Jane Drew Waller, currently Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois, has been, and is currently, engaged in criminal acts.

Upon taking the judgeship, Jane Waller took an oath of office, wherein she took an oath to support the U.S. Constitution. Apparently Jane Waller does not subscribe to the First Amendment of that Constitution.

A part of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (a part of the Bill of Rights) states, in pertinent part, that the people shall have the right "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances". U.S. Courts have repeatedly held that access to the courts means an "adequate, complete, effective, fair, full, meaningful, and timely" access to the courts. Courts have been held that a mere formal right of access to the courts does not pass Constitutional muster.

Whenever a non-represented litigant is before the court, none of the non-represented's Constitutional Rights are waived. And under the Supreme Law of the Land, a judge loses jurisdiction in an action whenever a litigant's Constitutional Rights have been violated. An inspection of the record of cases before judge Waller evidences that judge Waller has violated litigant's Constitutional Rights, and therefore she was not acting as a state judicial officer, but was acting in her private person.

"No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it." Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).

Jane D. Waller has violated her oath to support the Constitution of the United States and has warred against it. She has also warred against the Constitution of the State of Illinois (see Illinois Constitution, Article I, sections 5 and 12).

Another instance wherein judge Jane Drew Waller violated the Constitution is where she has issued a gag order upon a litigant. No judge has Constitutional authority to issue a gag order (except in certain National emergencies). Recently the Appellate Court, with respect to another judge, ruled that the gag order violated the litigant's First Amendment's Rights. To read this other case, which applies to judge Waller as well as all judges, click here. In every case wherein judge Waller issued a gag order, she has lost jurisdiction and her orders are void.

Any orders issued by judge Waller whenever she had violated the Constitution were, and are, void, of no legal force or effect.

The Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 62(A) mandates that "A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself or herself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary." If judge Jane D. Waller knows the law, then she is intentionally and deliberating violating the law. The record of cases before her evidences that she has no respect for the law.

In her acceptance of monies and other benefits from the government, she has engaged in acts of fraud upon the government for her not performing her Constitutional duties.

Judge Jane D. Waller is a criminal in a black robe. Judges, who engaged in criminal activity, or who do not support the U.S. Constitution, have no immunity from prosecution.

CLR suggests, that whenever the judge has violated his/her oath to support the Constitution, all benefits received by the judge are based on fraud, and that all such benefits are "ill-gotten" gains. Also, all actions taken to benefit any party by the judge with these "ill-gotten" gains are also fraud upon the Defendant or the Plaintiff involved and/or the government. Those who may benefit from these "ill-gotten" gains, either directly or indirectly, may include the judge's spouse, children, parents, in-laws, siblings, other relatives, friends, and associates.

Just as a person who is in possession of property which has been stolen is not the legal owner of the property, a person who is in possession of "ill-gotten" gains is not the legal owner of those "ill-gotten" gains. The stolen property must be returned to the legal owner; the "ill-gotten" gains should be returned to the legal owner.

The title to personal property requires a chain of proof as does the title to real property.

In criminal law the hardest case for a defense attorney is the one he must contend with where his client, the defendant, is accused of being "in possession of stolen property". In such a case the only valid defense is proof of ownership of the goods in question. The burden is on the party who may have "ill-gotten gains" in their possession to prove that they have not received any "ill-gotten gains".

In the case of judge Jane D. Waller, the Illinois Constitutional officer to prosecute her is her husband, Lake County State's Attorney Michael J. Waller. Do you really believe he will perform his statutory duty and prosecute his wife? Or will he violate his statutory duty? And connive with his spouse to violate the Constitution.

The following is a list of some of the persons who may have received some of the "ill-gotten" gains obtained from the defrauding of the government by judge Jane D. Waller:

Michael J. Waller
Patrick Waller
John Waller

Copyright© 2000-2001 by Citizens for Legal Responsibility®.
                        All rights reserved.

    email: clr@clr.org