Category Archives: Meet Brendan Kelly

Judge Brian A. Babka and Brendan Kelly, A Drunk Cop's Best Friend

On St. Patrick’s Day, 2012, Fairview Heights Police Sgt., James Krummrich, was arrested for driving under the influence. There was a hearing to rescind the administrative suspension of Krummrich’s driver’s license which was presided over by Judge Brian A. Babka.

I was pulled over by Fairview Heights Police on Feb. 17, 2009, because I was “weaving within my own lane”. Officer Joshua Alemond is the one who followed me while allegedly weaving, and upon my being stopped, I was beaten and Tased by Officer Aaron Nyman. There was never a request for a blood alcohol analysis or field sobriety test. I was not even charged or arrested for driving under the influence, but arrested regardless.

Here, Krummrich is involved in an accident, admits to drinking, and is observed by another officer to appear intoxicated. In my situation, the then Circuit Clerk, Brendan Kelly, fraudulently filed a civil case on my behalf which ended up in front of Babka. The reason for that case is because I swore to criminal complaints that I wished to present to a judge for the purpose of having arrest warrants issued for the crimes committed by Alemond and Nyman. Kelly, who had no right to even touch the complaints, filed a miscellaneous civil case on my behalf. When I appeared before Babka I raised this very issue and he ignored the irregularity.

One of the fatal flaws in Krummrich’s case is the failure of the Belleville Police Officer Anthony Branchini to request Krummrich to take a field sobriety test. Could this possibly shoddy police work on the part of Branchini? Very possible, but after how many arrests for DUI does a cop not request a field sobriety test? This is almost second nature. Although, I have to admit, this is not the first time Branchini has exhibited less than compentent ability in building a case. If you are intetested, then look up Ticket No. 0232640 issued by the Belleville Police Department on June 24, 2006 and read the Officer Narrative Report signed by Branchini. For a dumbed-down read of how the Illinois DUI laws work, read this piece from the Secretary of State, DUI Factbook 2012.

Babka, having possession of sworn criminal complaints by way of the fraudulently filed civil case by Brendan Kelly still played dumb and had me explain why I felt a private individual could bring charges directly to a court. I write about this in detail in another post, but essentially Babka first had me present the case law I was relying upon, then appear again to tell me my case law was good, albeit old, and fatally flawed because it referred to “magistrates”. I then wrote a lengthy brief regarding magistrates and how they are essentially the same as Associate Judges, courtesy the Illinois Constitution of 1970, but the duties still applied, which meant hearing complaints and issuing arrest warrants. Following Babka’s dismissal of the case I wrote a motion to reconsider because he refused to, or was incapable of, understanding the difference between issuing arrest warrants based upon complaints and commencing a prosecution.

Babka will not go against cops, so it seems, and will even disregard testimony of another cop in prosecuting a cop when there is sufficient cause to believe the officer to be intoxicated. In my opinion, Babka is a fraud, liar, and incompetent boob. He knew, or should have known, the difference between a magistrate and an associate judge, realize the case before him was a fraud, and act upon sworn criminal complaints. Instead, he obfuscated, dissembled, and ignored violations of law while committing malfeasance on his own.

With this story, Krummrich, a member of the same police department that alleged that weaving within one’s own lane was probable cause for initiating a traffic stop for driving under the influence, was involved in more serious circumstances for the same offense and given a pass by a drunk cops best friend, Brian A. Babka.

This story has been followed by the Belleville News Democrat. I’ll post links and text from those stories here, along with my commentary, since the News Democrat has blocked me from posting comments to their stories due to my “proselytizing”. That said, what follows is the articles from the BND.

Fairview Heights cop arrested for DUI; sergeant crashes car in Belleville
BY KEVIN BERSETT – News-Democrat -Tuesday, March 20, 2012 at 5:25 AM

A Fairview Heights police sergeant was arrested for DUI on Saturday in Belleville.
James Krummrich, 47, was booked after he was involved in a traffic accident about 5:45 p.m. in the 900 block of North Illinois, according to Belleville police. He allegedly appeared intoxicated, so he was taken into headquarters where he was released after posting bail.
Krummrich declined to comment for this story.

Krummrich, a 15-year police veteran, has been suspended with pay pending the outcome of an internal investigation, Fairview Heights Police Chief Nick Gailius said. If the investigation turns up any evidence he did something unbecoming of an officer, his case will be turned over to the city’s Board of Police and Fire Commissioners, the chief said.
“It’s important to note that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty in court,” Gailius said.

Gailius would not comment on whether Krummrich had ever been previously disciplined by the department. Krummrich was off-duty and not in his police vehicle when the crash occurred, Gailius said.

“We are very thankful that no one was injured in the accident,” Gailius said.
No additional information about Krummrich’s arrest or the crash was released Monday by Belleville police.

Krummrich has been a sergeant since 2008 and is currently paid $86,136 to be a patrol supervisor. He is also an instructor at the Southwestern Illinois Police Academy.
Academy Deputy Director William Sax said he was unaware of Krummrich’s arrest and whether the academy would take any action against him.

Copyright 2012 Belleville News-Democrat. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Contact reporter Kevin Bersett at or 239-2535.

Cops versus cops: Fairview officer’s DUI hearing leaves judge undecided
BY KEVIN BERSETT – News-Democrat -Tuesday, May 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Questions were raised Tuesday in St. Clair County Circuit Court over the Belleville Police Department’s handling of the St. Patrick’s Day DUI arrest of Fairview Heights Police Sgt. James Krummrich.

Associate Judge Brian Babka thought the factors surrounding the case were so unusual that he quoted a lyric from the ’60s rock band Buffalo Springfield during a hearing held to decide the fate of Krummrich’s driver’s license: “There’s something happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear.”

Babka said he couldn’t conceive how the arresting officer Anthony Branchini could indicate Krummrich was “fit to drive” on a police report detailing Krummrich’s arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol. Babka also mentioned an allegation by the defense that a Belleville police lieutenant, not identified during the hearing and not at the scene of the crash, was the one who made the decision to arrest Krummrich, not the officers at the scene. – ISN’T IT INTERESTING THAT BABKA HAS A SYNAPTIC CONUNDRUM OVER CONFLICTING TESTIMONY, YET A FRAUDULENTLY FILED CASE WITH SWORN CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS COMPLETELY ESCAPE HIM IN MY CASE.

“There’s a lot of irregularities here,” Babka said.

At the conclusion of the hearing, which lasted more than an hour, Babka said he may need up to a week before deciding whether to rescind Krummrich’s driver’s license suspension. The suspension of Krummrich’s license for a minimum of 12 months was set to begin Wednesday.

Krummrich, 47, of Fairview Heights, has been on administrative leave with pay since his arrest. He is the subject of an internal affairs investigation, but the Fairview Heights Board of Police and Fire Commissioners has not scheduled a hearing yet on whether to take disciplinary action against him. – WHEN I TRIED TO FILE MY COMPLAINT AGAINST FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS POLICE JOSHUA ALEMOND AND AARON NYMAN, ACTING CHIEF GALLIUS HAD ME WRITE IT OUT ON A LEGAL PAD. HE DID NOT DIRECT ME TO THE FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS BOARD OF POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSIONERS. HE TOO, IS A FRAUD.

Defense attorney Gregory Skinner had called for Tuesday’s hearing. He is seeking to have the suspension rescinded on the grounds that the Belleville police report was defective and that Branchini did not have reasonable grounds to believe that Krummrich was driving under the influence. – I TOO DEMANDED A PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING TO CHALLENGE THE LEGALITY OF THE STOP WHERE I WAS ARRESTED AND BEATEN. THE FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS DID NOT APPEAR FOR THE HEARING, SAYING THEY WOULD NOT BE COOPERATING, AND MY CHARGES WERE DISMISSED.

Belleville police accused Krummrich of refusing to submit to sobriety tests after he was involved in a two-vehicle accident about 5:45 p.m. March 17 in the 900 block of North Illinois Street. No one was injured in the crash. A driver who fails to submit to sobriety tests automatically has their license suspended for a minimum of one year on the 46th day following their arrest.

At the hearing, Branchini testified that he arrested Krummrich because he smelled of alcohol, his eyes were glassy and he said he had a few drinks. Krummrich had already admitted to driving the truck involved in the accident, said Branchini, who has been a Belleville police officer since 2009. – THIS SEEMS LIKE MORE EVIDENCE THAN SOMEONE “WEAVING WITHIN THEIR OWN LANE”, YET KRUMMRICH IS ARGUING THERE WAS NOT PROBABLE CAUSE FOR HIS ARREST? PRICELESS, FOR A COP TO MAKE SUCH ASSERTINS, ESPECIALLY WHEN HIS GUYS ARE OUT DOING THE SAME TO OTHER PEOPLE.

Collinsville Police Sgt. Charles Mackin, who was a passenger in Krummrich’s 1995 GMC Sierra pickup, testified for the defense. Mackin said he was with Krummrich or Branchini during the entire time prior to Krummrich’s arrest and never heard him refuse to take a sobriety test. – I WOULD NOT PUT TOO MUCH STOCK IN TESTIMONY FROM ANOTHER COP, ESPECIALLY A COLLINSVILLE COP.

Mackin also testified that based on his 22 years of police experience he would not have arrested Krummrich for DUI. Was Krummrich under the influence of alcohol at the time, Skinner asked. – WHAT MEANT TO SAY, IS THAT HE WOULD NOT HAVE ARRESTED A “FELLOW OFFICER” WHO WAS DRUNK. THAT’S HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS.

“No, not at all,” Mackin testified.

Belleville police officer Dusty Kallal, who assisted Branchini, said he asked Krummrich to take a field sobriety test but he declined. Kallal admitted that he failed to mention this in his report.

But Assistant State’s Attorney Julie Elliot argued that Krummrich’s refusal to take a sobriety test was mentioned in Branchini’s report.

Branchini testified that Krummrich refused to take a field sobriety test at the scene and after his arrest he refused to take a breath test at the police station. Branchini said he had a video from his patrol car camera of Krummrich’s original refusal.


In response, Babka took off his glasses, put his hands on his head and asked Skinner whether he wanted to request sanctions against the prosecution for its failure to turn over the video as required. Elliot countered that Belleville police never gave her office that video, although they did submit videos from Kallal’s car and the booking area.
“I’m just as blind-sided as you are,” Elliot said to Babka.

Branchini and Kallal would not comment following the hearing. Belleville police spokesman Capt. Don Sax said he was unaware that the prosecutors did not receive all the videos.
“I wouldn’t know why not, without looking into it,” Sax said. “I had no idea they didn’t have everything.”

Belleville police have denied a public records request from the News-Democrat to view all the reports and the videos related to Krummrich’s arrest because the case is ongoing.
In closing arguments, Elliot argued that whether the state could prove Krummrich was under the influence of alcohol should be left to trial. All that the judge should consider when deciding whether to rescind Krummrich’s suspension was whether the officers had reasonable grounds to believe he was under the influence of alcohol.

Skinner countered that it appears the police investigation was not done in a “very competent” manner and that no field test was ever offered for Krummrich to deny.
Babka said the “gold standard” on whether the sobriety test was refused would have been the video from Branchini’s car, but the court didn’t have it. The judge hinted that he would have also liked to have heard Branchini explain why he put down Krummrich as fit to drive on his DUI report. The prosecution, however, never asked the officer that question.
“They’re some unusual features here,” Babka said. – THERE WERE UNSUAL FEATURES IN MY CASE TOO, MR. BABKA. WHY DIDN’T YOU QUESTION THOSE?

Copyright 2012 Belleville News-Democrat. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Contact reporter Kevin Bersett at or 239-2535. Follow him on Twitter at

Judge reinstates driver’s license for Fairview police sergeant charged with DUI
BY KEVIN BERSETT – News-Democrat -Friday, May 4, 2012 at 10:12 PM

A St. Clair County judge rescinded on Friday the driver’s license suspension of Fairview Heights Police Sgt. James Krummrich who temporarily lost his license following a St. Patrick’s Day DUI arrest.

Associate Judge Brian Babka sided with the testimony of a Collinsville police sergeant, who was a passenger in Krummrich’s pickup, and questioned the strength of the evidence offered by Belleville police, whose handling of the investigation was scrutinized Tuesday during a hearing over the license suspension.

“I find that the testimony of defendant’s witness, officer Charles Mackin, of the Collinsville Illinois Police Department, was entirely credible, and very probative,” Babka wrote in his order. “An officer with 22 years of experience, his testimony was unimpeached. He stated his opinion was that defendant was not under the influence at all, and that there was not enough evidence to charge the defendant.” – NEVER MIND A WRECKED VEHICLE, AN ADMISSION TO HAVING BEEN DRINKING, AND A NUMBER OF OTHER OFFICERS CITING KRUMMRICH’S APPEARANCE. HE HAD A NOTE FROM HIS MOMMY, SO I’LL LET HIM GO.

James Krummrich

Fairview Heights police sergeant James Krummrich, arrested for DUI on St. Patrick’s Day in Belleville. – Provided/BND

Krummrich, 47, was charged with DUI and improper merging into traffic in connection with a March 17 two-vehicle accident in the 900 block of North Illinois Street that did not result in any injuries. He lost his license under Illinois’ statutory summary suspension law, which strips DUI defendants of their driver’s license for a minimum of 12 months when they refuse to undergo chemical testing.

Defense attorney Gregory Skinner requested Tuesday’s hearing. He was seeking to have the suspension rescinded on the grounds that the Belleville police report was defective and that police did not have reasonable grounds to believe that Krummrich was driving under the influence of alcohol.

Skinner would not comment Friday because he had not yet read the order.
Belleville police testified that they had reasonable grounds to believe Krummrich was under the influence of alcohol because he admitted to having a few drinks, had glassy eyes, smelled of alcohol and refused a field sobriety test.

“We respectfully disagree with the judge’s decision, and we are reviewing it,” State’s Attorney Brendan Kelly said. – WELL, MY CONFIDENCE LEVEL JUST WENT THROUGH THE ROOF. BRENDAN KELLY, THE SAME GUY WHO AS CIRCUIT CLERK MISHANDLED MY COMPLAINTS AND PLACED THEM IN FRONT OF BABKA? GOOD LUCK.

In his order, Babka cited case law that stated officers must show probable cause that someone was driving under the influence, and not act on “mere suspicion” when making an arrest.

A driver involved in an accident and who smells of alcohol must show additional signs of intoxication before they can be arrested for DUI, the case law cited by Babka stated. These signs could include bloodshot eyes, slurred speech or erratic driving, none of which Krummrich displayed, the judge stated. In fact, arresting officer Anthony Branchini described Krummrich as cooperative, orderly and “fit to drive” in his report on the DUI.
Babka reiterated the unusual factors surrounding the case, which he had made note of during the hearing.

“There is a veritable ‘tsunami’ of unusual or irregular events that surround this cause, including the disclosure during the hearing of a video/audio recording of some of the events that was not previously produced to defendant despite a prior discovery request, no record of a field sobriety test being offered by an officer during an investigation of an alleged DUI in his report, a bizarre report by an alleged eyewitness to the accident involved which was found to be completely erroneous, (including the driver and passenger changing seats), mistakes in the investigative officer’s reports such as a (preliminary breath test) being offered, when admittedly, there was no such offer, and other events,” the order states.
Belleville police failed to provide prosecutors with a video from Branchini’s patrol car, which he testified would have shown Krummrich refusing to take a field sobriety test. Assisting officer Dusty Kallal testified Krummrich refused a field sobriety test and later a breath test after his arrest, but did not mention these in his reports. Krummrich’s denials to take the tests were mentioned in Branchini’s report, according to Kallal and Assistant State’s Attorney Julie Elliot.

Mackin testified he never witnessed Krummrich being offered a field sobriety test. He also alleged that a Belleville police lieutenant not on the scene made the decision to arrest Krummrich, not Branchini or Kallal, who testified to having a combined 11 years police experience.

Belleville Police spokesman Capt. Don Sax refused to comment for this story because the case is ongoing. Belleville police have refused to release police reports, 911 tapes and videos related to the case for the same reason.

Krummrich has been on administrative leave with pay since his arrest. No trial date has been set in his DUI case.

Copyright 2012 Belleville News-Democrat. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Contact reporter Kevin Bersett at or 239-2535. Follow him on Twitter at

Saturday, May. 05, 2012
Baffled by DUI ruling

The Belleville police’s handling of Fairview Heights Police Sgt. James Krummrich’s DUI is, in a word, a mess. It seems like the work of the Keystone cops.

Krummrich was ticketed for DUI on St. Patrick’s Day following a two-car accident.
Why did Belleville officer Anthony Branchini mark on the report that Krummrich was fit to drive after a DUI ticket? Why, if he had a dashboard video of Krummrich refusing to take a field sobriety test, wasn’t that turned over to prosecutors? And what’s this about a lieutenant not at the scene making decisions?

These and other discrepancies will make it difficult, maybe impossible, for the St. Clair County state’s attorney to successfully prosecute Krummrich for DUI. If Belleville Police Chief Bill Clay isn’t already investigating his officers’ handling of this case, he needs to get started.

That said, we are baffled by St. Clair County Associate Judge Brian Babka’s decision to let Krummrich keep his driver’s license. In Illinois accused DUI drivers who refuse chemical tests automatically lose their driving privileges for a year. But Babka ruled that there wasn’t sufficient reason for the police to ask him to take such a test in the first place.
Really? Krummrich was involved in an accident, he admitted he had been drinking and an on-duty police officer said Krummrich smelled of alcohol and his eyes were glassy. That seems like plenty of reason for the police to want to check to see whether he was over the legal limit.

Babka notes that Krummrich wasn’t swaying or slurring his speech, and that his policeman pal who was riding with him testified that Krummrich wasn’t driving impaired. A motorist doesn’t have to be falling down drunk to be impaired. The legal limit in Illinois is a relatively low .08.

As far as the pal’s testimony, he may be too close to the situation to be objective. What else would he say? That he let his friend drive even though he’d had one too many?
We expected Babka to back up the automatic suspension law. How disappointing that instead he found a loophole for Krummrich.

My Letter to the Editor of the Belleville News Democrat which ran on 5/15/12

Police held to a different standard

So, Fairview Heights Police Sgt. James Krummrich admitted to drinking before an accident, and another officer perceived his appearance to be consistent with intoxication. Thanks to a technicality (cop talk), Krummrich found refuge under the robe of St. Clair County Judge Brian Babka.
Did Babka apply the law? I find that hard to believe; especially when I’ve seen Babka directly ignore the law, require me to write a brief, and then refuse to hold a hearing on his ruling denying my motion.
Let’s say that Krummrich was driving his car home at 2 a.m. and an officer observed him “weaving within his own lane,” not speeding or even crossing the lines. According to actual police reports and an absurd assertion by the assistant state’s attorney, the police would have the necessary authority to suspect the driver of being intoxicated, initiate a stop, forgo any questioning or investigation, and then proceed to Tase, beat, and arrest the sober “perp.”
Eventually, the accused would have a case filed on his behalf by the Circuit Clerk, which would then end up in front of Babka, who would acknowledge the apparent “irregularity” with the case file, but proceed nevertheless. Babka may then, after being confronted with “settled law” (Including the Illinois Constitution), scratch his head over the definition of “magistrate,” and further refuse to do his judicial duty in hearing a sworn complaint.
Why didn’t Babka play dumb, like he did in Case 10-MR-212? Why do cops “lawyer up” when it suits them? A malfeasant by any other name. …
Mark McCoy

UPDATE – 7/26/12

State’s Attorney, Brendan Kelly, goes on the record with his decision to not prosecute Fairview Heights police sergeant, James Krummrich, for his alleged drunk-driving-related crash on St. Patrick’s Day, 2012. Kelly goes on the record with stating he investigates and prosecutes police against whom criminal allegations are made, which is an absolute lie, considering how he took complaints from me regarding Fairview Heights Police, Officer Alemond and Officer Nyman, and improperly filed them as a civil case before Judge Brian Babka, who then dismissed the case.

I have made a number of people aware of this, including the Belleville News Democrat, who refuse to print one word involving the ordeal.

This is the story at the Belleville News Democrat

krummrich crash report

Here is Brendan Kelly’s statement in regard to the Krummrich case, in response to a News-Democrat reporter’s questions:

Sgt Krummrich”™s cases are no longer pending. In the interest of the public trust, the problems in this case should be discussed. No one is above the law especially those who have sworn to uphold the law. That’s why my Office has charged nine law enforcement officials with criminal charges in the last nine months. My Office continues to review allegations of unlawful conduct by police officers and will prosecute police officers who have violated the law when the facts and evidence allow us to do so. At the scene, the decision to arrest someone is a police decision, not one made by prosecutors. The patrol officers allegedly had evidence that Sgt. Krummrich had caused an accident after pulling out of the parking lot of a tavern. They also allegedly had evidence that his eyes appeared glossy and that he stated “œ a few” when asked if he consumed any alcoholic beverages that day. I will not criticize the decision to arrest him.

The evidence was insufficient to convict beyond a reasonable doubt for several reasons:

” there was no evidence that Sgt. Krummrich was staggering, unsteady, stumbling or unable to stand in either the on scene video or booking video at the station.

” there was no evidence that Sgt. Krummrich had blood shot eyes or slurred speech.

” there was evidence Sgt. Krummrich admitted to having “œa few” drinks, but no evidence of him admitting to being intoxicated.

” there was no evidence from field sobriety tests because none were performed by Sgt. Krummrich.

” there was no evidence of blood alcohol content because Sgt. Krummrich did not perform a breathalizer test.

” there was no evidence of alcoholic beverage containers in Sgt. Krummrich”™s vehicle. Mistakes were made by the arresting officer that undercut his testimony including

(1) after he arrested Sgt. Krummrich for DUI, he marked in a report that Sgt. Krummrich was “œfit to drive,” and

(2) he testified that on scene, Sgt. Krummrich refused to do sobriety tests, but no such refusal was captured on the audio recordings of the stop.

There is zero evidence to believe the patrol officers purposely made mistakes or did anything unlawful. Mistakes were clearly made, but it is also clear these mistakes were neither malicious nor purposeful. Consequently, I have no credibility concerns about these Belleville officers. Officer Branchini logged a copy of his squad car recording into evidence. A prosecutor requested a copy of this recording listed in the evidence receipt. A separate officer tendered to that prosecutor a copy of the booking area video and a recording that turned out to be from Officer Kallal”™s squad car. Copies of these recordings were tendered to the defense. Nothing indicated this recording was anything but what was documented on the evidence receipt. This mistake came to light at the hearing and was rectified by getting a copy of Officer Branchini”™s recording that was then provided to the defense. However, neither of the recordings from the squad cars captured anything incriminating against Sgt. Krummrich. After the hearing, my Office ordered an 88 page transcript of the hearing to precisely review the testimony of all the witnesses. At the end of this review and in light of the court”™s very detailed, factual findings, it was clear that the right thing to do- the only thing to do- was to dismiss the DUI case. We can”™t make up evidence. I can”™t prosecute someone based on my personal feelings about a situation. I”™ve got to have evidence. The remaining traffic charge(improper merging into traffic) was disposed of only after the attorney of the victim involved in the accident made clear his client no longer wished to proceed in any case. The finding of guilty on this charge had nothing to do with the dismissal of the DUI case. With summary suspension hearings, judges can rule against the prosecution in two ways”¦first, a judge can find there was a procedural / technical violation such as the officer failed to read verbatim the warnings to motorist. Second, a judge can find there were no reasonable grounds or probable cause that the driver was intoxicated. If the Judge had ruled in favor of the defendant on a procedural technicality, and the evidence had been stronger, we may have moved forward with the criminal case. He did not do so. Instead, the judge made a legal conclusion based upon findings of fact from evidence presented at the hearing. The judge found that “œthere is no credible evidence that defendant was intoxicated.” It is not unusual to dismiss a case after the court makes such a finding. This is because once a judge has decided there is no probable cause the driver was intoxicated, it will be a practical and legal impossibility to prove intoxication at trial beyond a reasonable doubt. At our request, Belleville officers conducted some final additional investigations seeking proof Sgt. Krummrich purchased alcohol around the time of the crash. No evidence could be found. In addition, a witness to the accident initially claimed that the driver and front seat passenger of Sgt. Krummrich”™s vehicle had switched after the accident, and then returned to the scene after he confronted them. My Office requested the Belleville Police to investigate this very serious claim. When questioned by Belleville detectives, this witness said he was not 100% sure they switched. Also, the detectives checked unsuccessfully for any video recording devices that may have captured the accident or where Sgt. Krummrich”™s vehicle was driven after the accident. On scene, Sgt. Krummrich stated he was the driver at the time of the accident. The driver of the other vehicle involved in the accident repeatedly stated on scene that Charles Mackin was not the driver of Sgt. Krummrich”™s vehicle. After the investigation, there was insufficient evidence to support this claim that the occupants of Sgt. Krummrich”™s truck had switched seats. The credibility of these officers will be reviewed on a case by case basis as is the credibility of every witness in a case.

No one is above the law, but neither is anyone below the law. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt applies to a charged police officer as well as any civilian. The evidence is what the evidence is no matter who you are or who you know. This is true for the other officers and public officials being prosecuted by my Office right now. John Adams said, “œfacts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” The facts in this case are especially stubborn. Political perception and cynicism about the system made this a frustrating case to have to dismiss. But a prosecutor’s decisions have to be made on the law and the evidence. In the end that may be a prosecutor”™s most important duty regardless of the potential criticism. Mr. Romanik is free to discuss his cases, but prosecutors do not have that luxury. We cannot and will not comment on his cases because they are still pending. We will not compromise his right to a fair trial.

Belleville Police video of Fairview Heights Police Sgt. James Krummrich’s arrest on March 17 after a car crash. DUI charges were later dropped and Krummrich pleaded guilty to improper merging.

This is a letter I submitted via email to the Letters to the Editor ( on 7/26/12, regarding Kelly’s statement about prosecuting police who violate the law:

Allow me to quote State”™s Attorney, Brendan Kelly, from his statement to the BND regarding the Krummrich case:

“œMy Office continues to review allegations of unlawful conduct by police officers and will prosecute police officers who have violated the law when the facts and evidence allow us to do so.”

I have a question for Mr. Kelly; since when?

When Mr. Kelly was Circuit Clerk he personally took sworn criminal complaints from me where I allege violations of law by Fairview Heights Police officers Alemond and Nyman, under the guise of properly filing them for review by the then State”™s Attorney, Bob Haida. I have emails between Mr. Kelly and myself where this was discussed at length until I brought up the contradictions and hypocrisy in his statements regarding how the charges should be handled.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Remedy Case 10-MR-212 was filed by Mr. Kelly and set for hearing before Judge Babka, another dissembling, disingenuous lackey for the corrupt powers-that-be who acknowledged irregularities with the case and confirmed my supporting case law was good, but who still refused to hear the complaints.

Tell me something Mr. Kelly, what of the complaints and supporting evidence you have in your possession regarding Fairview Heights Police? Where is your law enforcement fervor with respect to those charges? Where is the BND reporting on all of this, especially when I have provided them with the same evidence?

To you all I say, liars, hypocrites, despots, frauds, thugs, thieves, and psychopaths. There”™s more at

UPDATE 8/8/12

Well, the BND edited my letter and left off the last paragraph.

The last paragraph which reads:

“There’s more at”

originally read:

“To you all I say, liars, hypocrites, despots, frauds, thugs, thieves,
and psychopaths. There?s more at”

So, they won’t let me call them liars, hypocrites, despots, frauds, thugs, thieves, and psychopaths….

Some newspaper.


There has been one reply to my post

where I was somehow allowed to reply after being previously banned. I’m posting a screenshot of my reply since I expect the BND to delete my post.

and of course, not too long afterward, I was censored. Here’s a screenshot of my post being removed:

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Electile Dysfunction – Don't "Pull a Boner" and Vote for These People

When it comes to selecting a Democratic candidate from this year’s political menu, nothing speaks more to flaccid competency than the St. Clair County Democratic Party. I find all government to be a manifestation of a societal mental disorder, but the boots-on-the-ground for this political profundity are those served up on ballots across America. The fifedom known as a Judicial Hellhole, St. Clair County, is home to some of the more renowned malfeasants I have come to know.

I find it hard to believe that I would be so unfortunate to have encountered all of these officials and received the kind of treatment I witnessed. It is safe to say that arrogance, incompetence, and fraud are the order of the day for politics in St. Clair County and dare I say, probably everywhere. The issue is so systemic that jokes are made of public incompetence and corruption as though it were expected. Yet, people continue to vote for people like this and then proceed to whine.

The range of actions witnessed by the foregoing individuals goes from malfeasance to criminal. Mr. Kelly went so far as to invoke his constitutional duty, in one of our email conversations, and then in an act of fraud, file a civil case on my behalf.

I make no secret about my feelings towards government. I hold myself, and mankind, to a higher standard. Ordinary people elect ordinary people to do extraordinary things that in some way touch all of our lives. Truth be told, they are just ordinary people and have no power to do anything unless we surrender our will, and subsequently our wealth, to them and the institution they serve. Public service has become self-interest and becoming beholden to oligarchs who control us through our purse strings and threat of reprisal from the all-powerful State.

My experiences with these people was not an anomaly, or a one-off. I did not happen to catch them on a bad day. These are people who, when held to a standard presumed to be applicable to all who supposedly take an oath that at some point references a constitution designed to preserve and protect individual rights, resort to violence, fraud, and arrogance in either avoiding that duty or turning that power against us. I urge voters to not select any of these individuals for office. I make my case below.

Brendan Kelly - State's Attorney

State’s Attorney, Brendan Kelly. The man who mishandled criminal complaints as circuit clerk and filed a civil case on my behalf in an effort to derail my pursuit of criminal charges against police. I’ve had a number of actual, and attempted, conversations with Mr. Kelly all of which I have thoroughly documented. I believe if Mr. Kelly acted the way he did as Circuit Clerk then how can he be trusted with the power of the State’s Attorney? If Mr. Kelly acted in his official capacity and took sworn criminal complaints under the pretense of properly filing them, and then file a civil case on someone’s behalf where no filing fee is paid, how does that translate to being entrusted with executing the duties of the State’s Attorney where integrity should be primary consideration since we are talking about prosecuting individuals for violations of law which could result in their being imprisoned or executed? Is this the type of character we want in these matters? I think not. There are also other allegations brought to me by other concerned individuals concerning Mr. Kelly’s actions in office, but to be fair, until I have examined the allegations and evidence I can make no such mention here.

Zina Cruse - Associate Judge

Photo courtesy Zina Cruse for Judge

Judge, Zina Cruse. The woman who jailed me for contempt when I refused to enter a plea to a charge that was dismissed 3 years prior. I have posted about Ms. Cruse’s deficiencies a number of times. When confronted with a paper from her own court demanding an appearance for a specific issue, and then to adjudicate on another entirely different and moot issue is not the makings of a reasonable judge. Going further, when presented with the information, she becomes emotional and aggressive, calling the bailiffs to take me into custody for disagreeing with her and threatening to have me jailed over an entire weekend for contempt. Ms. Cruse seems to have some emotional or mental deficiencies that render her incapable of reason and impartiality.

Kahala Dixon - Circuit Clerk

Acting Circuit Clerk, Kahala Dixon. The woman who, then serving as Assistant State’s Attorney, argued that jurisdiction was related only to where an offense occurred (the situs), and that the State’s failure to file a verified complaint was not a jurisdictional matter. She also attempted to proceed to trial without a witness, and when the defendant moved to dismiss, she felt entitled to another court date because it is common for the State to not have their witnesses ready on the trial date. Ms. Dixon did not understand that there is subject matter jurisdiction, and in personam jurisdiction. She could only focus on “Did it happen in St. Clair County?” as her justification, and not on the fact that for the State to have in personam jurisdiction, there must be a properly filed complaint, and when the accused demands the filing of a verified complaint, under the law, she has a mental vapor-lock and requests a new trial date where she can really be prepared this time. Better she serve in the Circuit Clerk’s office where she can’t hurt anyone directly.

Judge Robert Lechien

Photo courtesy the Madison Record

Judge Robert Lechien. The judge who was previously assigned to my civil case against Fairview Heights Police. I filed the suit pro se, and in the usual course of business the opposing counsel filed motions for particular relief in a matter. Before I go on, some will say my opinion of Lechien results from sour grapes because I did not receive the ruling I desired and such is the way of law, and I’m just a poor loser. That may be said, even though I believe I thoroughly rebutted the opposing side based on the law, but the sticking point was when Judge Lechien called the letter of the law “punctilious”. What he was saying is, I am asking the court to apply the technical and specific wording of the law to the issue at hand, and that is presumably unreasonable. When I held him to the actual letter of the law and it’s application in other cases, he resorts to saying, “You’re just being picky.” If that is the case, then the Constitution, statutes, his oath…. are “punctilious”, and therefore of no power to bind him to any standard other than we he creates.

Judge Vincent Lopinot

Photo courtesy the Madison Record

Judge Vincent Lopinot. I originally had no issue with Judge Lopinot, as my initial exposure to him was as my instructor in a torts class I took at a local college. I may be judging Mr. Lopinot a little too harshly, but I took exception to the way he callously dismissed me when I attempted to approach him regarding criminal complaints against police officers, a duty bound to him by way of his position as a judge. He told me he did not have to hear such complaints and stomped out of the courtroom, after what I have to admit was a respectful ruling on a case he had just finished presiding over when the above, Khala Dixon, was acting as Assistant State’s Attorney. I also took exception to the way he handled a seat-belt ticket for my niece when she attempted to present a motion I had written to the court where Lopinot was presiding. He treated her with the same callousness and contempt he treated me. You could be my best friend, but when you have a duty to act then you act. You do not turn your back and walk away. On this point, I find it impossible to recommend Judge Lopinot for election. He may have acted out of ignorance, but as the adage goes, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

The elusive Brian Alben Babka

Judge Brian A. Babka. This judge is the consummate schmoozer and issue-dodger. Babka is the personification of the bastard-lawsuit filed on my behalf by Brendan Kelly when he was Circuit Clerk. I had 2 hearings before Babka regarding the issue, and he is aware that the case was not filed by me, but by Mr. Kelly. He continued to engage the fraud and hear my arguments regarding bringing criminal charges against Fairview Heights Police officers, Joshua Alemond and Aaron Nyman. Judge Babka actually had in his possession the criminal complaints, as well as my motions for presenting them to the court. Upon reviewing the supporting case law I provided where a private individual can present sworn complaints to a “magistrate” for hearing and upon finding probable cause issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused to be later held for possible prosecution, Babka managed to dodge the issue by claiming he did not know the difference between a magistrate and an associate judge. I went on to file a meticulous brief in support of my motion which Babka summarily dismissed.

I do not have a picture of Babka, but aside from my site information, here are some other links to his professional life.

Tagged , , , ,

Meet Brendan Kelly

My dealings with Mr. Kelly began when he was serving as the St. Clair County, Illinois, Circuit Clerk. I dealt with his office trying to file criminal complaints, under the direction of Judge Randall Kelly, against Fairview Heights Police Officers. The clerks working in his office were reluctant to accept my filings in the matter, which turned out to be the correct action. However, during my mistaken insistence Mr. Kelly met with me personally and took possession of my sworn criminal complaints. Mr. Kelly had no constitutional authority to act in such a manner. Some may say that he was being accommodating in assisting me getting my complaints filed, but as Mr. Kelly is an attorney he should have known, as his clerks did, that his office was not the proper venue for addressing such complaints. I believe Mr. Kelly misled and deceived me by taking my complaints under the pretense he had any authority to have them reviewed as sworn criminal complaints. There are a number of internet sites referencing Mr. Kelly, so do not think my issues with him are biased, but rather based on experience. Here are other sources of information about Mr. Kelly.

Now that Mr. Kelly is State’s Attorney, I would expect him to take action on the information he is in possession of, that being the dashboard video and evidence from my criminal charges, which show the Fairview Heights Police lied and fabricated evidence to support their actions in beating me. I allege the police, Joshua Alemond and Aaron Nyman, committed acts giving rise to official misconduct. Despite all my communications with Mr. Kelly he fails or refuses to address the matter, yet he claims to be the chief law enforcement officer of St. Clair County. Mr. Kelly, the law is not selective. Police are not exempt from prosecution for criminal acts, or are they? When will you quit dispensing platitudes about justice and address my complaints. I am not going away on this matter. I prefer to remain civil, but I will escalate the tone of my discontent the longer the issue goes unanswered.

Google search for “Brendan Kelly St. Clair County”

Selected returns for the above search:

Streamwood cop charged in motorist's beating. Hey, St. Clair County, get a clue!

Apparently, the State’s Attorney in Cook County has more principles than either Bob Haida or Brendan Kelly in St. Clair County. I have been pursuing criminal charges against Fairview Heights Police originating with an unlawful traffic stop on Feb. 17, 2009. My story is here.

I will be contacting the Cook County Assistant State’s Attorney, Alexander Vroustouris, for some background on how charges were brought against the officer, James Mandarino.

Ronald  Bell, 28, on March 28 at St. Alexis Hospital Hoffman Estates after prosecutors say he was beaten by Streamwood Police Officer James Mandarino.  (Photo courtesy of Stacey Bell, victim’s brother) MORE PHOTOS

As Ronald Bell crouched on his hands and knees on his driveway, the Streamwood police officer started whaling away with his metal baton, striking Bell on his back.

Bell tried to block the blows with his right arm, but Officer James Mandarino then hit him on the head and arm — 15 times in all — until Bell collapsed to the pavement, clasping his head in his hands in a desperate attempt to shield himself from further abuse.

Bell was charged with resisting a police officer and reckless driving, both misdemeanors, and was issued a handful of traffic tickets, including driving under the influence.

But less than a day later, the attention of law enforcement shifted to Mandarino. A digital camera mounted on his squad car recorded every second of what Cook County prosecutors said was an unprovoked beating. The early-morning assault played out amid the headlights of the police cruiser as its windshield wipers swept back and forth in the rain. (See video HERE)

What I find interesting is that there are comments posted by police officers on this site where they appear to support the beating dispensed by this thug. The police mindset is disturbing.

Excerpt from

04-15-2010, 08:18 PM
Watch the full video, and you’ll definitely still see nothing wrong with this. 

I know this officer. Mandarino was one of my FTO’s, and I feel fortunate to have had the experience of working with him during my time on the department. I can’t comment on this incident; I wasn’t there. I CAN state, he’s one of the smartest and most trusted officers around. He’s respected and deserves that respect. Without a doubt, the news outlets are making their headlines by showing one minute of a five minute video (you can see the whole thing on youtube), crying foul for the offender, but in the process, negligently tarnishing the name and reputation of a good officer. It’s tragic.

My pursuit of criminal charges against Fairview Heights Police for beating me.

Since February, 2009 I have been involved in battling the State of Illinois in attempting to bring criminal charges against Fairview Heights Police officers, Joshua Alemond and Aaron Nyman, for criminal acts resulting from an unlawful traffic stop. On that day I was on my way home from work when I was pulled over for no reason by Joshua Alemond, a Fairview Heights Police Officer. I was ordered out of my truck at gunpoint and subsequently beaten and Tasered by Alemond and with the assistance of Aaron Nyman, another acting Fairview Heights Police Officer. I was charged with 5 offenses, all of which were dismissed, and have since been pursuing criminal charges against Alemond and Nyman as well as filing a civil case. With the assistance of Brendan Kelly, the then Circuit Clerk, and Bob Haida, the then State’s Attorney, officials still refuse to take any action despite my presenting sworn criminal complaints. Circuit Clerk, Brendan Kelly, took possession of my complaints and mis-filed them. I also sent copies to the State’s Attorney and Chief Judge, all of whom refuse to respond or take action. Bob Haida and Brendan Kelly were in possession of the dashboard video which contradicts the complaint filed by the police.

Apparently, it is possible for police to be prosecuted as evidenced in the story here. Brendan Kelly and Bob Haida could learn something from Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney Alexander Vroustouris.

I have been trying to get the State’s Attorney to take notice of the criminal actions of the police and press charges. That story is here.

The charges stemming from this event include:

A bench warrant for failure to appear for a previously dismissed driving without a license charge in 2006. The charge had already been dismissed by Collinsville in 2006 and then improperly filed in St. Clair County outside of the permissible time for filing charges of which I was never lawfully notified.

Improper Lane Usage which allegedly gave rise to reasonable suspicion that I was “intoxicated”. The Joshua Alemond claimed, per his report, that I was “weaving within my own lane”. Watching the dashboard video from Alemond’s patrol car it is clear that I operated my vehicle in a safe manner with no weaving.

Fleeing/Eluding a Peace Officer which stems from my failing to immediately stop when Alemond turned on his emergency lights. The dashboard video and Alemond’s own report states that I slowed down, activated my hazard lights and high beams. I then continued driving safely for about a mile to a lighted side street out of concern for my safety for choosing to not stop on the narrow shoulder of a dark highway at 2am.

Resisting a Peace Officer which stems from my refusing to place my hands behind my back when ordered to do so by Joshua Alemond when the command was being given to me while I was being beaten and Tasered. Both Alemond and Nyman, each weighing over 200 lbs. were on top of me kicking, punching, and Tasering. The command to place my hands behind my back was not given until after they began beating and Tasering me, thereby making it impossible to comply.

No Drivers License which stems from Alemond and Nyman performing an illegal and unconstitutional search of my personal belongings that were inside my truck while I was handcuffed, injured and bleeding in the back of the police cruiser. I was never demanded to produce a drivers license, but instead, because they could not find one they decided to charge me with not having one.

No Insurance which stems from the same circumstances as the drivers license charge.

In essence there was NO probable cause and NO lawful warrant. For reasons yet undetermined, Joshua Alemond decided to initiate a traffic stop and then fabricate charges.

Documents related to the charges, including court transcripts and orders of dismissal:

Transcripts of Proceedings

Record of Proceedings 8-24-09 First Appearance

Record of Proceedings 9-30-09 Second Appearance

Record of Proceedings 10-26-09 Third Appearance

Record of Proceedings 11-30-09 Case Dismissed

Court orders dismissing charges

Order dismissing no DL

Order for fleeing and eluding dismissal

Order dismissing 4 remaining charges

This story is lengthy and has been chronicled piece-meal in various posts so I won’t go into detail here.

In essence, I never entered a plea to any charges when I appeared in court before Randall Kelly. I challenged jurisdiction every step of the way. Upon challenging jurisdiction as well as the alleged reasonable suspicion for arresting me the court then had to allow for a hearing where I challenged probable cause; which in the police report mentions “believing the driver to be intoxicated”. I don’t expect many of you to understand the reasoning behind my Declaration. Whatever our disagreement, it is a document that originates with a moral and philosophical response to what government has become. People have a right to disagree with, and even refuse consent, to that which they find contradictory to their conscience. All things considered, I am a peaceable, non-violent man. If disobedience is a crime then guilty as charged.

I had also been using Freedom of Information Act Requests to try and procure dashboard video and other records which speak to the police report being filled with lies, distortions, and fabrications; as well as containing evidence which would exculpate me of all charges. Fairview Heights Police used a number of tactics to deny the requests and by pressing my rights under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (Bailey) the police were required to produce any and all evidence, of which I was permitted a copy. Last month I was provided with certified copies of the dashboard video from both police cars. My 8 month struggle to procure the video had come to an end, and it speaks volumes.

11/30/09, was to be THE day where the probable cause hearing would take place after a number of continuances. I finally had the video, the police report, my supporting case law, and my questions ready to go. However, this time the Alemond and Nyman did not appear.

Judge Randall Kelley called myself and the State’s Attorney, another Kelley (no relation) to the bench. I was asked if I was prepared to proceed to which I replied yes. Then Mr. Kelley was asked if he was prepared to which he replied no. He then asked Judge Kelley for a continuance because the police, his witnesses, were not present. He said he spoke to them on Friday prior to remind them of the appearance and they told him they would not be able to attend.

Judge Kelley then asked me how I felt about the continuance and I explained that I had been more than accommodating in agreeing to necessary continuances in the interest of fairness, all of which did benefit myself and the prosecution, and the last appearance date where we discussed this date took into account the schedules of the Alemond and Nyman. I explained that I had been present and prepared at every appearance and the prosecution had not. Therefore, I felt another continuance would prove unduly burdensome to myself and contrary to due process. I voiced my objection to granting the continuance.

Judge Kelley then asked Mr. Kelley if he had done everything in his power to ensure the appearance of Alemond and Nyman, to which he said yes. Judge Kelley then said that he agreed with me; that I had been present at every appearance and prepared to argue my motion. He said that another continuance for the State would prove unduly burdensome to me and he therefore DISMISSED ALL CHARGES.

So, what does this mean? Well, the police would have to been sworn in prior to their testimony for the hearing. The report and video contradict each other. The video, being the authoritative record of the events, would speak to perjury and fabrication of evidence as well as exculpate me of the charges while showing Alemond and Nyman engaged in a number of misdemeanors and felonies. Alemond and Nyman could NOT appear without jeopardizing themselves by way of the evidence on the record. Therefore, no witness, no case. I also do not believe the State could have prevailed with two obviously compromised witnesses.

What next? With the video in-hand I am looking for an attorney who will pursue civil action against the Alemond, Nyman, and the City of Fairview Heights. I have a number of criminal (misdemeanor and felony) charges that I will be working to have filed against Alemond and Nyman. There is still a lot of work to do, but I am unencumbered with any criminal charges which may tend to cast doubt over my claims against the police.

This whole situation speaks to a systemic problem with what is known as “law enforcement”. Police believe they are above the law, they are the law. We are a nuisance and should we transgress upon their particular sensibilities they may exact whatever justice they may see fit to summon and be indemnified from prosecution because of “departmental policy”. They believe themselves to be a superior class of person and we, the people, the rabble. This debate needs to take place in the public domain and illuminate the self-aggrandizing, megalomaniacal threat that is modern “law enforcement”.

This is my account of what transpired on Feb. 17, 2009

Excessive Use of Force by Fairview Heights, Ill. Police for a traffic stop on 2/17/09 on Highway 159 in St. Clair County, Illinois.

This is all courtesy of the arresting, and beating, “officer”, JOSHUAH M ALEMOND and AARON NYMAN

Statement of Mark McCoy (To the best of my recollection at the time after being beaten, Tasered, and suffering blows to the head)

I got off work at 2a.m. CDT on 2/17/2009. I departed my place of work and proceeded north on Highway 159. I proceeded through Swansea, IL, and then through Fairview Heights, IL. The speed limit from Swansea to Fairview Hts. is 45mph. I maintained my speed within that limit. When I reached Fairview Hts. the limit reduces to 35mph. I continued at that speed until I reached the intersection of Highway 159 and Rt. 50. where I stopped at a light for less than a minute. Looking into my rear view mirror, I noticed headlights approaching from the rear’ Before the vehicle could reach me the light turned green and I resumed my travels northbound on Hwy. 159. I noticed in my rear view mirror that the approaching vehicle turned east on Rt. 50 where a police light-bar was visible on the vehicle. It was a police cruiser.

I continued north on Hwy. 159 through Fairview Hts. and reached the last traffic control light before heading out of the City. This light is at an intersection that leads to a gas station to the right and a shopping plaza to the left. Just past that light is a facility known as “The Fountains”. Past that point it is nothing but 4 lanes of Hwy. 159 leading to Collinsville, Il.

As I reached the last traffic control light I noticed another vehicle approaching rather quickly.  I thought it might be just another person driving fast since a police car just turned west. I maintained my position in the left lane of northbound Hwy. 159, using my high-beams when possible and dimming when another vehicle approached. I proceeded north for about a half mile while noticing the vehicle I saw approaching quickly was now maintaining a distance behind me. I thought nothing of it in particular.

At a little more than a half-mile past the Fountains, that vehicle turned on emergency lights, flashing alternating red and blue. I believed I was about to be pulled over. Looking to the right, there is a very narrow shoulder. Hwy. 159 has no lighting. I looked for a place to stop, but did not consider the shoulder a viable option, especially with prolific video of cars striking other cars on the side of the road; often when stopped by police. I knew of a lighted street down the road since I travel this route 4 nights a week. I intended to stop on that road, Donald Baily Drive, a private driveway for the pipefitters union hall.

Up to this time, I had only seen flashing lights and heard no horn or siren. I was not able to discern any markings on the vehicle which would indicate it was an official police vehicle; nor could I identify the driver of the vehicle as a uniformed officer. I was over  three-quarters of a mile past the Fountains. I was approaching the lighted street and since seeing the flashing lights I reduced my speed by about 5 mph and activated my flashers in effort to acknowledge the signal and to avoid any misperception that I was attempting to flee or elude. At about this time I noticed a siren sound of “whoop whoop” emanating from the vehicle. It was only a short, reasonable time that I turned right onto the lighted way of Donald Bailey Drive, where I then pulled to the right and stopped.

Upon stopping, I rolled down my driver’s side window. I called my wife and had her on my Bluetooth speaker during the stop. I told her that I was being stopped and to stay on the phone if possible. The officer was shouting for me to “show my hands”. I placed both my hands outside the driver’s side window and shouted the question to the officer, “Am I under arrest?” The officer responded with “Exit the vehicle”. I responded again with “Am I under Arrest?” Another command, “Turn around and place your hands on your head. Walk backwards towards my voice”, I asked again, “Am I under arrest?” Another command, “On your knees and cross your ankles!” At this point I accepted the reality that I was under arrest since it now appeared that my freedom of movement was being restricted.

I complied with the last command and, with my back towards the officer, dropped to my knees and placed my hands behind my head and crossed my ankles. I sensed the officer approaching from the rear and expected to be cuffed. Instead, unexpectedly and suddenly I experienced a force pushing me towards the pavement. My natural reaction was to stiffen and maintain my balance since I believed possible injury was imminent without the use of my hands as they were restrained from behind. The unknown officer pushed my head forward and continuing to exert pressure upon my neck and head, causing great pain. It felt as if the weight of the officer was assigned to one knee which resided upon my neck and head. My face was directly upon the concrete road. I could feel my glasses give way and my lip split. Hoping that the worst was over I waited for the cuffs, but instead sensed what appeared to be a Taser placed against the base of my skull at the back. I could hear the “clack, clack, clack,… of the sparks and my neck experienced what felt like hundreds of bee stings. The sensation seemed to last forever, and I sensed no sign of letting up.

I began to fear I may be seriously injured or killed. In self-defense and desperation, I tried to reach back to knock his hand away. The officer pressed harder, both on my neck with his knee, and with the Taser. I resigned to accept whatever fate should this continue and after going limp I was cuffed and left to lie on the ground.

While on the ground, I could not see much and I believe other officer arrived during the beating; which later would be shown that there were actually two officers, only one of which I was initially aware. I soon found myself in the back seat of the patrol car, but the timeframe between being Tasered and moving to the car is fuzzy. I may have blacked out or become disoriented. I sat in the back seat and just bled for some time while other police arrived and went through my truck. My glasses were off and presumed broken so I could not discern much from where I was. It is all rather fuzzy at this point. The police attempted to ask me some questions, to which I replied since I was under arrest I would reserve any statements for counsel.

I was placed in the back of the cruiser and left for what seemed like about a half-hour. In that time I experienced an irregular heartbeat, shortness of breath, and difficulty swallowing. I believe possibly because of my neck muscles contracting from the shock and closing off my windpipe, but I’m not certain. The sensation subsided after about 10 or 15 mins, but reoccurred every so often for a minute or two. One of the patrolmen opened the driver-side rear door and asked me if I required medical attention. This was after about a half-hour of no inquiry. I requested medical attention. He asked if I wanted an ambulance at the scene or to wait for EMS at the station. I said I wanted an ambulance at the scene. The patrolman commented that my injuries appeared superficial and he would have EMS waiting at the station. He then slammed the door and walked away. There were two EMS personnel, at the station who did a cursory cleaning of debris from my facial wounds.

My wife arrived and sat on Hwy. 159 to observe from the side of Hwy. 159. I was eventually transported to Fairview Heights Police Station and processed.

The salient points of this store are; 1. I never identified myself or showed any identification. Who did this man believe he was beating and why would he feel this level of force is necessary? It appears to me that he preemptively ran my plates and discovered an outstanding “bench warrant”. I believe he was running plates with NO reasonable suspicion and looking for a warrant hit. There are SO many of these things out there that you can throw a rock at someone who has one for merely missing a court date, not completing the payment of a fine…… and most aren’t even seen or signed by a judge. After this man got a hit on a warrant he contrived “swerving” as reasonable suspicion. 2. I am essentially under arrest immediately for a traffic infraction, if there is no warrant component. Why, if the man was so afraid of me, did he not maintain a safe distance with his weapon and me in my truck while he called for backup? 3. Why did they pry a lock off my rear passenger-side storage compartment? The keys were on the ring with my ignition key. 3. Why kick a man to the ground from behind while he is on his knees and defenseless, as well as exhibiting no overt threat? 4. Why, when I asked if I am “under arrest”, did he not answer? A simple “yes” would have sufficed. 4. His statement to me, “If you would have pulled over when I lit you up this never would have happened.” This essentially says that “If you would have read my mind and pulled over when I thought you should you would not have suffered under punishment determined by me for transgressing my arbitrary and unannounced sensibilities.” 6. I was denied medical attention when requested. I was left alone, injured, with no inquiry as to my condition; especially after being Tasered in the back of the neck. 7. After receiving a copy of the report, I discovered there were two patrolmen on the scene when I was beaten and Tasered. Why such force when a man on his knees and hands on his head? 8. I was not informed of my rights at any time, nor was I afforded an opportunity to speak with counsel while in custody.

So, what do we have? Perjury for falsifying an “information” (ticket) in fabricating reasonable suspicion for the stop. Unlawful imprisonment for detaining me under color of law and with the threat of deadly force when the impetus for the stop was never lawful (fruit of the poison tree). Assault, battery, and cruel and unusual punishment for the injuries inflicted upon me for violating “his” law. Unlawful search and seizure. The tape from my recorder as well as the broken lock in my rear passenger compartment constitute a violation of the 4th Amendment protection from search without a warrant or probable cause. Nowhere in the stop for a bench warrant or improper lane usage did any probable cause of a “crime” arise. I was not apprised of my rights or afforded counsel. I was denied medical treatment.

I transcribed Alemond’s report for easier reading and for making notations. You are free to compare it with the PDF version to check for inaccuracies.

Report by Joshua Alemond:

On 02/17/09 at approximately 0211 hrs, I was traveling northbound on Hwy 159 in my marked patrol vehicle, when I observed a red Chevrolet pickup truck, bearing Illinois registration 69128L, traveling northbound in the innermost traffic lane, crossing over I-64. While behind the vehicle, I conducted a computer check of the vehicle’s registration, at which time it revealed it was registered to MARK MCCOYof 41 Grandview, Collinsville, Illinois, 62234. The vehicle was clear and valid, with an expiration of 03/3009. As I continued to follow the vehicle, I observed it begin to weave within its own traffic lane, going from the outer far line to the inner far dash line on several occasions. Believing the driver of the vehicle to be intoxicated, I activated my overhead lights in an attempt to conduct a vehicle stop. This was conducted on northbound Hwy 159, just north of the Fountains Parkway. The vehicle refused to stop and continued to travel northbound in the innermost traffic lane, keeping to the 45 mph speed limit. After the vehicle failed to stop for my overhead lights, I activated my siren and air horn on several occasions, in an effort to stop the vehicle, however; ignoring this, the vehicle continued to travel northbound. At one point the driver activated his bright headlights and applied his hazards as he changed from the innermost traffic lane to the outermost traffic lane. It should be noted that I could not see into the cab of the pickup truck due to the heavy window tint on the rear window. I informed FHPD dispatch of the vehicle’s license plate and that he was refusing to stop. I continued to follow the vehicle past Milburn School Road, and the entrance to the Stonewolf subdivision. The vehicle then made a sudden and aggressive right turn from Hwy 159 onto Donald Bailey Drive, a dead end private roadway to the Pipefitters Union Hall.

It should be noted that while following the vehicle for a mile and a half, I conducted a further computer check of the vehicle’s registration, discovering that one of the registered owners, that being MARK R. MCCOY, M/W, DOB: 08/11/59, was wanted through St. Clair County Sherriff’s department, per warrant number 06TR0058724.

As the vehicle made this sudden turn onto Donald Bailey Drive, it continued traveling forward for several feet coming to a sudden and abrupt stop. After the vehicle came to a stop, still not being able to see the interior or what the occupant or occupants were doing, and for my safety I initiated a felony vehicle stop. I drew my department issued weapon and ordered the driver of the vehicle to show me his hands. I repeated this command several times receiving the response from the driver after which he showed me his hands “Am I arrested?” I ordered the driver to exit the vehicle, keeping his hands raised, to which he eventually complied. I then had the driver walk, with his hands raised, backwards towards my vehicle. I then ordered the driver down on his knees. The driver continued to ask, “Am I under arrest?” I ordered the driver down on his knees, to cross his legs, to cross his ankles, and place his hands on top of his head. The driver initially refused every order I had given him forcing me to repeat my command. It should be noted that during the stop my commands were clear, concise, and in a loud voice. I observed the driver to be a middle aged male white.

Officer Aaron Nyman, DSN 171, responded to the scene to provide cover. I asked the driver if there was anyone else in the vehicle, to which he responded “No”. With Officer Nyman providing cover, I holstered my weapon and approached the subject. I began to lay the subject on the ground for the purpose of handcuffing, at which time he refused to give me his right hand. As he lay face down on the ground with his left hand behind his back, his right hand was lying under him near his waistband. The subject began to resist by pulling his right hand away from me; I ordered him on several occasions to place his hands behind his back, to which he ignored.

Seeing this resistance, Officer Nyman left his cover position and assisted while I struggled with the subject to place him in handcuffs. While attempting to place his hands behind his back and due to his uncooperative behavior, I struck the subject in the right side of his torso in an attempt to gain pain compliance. At this point, I was aware that Officer Nyman had initiated a dry stun to the subject with his department issued taser. The struggle continued for several seconds until Officer Nyman and I pinned the subject to the ground using our legs and body weight and successfully placed him in handcuffs. After being placed in handcuffs, the resistance ceased and the struggle stopped.

While Officer Nyman was securing the driver, I then cleared the interior of the pickup truck, finding no other occupants.

A search incident to arrest revealed no weapons or items of contraband. After picking him off the ground I observed that his face was bleeding. The subject had sustained minor abrasions and lacerations to his face and lip during the struggle. I also observed that the eyeglasses the subject had been wearing were broken and lying on the ground, along with a cell phone and Bluetooth earpiece. During the search incident to arrest, I was unable to find a driver’s license for the subject. Knowing that the vehicle’s registered owner, Mark R. McCoy, to be wanted I asked if he was this subject. The driver refused to answer, stating “I want counsel”. During this time he did ask what he was being arrested for, at which time Officer Nyman informed him Fleeing and Eluding as well as Resisting Arrest.

The driver was secured in the rear of my marked patrol vehicle. Sgt. Krummrich, DSN 141, was notified and responded to supervise the scene.

Officer Nyman and I conducted a search incident to arrest of the interior of the vehicle, finding no weapons or contraband. We did locate a laptop computer, two cell phones, an audio voice recorder, as well as three digital cameras, and a video recorder. Officer Nyman also located several anti-government and anti-police pamphlets and reading material.

When asked why he had refused to stop for my marked patrol vehicle, the subject stated that he was looking for a safe place to stop. It should be noted that this section of State Highway 159 is a four lane highway with a center turn lane and wide shoulder for both north and southbound traffic.

The subject requested medical attention, at which time he was informed that MedStar EMS ALS had been contacted and would respond to FHPD for treatment and evaluation.

While conducting a search of the interior of the vehicle, I located a US Passport, belonging to the registered owner and driver of the vehicle, that being MARK R. MCCOY, M/W, DOB: 08/11/59. FHPD dispatch confirmed the warrant through computer hit conformation as being active per warrant number 06TR0058724, bond amount $1,000, 10% applying.

McCoy was transported to the FHPD after being placed under arrest for his outstanding warrant, as well as Resisting a Peace Officer. He was issued Non-Traffic Complaint 1115419 for this charge. He was also issued Illinois Traffic Citations 1159154 for Improper Lane Usage, 1159155 for Fleeing/Attempting to Elude Police, 1159156 for No Valid Driver’s License and 1159157 for Operating an Uninsured Vehicle. Copies of the Citations are attached to this report. Upon arrival at the FHPD, McCoy was properly booked for the aforementioned charge.

Prior to his booking, MedStar EMS had arrived to treat McCoy’s minor injuries.

While still on the scene with McCoy’s vehicle, Officer Nyman prepared FHPD 112, this department’s Towed Vehicle Report. A copy of which was provided to McCoy. Walter’s Towing responded and towed the vehicle to their facility.

A check of McCoy’s criminal history indicated a total of two arrests with two convictions, including one charge with one conviction for Larceny, one charge with zero convictions for Forgery. McCoy’s last arrest was by the FHPD on 04/16/80.

Upon completion of all booking procedures of McCoy was released from FHPD custody after posting the required cash only bond. At this time, he was provided all his appropriate copies of the Towed Vehicle Report, Non-Traffic Complaint, as well as his Illinois Traffic Citations.

Items Discovered During Search Subsequent To Arrest

Item of note:
Per Aldemon’s report, page 5 of 6, he states, “Nyman also located several anti-government and anti-police pamphlets and reading material.
Here is a list of the reading material in my possession and where it was located:

Pursuant to the warrantless search incident to arrest, the inventory of my vehicle contained:

Healing Our World, The other piece of the puzzle by Dr. Mary J. Ruwart

Asset Protection Secrets,  by Arnold Goldstein J.D., LLM, Ph.D
DSC Power 832 Security System

Pioneer DEH-P7700MP Stereo

Under The Hood by TechOnline

Owners Manual – 1998 Chevy S-10

Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights, by Professor John E. Finn

Mother Earth News, Issue No. 228

American Juror, Newsletter of the Fully Informed Jury Association and the American Jury Institute, Volume 20, Issue 1 Spring 2008

The Philosopher’s Handbook, by Stanley Rosen “Essential Readings from Plato to Kant”

Philosophy for Dummies by Tom Morris, Ph.D.

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America, autographed by 2004 Libertarian Presidential Candidate, Michael Badnarik

That’s it as far as “printed material” aside from some cell phone plan tri-folds and business cards.

Apparently, Alemon and Nyman have a distorted view of what constitutes “anti-government” and “anti-police”. Notwithstanding their hyperbolic and exaggerated interpretation of my reading material genre, it was in-fact police working for government who violated my rights, beat, and shocked me. Of course, to be accurate, it was ignorant, violent, oppressive, and lying men in costumes who used their delusional belief in being morally or lawfully superior to others by virtue of the color of their clothes, or possession of weapons which harmed me. Police and government are fictions, and possess no conscience. Alemon and Nyman, concordantly, are flesh who choose not to embrace their conscience, or have instead adopted despots as their external conscience.

Analysis of charges, in the order of they allegedly occurred.

Improper Lane Usage (Probable cause for the initial stop). The report states that, “As I continued to follow the vehicle, I observed it to begin to weave within its own traffic lane, going from the outer far line to the inner far dash line on several occasions. Believing the driver of the vehicle to be intoxicated, I activated my overhead lights in an attempt to conduct a vehicle stop.” The statute below at (a) states “…within a single lane…” which is what the report confirms, “…within its own traffic lane…”

(625 ILCS 5/11-709) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-709)
Sec. 11-709. Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into 2 or more clearly marked lanes for traffic the following rules in addition to all others consistent herewith shall apply.
(a) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.
(b) Upon a roadway which is divided into 3 lanes and provides for two-way movement of traffic, a vehicle shall not be driven in the center lane except when overtaking and passing another vehicle traveling in the same direction when such center lane is clear of traffic within a safe distance, or in preparation for making a left turn or where such center lane is at the time allocated exclusively to traffic moving in the same direction that the vehicle is proceeding and such allocation is designated by official traffic control devices.
(c) Official traffic control devices may be erected directing specific traffic to use a designated lane or designating those lanes to be used by traffic moving in a particular direction regardless of the center of the roadway and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such device. On multi-lane controlled access highways with 3 or more lanes in one direction or on any multi-laned highway with 2 or more lanes in one direction, the Department may designate lanes of traffic to be used by different types of motor vehicles. Drivers must obey lane designation signing except when it is necessary to use a different lane to make a turning maneuver.
(d) Official traffic control devices may be installed prohibiting the changing of lanes on sections of roadway and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such device.
(Source: P.A. 84-1311.)

Fleeing/attempting to elude.

(625 ILCS 5/11-204) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-204)
Sec. 11-204. Fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer.
(a) Any driver or operator of a motor vehicle who, having been given a visual or audible signal by a peace officer directing such driver or operator to bring his vehicle to a stop, willfully fails or refuses to obey such direction,increases his speed, extinguishes his lights, or otherwise flees or attempts to elude the officer, is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. The signal given by the peace officer may be by hand, voice, siren, red or blue light. Provided, the officer giving such signal shall be in police uniform, and, if driving a vehicle, such vehicle shall display illuminated oscillating, rotating or flashing red or blue lights which when used in conjunction with an audible horn or siren would indicate the vehicle to be an official police vehicle. Such requirement shall not preclude the use of amber or white oscillating, rotating or flashing lights in conjunction with red or blue oscillating, rotating or flashing lights as required in Section 12-215 of Chapter 12.
(b) Upon receiving notice of such conviction the Secretary of State shall suspend the drivers license of the person so convicted for a period of not more than 6 months for a first conviction and not more than 12 months for a second conviction.
(c) A third or subsequent violation of this Section is a Class 4 felony.
(Source: P.A. 93-120, eff. 1-1-04.)

Resisting Peace Officer

(720 ILCS 5/31-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 31-1)
Sec. 31-1. Resisting or obstructing a peace officer, firefighter, or correctional institution employee.
(a) A person who knowingly resists or obstructs the performance by one known to the person to be a peace officer, firefighter, or correctional institution employee of any authorized act within his official capacity commits a Class A misdemeanor.
(Source: P.A. 95-801, eff. 1-1-09.)


Tagged , , , ,

Letter to the Editor of the Belleville News Democrat 2/23/2011

This is a letter written to the Editor of the Belleville News Democrat and published on 2/23/2011

The link is here, but I can’t say how long it will be available.

Revolt like an Egyptian

America, you have been outdone. All of your posturing, platitudes and rhetoric are for naught.

The events that coalesced the Egyptian people to take a stand exist here in America, but nary a dissenting voice is raised against your keepers. How sad; and you call this the land of the free and home of the brave.

Egyptian blogger Wael Ghonim stated he had enough when he saw photos of a fellow Egyptian who died at the hands of police. He said the Egyptian police acted like they were in charge instead of the people. What caused a revolt in Egypt happens every day in America.

He also mentioned that you must first lose psychological fear; the fear government uses to keep you accepting its abuses. My fear left long ago. What are they going to do to me? The Fairview Heights Police already tried to kill me and failed.

Since that time I’ve filed a civil lawsuit and approached former State’s Attorney Bob Haida, State’s Attorney Brendan Kelly, and Judge John Baricevic with criminal charges. They have refused to answer or mishandled the information. I’ve approached the News-Democrat as well. There is no justice here.

I go into much more detail on my site at

You think you are free? You think you have responsive government? Think again.

America deserves what the Egyptian people gave their government.

Mark McCoy


This is a response to my letter from a News Democrat reader, Bev Mattison.

Proud to be an American

I need to respond to the recent letter by Mark McCoy.

My first thought after reading his letter was, seriously? Then I reread it. I couldn’t believe anyone would compare the United States government with Egypt.

I was especially amused by him comparing the person killed by Egyptian police to his apparent encounter with the Fairview Heights Police Department, stating, “Fairview Heights Police tried to kill me and failed.”

All deference to his overactive imagination, but if the Fairview Heights Police Department tried to kill him, they would have succeeded. Their training and professionalism are top-notch. They don’t make those types of errors.

McCoy also asks, “Do you think you’re free?” Yes, mostly. “Do you think your government is responsive?” Not always, but it’s far superior to most other countries.

As for America deserving what the Egyptian people gave their government, I agree. Ours took place about 236 years ago. It was called the American Revolution. You can Google it!

Bev Mattison

Fairview Heights


75-Year Prison Sentence for Taping the Police? The Absurd Laws That Criminalize Audio and Video Recording in America

Reprinting this article courtesy the original here


What is being done to Michael Allison is nothing more than psychological terrorism directed towards anyone who would exhibit audacity in taping police. Government, and police in particular, cannot withstand documentation of their violent, public acts. They act illegally, immorally, and violently against people, using the so-called “law” as their justification. In reality, there is no such law. As with Mr. Allison, the words of the legislature, another arm of the criminal body of the State, are twisted and aimed at him to send an overt message to the rest of us; “You people are not in control.”

I have been taping government officials for some time. I used to work as a private investigator and am very adept at “wiring” myself. I have recorded conversations with the Chief of Police of Fairview Heights, the Mayor of Collinsville, St. Clair County Circuit Clerk (now State’s Attorney) Brendan Kelly, Judge Vincent Lopinot, and Judge LeChien. The Fairview Heights Police, Joshua Alemond and Aaron Nyman, who beat and Tasered me on February 17, 2009 were recorded via my mobile phone and bluetooth headset, before the Tasering and beating destroyed the equipment. My truck was also wired for video and audio, but I did not have the video running at that time. The police did, however, find a micro-cassette recorder in my console and removed the cassette from it, unlawfully. What they failed to find is the microphone hidden in the door frame that went to another digital recorder. Even after illegally searching my truck and breaking a lock to get to a hidden compartment, the digital recording survived their search.

I will be posting copies of the audio on another page from my encounters with these criminals. Luckily, when the police beat me and destroyed the phone they must have assumed it was totally inoperable, but failed to check the removable memory card for the recorded audio. I have since removed all of my “illegal” recordings off site to a number of servers for safe-keeping and no longer keep the originals in my possession. I am also working on establishing an anonymous FTP server where people who do record can upload their audio/video without a traceable trail to their identity.

I am confident Mr. Allison will not be found not guilty, and the State will most likely try to strike a deal. I say to Mr. Allison, you hold all the cards and trust the jury. As far as the juvenile  megalomaniacs writing these deceitful and oppressive laws… to hell with you.

As far as Judge Kimbra Harrell, you may wish to contact her personally and let her know how you feel about her distorted view of authority.


OLNEY, IL 62450
(618) 392-7070


Born 1957
3495 VAN RD
OLNEY, IL 62450
(618) 395-4040

The growing accessibility of recording devices is prompting officials to dig up dusty old eavesdropping laws that are being used to intimidate the nation’s citizens.
January 28, 2011 |

Last January, Michael Allison, a 41-year-old mechanic from Bridgeport, Illinois, went to court to protest what he saw as unfair treatment from local police officers. Allison is an auto enthusiast who likes to tinker with cars, several of which he keeps on his mother’s property in the neighboring town of Robinson. Because both towns have “eyesore,” or abandoned property, rules that require inoperable cars to be either registered or kept in a garage (which neither house had, and which Allison could not afford to build), Allison’s cars were repeatedly impounded by local officials.

Allison sued the city of Bridgeport in 2007, arguing that the eyesore law violated his civil rights and that the city was merely trying to bilk revenues from impound fees. This apparently enraged the local police, who, Allison alleges, began harassing him at home and threatening arrest when Allison refused to get rid of his cars.

Shortly before his January 2010 court date, Allison requested a court reporter for the hearing, making it clear to the county clerk that if one was not present he would record the proceedings himself.

With the request for a court reporter denied, Allison made good on his promise to bring his own audio recorder with him to the courthouse. Here’s what happened next, as reported by Radley Balko in the latest issue of Reason magazine:

Just after he walked through the courthouse door the next day, Allison says Crawford County Circuit Court Judge Kimbara Harrell asked him whether he had a tape recorder in his pocket. He said yes. Harrell then asked him if it was turned on. Allison said it was. Harrell then informed the defendant that he was in violation of the Illinois wiretapping law, which makes it a Class 1 felony to record someone without his consent. “You violated my right to privacy,” the judge said.

Allison responded that he had no idea it was illegal to record public officials during the course of their work, that there was no sign or notice barring tape recorders in the courtroom, and that he brought one only because his request for a court reporter had been denied. No matter: After Harrell found him guilty of violating the car ordinance, Allison, who had no prior criminal record, was hit with five counts of wiretapping, each punishable by four to 15 years in prison. Harrell threw him in jail, setting bail at $35,000.

That’s up to 75 years in prison for breaking a law Allison did not know existed, and which he violated in the name of protecting himself from what he saw as an injustice.

As Balko points out, Allison’s case may be extreme, but he is hardly alone in facing outsized punishment for efforts to combat police wrongdoing. Take Christopher Drew and Tiawanda Moore, two Chicagoans highlighted in the New York Times last week. Drew, a 60-year-old artist, faces up to 15 years in prison for using a digital video recorder during his December 2009 arrest for selling art without a permit. Drew had planned on getting arrested in protest of the permit law, which he saw as a violation of artists’ rights. He was unaware that filming the ordeal was illegal.

Likewise, Moore, a 20-year-old Southside resident, did not know it was illegal to record a conversation she had with two police officers last August, and she too faces a prison sentence of up to 15 years for doing so. Moore’s case is especially troubling because she was in the process of filing a complaint with the two officers about a third officer, who Moore alleges sexually harassed her in her home. She told the Times that she “was only trying to make sure no other women suffered at the hands of the officer” by making the recording. Presumably, she was also trying to protect herself in case she faced another lewd advance. Instead, the officers tried to talk her out of filing her complaint and then slapped her with eavesdropping charges when they found out her Blackberry was recording.

These stories all highlight Illinois’ draconian eavesdropping laws, which, ever since a privacy provision was overturned in 1994, have made it illegal to record audio of an individual without his or her consent. Carrying a sentence of between four and 15 years, the laws in the state are some of the harshest in the nation.

Illinois isn’t the only state waging a war on citizens with recording devices. Across the country, the growing accessibility of recording devices (like smart phones) and media-sharing sites (like YouTube) is prompting officials to dredge up dusty old eavesdropping and wiretapping laws, leading to “a legal mess of outdated, loosely interpreted statutes and piecemeal court opinions that leave both cops and citizens unsure of when recording becomes a crime,” according to Balko.

The good news is that few people have actually been convicted under these laws for documenting police wrongdoing; neither Michael Allison nor Christopher Drew nor Tiawanda Moore are likely to go to prison for the recordings they made. The bad news, though, is that these laws are being used to intimidate the nation’s citizens, making them afraid to stand up against police officers and other officials who are acting illegally and/or immorally. As long as no one is convicted, the law goes unchallenged, notes Adam Schwartz, senior staff counsel for the ACLU of Illinois.

The intimidation techniques extend to still photographers as well, as documented by Carlos Miller on the blog Photography is Not a Crime, which catalogs rights violations against people with cameras and teaches citizens about their legal rights to photograph people and places. (Things that can almost always be photographed from a public place, “despite popular opinion,” according to Miller’s Web site: criminal activities, law enforcement officers, industrial facilities.) Miller himself has been illegally arrested and had his photos deleted for taking pictures of police officers.

Although he’s always beaten his cases in court, Miller recognizes that coming out on top after the fact isn’t good enough. “There’s this idea that just because charges are dropped, there’s no harm,” Miller told Reason. “But that isn’t right. There’s definitely harm when someone is illegally arrested and has to spend a night or more in jail. Your life is disrupted. You now have legal bills to deal with. There’s also harm when a cop wrongly tells someone they can’t photograph or record. He’s intimidating them into giving up their rights.”

Some of the most widely viewed posts on Miller’s blog — “St. Louis Cop Beats Man Down in Youtube Video,” “Surveillance video once again shines light on Philadelphia PD corruption” — are testament to why citizens need the explicit legal right to document officers’ wrongdoings. Without the recordings of these events (and many, many others like them), justice probably never would have been realized, and the truth never brought to light. Unless we overturn the nation’s most over-the-top eavesdropping laws, our legal system will continue to obstruct, rather than promote, justice.

In the beginning….. A preface to this subject

I’ve decided to take all the issues I’ve experienced with corruption and abuse in St. Clair County and do my best to make them known. I believe that most people are already aware that government is a failure, but still blindly support it out of habit, fear, or ignorance. St. Clair County is in no means the only pustule on society, but it is the closest and most intimate to me.

I’ve been writing and speaking about the abuses and failings of government for some time. Some call me an anti-government zealot. That is like calling someone an anti-Santa Claus zealot. Neither one really exists. Government is just a convenient definition for an organized criminal enterprise used to soothe the consciences of its supporters when subduing others with whom it disagrees or from whom it demands wealth for its own perpetuation. It may have began as a “good idea”, but there are many good ideas which do not demand allegiance and obedience to, what is ultimately, a violent expression of power by force. There are places in this world were there is no articulable governing body aside from society itself. Government does not rise up from nature.

As a result of my refusing to obey, I have been attacked and assaulted by men who in a fit of delusional superiority beat and arrested me for no reason. These men were acting as police officers for the city of Fairview Heights, Illinois. Their names are Joshua Alemond and Aaron Nyman. These men drew blood and facilitated the theft of my property. They assisted in torturing me and violating my natural rights. Thus began the journey I embark upon at this time to bring that event and all subsequent events to light. Assisting these men were officials who engaged in misfeasance, malfeasance, and violation of their oaths of office. These men are now Chief Judge John Baricevic and then St. Clair County Circuit Clerk Brendan Kelly. Mr. Baricevic was serving as the State’s Attorney at the time and Mr. Kelly has replaced him in that role.

Since the events on February 17, 2009 involving Alemond and Nyman, I initiated a civil suit against the City of Fairview Heights, Nyman, and Alemond claiming damages in excess of $150,000. Thanks to the arrogance and bias of Judge LeChien, who granted a stay in favor of the Defendants without support of law, the case is now set to continue sometime in May, 2011. Two other judges were complicit in circumventing justice; no such thing were government is concerned. Their names are Zina Cruse and Vincent Lopinot. Zine Cruse jailed me for contempt because I refused to agree with her during an appearance following my arrest on Feb. 17, 2009. She demanded me to enter a plea to a charge that had been dismissed over 3 years before. My reason for appearing was completely different than what she believed and clearly spelled out on the Order I presented to her. She refused to do anything other than shout me down and order me held in contempt. Vincent Lopinot did everything but cup his hands over his ears and chant when I tried to present sworn criminal complaints charging Nyman and Alemand with criminal charges. All charges against me were dismissed because they were fabricated and the police falsified reports with the help of the State’s Attorney to try and prosecute me.

The actions of John Baricevic and Brendan Kelly were more disturbing. I contacted Baricevic by phone and mail, bringing to his attention the same criminal complaints. He, the State’s Attorney, refused to consider criminal charges against police. One clerk in his office even told me the State’s Attorney, “…works for the police…”. Brendan Kelly engaged in chicanery and malfeasance in taking my criminal complaints and mis-filing them to the point of my missing relief due to the statute of limitations running out on the charges. He evaded, obfuscated, and lied. In response, I was able to find a basis in law to draft new complaints which allege felony charges against Alemond and Nyman, thereby extending the statute of limitations. It has also come to my attention that Mr. Kelly has engaged in what tacitly amounts to theft when parties file what are called “jury demands” in civil cases. There is a fee of around $450 for each jury demand. When a plaintiff files a case and demands a jury that plaintiff pays the jury demand fee. Should a defendant file an answer to that case they often-times file a jury demand and pay the fee to preserve their right to a jury trial. The issue is, once a party has paid the jury demand fee the other parties do not have to pay. I have been made aware of Mr. Kelly keeping the jury demand fees from the other parties to a case when the fee has already been paid, thereby making $450 for each superfluous fee tendered.

All of this is not without knowledge of those with the wherewithal to report such matters. I have been in communication with Beth Hornsforfer of the Belleville News Democrat via email and telephone. I would hope that such well documented abuses and corruption would be front page news. Despite all the information I provided or offered, interest waned an I am left now to my own devices to pursue my remedies.

Which leads me to this. Using my website as the repository of detailed information, and the Letters to the Editor as a notice to the public, maybe interest will move people to either take action or just wake up to the rogues who violate the “public trust”. I also have proof that the majority of traffic and misdemeanor cases are conducted illegally. However, judges get a percentage of the money extorted in fines thereby minimizing any possible desire to actually follow the law.

Yes, I am an Anarchist. For the ignorant and uninitiated, that does not mean mayhem and disorder. Only fools ascribe such meaning to the word. I am, however, not obligated to follow what some men man call “law” and tithe or otherwise obey the State. It is not a creature of my doing and in good conscience I cannot support such a malignancy. If my crime is disobedience, then come to me and do what you will. Otherwise, leave me be. I have no use for such foolishness or violence.

More to come……..

Email exchange with Brendan Kelly, Circuit Clerk of St. Clair County.

Pursuant to my letter to the St. Clair County State’s Attorney and Chief Judge, I received an email from Brendan Kelly, the Clerk of the Circuit Clerk. Interestingly enough, of the 3 persons to receive my letter, Mr. Kelly is the only who is constitutionally impotent to afford any relief or take any action. The State’s Attorney and Chief Judge have failed to respond in any way whatsoever, but Mr. Kelly appears to be the hapless bureaucrat who acted with “good intentions” for little ‘ol me. However, since I am “special” and loved by so many in government, I was not charged any sort of filing fee for my complaints. The emails appear in order from the most recent to the oldest. I hope you ask the same questions I’ve been asking since this all began. It’s really very simple. Mr. Haida, charge the Fairview Heights Policemen, Joshua Alemond and Aaron Nyman with official misconduct and, Mr. Baricevic, if he fails to do so then you should appoint a special prosecutor. That’s what I thought.

Email from 8/27/10

Mr. Kelly,

Thank you for your reply.

The complaints which I described as misdemeanors were clearly captioned “Criminal Complaints”. I distinctly recall the clerks, on more than one occasion, asking me about the nature of my complaints, as well as inspecting them. They were shared with a number of people in your office in an effort, I presume, to determine the proper course of action. At one point I was instructed to leave the complaints with your clerks who then promised to investigate the process for filing, and who ultimately returned them to me via US Mail after a determination had been made that there was nothing they could do for such complaints. I admit that I acted in error by bringing them to your office and seeking guidance, but such has been the advice given to me by others. Although you and your staff are not charged with a duty of providing legal advice, it is not unreasonable for someone to inquire about whether your duties are proper for affording the relief sought. Again, mea culpa, for acting upon the advice of others who are presumed to know the law and procedures.

However, my complaints were clearly marked as “criminal complaints” and refused by your clerks on more than one occasion before being received by you, personally. There was no subterfuge or trickery in my attempting to slip criminal complaints past the clerks in effort to have them filed when they otherwise would not. The charges alleged in those complaints were subject to the statute of limitations, which you state was of no concern, for your office having received and filed them. Maybe I should have been more specific, since there are statutory limitations on the initiation of civil as well as criminal matters. So your statement that I was deprived of no relief by way of any lapsing statute is partially correct, if my complaints were civil in nature. I have yet to find a provision within the criminal code for tolling a statutory limitation for having filed complaints with the Clerk of the Court.

In the second paragraph of your email you make reference to deputized clerks of the court possessing a legal obligation to file documents which are presented to them. I thank you for your candor and confirmation in expressing the constitutional duties of the clerks serving under your direction. This does raise two questions, however. One, if the clerks do serve under such a constitutional obligation then I must inquire why it took so many visits to your office, and persistence, before I finally met with you to receive my complaints? I do not mean for the actions of the deputized clerks to reflect upon you personally, but in a sense, they do reflect the policies, duties, and standards promulgated by your office. If there existed such a duty at the time I engaged the clerks, over a number of visits, then I wish to inform you of either a lack of understanding for that duty or a reluctance to submit to it. I must say that the ultimate exercise of that duty was not realized until I met with you, and before that time, my visits to your office proved both frustrating and arduous. I do not believe the question has been answered as to whether or not the Clerk of the Court is constitutionally proper in receiving sworn criminal complaints. If the complaints were brought in error, which I now contend, then the clerks acted properly in not accepting them. The second question I have then is what, if any, filing fee would be assigned to my type of complaints; where in the published court rules and fees can said fee be found; and did the filing of my complaints inevitably bind me to remitting a fee that I am was not otherwise aware of? I have not been asked to remit a fee and since the papers were received and filed without a fee, does that affect the efficacy of the filing? Realizing my error, I would not choose to remit a fee for erroneous filing.

Lastly, addressing your final paragraph, you mention there has been no conversation with either the State’s Attorney or judiciary. In your voice message left on my mobile you make reference to, “…get the judge’s advice about where it should go…” which would indicate an intent to speak with a judge at some time in the future regarding the complaints. As documents were file stamped on June 17, 2010, and your email of August 26, 2010 states there has been no discussion with the judiciary, I would like to ask, within the context of your voice message of August 20, 2010, just when was a conversation to take place with the judiciary for advice about where the complaints should go? I would hope that some conversation had taken place with the judiciary, subsequent to the June 17, 2010 file stamp. I apologize if I was presumptuous in assuming any conversation had taken place, but I believe it is not unreasonable to believe such, given your voice message and amount of time, which had elapsed between the file stamp of June 17, 2010 and the present. I copied the State’s Attorney and Chief Judge on the documents you received on 8/16/2010, both of whom remain conspicuously silent on the matter. That issue is not germane for the purposes of this email, but it does speak to full disclosure to all parties who may be able to provide some guidance on the matter.

As an aside, the case management system of which you speak is, in my opinion, something less to be desired. Subsequent to a dismissal of charges on order of the court, I received orders filed by your office. The orders do not accurately reflect the proceedings. The Court dismissed all charges, yet, in Case Number 06TR0058724 the order states, “The Court orders the charge be dismissed by motion of the state.” The state made no such motion and the Court cannot compel the state to make such motion. Then again in Case Number(s) 09MC0000942, 09TR0009129, 09TR0009130, and 09TR0009132, the, “Court orders the charge be dismissed with prejudice by the Prosecution.”, which is incorrect. An official court reporter transcript clearly reflects the Court dismissing the charges, yet the record represents the Court ordering the charges be dismissed by the state, in some of the cases “with prejudice”. This is not an accurate reflection of the record. When I inquired with one of the clerks about this inconsistency, she commented that the system does not provide for orders being dismissed by the Court. This poses possibly serious consequences in that if a record were required for appellate review, the erroneous reflection of the record could significantly prejudice the defendant, as appeals deal specifically with the official record. In my opinion, this is a serious issue that I thought should be brought to your attention.

I appreciate your position in directing me towards legal counsel and yes, I agree there is a level of complexity in navigating the “system”, but a complexity that is not usually an insurmountable bar to study, inquiry, and reason, but one which has been intentionally belabored, compounded, manipulated, and obscured by the very persons with whom you suggest I should consult.

If you will indulge me this one diatribe; it is the function of government to protect the rights and property of the individual who voluntarily submits to the authority of that government which exists only through consent, support, and allegiance of the governed. All sovereignty begins with and remains with the people. What has manifested today is a “system” which purports to pass law; which is nothing more than legislative prohibitions upon otherwise non-violent acts masquerading as police powers or administrative regulations. Law is beyond the reach of government. It does not derive from legislative proclamations or will of the majority. Law is the master of governments, not clay to be molded into weapons by it, to be used against the inhabitants. The remedy I seek is discernible in both common law and statutes. If I sought lesser and more barbarous justice I would emulate a law enforcement officer and take shelter behind a policy for my wrongdoing. Just my observations. I have finished.

Finally, as I am distrusting of surgeons and aspirin, being a naturalist, I will pursue my objectives honestly, diligently, and peaceably, wherever they may take me.

Thank you for your time, and please abandon any further attempts to file my criminal complaints in any regard whatsoever, notwithstanding an arrangement facilitated through your efforts in my meeting with the Grand Jury. I look forward to your response and clarification on the questions posed herein.


Mark McCoy

On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:39:07 -0500
“Brendan Kelly” <brendan.kelly [at] dot us> wrote:

> Mr. McCoy:
> The original complaints which you describe as misdemeanors were filed
> with this office and received a “file stamp” on the date which you filed
> them- June 17, 2010.  When these documents received a case type
> assignment and placed into an actual file folder is not relevant to the
> issue of statute of limitations and does not deprive you of any relief
> at least in that regard.  Again, the “file stamp” date of June 17, 2010
> is the relevant date for those documents- the very day you filed them
> here.
> Since those documents were received and file stamped by a deputized
> clerk of the court, and since the more recent package of information
> which you describe as felonies was also similarly file stamped- on
> August 16, 2010- a record of some type had to be created. That is legal
> obligation as the Clerk of the Court.  As a matter of course, criminal
> charges of any type either felony or misdemeanor are initiated by the
> State’s Attorney or grand jury in our case management system.  Since the
> documents you filed with my office were not filed by either entity, and
> because some record was required, those filings were assigned case
> number 10-MR-212.  MR stands for “miscellaneous remedy.”  A wide variety
> of legal issues fall into that category and is often the case type used
> when it may not be clear where a party’s pleadings need to go.  In some
> circumstances, legal issues in an MR case are later assigned a different
> case type once the court has made a determination where they belong.
> This may or may not be the outcome in your case. Also, the earlier June
> filing in no way precludes the later August filing.  They are both in
> the file.  Which issues you pursue are up to you.
> At this point I have had absolutely zero discussions with the State’s
> Attorney regarding your case, nor have I had any discussions with the
> judiciary.  As the Clerk, my role is not to comment on the merits of
> your case or particular legal arguments.  In fact, I am prohibited from
> giving you any legal advise- that would violate  my constitutional duty
> to be an unbiased administrative officer of the judicial branch.  My
> role is to simply maintain some sort of record according to the laws of
> Illinois and allow the parties to present their case for resolution by
> the court.  Truly, my very best advise to you is to seek legal counsel.
> Novel cases such as yours would be well served by a trained attorney.
> Our democratic system of laws should be easy to navigate in all cases by
> any citizen, but some cases definitely require the guidance of an
> officer of the court and member of the bar.  Some physical ailments can
> be addressed by taking an aspirin, others require a surgeon.
> Please let me know if I can be of further assistance regarding the
> record in this case.
> Very Respectfully,
> Brendan F. Kelly
> Clerk of the Circuit Court
> St. Clair County, Illinois
> 10 Public Square
> Belleville, Illinois 62220
> (618) 277-6600 – Main Number
> (618) 277-1562 – FAX
>brendan.kelly [at] dot us
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  The information contained in this email (and in
> any accompanying documents) is covered by the Electronic Communications
> Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510-2521, is legally privileged and may
> constitute confidential information.  If you are not the intended
> recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of
> this email or any attachment is strictly prohibited.  If you have
> received this email communication in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and delete the message from your system.
> —–Original Message—–
> From: Mark McCoy [mailto:mark [at] markmccoy dot com] On Behalf Of Mark
> McCoy
> Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 8:31 PM
> To: Brendan Kelly
> Subject: Re: case
> Mr. Kelly,
> Thank you for the reply,
> To answer your question, what I need to be done is, per my mail package
> received by your office, is to either present my complaints to the
> States Attorney or Grand Jury. Considering the inattentiveness of the
> State’s Attorney, I am inclined towards the Grand Jury.
> I mentioned to your assistant that the complaints which you took
> possession of were no longer required. Too much time had elapsed since I
> gave them to you and you contacting me on  8/20. The statute of
> limitations expired on the misdemeanors and I chose then to frame the
> complaints as official misconduct charges, which are felonies. Which
> leads me to my next question; why were criminal complaints filed after I
> sent message to you via your assistant that I no longer required them in
> that form, why were they filed outside the statute of limitations, and
> why were they filed as civil cases?
> With all due respect, Mr. Kelly, given the gravity of the charges I
> would have expected to have been contacted by the State’s Attorney by
> now. That issue is not your concern, but I reasonably assume that there
> has been some conversation between your office and the State’s Attorney
> in regards to this matter. I acted upon information imparted to me by
> others who were presumed to know the process, but upon witnessing the
> lack of knowledge and information amongst so many who are charged with
> the public trust to provide guidance, I must assume there is either an
> intentional refusal to assist private individuals in finding the proper
> forum for such matters or a genuine lack of understanding regarding the
> laws they are elected to administer.
> In your case, I see no further action necessary since this is not within
> the purview of the office of the Circuit Clerk to address. I requested
> your assistant to inform you of my wishes to abandon the complaints. The
> complaints were not only mis-filed, but filed at such a time so as to
> deprive me of any relief due to expiration of statutory limitations. It
> seems this has been serendipitous, since it caused me to discover the
> method by which misdemeanors could support felony complaints of official
> misconduct.
> I will now pursue relief directly through the State’s Attorney or
> approach the Grand Jury directly. If you have any information which may
> prove helpful in expediting this objective I would be happy to receive
> it. Nevertheless, I will succeed in presenting the new complaints to
> those so encumbered with a constitutional duty to act, where their
> actions may be upon the record for all to see.
> Feel free to forward this message to any parties whom you may feel would
> find interest in the subject matter or who are otherwise empowered to
> act.
> Thank you for your time.
> On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:41:58 -0500
> “Brendan Kelly” <brendan.kelly [at] dot us> wrote:
> > Mr. McCoy:
> >
> > Sometimes it is difficult to reach me by phone.  I get nearly 30
> > messages a day so please try to e-mail and maybe we can figure out
> > what needs to be done at this point.
> >
> > Very Respectfully,
> >
> >
> > Brendan F. Kelly
> > Clerk of the Circuit Court
> > St. Clair County, Illinois
> > 10 Public Square
> > Belleville, Illinois 62220
> > (618) 277-6600 – Main Number
> > (618) 277-1562 – FAX
> >
> > <mailto:brendan.kelly [at] dot us>
> >
> >
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  The information contained in this email (and
> > in any accompanying documents) is covered by the Electronic
> > Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510-2521, is legally
> > privileged and may constitute confidential information.  If you are
> > not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying,
> > distribution or use of this email or any attachment is strictly
> > prohibited.  If you have received this email communication in error,
> > please notify the sender immediately and delete the message from your
> system.
> >
> >
> >
> Mark McCoy – Articulate Anarchy, Reasoned Rebellion, Paroxysmal
> Philosophy Promoting Natural Rights and Civil Disobedience

Mark McCoy – Articulate Anarchy, Reasoned Rebellion, Paroxysmal Philosophy
Promoting Natural Rights and Civil Disobedience
mark [at] markmccoy dot com