In UNITED STATES Federal Court
For the central district of the State of IL
URBANA, IL 61801
dated 3/9/10
case ___________

JAMES FRANK OSTERBUR
2191 county road 2500 E 
St. Joseph, IL 61873

VS

STATE OF IL, as represented by the governor for IL
Mr. Patrick Quinn   207 state house,   Springfield IL 62706
(because this is the state, and the judiciary, wherein trial began)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.
As represented by the solicitor general office USA
ROOM 5614, Department of Justice,
950 Pennsylvania ave, NW   Washington DC 20530-0001

JUDGE CHASE LEONHARD
Champaign county courthouse , for the state of IL
101 E Main
Urbana IL 61801

 

RE: the eviction of due process, by a corrupt and invasive court.  The failure of amendment 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15,  & 26; to provide for and protect the citizens of this USA. Because, tyranny in the court/ IS NOT JUSTICE.  THE LAW decides a trial, “NOT, just because the judge says so”.  I demand due process, and the law, NOT the whim or opinion of a judge, outside the realm of justice. As would be fundamental to the needs and parameters of this entire case; through constitutional guarantees & law.   Not, a game.

A: MAKE THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, obey the first amendment redress of grievances in this Champaign county courtroom. Return the case 09 LM 1414 to court (a different judge)/ and require them to let it proceed to its purpose and demand for law. 

B: Establish the foundation of DUE PROCESS, as it pertains to first amendment law/   by describing exactly what the judge must understand, by the description of his job and his oath.

C:   CLEAN THE COURT system of America:    By review of reality, in terms of    “HOW a citizen of this nation and this state is treated, in court/ without the aid or education or money applicable to lawyers. And demand JUSTICE, for all.  The court has no authority beyond the law/ but must act within the demand of law; and in particular constitutional law, where no real interpretation of first amendment legal rights, can exclude or deny redress for the people.

This is a clear federal question jurisdiction case/ with appropriate pendant jurisdiction issues

the element of money brought into a case of obvious GUARANTEED AND INHERENT RIGHTS OF LAW, deprived and taken from me, and this nation/ are inestimable.  The issues of fraud, and the criminal intent to steal from me both my right to trial, and my need for mediation in terms of a medical billing deemed and declared to be unfair.  The issuance of a description, in the word   “Neological” that can and will follow me, throughout any legal question presented in the future.   Is set at   $50,000.00 : BECAUSE THE COURT DEMANDS MONEY, and a minimum:  MUST BE IN CONTROVERSY!   This amount is then:  against the judge of record/ BECAUSE HE DID NOT ACT WITHIN THE LAW, nor did his actions present any aspect of justice:   THEREFORE HE deserves NO protection from the consequences of an action perceived as criminal in the relationship he chose to establish between me and my legal case for first amendment, and “contractual rights: ( I said anything but the emergency room/ they said yes we can).”   Correct jurisprudence would allow that constitutional right and law, are more important than money/ JUSTICE more important than any amount added: “but fools” are unaware.

The foundation of fraud, in this case 09LM1414 established in Champaign County Court, under judge Chase Leonhard; is distinguished by the establishment of tyranny, a purpose called malice, & a mock trial used to harass the plaintiff (rules of the court are not laws/ neither do they control justice in the court: DUE PROCESS does).    Are hereby identified as corruption and failure in the court/ NOT JUSTICE! The denial of a first amendment right:   for nothing more than hearsay, and the demand or indictment of a judge who purpose is/ because his words do so prove: TO STEAL FROM ME, BOTH MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT, AND MY FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT GUARANTEE.   With his few words, that are absolutely untrue.
  Under the fairness doctrine: 412 US 94,111 and under the law 47 U.S.C.     315(a).  This demand for justice extends to public view/ through the fair and legitimate broadcasting of public importance/ as will be provided by the court.  That cause in controversy is Quantified by its reliance on REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, and the denial of what affects us all: as an ENTIRE NATION.  Thereby of critical and national importance, which the people themselves must hear. A trial of the court, by which we all, surrender our right or opinion, TO be governed by THE LAW:  NOT a judge!

 

 When told to explain what he, the judge;   did not understand, the judge refused/ and in fact “calls me a libelous name”.  While I merely ask for a trial by jury, petitioning for redress of grievances as the law allows.  The declaration of independence says it best: “we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”  This is we, because even though I have begun the petition, it is WE THE PEOPLE of this nation, that provides the answer!  Not a political answer/ but a legal resolution to demand accountability, and understanding;   from those employees hired to do the job we have assigned to them.
THIS UNITED STATES, & the STATE OF IL,   PROVEN BY:  obstruction, and lies;   and the intent of the court throughout its levels both state of IL and nation, is determined  to destroy the law, by a monopoly and arrogance:   our first amendment redress of grievances. Maintaining “a mock trial” is all that is needed to refuse the people their guaranteed and inherent right as the constitution allows.
 For the single purpose, to thwart:  A LEGAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE;     THE LAW, as is their legal right to redress of grievances.  Whose function is:   DISPLAYING OUR OWNERSHIP of this nation, THE ULTIMATE FORM OF OUR AUTHORITY, as we the people.

Proving as owners:    That,  WE THE PEOPLE, shall decide, interrogate, investigate, and examine/ and receive accountability from government employees;   as we see fit!   Under the constitutional terms called OWNER, of this nation called the United States of America, and its decree of government called DEMOCRACY;   “Or more simply, democracy is:   we the people, decide within constitutional boundaries and law”.  Thereby proving the American fundamental, in its bill of rights section 2:   “that all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all time amenable to them.”

THIS FEDERAL COURT, is required to make the state of IL, through its Champaign county courtrooms/ in Urbana IL, OBEY THE LAW, that is the first amendment redress of grievances.  As the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION demands, that you shall do.
Due process is not a joke.  The relationship of law to the citizen is NOT determined by useless rhetoric or incompetent assertions in techniques/ nor are outright lies to be tolerated. DUE PROCESS is the law, according to the fourteenth amendment quote “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”.  That does include protection against harassment, and failure by any judge.

 The court is reminded, that it too is, or more correctly WILL be on trial here.   Because in the review of cases/ this court, will be found in contradiction to the law, guilty of  obstructionism:    regardless of the right guaranteed to this and every citizen, by the constitution of this USA.. Their redress of grievances!  As will BE, the US appellate court, 7TH district, (and lower courts) through the same realities of trial and procedures used to guarantee “the people shall NOT own this law”.  In BRAZEE V.  MICHIGAN 241 U.S.  340   “....very generally regulated, deal with a necessitous class, the members of which are often dependent on them for opportunity to earn a livelihood, are not free to move from place to place, and are often under exceptional economic compulsion to accept such terms as the agencies offer.  We are not judicially ignorant of what all human experience teaches, that those so situated are peculiarly the prey of the unscrupulous and designing.”    Taken at its “breath” to discover the reality of a citizen unversed in the peculiarities of a courtroom.  Given no possibility for most to escape the constraints of cost.  Being unable to find relief elsewhere: makes us a prey.  UNLESS clear and critical authority from the people themselves, by watching over the court provides the access needed, and supervision warranted for law, to BE FAIR.
The functional truth is then:    Only the US SUPREME COURT, can hear this case!  Even though they too are implicated (not a game)/ and must address the failure of US supreme court case 08-1339.    They ARE “the judicial power” of this USA.  But they too, are held accountable by law, by the authority of  WE THE PEOPLE, as owners of this nation: as there is NO ROOM for tyrants, kings, or thieves. Rather according to article 3 of the US constitution:   “The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during GOOD behavior....”.   To avoid any confusion as to whether the supreme court can hear, their own trial: article 3 section 2 establishes “the judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity..”  The doctrine of freedom, understands the need for we the people to establish our ownership of this nation by constitutional law/ and the court cannot interfere; by oath they must protect and support this nation and its people, with the law. Its their job!  Nor can the people evade or destroy the effects of law as is applied by the constitution itself, they must use the law as the constitution designs.   The court has a superior duty to insure compliance with the constitution/ not interpret it beyond its scope: but defend it as the people would or need for themselves, by realities that are fair to all/ and equal in scope to every citizen.  The disguise of irrelevant and mischievous rules or conceptions in the court, seek to destroy in this case;    our constitutional law: redress of grievances by the first amendment.  Your oath of office, FORBIDS such a thing/ and any exception or attempt to control or evict from the constitution OUR LAW, is an act of treason.

As a citizen I am entitled to hear, WHY the law is denied to me, and to us all, as a nation under the rule of democracy?  If this is not the law, then explain it to me, with LAW.  This court is reminded, article 3 section 2.1 the judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity arising under this constitution....to controversies to which the Untied States shall be a party.... and between a state, or the citizens thereof....”  The assertion of law overrides the simplicity of McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) and applies what is fundamental and true about constitutionality/ democracy/ and freedom: “let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the constitution, are constitutional”.As we proceed, this test will be applied.  The court is reminded: “it holds a monopoly” in judicial terms/ and wherever a monopoly exists, the test of valid and fair DOES come under the scrutiny of authority.  WE THE PEOPLE are the authority, because we are the owners, under constitutional law, by the demand called democracy.  Our authority, IS a constitutional demand here: “because someone, has to decide what good behavior is”! A court cannot judge itself!  For where there is law designed by justice, rather than a judge/ there is also balance, establishing protection for both sides by the understanding OUR CONSTITUTION shall rule/ NOT “simply a judge/ or a president/ or any other”.  But the foundations of our interest and purpose as a nation for life first.
Case HURTADO V. CALIFORNIA   110 U.S. 516, 4 S. CT 111, 28 L. Ed, 232 (1884) “Arbitrary power, enforcing its edicts to the injury of the persons and property of its object, is not law, whether manifested as the decree of a personal monarch or in impersonal multitude. And the limitations imposed by our constitutional law upon the actions of governments, both state and national, are essential to the preservation of public and private rights,...  The enforcement of these limitations by judicial process is the device of self-governing communities to protect the rights of individuals and minorities, as well against the power of numbers as against the violence of public agents transcending the limits of lawful authority, even when acting in the name and wielding the force of the government”
the enforcement of limits upon the judiciary by the term “good behavior” is the device of a self-governing nation to protect itself from the violence of    “any man or set of men, who believe they are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community” {bill of rights} section 4
in DE JONGE v.  OREGON   299 U.S.  353, 57 S. CT.  255, 81 L. Ed 278 (1937)    “..the more imperative is the need to preserve inviolate the constitutional rights of free speech, free press, and free assembly in order to maintain the opportunity for free political discussion, to the end that government may be responsive to the will of the people and that changes, if desired may be obtained by peaceful means.  Therein lies the security of the republic, the very foundation of constitutional government.”
While in reality this case today, is a legal battle for the procurement of a constitutional right provided by first amendment law/ redress is nonetheless the most peaceful means of discussing change available to the people.  It is their right, it is their law; and none may suggest otherwise, because the constitution itself describes this to be so.  Redress is, whatever the people determine it to be, within constitutional doctrine and declared intent; as would the preamble intend to state and clarify for this nation.

In   MINERSVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT   V.  GOBITIS   310 U.S. 586, 60 S. CT 1010, 84 L. ED.  1375 (1940)   “.. The constitution expresses more than the conviction of the people that democratic processes must be preserved at all costs.  It is also an expression of faith and a command that freedom of mind and spirit must be preserved, which government must obey, if it is to adhere to that justice and moderation without which no free government can exist.
The question is then:   do you, or do you not as a courtroom in this UNITED STATES, adhere to justice, freedom for the people, and the right of democratic processes?Neither a robe or a courtroom:   makes a judge my/ our, “ ruler”.IT IS THE LAW that rules.  It is due process that decides what is fair/ NOT the opinion or whim of a judge.

EUCLID   V.  AMBLER REALITY CO.   272 U.S.  365,  47 S.  CT.  114, 71 L. ED 303 (1926)   “...for while the meaning of constitutional guarantees never varies, the scope of their application must expand or contract to meet the new and different conditions which are constantly coming within the fied of their operation.  In a changing world it is impossible that it should be otherwise....”
Even though redress of grievances has never been used by the American public/   it is THEIR LAW, and the day has come!
YICK WO V. HOPKINS   118 U.S.  356, 6 S. CT 1064, 30 L. ED 220 (1886)   “..may be a government of laws and not of men”.  For, the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life, at the mere will of another, seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself...”
Any assumption that one single man, can evict another; from his own constitutional guarantees, even if it is a public servant sitting as a judge:   IS IN ERROR.  Only the law can do that/ and this judge was demanded and instructed to provide the law, or be specific about his complaint and within constitutional boundaries.  He provided no such thing.

In terms of constitutional law the reality is simple: in the first amendment I am guaranteed the right to petition others in a legal and peaceful manner to gather together, and by the decision of a vote, decide:   if we believe as a majority, that it is necessary to ask the community at large if we should not proceed with accountability in our government by investigation and examination of the evidence through a court of law.  To assure ourselves, that NO LIES shall be given/ or the punishment of such will be severe.  Believing truth is our only defense, our clear and undeniable right,  within democracy:   to protect ourselves, from our employees of government, when clearly a need exists.  Redress is neither a light or transient decision:  thereby acceptance is,  the responsibility that goes with this truth:   because it is fundamental to this decision. Legal redress is not “a political opinion”/ but rather it is, a demand investigating, and examining the evidence of our reality, so that truth will decide what our future will be/ or what we must change for ourselves. Establishing whatever change we believe is necessary, is the liberty we fight and/ or die for, and our right as owners.  This petition to decide if “we the people”,  believe redress is necessary for  our nation,  builds upon the steps that identify: WE, do/ or WE do not as a majority choose to do this very thing: as a county/ then as a state/ then as a nation, each accepting the responsibility that this decision applies.  Each knowing, we believe this effort is necessary and true; and will have costs.  Because lies have a price/ and accountability is about the lies; that we may then own the truth, for ourselves!
The court fails.
The fourth amendment guarantees our right to be secure/ a reality that cannot be established for millions of people today, thereby as a matter of duty, REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES is necessary.  The right not to have our property or persons seized;   our law in this first amendment has been seized/ our ability to defend ourselves from government failure & corruption, is being tested.  We must defend ourselves/ because it is clear the leaders did not protect us, & have failed our nation.
The court fails.
the fifth amendment states I shall not be deprived of my property, my GUARANTEED RIGHTS by the constitution of this USA without due process of law.  It is not due process to thwart justice and obedience to constitutional decree as defined by its preamble/   with lies and foolish innuendo, whether written in a book of procedure or not.
The court fails.
The seventh amendment demands: in all controversy where any significant value has been established at risk/ there shall be a trial, by jury if so requested.
The court fails.
The ninth amendment demand:    allows itself to be read, “the rights of a judge to control his or her courtroom with discipline” shall not be construed to remove from the citizen due process of law.
The court fails.
The tenth amendment demands: that a first amendment redress of grievances is indeed well within and in fact is the law/ and no amount of protest by a government official/ employee can change that.
The court fails.

The thirteenth amendment demands:   there shall be no slavery, or involuntary servitude.  Yet wherever the very foundations of economic survival for this nation are revealed: the reality is, that our employees have traded our securities for lies/ making the people vulnerable to all manner of tragedy.  This need, this right to intervene before major collapse of all the boundaries and hopes of this people die:   is defined by REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, and our right to an accounting, its truth, and its responsibilities as a decision of this people; is undeniable.
The court fails.
The fourteenth amendment demands:   equal protection of the law.  The law is not an excuse to avoid reality, or design a pyramid of rhetoric with the clear intent to evade and disguise a tyrant, or a system of tyranny;     withholding the law from me.  I demanded the law/ I got ridicule and the seizure of my rights.
The court fails.
The fifteenth amendment demands: none shall be allowed to intervene in our rights, as a citizen to vote upon what we believe is fundamental to our nation.  Regardless of how you perceive me, or my cause:   my right to assemble peacefully, a petition for legal change, as the constitution provides,  for this people,    cannot be denied.
The court fails.
The twenty-sixth amendment demands:   that the young shall NOT BE DENIED the protection of the constitution or this government simply because of age.  In reality, the legislatures, and very foundations of male dominated leadership; have in fact sold the youth and future of this nation “to hell, and Armageddon (nature in chaos)”.  With their decisions.  Within the reality of threats so pervasive and real, that it is absolutely clear this entire world of life can fall to extinction because of the realities that have been placed against us and   life on earth.
The leadership of america/ the court system fails.  In addition: The first amendment freedom of the press has failed this nation/ by not providing information regarding either threats or greed.   Because the court sold it, into the hands of a “tiny few GREEDY individuals”/ who care only for themselves! And that must be changed to its original purpose, as protection for this people from “the money, which always assaults the people  wherever greed is allowed”.  

Redress is required to resurrect the nation, and correct each of these problems:     FOR LIFE, for THE FUTURE, and for THIS NATION:    FIRST!  Not after “the interests of greed, power, or pride”: have destroyed a nation and a world.   But here and now,    FOR LIFE FIRST, as our decision and right;   NOT “second” to greed or any other purpose but life, happiness, respect, and all that gains from the truth:   we owe this to ourselves, the future, and each other!

 

 The functional parameter of this lawsuit, presented in this federal court is: a state court judge has declared, in case 09-LM 1414   a case involving redress of grievances for the people.  Quote “...plaintiffs complaint is at once prolix (filled with unnecessary language or facts) and neological (the use of words or intent coined by a psychotic).  Indeed, with due respect to plaintiff, the complaint is simply incomprehensible from a legal standpoint.”   This judge continues his lies, by rewriting my words regarding service rendered/ rebuilds my complaint to serve his needs/ attempts to suggest it is not within his authority to allow a jury to call for a county vote as to whether “we this people”/ should ask the others for REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES as a nation.   It is clear, he will not be deterred from this intended escape of the law.  The assertion of the judge makes it boldly clear: that no amount of refiling shall make a difference/ the judge refuses to be specific or use the law in his decision; but merely complains “he don’t like the words”.  Rather “the use of, bastard’s in the court” an illinois law 735 ILCS 5/2-603 is offered as the substance allowing him to dismiss the constitutional rights of redress of grievances/ a first amendment demand upon the court. Proving, by case management as filed by the plaintiff:   it don’t matter what will be provided/ this judge demands:   THIS FIRST AMENDMENT REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES SHALL NOT STAND.       Which brings the call of traitor within this courtroom.  Because plain, concise, and clear are provable in a public venue that would include school age children over the age of 12.     The case is plain and simple; we the people deserve our say, in healthcare, in all matters of threat as we decide:    in court, with accountability over, and investigation of, our employees.  As the law allows by redress of grievances/ our first amendment right.    WE ARE THE OWNERS, NOT YOU.

 

Case management requires: that this judge be held accountable for his words!  That his assertion CANNOT understand, be held up to review; by demanding as a judge whose entire job it is, to be able to comprehend the words of another:   shall require him to admit and defend.    WHAT DO YOU UNDERSTAND!   Because if indeed he is unable to comprehend what he states to be “plaintiff is intelligent and has command of English”.  Then he cannot be a judge, because he fails the primary test of a judge: either in comprehension/ or in truth!  If he cannot comprehend, then his ability as a judge/ his job is compromised and he fails the people.  If instead he proves an outright LIAR, then he fails the law, the people, and this nation as a representative/ and must be evicted, held to the consequences of perjury; and pursued for the criminal actions of stealing from me my/ our GUARANTEED RIGHTS, as a nation.  And my guaranteed right by the law of DUE PROCESS.

Redress of grievances is not a game/ it is our truth as a democracy; wherein the people have their own say in times of crisis.   NOT a vote for you to vote for me, or me to vote for you/ INSTEAD a vote on the major issues that we have decided for ourselves to control and decide as to what the law shall be in this United States of America.   If that is what we so choose with regard to redress and our right as owners of this land.            NOT dismissed by conceptions of “rulers and slaves”/ but a free people, who own the right to their decision as a nation, on the laws and their employees.  Because it is OUR NATION, not yours, as “the employee”: that failure to provide our first amendment right of redress:    would signify theft of a nation, our ownership, our right to decide;   called Democracy.

Authority means, quote:   “The permission or power delegated to another” .  We then ask, WHO has the ultimate right of decision for this nation: the court/ the government employee/ we the people/ or constitutional law & the intent for democracy: (governing the nation by our individual vote)? 
The CORRECT ANSWER IS: that the constitutional law and intent for true democracy DOES HAVE THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY, to decide for this nation as we the people under law.  That law, to prove democracy and ownership for, we the people: is the first amendment redress of grievances.  The petition started in the lower State of IL case 09LM1414, champaign county court, Urbana IL judge Chase Leonhard IS THE FUNCTIONING REALITY:    Of a true and real establishment of that very law called first amendment redress of grievances/ by petitioning the people through the court, to come together by decision; and accept the task of determining what is or is not in the best interest of this nation by direct vote of the people themselves. The fact that we are in national crisis is NOT in dispute/ therefore the time for this law is now.

Judge Leonhard uses his authority to sit on this bench, over this trial in the malicious abuse of DUE PROCESS, with the clear intent to control access in this court & to the preliminary legal petition needed:   for WE THE PEOPLE, to have our say. At a time when there can be absolutely NO ROOM for doubt, that an accounting of our government employees must be demanded, created, and governed by a vote for OURSELVES, an acceptance of the responsibility required to save ourselves from worse.  On the issues that have plagued/ do plague/ or will plague this nation, as we decide.  Those threats, causing crisis across this land, and are clearly beyond our employees, ability to solve.  This is our nation/ this is our state/ this is OUR LIVES/ and this is OUR RIGHT BY LAW, according to the first amendment of the United States of America.
Let me be clear: that the judge used determinations which are wholly and completely inconsistent with the facts.  Asserting deductions or assumptions which are an absolute abuse of his discretion, and the standards common or necessary to a courtroom of law, wherein justice “the marriage of law and fair play through equal treatment” lives.  The arbitrary assertion, “that this is his courtroom”/ IS ABSOLUTELY TRAITOROUS to this nation:   AS IT BELONGS, TO WE THE PEOPLE! No judge owns a courtroom, it is OURS!  The challenge is made, in this courtroom, to declare otherwise, and prove it.   Therefore the term liar, when the intent is to withhold a guaranteed right of the American citizen, and we the people; is held up to view.  It is OUR LAW, thereby it is our right/ and no judge is authorized to withhold the law.  This was not a capricious act/ as this judge was given twice,  the full range of exactly what would be expected of him.  Creating a full & equal opportunity to change his mind/ by obeying the law, and his duty.  He has declined, producing the means to describe his decision as completely UNFAIR, and without legal bounds.  That means in true legal terms:   HE HAS stepped outside his robe/ his authority as a judge/ and comes under the terms of CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. 

The clear and literal reality, of a man whose determination and position is:   to STEAL FROM ME, by right to guaranteed legal process/ TO CHEAT ME from the guarantees and authority of law and nation/ and TO LIE to me, with regard to what is fundamentally and functionally LEGAL DUE PROCESS in this state and nation.   These rights for both me and this nation, that cannot be underestimated in value. He has attacked!  Particularly in this day, & at this time, when the process of determining whether or not:   A LONG LIST OF THREATS MADE AGAINST THIS NATION, STATE AND WORLD, will grant our future to survive; or not.  Fundamentally questioning whether we shall starve, or thirst, or face horrendous consequences or whatever the cost of current realities shall be.  It is our right to understand, it is our right to accept the duty of knowledge and adhere to the preservation of our lives, our nation, our world, and the children, by assessing our reality and truth, through accountability and the examination of evidence.  AND OUR OWN DECISION BY VOTE, as a nation.  It is our right to decide these things for ourselves/ it is a traitor that demands, “we shall not have this law”. 
This judge stands against WE THE PEOPLE, and rules within the terms of tyrant;   such that we should just die/ because he wishes to pretend “god over us”.
There ARE penalties for that, in this nation.  A criminal trial discovering what is it worth:   to destroy our law, and terrorize our people with treason, leaving them open to destruction.

THIS COURT:   is instructed to obey the constitutional first amendment law, and establish trial 09LM1414 as the guarantees of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA demand.  Allowing the jury to have their say, and if yes then the county and state.  Their decision is:  to ask the county/ by vote the county asks the state/ and by vote the state asks the nation as a whole: if we the people, shall demand our inherent right of redress by the first amendment.  THESE ARE THE WAYS OF A LEGAL PETITION in first amendment redress of grievances/ and there is no law, or precedent or cause to suggest otherwise!   It is not a request, it is the law.  This is a petition of law, the working parameter of ownership in democracy, as we the people.

THIS COURT:   is instructed to establish, whether collusion in the champaign county courthouse existed, to deny to this nation:   “WE THE PEOPLE”:    OUR GUARANTEED RIGHTS, AND FIRST AMENDMENT LAW.  Treason, is a serious charge.

THIS COURT: IS REQUIRED to assemble and create a review of all cases presented throughout the various levels of the judiciary in this UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;   by the litigant    JAMES FRANK OSTERBUR (JAMES F. OSTERBUR) wherein an issue of redress of grievances was created;   and establish whether there is justice in the court.   Or if THERE IS A PATTERN in the courthouses of america, whereby the conspiracy of the court to deny to this people, in this UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;   the truth of who we are, as a democracy.  Either determined by the law and the people’s right to justice/ or corruption in the court.  In truth, that pattern has already been established in the simple fact:   not one single trial, or beginning of trial can be found establishing this first amendment legal right. In the history of this nation/ it is without doubt      “someone asked, demanded”.

The question then is:   Who is the power of this land, the people or the employee?  The court is accused of: taking  our GUARANTEED RIGHTS away, with endless excuses/ avoiding fair play and justice, by playing games instead of working for life.  The question to the court is:    WHAT IS “GOOD BEHAVIOR/ because the constitution does NOT say any behavior will do”! In the legal setting of a courtroom where lives and property are at stake, is there not a demand for FAIR PLAY?  Because without good behavior DUE PROCESS is merely a game.  The authority of ownership, the reality of possession, the purpose of the law, and the demand for democracy are all:     property of the people.  OUR RIGHTS, not yours.  Our desire for justice/ YOUR DUTY.  Our democracy/ your job.   Our authority over this nation/ your sworn oath to protect. Fails without good behavior/ and this case is determined to define and create exactly what that good behavior is, or is not.

The finding in case 09LM1414  being:    if the removal of due process by malicious abuse in the judiciary, is allowed.  Then does that not cause to say:   not only is this reckless disregard for the law or truth, but an UNDUE authority, not governed by judicial immunity.   The question then: is it a traitorous act, when the foundations of a nation were deliberately undermined?   The removal of a first amendment law and its purpose in allowing the people to protect themselves, from their own employees: IS NOT an authority given the court/ in any level or venue.  It is an authority given to the people, over their nation.
The courts job is to support the law, and protect the people, by adhering to constitutional demands. THE DAMAGE OF THAT TREASON, failing to defend the securities and purposes provided by constitutional demand on our employees.   BEING CLEARLY VIEWED TODAY!  In the reality of very many lives in crisis, with more to come. A nation buried in debt, failure, and threats!  A citizen and thereby a nation:   being turned away, from our legal right to intervene as owners should we so declare.   This case 09LM1414,  through the presentation of a petition (its procedural votes as have been described) in court, by which we the people demand to be heard is a literal right by law, of the people intended to protect themselves.  Not a game/ a recognition in failure; and the assertion WE MUST, because our employees cannot.

The court is reminded: that justice is its “mission in life”/ therefore a review of all cases, to determine and distinguish what is or was functionally       FAIR PLAY, EQUAL OR BALANCED, AND HONEST JUSTICE :  as the people themselves would agree.  Did the court in past cases “DO their job correctly, or with honest intent for justice”. Did they succeed in pressing for fair play, equal rights, democracy, or the assertion “we need assistance within the law that protects us all”?   Do the cases represented in fact, establish a court system either OBEYING THE LAW, or failing the people. Or does it produce a court system controlled for the benefit of the lawyers/ by removing any and all possibility of honest representation by the public.  That answer is already provided, by the exorbitant prices charged as “attorney fees”.   A review of many more cases should follow, when it is determined:   the court is failing this USA, because it protects the power, the pride, and the money instead of the people.  IT controls the people/ rather than controlling power over the people, as is its job.  The entire constitution, the bill of rights, and the declaration of independence is about controlling those who would choose,  power over the people.  The court is accused:   in opposition to that fact/ thereby fundamentally and criminally in confrontation with WE THE PEOPLE, of this United States of America.
The investigation of cases is necessary, and a part of this trial, because corruption and conspiracy in the courthouse IS A VERY SERIOUS MATTER to this nation/ every nation.  I must obey the law/ but so must every employee of government obey the same law; with more vigor, due to their sworn oath! The reality of asserting the path of a single individual, without the benefit of a legal education, throughout the process;   DOES represent the reality of courtroom covenants, either kept or abandoned, in this USA.  Therefore they are to be construed liberally, as the procedural instructions to:  every judge, in the matter of a pro se litigant is intended to be  These trials (etc) establish a truth about the court, and its judges, in this state of IL/ USA; to their relationship with power over the people.  That is literal and clear.
One could say:  Is the court not grateful for their “day in the sunlight”?  Do you not wish “the accolades” worthy of a people doing their duty? Then surely you agree;    What a good thing.  “Let the court be praised/ or corrected, because it is necessary”.  Its your job, “to be open, and fair”, is it not.  Prove your reality, as the providers of our legal reality:    IS GOOD BEHAVIOR!

THE COURT IS REMINDED: what the people intend to hear:    is for JUSTICE, FAIR PLAY, EQUALITY, AND EQUITY regarding every decision!    THAT is what we want/ and that is what we DO pay you for!  Its your job.

Therefore the games of the court, including the incidentals of procedure/ the assertion or assumption of precedent/ the laws inferior to the US CONSTITUTION/ or the intent of process that is NOT in submission to OUR DECLARED RIGHTS OR REALITY as described by the preamble of our government:   this constitution of the United States of America!    Are not allowed!

INSTEAD our constitution, the declaration of independence, and the bill of rights: IS OUR GOVERNMENT!  IS to be recognized as our government!
 Because these bind us all together as one nation, in agreement: by the terms ACCEPTED as WE THE PEOPLE.   The descriptions: that this is who we shall be together!   It is the words accepted,  that governments are born from.   It is the guarantees of freedom, justice, and equality;   that give us the desire to fight and die for this nation.   In democracy there are no rulers: NO temporary employee, who promises, propagates, steals, or lies/ that we are required to die for.  We fight for ourselves, because it is OUR NATION!
But we must learn: the law is more powerful than rulers, any ruler! And our assertion, that this will be justice for our land, AS WE THE PEOPLE.    Cannot be denied!  Because in the end, we are the power/ because we are the people who do the work, and make this society alive.  We, are the soldier/ we are the money/ we are the owners/ we, are the resource.  Through the law,    WE WILL RULE THE NATION.    As true democracy, chosen by vote/ enacted by those hired to “do our will”.  Redress is the authority of ownership, by accountability; the refusal to provide redress to this people, is a war against democracy.    Substantial and real governing, is the assembly of what is real, by investigating the evidence/ and proving what the future will be.  No gambling, No assumptions, No acceptance of failure:   TRUTH DECIDES!

In the reality of men, the disciplines that set us free, are also entitled to enslave us/ the world and work of government, an ascension past the door of poverty for most; but built upon those who must die;  or be used, abused, or discarded.  That is the way of men, to play games with life.  Within the freedoms of truth, are the compositions discovered when both hate and pride are removed to reveal a new and different way.  The challenge is, to take what is precious, and not assume it is less.  The challenge is, to believe that life is the greatest treasure in this universe, and not accept less.  The challenge is, to understand the value of a life competes with the reality of its competition/ but that does not mean it has less value.  The challenge of an identity: accepts the decision I make, IS the life I am!  The participation of justice in every life, assigns to the living: “the definition of me”/ demands from the dying, “run away, hide, or be judged”.  We are the essence of life in this world, by the comprehension and ability to affect or afflict the reality of our existence by the distinctions of our decision.  We are, the ability of life to survive or die upon this planet; because we have attained the power to kill.  There are no resolutions either in hope, happiness, or respect/ where there is no justice.  There are no boundaries which bring peace and harmony, without the element and essence of law/ because humanity, or more particularly (a large percentage of) men do not see the value of life, without war or games.  Therefrom the participation of women, identifies and creates “a new way, and a new method” upon which the survival of this planet shall be decided.  Because we are so many people, the old ways of war and games for money have died;   or we will.  Trial is created, to discover and define the elemental path of life, as we go forward to meet the crisis of what men have done.  The reality and consequence of women as leaders, defined by their gender/ and her own ways must expand. Because major war is death, to this planet/ and every threat we face, is stamped with the words “extermination, if we fail”.        The nineteenth amendment states, “leadership and the mantle of decision, cannot be denied due to sex, specifically female”. It is the life inside that matters/ not the gender. But gender realities identify true differences, and reality adjusts because of that fact.  The reality of this day, and this hour is: without change, our truth has only one result/ we will not survive.     WE MUST, HAVE DIFFERENT!

  Therefore the terms of “our government”/ and its written instruction;  Shall rule this process and this trial.  WITHIN the critical construction, that democracy means WE THE PEOPLE/ not you the employee.  WITHIN this simple truth, you must arise: there is NO supremacy in this nation.   Not for the citizen/ not for the judge/ not for the president, no one.  WE ARE EQUALS, apart from you (leaders of the work) have sworn:    to uphold the law, by defending the people, THE LAW, and the constitution/ or face penalties.  You must decide for yourselves, as a nation:   if you will face your truth, and respect prove:   your lives will accept what reality now demands is necessary to survive.  None can stop you.  None can make you.  Either you choose to understand the reality and consequences of serious threat and destruction against you/ or life fails.  Believe it or not.  There is no going back, past the point of no return/ that point comes in years at the maximum/ NOT decades! It may well be only months.  TRUE AND LITERAL CHANGE IS COMING/ one way or the other, your only decision is to participate in one direction or the other.  Because change will not be denied.  IF YOU stand up for life, I will stand with you/ and we will not be denied our say; and our right to choose.  But if you do not stand up for the simple purpose of life first, and the demand:   TO KNOW THE TRUTH, about our nation/ our future/ and our world.  Then I will abandon you, to the fate you have chosen, to the reality of no mercy at all.  Prove yourself now!   Prove, for life/ or don’t care enough!
MAKE YOUR DECISION!

Because the possibility exists
The people are reminded: behind closed doors, the court does whatever it pleases, making up any situation it desires, and demanding adherence to whatever it says.  Because after all, “who, can say or prove different”!  THEREFORE CLEAR AND CERTAIN DEMAND SHALL EXIST, to open every “door, and turn on every light, and invite every media which demands a seat”.  When and where trial begins!  I bring no weapons/ I bring no cause for a conviction against me in any conceivable way.  I will be walking for peace and the purpose of law; and nothing will change that.  Regardless of what you may or may not hear.  Should I die, this is a national issue called redress by the first amendment; and can be carried on by those who admit too/ and describe actions that are concurrent with the term, and basis of purpose called:   “Life first”, for this world!

The people are allowed:   having given you the basis, and keys of REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, to choose for themselves.  The reality of our employees, is to be considered / NOT our “government”;   but those who are employed for a specific reason, with a distinct job to do.  WE ARE THE OWNERS!  Our government as a function in reality:   is the three main constitutional documents sustained and created as the United States of America: the constitution/ the bill of rights, and the declaration of independence.  Our “employees”, are   “Our employees.”

 Should you find it necessary to go on for yourselves: let there be thousands of filings across this nation.  Keep it simple!  Demand a redress trial, within the reality of accounting and examination of the facts:    Because of this crisis, this threat, this need, or whatever it is that you believe must be addressed.  Let the court respond/ and the people decide accordingly.   BUT as this case is already conceived for that purpose;   “Give it, its chance to succeed first”.  It does no one good, to create confusion.  The above test is about proving to the court:    WE WILL, HAVE OUR LAW!
YOU may use the chat room provided www.justtalking3.info  for that purpose, establishing the results and organizing as necessary. To discuss the links:   “THE LIST” of threats assembled there, or “talking points”; in relation to trial.  And elsewhere, in the “justtalking.info series” of web sites I have prepared. Or other topics/ I will NOT be participating in any chat, or chat room.  Some contributions may be necessary due to the potential volume of data distribution. Unless otherwise instructed, by you;  any contribution could also be used for the purpose of this trial, and/ or advertizing said trial across the nation.  Including the other supporting web sites that I did create.
___________________________________________________

The list of those cases involving this plaintiff;   is found on the following web sites; and shall constitute a valid presentation; as various courts in hiding their crimes;   threw some of  the case files away.

www.justtalking3.info   09LM1414 Champaign county court
  This case, being resolved “today” involving the relationship between medicine and citizen, WAS expanded to include:   as defined by money and health issues between the citizen and the healthcare industry.  Redress to resolve, was demanded.
The judge falsified his decision with fraud; and dismissed.
The conclusion of that court, being in short: “...cases such as these are not uncommon. They often present a blinding blizzard of chaff...   ..this ruling only addresses the present form of plaintiff’s complaint......the court does not understand the plaintiff’s claims,..”    
My response PROVE IT WITH LAW!  Be specific about “what you don’t understand”.
 The reality: even this judge admits, “the court commonly shits on the citizen”, and cares nothing, for the law or justice or right. 

 

www.justtalking2.info    US supreme court 08-133  

A case: demanding the US SUPREME COURT must answer the question,   will you obey the first amendment redress of grievances law?  Having been docketed (all procedural requirements met)  and paid for:     the ruling and signature, of a judge is required.
the circuit clerk instead responds:   case dismissed.
My response: this is anarchy and treason because it is the law..., and the law does not allow for “just cause I don’t want too”!  These are NOT our rulers!  They are OUR employees!

www.justtalking.info  Are several more cases

the trial abstract of cases found at www.trialforlife.info/ wherein the first assembly of:     OUR first amendment redress of grievances RIGHTS,  took place.  Contain several more/ including issues with city.  IF the links are not working in this file, the filings are listed as items as you go down the page.