"Rick" <> wrote in message
news:hqcqme$549$...
> Rocky wrote:
>> "richard"<> wrote in message
>> news:ger5oz7ryfsh.1e4g9crwo6nsv$....
>>> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 02:02:47 -0600, Rocky wrote:
>>>
>>>> I won a jury trial 12 to 0 as a pro se litigant against a woman that
>>>> worked
> ...
>
> YOU are posting in the wrong group. This group is (mostly) about help with
> computers.
>
Kindly just shut the **** up.
Tell me if you think this is too wordy and detailed:
The ORDER below proves that Judges in the Appellate Court are as reckless
with the law and as reckless with the facts as a reckless attorney is.
Duane Thompson was the reckless attorney in question and he failed to state
correctly the decision of the Appellate Court in the Mack vs. First Security
Bank of Chicago regarding the directed verdict At 110 Ill.Dec. page 542 the
court reverses and remands the case.
Duane Thompson knew from the way I worded my initial complaint against
Beverly Rusk, the exhibits I used to completely impeach her in the jury
trial I won and the argument I tried to make during the malicious
prosecution lawsuit that the Mack vs. First Security Bank of Chicago fully
supported my argument from the start.
Duane Thompson also furnished false information about the existence of
malice even after hearing where the evidence of malice was located and that
"it can be used to prove malice" from the statements below.
Page 18 line 17
THE COURT: He's showing the witness page 25 of the transcript.
Before the next statement was made Judge Telleen made it clear what word he
would accept as malicious.
Page 29 line 14:
MR WITTEKIND: The words she uses to describe it can be used to prove
malice.
All the Appellate Court would do in their ORDER below when they allowed
themselves to be duped by Duane Thompson was overlook the evidence of malice
in the transcript for the jury trial, manipulate testimony that was
completely impeached by prior inconsistent statements using the very facts
these judges were making assumptions about and then going so far as to
falsify evidence themselves in the fourth paragraph of their ORDER.
But not only would Appellate Court Judges help Duane Thompson conceal
evidence of one malicious prosecution they would help Duane Thompson conceal
evidence of two malicious prosecutions where the evidence presented in the
second jury trial proves the first jury trial was won by rendering the
statue invalid with misleading jury instructions using perjured testimony
and using a woman that obstructs justice by furnishing false information
about her daughter.
Above found at:
http://nolegalauthority.com
Similar Threads
