – misconduct and wrongdoing has been done
Appearance of impropriety – not to the courts or prosecutors
Disciplinary action – probably not, it’s all a club
File and disclose ARDC complaint – only me
The police officer as a witness should have been disqualified because of the perjury and other actions
Zealous representation of prosecution, truthfulness to opposing counsel, - was not here
Made improper extrajudicial statements – very much
Lack of professional integrity in the fullest sense of those terms – this lacking was done by all
Mindful of our obligations to the administration of justice, which is a truth-seeking process – did not take place in my trial
Deceiving the court subverting the truth finding process – absolutely, every one did this, even the judges
________________________________________________________________________
Quality of justice, personal conscience, professional responsibilities, and exercise of sensitive professional and moral judgment guided by the basic principles underlying the rules, legal profession is unique in this respect because of the close relationship between the profession and the processes of government and law enforcement. Lawyers play a vital role in the preservation of society – not in this case
Failure to comply with an obligation or prohibition imposed by a rule is a basis for invoking the disciplinary process. The rules presuppose that disciplinary assessment of a lawyer's conduct will be made on the basis of the facts and circumstances as they existed at the time of the conduct in question and in recognition of the fact that a lawyer often has to act upon uncertain or incomplete evidence of the situation – the police report, a hand written observation at the time of the arrest, is factual incorrect and the fact that other judges have ruled so
To uphold the integrity of our trial system, we have said that the constitutionality of perjury statutes is unquestioned. Grayson, supra, at 54. See also Nix, supra, at 173-174; Havens, supra, at 626-627. The requirement of sworn testimony, backed by punishment for perjury, is as much a protection for the accused as it is a threat. All testimony, from third party witnesses and the accused, has greater value because of the witness' oath and the obligations or penalties attendant to it. Cf.G. Neilson, Trial By Combat 5 (1891) ("A means of ensuring the truth in human testimony has been a thing desired in every age").
§ 401. Power of court
A court of the
(1) Misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice;
(2) Misbehavior of any of its officers in their official transactions;
(3) Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command.
§ 1621. Perjury generally
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;
Is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the
________________________________________________________________________
The States Attorney office of Cook County and the Assistant States Attorneys Shari Chandra and Michael Andre, the defense lawyer John O Tatooles and or The trial judge – John J Scotillo, are guilty of; making a false statement of material fact, falsify evidence, assisting a witness to testify falsely, knowingly assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by police officer Mark Wenrich. Making statements of another person that the lawyers knows is false, misrepresentation also occurred by failure to act. Conceal or knowingly fail to disclose that which [the lawyer] is required by law to reveal. This was my trial. This is a typical pick and chooses law in a trial in
Lawyers having knowledge that another lawyer has committed a violation of the rules of professional conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority – not in this case
Some where on the internet I read lawyers having knowledge that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office, shall inform the appropriate authority. - No one but me chooses to do so.
Self-regulation of the legal profession requires that members of the profession initiate disciplinary investigation when they know of a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Lawyers have a similar obligation with respect to judicial misconduct. An apparently isolated violation may indicate a pattern of misconduct that only a disciplinary investigation can uncover. Reporting a violation is especially important where the victim is unlikely to discover the offense – not in my case.
A report should be made to the bar disciplinary agency unless some other agency, such as a peer review agency, is more appropriate in the circumstances. Similar considerations apply to the reporting of judicial misconduct – I am the only one interested in the truth.
Rule 8.4. MISCONDUCT.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
(a) Violate or attempt to violate the rules of professional conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another – this case is full of it.
(b) Commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects – this case is full of it.
(c) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation - the State's Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine, the
(d) Fail to cooperate during the course of an ethics investigation or disciplinary proceedings – we will see.
(e) State or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official; or
(f) Knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law – yep.
Although a lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence, dishonesty or breach of trust are in that category. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation – yep
A lack of courtesy, civility among members of the profession - yep
A lack of respect for the judiciary and for our systems of justice – there was and it seems as long as this type of charade goes on there will always be a lack of respect
A lack of regard for others, for the common good – no common good here, in my trial.
(a) A lawyer having knowledge that another lawyer has committed a violation of the of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, should inform the appropriate professional authority – I think so.
(b) A lawyer having knowledge that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office should inform the appropriate authority - I seem to be the only one that thinks so.
In the purest form, the truth is not disrespectful but innocent. This complaint is truthful and honest. There is no false representation here. This trial gave every one the opportunity to cheat, lie, deceive or to be professional. There is an old saying something like give anybody enough rope and they will hang them self’s.
I only wanted and thought I was entitled to the truth in a trial against me. I am alone in this complaint. No body dare help me to voice opposition or complain. I don’t know any one who could believe Officer Mark Wenrich’s testimony, let alone call him creditable.
This action has become ok for every one until it happens to them. Some one sees a crime, don’t do any thing about it. Some one needs help, don’t do any thing about it. Some one’s car broke down on the side of the road, so what. These ways, lost of respect for fellow man, lack of decency have become the main stay of our society. This sounds pretty bad, because it is pretty bad.
Also as to my trial lawyer James P Tatooles;
My primary defense lawyer James P Tatooles had an inadequate preparation – He told me when he went into court don’t worry we will get another court date. – The appellate court has agreed with the lower court, that he had plenty of time to prepare.
My primary defense lawyer did not provide me with an expert witness, which could explain the effect of the open cans of acetone (PVC glue and or primer) and my all day exposure. I purchased a breath analyzer, and with a single whiff, I produced a .05. What contribution and effect did that have upon the whole matter?
My defense lawyer did not provide me with any coaching, hints or advise for being on the witness stand.
________________________________________________________________________
My defense lawyer James P Tatooles I charge with all of the above in this letter and I would like to make a citizen arrest, based upon the truthful and honest charges that listed in this letter, but not limited to.
Appellate Court First Judicial District McNulty, P. J., Tully, O’Malley and JJ I charge with all of the above in this letter and I would like to make a citizen arrest based upon the truthful and honest charges that listed in this letter, but not limited to.
Associate Judge John Scotillo I charge with all of the above in this letter and I would like to make a citizen arrest and I would like to make a citizen arrest based upon the truthful and honest charges that listed in this letter, but not limited to.
State’s Attorney of Cook County Richard Devine I charge with all above in this letter and I would like to make a citizen arrest based upon the truthful and honest charges that listed in this letter, but not limited to.
.Palatine Police Officer Mark Wenrich I charge with all the above in this letter and I would like to make a citizen arrest based upon the truthful and honest charges that listed in this letter, but not limited to.
________________________________________________________________________
I do not know if the lawyers who I retained in further post trial arguments or the lawyers I hired for the appellate are guilty of what is above in this letter. They knew also of the court and police miss conduct, perjury and wrong doings. There was a lawyer I paid to convince the cop was not creditable in the pre sentencing arguments. Also there were 2 lawyers who I paid to appeal.
With all the schooling, training, education involved, no one sees a problem, nothing is wrong. I certainly hope not all judges, prosecutors, lawyers police have the same mind set.
I do not think these judges should be judges, prosecutors should be prosecutors, and lawyers be lawyers. If any one ever looked into their activities, I am almost sure my complaint represents a ongoing pattern.
These judges and prosecutors have put people in jail who commit same type of offence (some one drives a car, the passenger all of a sudden decides to rob, steal or kill some one, asks the driver 2 pull over I got to get something, comes back and says lets go). Without knowing the driver starts to drive away. Courts have put them both in jail.
Just think, just the thought that senator Obama probably was one that voted for my defense lawyer to be president of the NWSBA. He must be in the same mind set, that is all this country needs, (don’t need) is a lawyer from
Once again, I just wanted people to tell the truth and be honest especially in a court of law, especially by a police officer, prosecutor, defense lawyer, and judge, and more judges. One thing about this letter / complaint is that maybe some one else will read this down the line; on the internet, find it in the trash can, or hear about it some place. Maybe that person will be able to make a change, no matter how small and improve the direction
Date: ____________________ Signature: ___________________________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
