This proves a reckless disregard of the
law and a
reckless disregard of the facts by Duane Thompson in
Wittekind vs. Rusk 253 Ill.App.3d 577, 192 Ill.Dec. 467, 625 N.E.2d 427.
STATEMENT OF FACTS: Duane Thompson 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 has also failed to make correct statements about the Evidence of Malice.
Judge Telleen never saw a single word that was on the transcript for the jury trial but he proved that transcript contained evidence of malice when he stated "It has to be Mrs. Rusk - not Mr. Rusk." Page 28 of 1990SC3806. The transcript of the jury trial has Beverly Rusk using the word he was referring to on page 30 of 1990CM9 so there was evidence of malice despite Duane Thompson's false remark about it.
Duane Thompson and Judge Telleen recreated the exact errors of law that reversed and remanded the legal precedent that Duane Thompson misrepresented when they refused to let me enter the "Probable Cause" as an exhibit to prove a total lack of good faith and when Judge Telleen refused to let me transfer 4 exhibits from the jury trial I won into a malicious prosecution lawsuit.
1. Judge Telleen should have allowed me to use the two exhibits that were used to completely impeach all three of the State's witnesses with prior inconsistent statements because they classified as the Statement of Facts on the mind of Judge Brinn and they proved both Malice and a Total Lack of Good Faith.
2. Judge Telleen should have allowed Defense Exhibit #4 to be transferred from the jury trial I won into the malicious prosecution lawsuit because that exhibit proved Beverly Rusk used the word "infatuated" maliciously.
3 Judge Telleen should have allowed the letter from Don Thuline to be transferred from the jury trial into the malicious prosecution lawsuit to prevent the following objection to testimony from Duane Thompson: "I will object to that testimony. He's characterizing a letter that was held to be hearsay" page 7 of part 2 of 2 in 1990SC3806
After all was said and done, the only part of a jury trial that I would be allowed to transfer from the jury trial I won into a malicious prosecution lawsuit would be a letter signed by Beverly Rusk and it was just more of her false statements based on the malicious slander from a boy in 1974 so the effect was a retrial of a case that ended in an acquittal and that is a violation of the rule against Double Jeopardy in the Fifth Amendment.
CONCLUSION: In Summary, using the principles of law in the legal precedent that Duane Thompson misrepresented this case should have been reversed and remanded.
Transcripts are at:http://BrokenSixthAmendment.com/transcripts
Exhibits are at: http://SlimeFest.com/Exhibits