hline.gif (2424 bytes)

Justice Gone Wild

hline.gif (2424 bytes)

For a little background.  I won a jury trial 12 - 0 as a pro-se litigant (exhibits here) when I was allowed to present the facts that the people bringing charges against me did not know.  I easily demonstrated extreme prejudice, previous perjury and even first hand perjury by the complaining witnesses and simply because they had to lie to support the lies of someone else.

My entire defense to the charges was to show they were simply being malicious and there was no reason for the courts to be involved in the first place.   As I stated in the Jury trial on page 91: "They don't have to press charges on me. They could listen to what I have to say."  I then proceeded to demonstrate they could have just let me talk and that I was nothing like the courts have made me out to be.

Then in a trial for Malicious Prosecution, I could not reuse any of my exhibits, I couldn't even get the real "Probable Cause" entered as evidence.   I planned to show, the "Probable Cause" was a total farce and that the judge involved knew the woman had committed perjury before and all the judge was doing was helping a friend that he was one a first name basis with abuse the process again.

Without being able to use anything of value from the jury trial that I won 12 - 0 it was like the Judge Telleen said "to hell with that jury."

When it went to the Appellate Court, the Judges involved with the "Malicious Prosecution" lawsuit simply took a Transcript, one that had already been manipulated by Diane Reason, story below and then continued to manipulate a manipulated transcript even further.

But, there is something that can be said about what the Appellate Court judges did when they did that.  They pointed out, that the "Manipulated Transcript" did not fairly represent the trial at all or I could not have won it 12 - 0!  Once again, see Diane Reason below.

To make a long story short, there is another issue, behind all my web sites, and that is why would a transcript, prepared by a friend of someone that lied on the witness stand be manipulated?  No, the real question is, why wouldn't it be "Manipulated" for a friend or friends?  Diane Reason knew she would get away with it and even now, the Chief Judge at the Rock Island County Courthouse will not lift a finger to investigate it.

Why is it, that people that work in a Courthouse, act like there are not prejudiced, when they are told lies by a fellow worker?  The facts prove they are and will conceal evidence.  Here, put it this way, I could not have won a jury trial without knowing the tricks the prosecution would try to play on me, yet the the "Report of Proceedings" from the first jury trial does not show all the tricks they used on me.

How far will these people, in the Courthouse go, after being prejudiced by the lies of someone they work with at the Courthouse?  About as far as they can because they know nothing will be done about it.

Well, you might not believe it now, but after looking at this site, you will see that they will freely destroy parts of a "Report of Proceedings", Transcripts, Laws and even the Constitution itself, just to help maintain the outright lies, of someone that works at the Courthouse.  Sadly enough, all the woman at the courthouse was doing was repeating a horrendous lie that someone told her daughter and then even added to that lie.

If you want to see, the "real" reason, behind the altered "Report of Proceedings" the "Manipulated Transcript" and the Trashed "Due Process" that eventually led to a Desecrated Sixth Amendment, that has been published and is now being held against other Pro Se litigants, visit  OverProtectiveMother.com.


One case in point, that the courthouse favors the lies of people that work at the courthouse is, the fact no charges for "Perjury" or "Obstruction of Justice" have ever been filed against someone that worked and the courthouse and lies to Police Officers!

Even if they don't want to bring charges against Beverly, for all the lies she told to the Police Officers, why do they let the charges, that she got away with, when she lied to the Police Officers, stand?

A second case in point is, a Tainted "Report of Proceedings" prepared by two friends, of the woman that worked at the courthouse and had been prejudiced by her lies.  This is covered under Richard Coppula or Judge Brinn below.

A third case in point is, the "Manipulated Transcript" prepared by a so called "Official Court Reporter" that also knew this woman and heard her lies.  The specifics behind her "Manipulated Transcript" will be listed under Diane Reason below.


How can the Appellate Court, render a fair verdict, when the evidence they see, is not the same as what the jury saw, because what they see has been altered, or parts completely removed, by someone that was prejudiced, by outright lies of someone that worked at the Courthouse with them?

As for the name, I have for the people like Diane Reason, Richard Coppula and Judge Brinn, that alter evidence, to help a friend of theirs, get away with her outright lies, well, I would have to call them "Misguided Vigilantes."

I hope that, something can be done about these "Misguided Vigilantes" because a verdict has been published, where the judges didn't care about all the lies or what started them, they simply fabricated a way, using the completely impeached witnesses, to throw out the proper definition of "Probable Cause" so I could not reuse the same evidence, that I used to win a jury trial 12-0, as a pro se litigant to prove "Malicious Prosecution!"

Now, all those lies have led to a "Published Verdict" where instead of applying the laws for "Probable Cause" and "Malice" they simply repeated the impeached Testimony and declared that as a reason that the "real" definition of Probable Cause, should not be applied and I should not be allowed to reuse any of the evidence I used, to fully impeach those witnesses and win a jury trial 12-0 as a pro se litigant.


While some of the items, on this site, might not be believable, some of the facts are easily proven.

One of the easily proven "Justice Gone Wild" facts is, Judge Michael Brinn let a woman bring perjured testimony into court again.  This is proven by the fact, that a Police Report, sent to the State's Attorneys Office was used, in a second jury trial, for impeachment purposes.

Yes, Beverly lied to the Police and the State knew it.  The State never considered the extent of Beverly's lies and how easy it would be for me to prove she was just a "String of Lies" that started by a lie in 1973.  That is why they lost the second jury trial.  It also shows Malice, via a "Total Lack of Good Faith" by the prosecution.

Another obvious fact to prove "Justice Gone Wild" is what the Appellate court did, for Beverly in a "Malicious Prosecution" lawsuit.  In their ORDER, or should I say their un-judgement, they took a "Tainted Transcript" from a jury trial and ignored everything dealing with Due Process.

The Appellate Court ignored the Opening Remarks as to why Beverly lies, Cross Examination proving she lies, Testimony of the falsely accused, all the Exhibits used for Impeachment purposes.  They also ignored the Closing Remarks, that showed all her actions were based on a false belief and that she was just malicious.  Then, only using only the completely impeached testimony, from a "Tainted Transcript", they attempted to make it look like the second jury was the one that made a mistake instead of the first jury that I had about 10 years earlier!

After the Appellate court read a "Tainted Transcript" and pulled out the testimony of the impeached witnesses, they did away with the proper definition of "Probable Cause" and replaced it with a bogus "History."  When they did that, they concealed the fact that Judge Brinn was completely aware of the evidence that completely impeached a woman he worked with.  Judge Brinn was simply gambling that the falsely accused, being forced to go Pro Se again, because the accuser worked at the courthouse, would not know the proper procedure to completely impeach the States Witnesses and he lost his gamble!

If the unfair tactic, used by the Appellate Court above, when they used a "Tainted Transcript" to conceal a bogus "Probable Cause" and other things Judge Brinn did, that proved he knew, his friend, Beverly Rusk was lying through her teeth again, does not prove a "Total Lack of Good Faith" i.e. "Malice", I don't know what will.

When the Appellate court threw out the definition of "Probable Cause" and simply replaced it with repeating the impeached testimony, from a "Tainted Transcript" and then spicing it up with words that were never used, they Trashed the Sixth Amendment.

This case went back to the Appellate Court for "Errors on the Face of the Record" that are still there.  The definition of "Probable Cause" can not be sidestepped, because it denies the falsely accused the chance to show that it was tainted and that evidence of Malice can not be objected to, because it hides vital facts.  Instead of the Appellate court looking at the arguments, they heard, in an Oral Argument from Duane Thompson , that they could have their verdict published and then decided that they would impose Sanctions, against the falsely accused!  When they did that, that group of judges Desecrated the Sixth Amendment.


Jeff Terronez

Jeff Terronez, is the State's Attorney for Rock Island County.  On September 13, 2005 I spoke to him and it became apparent to me, that if he does nothing about how an Overprotective Mother manipulated various people at the courthouse with her outright lies, then he might as well be advertising, that he promotes perjury, Obstruction of Justice, Fraudulent Deception and the Falsifying of Transcripts prepared by people she had prejudiced.  Note:  Jeff Terronez, can still have the verdict for an earlier jury trial thrown out.  It is called Protectoral Discretion and he should use it to prevent a further injustice by the lies of an Over Protective Mother.

While this site is still under construction, you can find out how the "String of Lies" were started at OverProtectiveMother.com


Richard Coppula and Judge Brinn, both helped to taint a Report of Proceedings, to make me look like the "Bad Guy."  They knew I was going to argue "Statue held Invalid" where a phone call was all that was held against me, to make me look "guilty."  In the "Report of Proceedings" they had to make it look like I "Willfully Remained" and made it impossible to argue, at the Appellate Court the "real" reason I lost that jury trial.

They knew I also wanted to point out the fact that Richard Coppula had called the States witnesses "reasonable" in his closing remarks, and that fact alone was grounds for a miss-trial!  They tried to act like that didn't happen and would not let me get that fact into the "Report of Proceedings."

Well, in the second jury trial, the fact that Beverly or Ed had never been reasonable for a split second, was used against them and served to point out the "Report of Proceedings," where Richard Coppula and Judge Brinn tried to make it look like they had been reasonable for a split second, was a joke.

I will say one good thing about Richard Coppula.  In the time after he had been disbarred from practicing law and to right before he was sentenced to 3 years in jail, he was a lot of help.

Richard was not really trying to be helpful, in a few phone calls we had, he was really bragging about the tricks he used to win my first jury trial.  I made sure to take the evidence Richard Coppula used against me in the first jury trial and turn it in my favor in the jury trial that I won 12-0.

Richard also informed me, as to why Judge Brinn did not throw out the verdict of the first jury trial.  He pointed out that it was all among friends that that Judge Brinn was on a first name basis with Beverly and would even call her "Bev."  That would also explain why Judge Brinn lied to me about getting a chance to correct the obvious errors in the "Report of Proceedings" that the now disbarred, Richard Coppula typed up!

Me, I wondered why Judge Brinn never asked me any questions after the first jury trial.  I know I left a lot unanswered, but I realize now, he had heard all he wanted to from Beverly and what he used against me, as a "probable cause" in the second jury trial proves he never once tried to get to the facts straight.

Judge Brinn merely helped his friend Beverly, prosecute me maliciously a second time.  Too bad for him, I remembered the tricks the state pulled against me the first time, to "win" that jury trial, and since I was prepared for them the second time, I won the second jury trial 12-0!


Diane Reason

Prepared a "Manipulated Transcript" from a jury trial.  One that was void of the fact her friend had committed perjury on the witness stand again.

Using the exhibits that completely impeached Beverly Rusk testimony, found at http://SlimeFest.com/Exhibits   they showed Beverly lied to John Kinser about an earlier lawsuit to have a second lawsuit brought against me.

The exhibits used in the second jury trial also show that Beverly Rusk lied to neighbors and police officers to bring the first set of charges against me.

Through the course of the second jury trial, it was shown that Beverly Rusk lied to her daughter to have her tell me not to call her again.

While the word "Overprotective" was never used in the second jury trial, once it was pointed out that Beverly Rusk was the one preventing me from answering her daughter's questions, this fact is further supported by the "Report of Proceeding" from the first jury trial, it showed that Beverly Rusk had also furnished false information about her daughter's breakdown.  It was Beverly Rusk herself that was responsible for Cheryl's breakdown and Beverly Rusk was furnishing false information when she tried to put the blame on me.

In a later trial for Malicious Prosecution, the transcript of the 90-CM-9 trial can be used to show that Beverly was still lying on the witness stand.

There was absolutely no good faith with Beverly Rusk ever.  All she was was lie after lie after lie and that was proven by the second jury trial.

But the transcript prepared by Diane Reason does not represent the major lies that Beverly Rusk told to the prosecution and on the stand.

The manipulated transcript of Diane Reason can be found at http://BrokenSixthAmendment.com.  It looks like I was asking Beverly Rusk questions from out of the blue but that is not true.   All my questions were consistent with the trial and designed to blow the states case.  They were based on the opening remarks or her detailed description of the phone call.  Since those particular items, that my questions were based on, never made it into the transcript it makes Beverly look like a saint and incorrectly makes me look I was asking about things that were no part of the trial.

At the very least Diane Reason could have added a part to her transcript that says she missed those parts.  But for Diane Reason to prepare a transcript, knowing void of direct evidence of someone abusing the system only shows that friends that work at the courthouse will help other friends at the courthouse.

I realize that Diane Reason must have thought that she was helping Beverly Rusk get away with a white lie, but it was no white lie.  Beverly Rusk was a series of lies used for manipulating people.  The fact that Diane Reason's transcript does not show those lies makes it inconsistent with other things that Beverly has done.   The inconsistancies with Diane Reason's transcript also shows that friends will help friends abuse the system.

There was no crime in what Diane Reason did at the time, because she didn't know it would be used as evidence.  Then when it was used as evidence it proved it could not have properly represented the jury trial, just in the fact the jury trial was won 12 - 0.   Meaning the jury had heard the complaining witness perjure herself on the witness stand but that was no part of her "Manipulated Transcript!"

While the jury trial that I won 12 - 0 was still fresh in my mind, I wrote a letter to prosecuting attorney, Richard Coppula, while he was serving 3 years in jail, for "Theft by Deception."  He taught me the tricks of the prosecution to watch out for and I thanked him for it.  In this letter, I point out that Beverly lied on the witness stand again and if she hadn't, I would have just entered more information!

In other words, there are two items that prove the transcript was manipulated when evidence of Beverly's perjury was removed.  One, if Beverly had not lied on the witness stand I would have entered more evidence, showing who stated all the lies about me or I would not have won the jury trial 12 - 0!

Number two was the fact that Beverly Rusk's detailed description of the alleged phone call is missing.  That was Beverly Rusk biggest lie in the whole trial and yet that testimony never made it to the transript!

It is pretty easy for me to see that the transcript was manipulated by a friend of Beverly's or someone that didn't want to publish the fact they State knew they were using perjured testimony again!  It is also very easy for anyone outside the courthouse to believe that a friend inside the courthouse would alter a transcript for a friend.

There are a few peculiar items, that I do not remember, anywhere near the same way, the transcript says it happened.  And there is one item that is obviously missing and I'll refer to that as the missing 18 1/2 minutes, as in "Watergate."

If you are wondering why, I am complaining so much, about the "Manipulated Transcript" prepared by Diane Reason, it is because, it was the only thing held against me, in an appeal, for a decision, in a "Malicious Prosecution" lawsuit.

To make a long story short, there is no legal precedent, that gives judges the right to take completely impeached testimony, from a "Manipulated Transcript" and then use it to deny the falsely accused, the chance to show that the *real* "Probable Cause" itself contained evidence of Malice!

The *real* "Probable Cause" contained outright lies, misleading statements and a word that I proved was prejudicial in a jury trial!  In other words, if the proper definition of "Probable Cause" had been applied, I would have won the Malicious Prosecution lawsuit, using the same evidence I used to win the jury trial that it was based on!  For more information see BrokenSixthAmendment.com.

1.  The transcript was requested immediately after the jury trial was over.  I thought Diane would be more than happy to prepare it for me.  I even told her I would pay for it in advance.  She made me jump through hoops to get it.  It was like she didn't want to type it up and then, it took me almost two months to get a partial version of what really happened in the jury trial!

The reason, I was given, at the time, even after she was done with it, was, someone had to look at it.  I would still like to know who it was that apparently helped scrub the transcript clean, of very incriminating items, like the missing 18 1/2 minutes!   But it doesn't really matter who got to it, Diane Reason was the one that signed off on it, acting like nothing is missing!

2.  One of the statements made, in the opening remarks was, that Cheryl and I had one class together and it was "Only Band."  That was contradicted later by Beverly and if that part of the Opening Remarks, had made it to the transcript, it would have been a lot easier to prove that Beverly had lied to Casey Stengel, all because of her prejudice/malice that was started by a lie someone told her daughter in 1973!

After meeting with Vicki Bluedorn today, February 2, 2006, I realized there is a lot more, missing to the Opening remarks than just the above.  The complete area, where the Prosecuting Attorney leads into, what was suppose to have happened in the alleged phone call is also missing!

Vicki Bluedorn tries to make it sound like I imagined everything.  Vicki tries to make it sound like Beverly never completely described the alleged phone call and that the notes I took, during the trial were not true.  Vicki also tries to make it sound like, what I wrote down a few days after the trial, in a letter to Richard Coppula was just imaginary!  People have done things like that to me before, only to admit they were screwing with me, but I honestly think, Vicki is just to naive to see what happened.

It is people like Vicki, that don't even consider talking to others present at the trial, like the jury, that make it easy for court reporters to protect their friends with white washed transcripts!   Me, I'll have to call Vicki "Nurse Ratched", after the woman on One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest because she can't see that she has a bunch of Mislead Vigilantes in her Courthouse that believe the lies of an overprotective mother and and will gladly manipulate evidence to cover her lies!

Too bad Martha Stwart didn't work at the courthouse.  Not only would she have stayed out of jail, but she would have had a bunch of her friends doing everything they could to cover for her lies!

3.  This is refereed to as the missing 18 1/2 minutes.  For some reason, when Beverly Rusk described the alleged phone call, where it was supposed to have happened, what was said and who was in her trailer at the time, that never made it to the transcript.  The transcript starts off with her just answering questions about it.

Imagine, a "Telephone Harassment" lawsuit, where the complaining witness never tells the story of the alleged phone call?  It did not happen in this jury trial, yet the transcript makes it look that way.

Or was it in the transcript and edited out?  The fact that the page numbers were hand written tend to make me think it was in there then removed.  The reason this 18 1/2 minutes is important, is threefold.

Item 3 Sub 1.  When Beverly denied that she had said "Child 9 years old" that she had brought up, in the missing 18 1/2 minutes, it changed the whole course of the jury trial.  After Beverly's outright perjury, I no longer needed three exhibits I had ready to use and it kept the jury trial a one day instead of pushing it into two days.

Beverly's bold faced lie, prevented me from bringing out even more lies of hers, based on this "Child 9 years old" that happened to be Cheryl's Daughter, or Beverly's grand-daughter, and that "Cheryl's Daughter" had testified *for* me elsewhere!

Once Beverly told that bold faced lie on the witness stand , she had given me the trial, and I could breath a lot easier, knowing I would not have to use all my exhibits to impeach Beverly.   Yet the 18 1/2 minutes, where Beverly started her bold faced lie is completely missing from the transcript that Diane Reason prepared and it makes Beverly look like a saint!

In short, the jury did not see things the way Diane Reason's transcript was set up.  The jury was allowed to hear Beverly's perjury and the jury was allowed to hear other places that proved her daughter lied too.  Yet in the transcript, those were two of the places were scrubbed for some reason or by some (Diane) Reason.

Item 3 Sub 2.  The other item that makes the missing 18 1/2 minutes important is, it showed that the phone call was fabricated, because Beverly's description of the phone call was different than her husband's!  It supported my story of a fabricated phone call, in an attempt to support her other fabricated stories, that were all based on a lie someone told her daughter in 1973!  More on OverprotectiveMother.com.

Item 3 Sub 3.  Another other odd thing about the missing 18 1/2 minutes was, Beverly testified that she normally wakes up at 4 am to get ready for work, so what was she really complaining about?  She was just being malicious like she was in the first jury trial.

Item 3 Sub 4.  I clearly blame Cheryl's problems on an Overprotective Mother.   I was going to bring this out in court, but the Prosecuting Attorney did it for me!   He asked Beverly if I blamed her for her daughter's problems.  Beverly testified that "she didn't want to get into that."  That part is also missing from the transcript and if it hadn't happened the way it did, I would have brought that some of the cruel things that Beverly Rusk has done to her own daughter, in my testimony.

4.  Beverly and Cheryl, both loved to take things that happened once and make them sound like they happened more than once.  In the trial, Beverly clearly said "visits" before she had to change that to "visit" under cross examination.  The "visits" that she used is missing, and for a long time, I thought it was just because of a simple mistake, but, because of the number of other things missing, that incriminate Beverly, it makes me think, all the missing items were intentional and it was just a friend helping out a friend out the courthouse!

5.  Part of what Cheryl said during cross examination is missing.   She said it kind of quiet, but it was still clear to the jury since they were sitting closer to her than I was.  It was in the part where I was asking Cheryl about what type of guy she was looking for.  She ends up saying something to the effect "How do I know if you have been true."  What made that sentence odd, is it indicated that she had thought of it before.  Heck, she had even told me that in an earlier phone call and I never replied to her, but I left the answer with the jury in my testimony.

6.  The way the State introduced their last exhibit is just a small fragment of what really happened.  When Casey tried to introduce a letter I wrote Cheryl a long time ago, he tried to use a word with an "s" on it.  I told the Judge, it was just one time and held up one finger.  I also said the story is in that letter and I pointed to the letter Casey was introducing.

When the judge made Casey change to the singular version of his word, it pointed out that Cheryl had lied in her testimony when she tried to make it sound like things happened more than once!   Yet, that is another place, where a witness was impeached, that is missing, from the transcript!

7.  There are a few other areas that were only partially scrubbed or changed, like during Casey's questioning of me, but the closing remarks were so far, from what I remembered, that I chose to write what I remembered down on a separate sheet of paper.

For starters, in the closing remarks, I did not use the "Where is the proof of a phone call bit?"  The only time I said that was when I tried to have my phone bill entered as evidence.  The reason why I did not use that argument in the closing remarks is, I did not want Casey Stengel to have a chance to dispute that argument, so I stayed away from it myself.  I remember what Richard Coppula did to me on my first jury trial, where it was his reply to my closing remarks that made the most damage, so I tried my best to prevent Casey Stengel from having anything to say.

Casey Stengel tried to get rid of the court reporter for the closing remarks.   He made an unfair comment in the closing remarks, that I objected to, and that is not in the transcript.  Because of that fact, I entertain the idea that it was Casey Stengel himself, that helped Diane Reason get rid of incriminating evidence, because part of it incriminated him.  I learned from my first appeal, that when a prejudicial word is used in the closing remarks, just like Richard Coppula did to me in my first jury trial, it is grounds for a retrial!

On January 27, 2006, I happened to talk to Casey Stengel.  The conversation turned out great and I even shook his hand afterwards.  We were both in Vicki Bluedorn's office, in front of two other people that work at the courthouse and I'll state here, Casey has no problem admitting, that the reason why, I was the only pro se litigant to beat him, was because, "I knew all his tricks."

In short, if I'd known "all the tricks" the state used against me in my first jury trial, I would have won that one also and nobody should hold that verdict against me anymore.


Vicky Bluedorn

She is the Court Administrator of Rock Island County.  Her contribution to a "Tainted Transcript" is below.  Vicky knew, the transcript, prepared by Diane Reason was basically missing 18 1/2 minutes and a few other things.

After seeing what Vicki wrote in response to the above, I will explain it a bit more.  When I would mention the missing description of the phone call, Vicki would just hang, or freeze, like she was telling me, "That does not compute."   She certainly never wants to admit, that it was even possible, that someone that worked for her was abusing the system by manipulating evidence.  Too bad Diane could not hide all the lies of Beverly and that there is still proof that Beverly told lies to the neighbors and the Police Officers!

I asked for a copy of the transcript right after the jury trial, even before Diane Reason left the courtroom.  I checked with her a few times and Diane would tell me she had it done but was waiting for someone else.

I have an exhibit showing how many weeks passed while I was waiting for the transcript to be OK'd by a 3rd party.  Note:  It shows the original request was August 22 with the transcript being finished on October 10th.   Almost 2 months later and less than half of that time was waiting for Diane herself to finish it.

Obviously from the missing 18 1/2 minutes and a few other things in the transcript that showed up missing, the transcript had to go through a cleansing process, but by who, I might not ever know.

Vicki's first excuse for not doing anything about the "Tainted Transcript" and the missing 18 1/2 minutes was simply, "She wouldn't do anything like that."  Now Vicki's excuse for not doing anything has changed to "How many years ago was that?"

The question is, why wouldn't Diane Reason help change the transcript for Beverly since so many people in the courthouse, including her, knew her?   In other words, how could Diane Reason *not* change the transcript.  It is obvious Vicky did not care about the missing 18 1/2 minutes, and that it contained the most incriminating part of Beverly's testimony, but I wonder if that will change now that Diane Reason has retired.

What has made this missing 18 1/2 minutes so important is, that after looking closer at the ORDER of the Appellate Court is, they had to quote what Ed Rusk said about the fictitious phone call because what Beverly said about it was missing or removed!

For more information on the "Tainted Transcript", see Diane Reason.


Last Updated: 06/22/2008