thirstforjustice.tripod.com/grifgroahconwayetalfpetsgj51715fsapo.html

Document List of 5/24/15 - grifgroahconwayetalfpetsgj51715fsapo - D/L of 5/24/15 - Grif

1. D/L of 5/24/15 -Grif....

2. Report of 5/28/15 compose 5/27 - 2100-2315, 5/28 - 12:10-12:40 and efax and email, post and, print & mail to clerk

3. Proposed Order for Abbreviated First Superseding... Component of 5/24/15 of Petition to Get Information(s) Instituted of ....

Circuit Court of Cook County, IL

More et al

v Case # 11 CH 12339

Griffith et al

Proposed Order of 5/27/15 for Abbreviated First Superseding... Component of 5/24/15 of Petition to Get Information(s) Instituted of ....

This cause having come before this Court and the Court having received an "...Initial Component of 5/17/15 ...Criminal Charges...." and an "...Abbreviated ...FSC...5/24/15...." and a copy of this "Proposed Order of 5/27/15.... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. This Court has been apprised via this document that R.J. More ("RJM") is complaining that it is RJM's at least somewhat informed, but necessarily non-infallible, understanding ("TCAVDRCRSINNU"), that this Court has not succeeded in covering its "In re Murchison" (_U.S._) burden of keeping the line between the parties in any given dispute "nice, clear and true" in matters which RJM has presented to it over the past several years.

2. TCAVDRCRSINNU that for example there was no justification for this Court cancelling the briefing schedule established several years ago when RJM endeavored to procure appointment of a special prosecutor from this Court so that the CCSA could be served via a process server, when her subordinate was participating in the proceedings then being conducted in this Court, no justification for this Court's refusing to accept a subpoena via a claim that delivering it to the Courtroom Deputy could not constitute adequate service whereof in an arrangement in which RJM could not access the Court's chambers to deliver the subpoena into the hands of Judge Beibel himself because the Deputy would not permit such access, no justification for its non-provision of rulings on matters presented to it in various instances, including the non-elimination of unconsionable burdens imposed upon citizens such as RJM in regard to accessing the building in which this matter is being adjudicated and the prevention of the use of eletronic recording devices ("ERD") in proceedings conducted in this Court, notwithstanding that the IL Sup. Ct. has ruled in "People v Clarke" (_Il. Rep 3d_) that no government official can legally prevent any citizen from recording activity conducted by him or her, even w/o permission having been provided wherefore in any given instance in regard to matters not involving any privacy interest which society has recognized as being reasonable (as for example a cop offering condolences to another cop in re a family tragedy)

3. TCAVDRCRSINNU, that as sorry as RJM is that he has to say this, that RJM does not see any morally legitmate alternative in regard to these matters at this juncture of their resolution except to opine that this Court has not been adequately bearing the burdens of the exercise of the authority of the judicial office in which it has been exercising authority and that such leaving of such burdens not adequately born, cannot but redound to the enormous detriment not just to this Court in light of the accounting that will have to be provided in re its exercise of such authority (Heb. 9:27, Rom. 2:6, Mt. 25:41 et seq), but to all those effected whereby, most tragically, the innocents and posterity who possess no capacity to prevent their inheriting the consequences of the duty breaches of those who have historically preceded them, and that nothing excuses RJM from executing whatever affirmative acts RJM would ever have to execute in order to ensure the adequate coverage of the moral liabilty which RJM has to cover (Mt. 19:17) in regard to the matters this document concerns "(these matters") in order to prevent his encountering the "ultimate catastrophic loss" (Mt. 25:41 et. seq.).

4. This Court has been apprised that RJM finds it necessary to, via whatever would constitute appropriate dispositions in this regard, demand that this Court demonstrate the compatibility of its activity in regard to these matters with the promulgated thresholds at which adjudicative activity conducted in regard to the type of activity these matters concern must be conducted in order for any given adjudication of such type to possess moral legitimacy.

5. This Court has been apprised via this document that RJM remains convinced that RJM's participating in proceedings conducted in the Courtroom of this Court is not a morally justified risk at this juncture, given that, inter alia, any and all matters this document concerns can be resolved without RJM's having to be present in the Courtroom, and that RJM still has not succeeded in procuring any insurance to protect his estate from any detriment which might reasonably foreseeably result from RJM's participating wherein and that RJM would provide a more complete explanation regarding the basis of this understanding were RJM to receive a request and/or demand for such.

6. This Court has been apprised ("TCHBA") via this document that RJM is convinced that none of the activity these matters concern referenced in the documents submitted to this Court over the past 10 days is non-criminal in character, that the burdens of the exercise of the authority of the offices of those concerned in re whereto has in all of such matters remained unborn to the tragic detriment to all adversely effected whereby, even if most of the victims of such non-bearing of burdens will most likely never even understand the character of such detriment ever incurred and that permitting the type of government criminality involved to penultimately prevail (since HIs Omnipotence Christus Rex straightens everything out in the end, the appropriate adverb here is not "ultimately") is simply not a morally legitimate alternative for RJM.

7. TCHBA that it is RJM's understanding that the cancer of "adjudicative hydroplaning" - via which the issues in a given dispute which the party farther from the Rothschild's in the understanding of the adjudicator in any given instance ("IAGI") needs to get adequately addressed IAGI in order to prevail IAGI, remain unaddressed to the penultimate effect that the party closer to the Rothschild's in the mind of the adjudicator IAGI invariably ends up procuring a facially valid court order authorizing the summonsing of the collective force of the body politic upon his victimized adversary, for the purpose of enforcing his or her illegitimate agenda upon such type victim(s) of this type of egregious abuse of adjudicative authority - must be excised from the body politic if there is to be any hope for the recovery of the protections of the noncounterfeit version of the Rule of Law for the "99 %" of the members of such body..

8. This Court has been apprised that it is RJM's understanding that in order to adequately bear its burden regarding these matters that, at the very least, this Court must now simply institute criminal charges against Conway and Groah conditioned upon both such individuals being permitted to contest such imposition, and refer all other matters to the State Grand Jury with a Special Prosecutor directing its deliberations to resolve the rest of the matters concerned, or else to simply now declare that "The Criminal Code of the State of IL is herein declared to be unconstitutional as applied to any and all activity which would ever be conducted by Robert J. More for the purpose of vindicating the societal interests which the "Administration of Just Recompense" as the consequence(s) of violating any given provision of the Criminal Code of the State of IL is supposed to effect in regard to the matters this document concerns.

9. This Court has been apprised in regard to the Jason Klepacz murder trial in which Marco Alvarado has been indicted that there is an "M. Looper" who informed RJM some time ago that a "Phillip ____________" who resided in some building around 1500 W. Fullerton Ave in Chicago bragged about perpetrating such tragic murder and that parenthetically, Fr Leonard Feeney was never excommunicated for heresy but only for disobedience and that there is nothing incompatible in any magisterially protected promulgation with the position he adopted in regard to the conditions of salvation issue, since that pre-eminently important matter somehow arose in a prior proceeding in which RJM was a participant before this Court.

10. This Court has been apprised that no Defendant in 11 CH 12339, nor any person referenced in any of the documents to which this document is related as the proposed resolution whereof, will have received a copy of this document before the Court will have received a faxed copy whereof, that RJM will have emailed a copy whereof to all such parties w/n ten minutes after this Court will have received a copy of this document by fax and that RJM will provide responses to any questions this Court might have in regard to these matters.

11. The Court has been apprised that a "First Superseding Component" of this document will, Providence permitting be posted at: "thirstforjustice.tripod.com/grifgroahconwayetalfpetsgj51715fsafspo.html" by 10:30 a.m. on 5/28/15, and that, inter alia, RJM is scheduled to deliver a report in regard to the developments encountered by RJM and the activity otherwise conducted in the adjudication of this case to the Federal Grand Jury for the USDC for the NDIL, to the extent he would not be prevented from so doing, as RJM does not see how the implementation of such measure could justifiably be left unaccomplished, given the component of the history of this Court's activity in regard to which RJM is cognizant.

12. The entirety of the contents of what has been filed in this Case in this Court shall be impounded under seal of the Court in order to ensure that no ransacking whereof could be perpetrated before RJM would have had opportunity to document the contents of such file.

13. RJM may bring and use an electronic recording device anywhere and everywhere on the property of the building in which this Court adjudicates matters other than the types of "private activity" referenced herein supra, and RJM shall likewise be permitted to bring his book bag and computer and power cords into this building.

Prepared by Robert J. More on 5/27/15, in his ongoing _________________________, ________________