I am a non-offending parent living in a State halfway across the Country from the court where the judge is overseeing my son’s DCF case. From the first day that I appeared in her courtroom, the judge has been violating my Constitutional Rights. The very first offense was to deny my Right to self-representation. I attempted to call her out on it in the courtroom, but she spoke in circles about making sure I “understood the value of having an attorney who knows the law” since I reside in another State. When asked directly if she would rule against my motions and objections, unless they were made through an attorney; the judge affirmed that to be correct. That alone not only violated my Right to self-represent, it also stripped me of the Right to fair and unbiased proceedings. On multiple occasions the judge gave “legal advice from the bench”, one of which was to file for custody of my son. She claimed that it was necessary for her to be able to let my son come home with me. After I obtained an order for custody she called the judge who signed the order, and committed Fraud Upon the Court in order to get that judge to vacate the custody order & merge the custody case in with the DCF case. This was a blatant usurpation of authority/jurisdiction over me, as evidenced in her comment during the call with the other judge. The call between the two judges occurred in the courtroom, and the judge stated “I get to decide this, not him”. Her comment showed that she took personal offense to the fact that I was able to actually get an order for custody, before she could get the cases merged. A matter related to the incident involving the custody order, also involved my attorney. It is believed that the judge and other “legal professionals” in the case held a private meeting during the recess, prior to the call between the two judges. Such a meeting which would have included my attorney, violates my Right to be present when matters that affect me (as a non-incarcerated persons) are being discussed. In addition to the afore mentioned offenses that affect/relate to myself personally; the judge knowingly admitted an UNRELIABLE document into evidence, under the Business Records exception to the Hearsay Clause in the IL Rules of evidence. In the IL Rules of Evidence, the exception states that the document is presumed to be reliable. Therefore the acceptance of a document which she knew could not be presumed reliable, is a willful act against the very rules that govern the handling of the case. Due to the laws of the State of IL, it is impossible to get any photographs that would be able to be attached to this.
-Father in an ongoing case