Chalice - Patriot's Heart Network - Emergency: Petition - For Redress Before The Mchenry County Grand Jury

1 TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT(Second Appellate District)
2 FOR MCHENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS

Case No.:
3 SHARON ANN MERONI (aka Chalice Jackson)
PATRIOT’S HEART MEDIA NETWORK, )
4 INC., Members JOHN DOES and JANE )
DOES 1-20, Registered Voters and Members )
5 of PATRIOT’S HEART MEDIA NETWORK, )
INC., (728 NW HWY, Fox River Grove, IL )
6 60021 847-304-8800) )
EMERGENCY: PETITION –
7 FOR REDRESS BEFORE THE
MCHENRY COUNTY GRAND
8 JURY
Petitions,
9
10 MCHENRY COUNTY GRAND JURY )

FOREMAN AND GRAND JURY MEMBERS )
11
The matter of Voter Fraud is an emergency of the utmost importance to our County, State
12
and Country. Petitioner seeks an EMERGENCY appearance before the McHenry County
13
14 Grand Jury.
15
16 I, the undersigned Petitioner, appearing pro se as an individual, as a member of the Press
17 and as the Founder of Patriot’s Heart Media Network, Inc (a Citizen run media outlet) in
18 the role of “spokesperson” for John and Jane Does, members of Patriot’s Heart Media
19 Network, Inc, in accord with the directions of personal convictions and loyalty to the
20 Constitutional Republic of the United States of America, and the Illinois Constitution, on
21 oath and before God Almighty, set forth this prayer by way of Petition in the Twenty-
22 Second Judicial Circuit (Second Appellate District) McHenry County, IL seeking

23 EMERGENCY redress of grievances as a registered voting member of McHenry County,
24 to investigate all Criminal and Civil actions that resulted in rampant voter fraud in the
25 State of Illinois Primary Election, held on Tuesday February 5th, 2008 and the regular Nov
26
Page 1 – PETITION – TO APPEAR BEFORE THE MCHENRY COUNTY GRAND JURY
1 4th, 2008 Election. In Prima Fascia perspective, Petitioner knows from her research that
2 this voter fraud potentially reaches into all elected offices in the County and State.
4 It is noteworthy to state: This petition is not to serve anyone with specific charges. This
5 Petitioner’s intent is to communicate with the Foreman and the Grand Jury Members of the
6 sitting Grand Jury in the 22nd Circuit Court of McHenry County. Petitioner prayer for
7 redress, is for appearances before the convened Grand Jury, to present without restrictions
8 from the “Prosecutor” or Judge, evidence of pervasive voter fraud in McHenry County and
9
thus in the State of Illinois. This Petitioner seeks to work with the Grand Jury as a specially
10
appointed “Investigator” to compel testimony to determine how this voter fraud was
11
perpetrated against her, against the residents of McHenry County and of the great state of
12
Illinois. Petitioner also seeks redress from damages from this voter fraud.
13
14 1.0 PARTIES
15
1.1 Petitioner is Sharon Ann Meroni, Natural Born American Citizen, longtime
16
resident of and registered voter in McHenry County, Illinois whose First Amendment
17
right to cast ballots in an election without impermissible barriers has been deprived.
18
1.2 Petitioner, Sharon Ann Meroni, a resident of McHenry County is a Citizen
19
20 Journalist and Founder of Patriot’s Heart Media Network, seeking Redress under 1st
21 Amendment Rights, (US Constitution) and according to similar Illinois Constitution

22 Rights, URGENTLY seeks appropriate public disclosure of facts attesting to this voter
23
fraud.
24
1.3 Voter Registration information: As listed on Petitioner’s Voter Registration
25
Card (Exhibit A): McHenry County, Algonquin Township 45, Congressional Dist 16,
26
Leg District 26, Rep Dist 52, County Board 1 in McHenry County where the Petitioner
1
2 cast her ballots in the Primary and General Election, 2008.
3 1.4 Patriot’s Heart Media Network is a Media outlet Incorporated in the State of
4 Illinois, with the primary location of business in McHenry County, Illinois. Sharon Ann
5 Meroni is the Founder and Owner of Patriot’s Heart Network. Patriot’s Heart Network
6
has been involved in actions seeking redress on this matter. Petitioner is also known as
7
‘Chalice Jackson’ in her Internet role as a Broadcasting Blogger. As “spokesperson”
8
Petitioner states she personally knows of thousands of people who are impacted in this
9
10 matter.
11 1.5 Potentially, the path allowing for violation of Petitioner’s rights occurred in
12 part from Federal corruption and misdeeds, however the actual usurpation of Petitioner’s
13
First Amendment Rights occurred at the Fox River Grove Middle School polling place.
14
For this reason, Petitioner seeks redress at her County Grand Jury.
15
1.6 Petitioner will present to the Grand Jury indisputable evidence of massive
16
voter fraud and severe deficiencies in the current law in securing her constitutional rights.
17
18 1.7 Petitioner has not entered into this Petition lightly. With her soul, her total
19 beingness, and before her Lord God, Petitioner affirms she is taking this action
20 because she is driven to reveal these acts of voter fraud, believing her nation in grave
21
risk, knowing this is not about a specific political party, and testifying to the Grand
22
Jury, this is not about political vengeance.
23
24
25 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND STANDING
26
Petitioner considers voter fraud to have created a County, State and National
1
2 EMERGENCY. Therefore Petitioner seeks EMERGENCY handling of this Petition.
3 Petitioner prays to begin testifying before the Grand Jury on December 3rd, 2009.
5 The denial of standing by the courts in this country on claims against usurpers of federal
6
office is in itself an impermissible barrier to free speech which violates the First
7
Amendment right to free association and the right to bring a petition for a redress of
8
grievances. See NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958); see also Buckley v. Valeo, 424
9
10 U.S. 1 (1976).
11
12 Petitioner has exhausted all reasonable remedies known to her prior to bringing this
13
petition. Petitioner is prepared to testify to the multiple attempts made. This petition to
14
the McHenry County Grand Jury is that last bastion of redress available to her.
15
16
2.1 Petitioner alleges to have evidence of massive voter fraud which was
17
perpetrated against her Illinois Constitutional right to a free and equal election.
18 Article III: SECTION 3. ELECTIONS
All elections shall be free and equal.
19 (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
20
21 2.2 Petitioner is personally traumatized by the lack of Redress. The Petitioner

22
is an American Patriot who feels obligated by God and Country to protect and
23
support the US Constitution, and by her love of Illinois, her local homeland.
24
LITERALLY there is no rest for the Petitioner until this voter fraud issue is
25
26 redressed. Petitioner’s quality of life has been seriously compromised because of

this issue. Through intense loyalty to God and Country, Petitioner testifies that
1
2 there is no relief until this matter is redressed!
4 Petitioner believes her only form of Redress is to personally testify before the
5 McHenry County Grand Jury. Petitioner is prepared to testify to how this has
6
personally impacted her life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
7
8
2.3 The US Constitution is one source document guiding Petitioner’s action seeking
9
10 to testify before the McHenry County Grand Jury as the correct place to seek Redress for
11 the Grievance
12 1st Amendment US Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
13 religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the
14 people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for
a redress of grievances.
15
16 2.4 The Illinois Constitution, Article 1: Bill of Rights, Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 12, 23
17 and 24 is the second source document guiding Petitioner’s action seeking to testify before
18 the McHenry County Grand Jury as the correct place to seek Redress for the Grievance
19
Article I: Bill of Rights, Illinois Constitution
20
SECTION 1. INHERENT AND INALIENABLE RIGHTS
21 All men are by nature free and independent and have
certain inherent and inalienable rights among which are life,
22 liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights
and the protection of property, governments are instituted
23 among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)
24
SECTION 2. DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION
25 No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property
without due process of law nor be denied the equal protection
26
of the laws.
2 SECTION 4. FREEDOM OF SPEECH

All persons may speak, write and publish freely, being
3 responsible for the abuse of that liberty. In trials for
libel, both civil and criminal, the truth, when published
4 with good motives and for justifiable ends, shall be a
sufficient defense.
5
SECTION 5. RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION
6 The people have the right to assemble in a peaceable
manner, to consult for the common good, to make known their
7 opinions to their representatives and to apply for redress of
grievances.
9 SECTION 6. SEARCHES, SEIZURES, PRIVACY AND INTERCEPTIONS

The people shall have the right to be secure in their
10 persons, houses, papers and other possessions against
unreasonable searches, seizures, invasions of privacy or
11 interceptions of communications by eavesdropping devices or
other means. No warrant shall issue without probable cause,
12 supported by affidavit particularly describing the place to
be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
13
SECTION 12. RIGHT TO REMEDY AND JUSTICE
14 Every person shall find a certain remedy in the laws for
all injuries and wrongs which he receives to his person,
15 privacy, property or reputation. He shall obtain justice by
law, freely, completely, and promptly.
17
SECTION 23. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
18 A frequent recurrence to the fundamental principles of
civil government is necessary to preserve the blessings of
19 liberty. These blessings cannot endure unless the people
recognize their corresponding individual obligations and
20 responsibilities.
21
SECTION 24. RIGHTS RETAINED
22 The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained
23 by the individual citizens of the State.
24
25
26
2.5: Illinois Constitution empowers Petitioner to seek Remedy. Petitioner has tried
1
2 various avenues of Redress. Petitioner believes as secured in her Illinois Bill of Rights
3 McHenry County Grand Jury offers the certain remedy this EMERGENCY requires!
4 SECTION 12. RIGHT TO REMEDY AND JUSTICE

Every person shall find a certain remedy in the laws for
7
SECTION 12. RIGHT TO REMEDY AND JUSTICE
8 Every person shall find a certain remedy in the laws for
11
2.6: State Law empowers Petitioner to seek Redress through McHenry County Grand
12
13 Jury seeking to conduct investigations into massive voter fraud. Illinois Code dictates
14 where election fraud is first addressed:
15
In general, the circuit court shall hear election contests.
16 Individuals should refer to the particular statute which applies
to their unit of government. (10 ILCS 5/23-4, 23-5)
17
Additionally, there are other statues that apply.
18
19
2.7: Grand Jury instructions permit the Grand Jury to investigate outside of petitions
20
served by the “Prosecutors.” These instructions are found in the following locations:
21

22 A: Illinois Code
10.10 GRAND JURY
23 Grand Jurors shall be summoned to duty by the Jury Commissioner’s Office.
Grand Jurors shall be assembled and called to serve on the first Thursday
in January, March, May, July, September and November by the Chief Judge.
24 Their term of service shall be sixty (60) days, unless otherwise ordered.
If any day upon which a Grand Jury is to be called is a legal holiday,
25 such Grand Jurors shall be called to serve the next court date. After
being impaneled, instructed and sworn by the Court, the grand Jury shall
26 sit at such times as the Court may order or that the State’s Attorney or

the Grand Jury foreperson deems appropriate, (emphasis added) and may be
1 recessed from time to time to a day certain or subject to recall.
http://co.mchenry.il.us/departments/courtadmin/PDFDocs/22ndRules10.pdf
2
B: Handbook for Grand Jurors
3 After the foreperson is selected and sworn, the other members of the
grand jury will then take the following oath:
4
"You and each of you do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be),
5 that you will diligently inquire into and true presentment make of all
such matters and things as shall be given you in charge, or shall
6 otherwise come to your knowledge, touching the present service; (emphasis
added) you shall present no person through malice, hatred or ill-will;
nor shall you leave any unpresented through fear, favor, affection, or
7 for any fee or reward, or for any hope or promise thereof; but in all of
your presentments, you shall present the truth, the whole truth, and
8 nothing but the truth, according to the best of your skill and
understandin; so help you God.”
9 http://www.state.il.us/court/CircuitCourt/Jury/GrandJuror.asp
10
C: Powers and Duties of the Grand Jury
11
The grand jury has the duty of inquiring into matters relating to crime
or corruption in the area it serves. This information generally comes to
12 its knowledge in the following ways:
13 1. Information submitted by the Prosecutor.
14 2. Information that may come to its knowledge in the course of its

investigation of other matters.
15
3. Information called to its attention by the Court.
16
4. Information that it has of its own knowledge.
17
Most of the cases that you will consider as a grand juror will be brought
to your attention and come before you as a result of investigation and
18 preparation by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor will be either the State’s
Attorney, the Attorney General or an assistant to either of them. He or
19 she is the officer charged by law with the prosecution of crime in the
county. However, the grand jury possesses broad powers of its own to
20 inquire into crime and corruption in its jurisdiction. It has a right
under the law to make its own investigation unaided by the Court and
assisted by any prosecuting attorney. On petition signed by the
21 foreperson and 8 other grand jurors, showing good cause for same, the
Court may appoint an investigator or investigators to assist the grand
22 jury in its inquiries. Included in this power of investigation is the
right of the grand jury to subpoena witnesses and documents.
23
While neither the Court nor the Prosecutor may limit the scope of a grand
24 jury investigation, you should remember that these officials are
available for advice and counsel in any investigation the grand jury may
wish to undertake. Ordinarily, the grand jury will not act independently
25 of the Court and the Prosecutor. However, if these officials may be
26
concerned in any investigation contemplated by the grand jury, the jury
1 has a right to seek the advice of the Attorney General. (emphasis added)
2 2.8 . Petitioner has tried various avenues of Redress and has no other form of Redress
3 readily accessible. Petitioner has sought redress for grievances from the following places:
4
Senator Durbin: Phone, email, and personal service
5 Senator Burris: Phone, email and personal service
House Representatives in Illinois, especially Manzullo: Phone, email, personal
6 service and direct phone conversation
ALL 535 members of the US Congress: Personal service
7 Secret Service: Personal service
8 FBI: Personal service
DOJ: Attempted personal service – Sent to the US District Court
9 Pentagon: Personal service
US District Court: Judge Royce Lamberth - Petitions with Decisions
10 Senate Sub Committee of Congress: Personal service
Senate Rules and Administration Committee: Personal service
11 Spoke to a Hundred Thousand people while with the Tea Party Express
12 Attended as an embedded reporter, the Continental Congress 2009
Others not mentioned here
13
14 2.9 Petitioner identifies this Court as the correct court according to the Illinois’
15
Constitution: Article IV: The Judicary
16
SECTION 9. CIRCUIT COURTS - JURISDICTION
Circuit Courts shall have original jurisdiction of all
17 justiciable matters except when the Supreme Court has
original and exclusive jurisdiction relating to redistricting
18 of the General Assembly and to the ability of the Governor to
serve or resume office. Circuit Courts shall have such power
19 to review administrative action as provided by law.
20
21 3.0 APPEARANCE BEFORE A GRAND JURY AS A REMEDY
22 The exercise of the Fifth Amendment to appoint grand juries has long been
23
recognized by the federal courts including the Supreme Court of the United States in
24
cases as recent as United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992), when the court
25
said the following:
26
'[R]ooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history, Hannah v. Larche,
1
2 363 U.S. 420, 490 (1960) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result), the grand jury is
3 mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not
4 been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first
5 three Articles. It "'is a constitutional fixture in its own right.'" United States v.
6
Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9 1977) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S.
7
App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F.2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U.S.
8
825 (1977). ' "
9
10 “The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose
11 functioning the courts do not preside." Id.
12 "In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of
13
the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the
14
Government and the people. See Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212, 218
15
(1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 61 (1906); G. Edwards, The Grand Jury 28-
16
32 (1906). Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the
17
18 courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the
19 Judicial Branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges' direct
20 involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to
21
the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their
22
oaths of office. United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992). Also see
23
United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974); Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 6(a).
24
25 [504 U.S. 36, 48].
26
"The institution of the grand jury is deeply rooted in Anglo-American
1
2 history. In England, the grand jury served for centuries both as a body of accusers
3 sworn to discover and present for trial persons suspected of criminal wrongdoing
4 and as a protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental

5 action. In this country, the Founders thought the grand jury so essential to basic
6
liberties that they provided in the Fifth Amendment that federal prosecution for
7
serious crimes can only be instituted by 'a presentment or indictment of a Grand
8
Jury.' United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974), Cf. Costello v. United
9
10 States, 350 U.S. 359, 361-362 (1956). The grand jury's historic functions survive
11 to this day. Its responsibilities continue to include both the determination whether
12 there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and the protection
13
of citizens against unfounded criminal prosecutions. Branzburg v. Hayes, 408
14
U.S. 665, 686-687 (1972)."
15
3.1 Authority of the Citizens’ Grand Jury to Bring Presentment
16
HISTORY OF FEDERAL GRAND JURY POWER
17
18 "In addition to its traditional role of screening criminal cases for prosecution,
19 common law grand juries had the power to exclude prosecutors from their presence at
20 any time and to investigate public officials without governmental influence. These
21
fundamental powers allowed grand juries to serve a vital function of oversight upon the
22
government. The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the
23
primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past." CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW,
24
25
26
Vol. 33, No. 4 1999-2000, 821, IF IT'S NOT A RUNAWAY, IT'S NOT A REAL
1
2 GRAND JURY by Roger Roots, J.D.
3 The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides in operative part
4 that "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless
5 on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury."
6
In the newsletter of the American Jury Institute and the Fully Informed Jury
7
Association, citing the famed American jurist and Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story,
8
the difference between and indictment issued by a grand jury and a presentment was
9
10 explained as follows:
11 "An indictment is a written accusation of an offence preferred to, and presented,
12 upon oath, as true, by a grand jury, at the suit of the government. An indictment is framed
13
by the officers of the government, and laid before the grand jury. Presentments, on the
14
other hand, are the result of a jury's independent action: 'A presentment, properly
15
speaking, is an accusation, made by a grand jury of its own mere motion, of an offence
16
upon its own observation and knowledge, or upon evidence before it, and without any bill
17
18 of indictment laid before it at the suit of the government. Upon a presentment, the proper
19 officer of the court must frame an indictment, before the party accused can be put to
20 answer it.' "
21
"A 'runaway' grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the
22
accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has improperly been eliminated by
23
modern criminal procedure. Today's "runaway" grand jury is in fact the common law
24
25 grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the
26
standard model of American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact "runaways,"
1
2 according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent,
3 self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very
4 source, including the government itself." Creighton Law Review, op. cit.
5 The Constitution intended to give the grand jury power to instigate
6
criminal charges, and this was especially true when it came to government
7
oversight. This power has been eroded by the overreach of the legislative branch.
8
The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution still contains the same words quoted
9
10 above, but if you sit on a grand jury and return a "presentment" today, some
11 legislatures have required that a prosecutor or other officer of the court sign it or it
12 may not be allowed to stand in court, rendering the criminal charges such
13
independent grand juries have brought to the court's attention to be swept away.
14
And the reason for this can be found in a legislative distortion of the actual
15
underlying facts.
16
In 1946, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were adopted, codifying
17
18 what had previously been a vastly divergent set of common law procedural rules
19 and regional customs. In general, an effort was made to conform the rules to the
20 contemporary state of federal criminal practice. In the area of federal grand jury
21
practice, however, a remarkable exception was allowed. The drafters of Rules 6
22
and 7, which loosely govern federal grand juries, denied future generations of
23
what had been the well-recognized powers of common law grand juries: powers
24
25 of unrestrained investigation and of independent declaration of findings. The
26
committee that drafted the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provided no
1
2 outlet for any document other than a prosecutor-signed indictment. In so doing,
3 the drafters at least tacitly, if not affirmatively, opted to ignore explicit
4 constitutional language. Creighton Law Review, op. cit.

5 Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FRCP):
6
"An offense which may be punished by death shall be prosecuted by
7
indictment. An offense which may be punished by imprisonment for a term
8
exceeding one year or at hard labor shall be prosecuted by indictment."
9
10 There is no mention of "presentments" in Rule 7. But they are mentioned in Note
11 4 of the Advisory Committee Notes on the Rules:
12 4. Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation,

13
since presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as
14
concerns the Federal courts.
15
The American Juror published the following commentary with regards to Note 4:
16
[W]hile the writers of the federal rules made provisions for indictments,
17
18 they made none for presentments. This was no oversight. According to Professor
19 Lester B. Orfield, a member of the Advisory Committee on Rules of Criminal

20 Procedure, the drafters of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 6 decided the
21
term presentment should not be used, even though it appears in the Constitution.
22
Orfield states [22 F.R.D. 343, 346]:
23
'There was an annotation by the Reporter on the term presentment as used
24
25 in the Fifth Amendment. It was his conclusion that the term should not be used in
26
the new rules of criminal procedure. Retention might encourage the use of the
1
2 run-away grand jury as the grand jury could act from their own knowledge or
3 observation and not only from charges made by the United States attorney. It has
4 become the practice for the United States Attorney to attend grand jury hearings,
5 hence the use of presentments have been abandoned.'
6
The statement "Retention might encourage the grand jury [to] act from their own
7
knowledge or observation" is a usurpation of Constitutional power expressly granted to
8
the citizens of this nation under both the Fifth and Tenth Amendments to the United
9
10 States Constitution, power that was intended by the founding fathers, in their incredible
11 wisdom, to provide citizens with oversight over tyrannical government. These due
12 process rights are the preferred mechanism of the constitutional republic for the
13
combating of tyranny, and there is no time more pressing than our current estate for the
14
exercise of these rights.
15
The state, seeking to further alienate the exercise of powers expressly given to
16
citizens in this country, then went out to brand such an exercise as a "runaway grand
17
18 jury." A runaway grand jury is nothing more and nothing less than a constitutionally
19 mandated grand jury, aware of their power, and legally exercising that power to hold the
20 federal beast in check, as in "checks and balances." As a result of this statist tactic to
21
improperly disempower the Fifth Amendment, the grand jury has relegated to the
22
position of submissive puppet to the US Attorney.
23
The American Juror publication American Juror went on to say in a very relevant
24
25 commentary:
26
Of course, no statute or rule can alter the provisions of the Constitution,
1
2 since it is the supreme law of the land. But that didn't prevent the federal courts
3 from publishing a body of case law affirming the fallacy that presentments were
4 abolished. A particularly egregious example:

5 'A rule that would permit anyone to communicate with a grand jury
6
without the supervision or screening of the prosecutor or the court would
7
compromise, if not utterly subvert, both of the historic functions of the grand jury,
8
for it would facilitate the pursuit of vendettas and the gratification of private
9
10 malice. A rule that would open the grand jury to the public without judicial or
11 prosecutorial intervention is an invitation to anyone interested in trying to
12 persuade a majority of the grand jury, by hook or by crook, to conduct

13
investigations that a prosecutor has determined to be inappropriate or unavailing.'
14
As a result, the investigation of seditious, corrupt, or illegal acts of government
15
officials can be deemed inappropriate or unavailing by the prosecutor, or a judge can
16
dismiss the grand jurors pursuing such investigations. Consequently, corrupt
17
18 government officials have few natural enemies and go about their business
19 unimpeded. To further authorize this unconstitutional impediment to the exercise of

20 Fifth Amendment rights of a grand jury to issue a presentment, FRCP authors in 1946
21
added the following Rule 6(g):
22
"At any time for cause shown the court may excuse a juror either
23
temporarily or permanently, and in the latter event the court may impanel another
24
25 person in place of the juror excused."
26
Now judges can throw anyone off a grand jury, or even disimpanel a grand jury
1
2 entirely, merely for exercising its discretion.
3 The authors of the new Federal Rules did not, however, render common law use
4 presentments illegal or unconstitutional – they merely attempted to render them obsolete.

5 Note 4 to Rule 7 of the FRCP provides as follows:
6
"4. Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation, since
7
presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as
8
concerns the Federal courts."
9
10 The key word is, "obsolete." Obsolete means "outmoded,", or "not in use
11 anymore", but it does not mean "abolished" or "illegal." What was once obsolete in the
12 minds of the modernists in 1946 is now both appropriate and relevant.

13
The Constitution provides for "presentments." The Federal Rules of Civil
14
Procedure as they were enacted do not mention presentments, nor do they ban
15
presentments, and if they did, such a ban would be unconstitutional, since an
16
administrative enactment regarding procedure cannot overrule the Constitution. Note 4
17
18 simply states that "presentments" allowed for in the 5th Amendment of the Constitution
19 have become "obsolete", or outmoded, which is not to say that they were "eliminated."
20 Nothing can be "eliminated" from the Constitution by an administrative note.
21
22
3.2 Conflicting Allegiances
23
State and County Officials involved in this Voter Fraud, by whatever means, have
24
25 taken an oath similar to the one below, mandated in Article XIII, to uphold the US
26
Constitution and the Illinois Constitution. Potentially having violated that oath, therefore
1
2 they have self interest in all matters related to voter fraud in McHenry County and in
3 Illinois.
4 SECTION 3. OATH OR AFFIRMATION OF OFFICE

Each prospective holder of a State office or other State
5 position created by this Constitution, before taking office,
shall take and subscribe to the following oath or
6 affirmation:
"I do solemnly swear (affirm) that I will support the
7 Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of
the State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge
the duties of the office of .... to the best of my ability."
9
3.3 Ring out across the land, the Liberty Bells of “We The People”
10
11 Besides corruption, this issue relates to failed governance and rightfully belongs in
12 the “4th Branch” of Government for redress and remedy especially as relates to securing
13 Presentments. While Petitioner realizes this is a Common Law usage of the Grand Jury,
14
she states such usage is allowed by Illinois Law and Statues known to her. Further
15
Petitioner believes Illinois Article 1 (Bill of Rights) last two sections, Section 23 and 24,
16
in this matter, guides her directly to the McHenry County Grand Jury in its current role
17
18 and its historical Common Law role. Fervently, Petitioner prays with all her heart for
19 her small voice, like a single bell ringing out “Liberty…!!!” to be heard!
20 SECTION 23. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

A frequent recurrence to the fundamental principles of
21 civil government is necessary to preserve the blessings of
liberty. These blessings cannot endure unless the people
22 recognize their corresponding individual obligations and
responsibilities.
24 SECTION 24. RIGHTS RETAINED

The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights
25 shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained
by the individual citizens of the State.
26
1
2 "Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the
3 inhabitants thereof." (Source: Liberty Bell)
5 3.4 Illinois Constitution: Article XIII, Section 4 abolishes Sovereign Immunity

6 Sovereign Immunity as defined:
7 SECTION 4. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ABOLISHED

Except as the General Assembly may provide by law,
8 sovereign immunity in this State is abolished.
9
10 4.0 JURISDICTION
11
Personal jurisdiction over the Petitioner is properly found in this court, since the
12
13 Petitioner seeks redress for crimes against her constitutionally protected rights and related
14 to voter fraud in McHenry County, Illinois where she resides.
15
5.0 PRESENTMENT OF FINDINGS
16
17 Petitioner will establish that voter fraud has brought McHenry County, Illinois
18 and the United States to an EMERGENCY and crisis point.
19 Petitioner believes she has sufficient evidence to prove compelling cause exists to
20 warrant the investigation of McHenry County, State of Illinois and Federal Officials for
21
voter fraud. Additionally, some of those investigated will be County, State and National
22
Party Leadership of the Democratic and Republican Parties. Petitioner does not know
23
how this investigation will end, and seeks permission to work with the Grand Jury to
24
25
26
investigate. Intended or not, the consequence of the current election processes deprive
1
2 “We The People” of fundamental constitutional rights.
3 Petitioner’s last place for redress is before the McHenry County Grand Jury. She
4 suffers intense distress over this election matter, preventing her from attending to her
5 normal duties as she feels compelled by God and Country to seek redress until she is
6
finally granted relief.
7
Petitioner asserts her right for private testimony before the McHenry County
8
Grand Jury is Critical. However should that not be possible, Petitioner will work with the
9
10 Grand Jury to present evidence as already stated throughout this Petition.
11
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
12
WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays for relief as follows:
13
A. That this Petitioner be permitted to testify before the McHenry County
14
Grand Jury, as is duly and legally in session, to present justification for this
15
EMERGENCY Petition for appearance before the McHenry Grand Jury.
16
B. That the Grand Jury allow Petitioner to testify alone without the
17
“Prosecutor” or Judge present, to extensive evidence of pervasive voter fraud in McHenry
18
County and thus in the State of Illinois.
19
C. That upon being found as a credible witness, the Grand Jury, by way of
20
remedy and through a vote of 9, members of this Grand Jury agree to investigate this
21
voter fraud.
22
E. That upon being found credible, and duly empowered by Illinois law, the
23
24 Grand Jury through a vote of 9, ask the Judge to allow Petitioner to be appointed
25 “Investigator” as pertains to this matter.
26
1 F. Petitioner has no malice or ill-intent of any type towards Chief Judge
2 Sullivan or the “Prosecutor.” Regardless, she believes she is legally justified, and seeks
3 opportunities to testify to the Grand Jury outside of their presence in pursuit of her
4 redress.
5 G. In the first stage of testimony, Petitioner seeks to present to the McHenry
6 County Grand Jury historical information on Grand Juries, from the Federal, State and
7 County perspective such that the seated grand jury will have a broader understanding of
8 Grand Juries. Petitioner has prepared a booklet for this purpose she would like to provide
9
to the Grand Jury. Petitioner is prepared to distribute this packet to the Grand Jury on
10
December 3rd, 2009, or ASAP.
11
H. In this petition, Petitioner endeavors, with all her heart and to the best of her
12
ability, to present a complicated topic in an orderly and succinct approach. Accordingly,
13
Petitioner decided not to present specific allegations related to the voter fraud discussed
14
in this petition, but is fully prepared to do so with a day’s notice, allowing for her to
15
gather printed copies of the evidence to distribute to the Grand Jury.
16
I. Petitioner prays the Court and the Grand Jury will understand she has no
17
legal training but is eager and completely dedicated to overcome any shortcomings this
18
petition may have.
19
J. That the Grand Jury award such other relief in law and equity as they deem
20
proper and as held forth in the US and Illinois Constitutions.
21
22
23
24
25
26
1 VERIFICATION OF CLAIMS
2
The Statements and Claims made herein are the statements and claims of the petitioner’s
3 and those statements incorporated herein of others as part of the public record concerning these
matter. On oath and subject to the laws of perjury, the undersigned petitioner affirm and assert
4 that the preceding allegations and factual statements, including those factual statements alleged
on information and belief are true to the best of her knowledge, and that she has asserted these
5 claims, being legally competent to testify to these matters, and having acted voluntarily without
promise of payment or by threat; in good faith and based upon her understanding of the United
6 States Constitution and the Illinois Constitution, and the duly enacted laws which spring there
under.
7
On my sacred honor and in witness before my Lord God.
8
10
________________________________
11
12 SHARON ANN MERONI (AKA CHALICE JACKSON)

AND FOUNDER OF PATRIOT’S HEART MEDIA NETWORK,
13 IT’S DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE,
Signed from this location
14 728 NW Hwy Fox River Grove, IL 60021
Phone 847-304 - 8800 on this 2nd day of December, 2009
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Chalice - Patriot's Heart Network - Emergency: Petition - For Redress Before The Mchenry County Grand Jury

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Chalice - Patriot's Heart Network - Emergency: Petition - For Redress Before The Mchenry County Grand Jury

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

1 TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT(Second Appellate District)

2 FOR MCHENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS

10 MCHENRY COUNTY GRAND JURY )

16 I, the undersigned Petitioner, appearing pro se as an individual, as a member of the Press

22 Second Judicial Circuit (Second Appellate District) McHenry County, IL seeking

21 Amendment Rights, (US Constitution) and according to similar Illinois Constitution

2 cast her ballots in the Primary and General Election, 2008.

25 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND STANDING

2 EMERGENCY. Therefore Petitioner seeks EMERGENCY handling of this Petition.

21 2.2 Petitioner is personally traumatized by the lack of Redress. The Petitioner

26 redressed. Petitioner’s quality of life has been seriously compromised because of

Page 4 – PETITION – TO APPEAR BEFORE THE MCHENRY COUNTY GRAND JURY

2 there is no relief until this matter is redressed!

12 1st Amendment US Constitution:

16 2.4 The Illinois Constitution, Article 1: Bill of Rights, Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 12, 23

2 SECTION 4. FREEDOM OF SPEECH

9 SECTION 6. SEARCHES, SEIZURES, PRIVACY AND INTERCEPTIONS

4 SECTION 12. RIGHT TO REMEDY AND JUSTICE

14 where election fraud is first addressed:

Page 7 – PETITION – TO APPEAR BEFORE THE MCHENRY COUNTY GRAND JURY

13 1. Information submitted by the Prosecutor.

14 2. Information that may come to its knowledge in the course of its

21 3.0 APPEARANCE BEFORE A GRAND JURY AS A REMEDY

11 functioning the courts do not preside." Id.

25 [504 U.S. 36, 48].

4 and as a protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental

2 GRAND JURY by Roger Roots, J.D.

11 "An indictment is a written accusation of an offence preferred to, and presented,

2 according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent,

25 of unrestrained investigation and of independent declaration of findings. The

2 outlet for any document other than a prosecutor-signed indictment. In so doing,

3 the drafters at least tacitly, if not affirmatively, opted to ignore explicit

4 constitutional language. Creighton Law Review, op. cit.

10 There is no mention of "presentments" in Rule 7. But they are mentioned in Note

11 4 of the Advisory Committee Notes on the Rules:

12 4. Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation,

19 Lester B. Orfield, a member of the Advisory Committee on Rules of Criminal

4 abolished. A particularly egregious example:

11 prosecutorial intervention is an invitation to anyone interested in trying to

12 persuade a majority of the grand jury, by hook or by crook, to conduct

19 unimpeded. To further authorize this unconstitutional impediment to the exercise of

25 person in place of the juror excused."

2 entirely, merely for exercising its discretion.

4 presentments illegal or unconstitutional – they merely attempted to render them obsolete.

12 minds of the modernists in 1946 is now both appropriate and relevant.

4 SECTION 3. OATH OR AFFIRMATION OF OFFICE

20 SECTION 23. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

24 SECTION 24. RIGHTS RETAINED

2 "Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the

3 inhabitants thereof." (Source: Liberty Bell)

5 3.4 Illinois Constitution: Article XIII, Section 4 abolishes Sovereign Immunity

7 SECTION 4. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ABOLISHED

14 to voter fraud in McHenry County, Illinois where she resides.

18 and the United States to an EMERGENCY and crisis point.

2 “We The People” of fundamental constitutional rights.

10 Grand Jury to present evidence as already stated throughout this Petition.

25 “Investigator” as pertains to this matter.

12 SHARON ANN MERONI (AKA CHALICE JACKSON)

S-ar putea să vă placă și