This lawyer suggests: that the law of both state and nation as is deliberate in their constitutional views regarding what is right/ what is guaranteed/ and what is justice in this state of IL, and this nation of America:   are to be discarded for “his conception of rules.   That a judge or a judicial decree consuming participation in the court, is consistent with due process:   when it is in fact absolutely irrelevant in this case”.  The evidence is: our guarantees are greater than his complaint.  The reality:   we can change the truth of democracy itself, as we desire it to be, because   DEMOCRACY MEANS,    WE THE PEOPLE RULE/ not our employees!
The law of this state over all its employees/ over this entire people,  is simply the constitution of the state of IL.  These agreements establishing our rules of behavior applied to the purposes of our employees with regard to their job is:   to remain in their jobs as servants of we the people, not their rulers/ not their spenders/ not their masters/ etc: you cannot and do not serve us, by bankrupting our lives/ or placing the children in debt because you want to have anything you please.  We are equals/ not your slaves.
“We, the People of the State of Illinois - grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which He has permitted us to enjoy and seeking His blessing upon our endeavors - in order to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people; maintain a representative and orderly government; eliminate poverty and inequality; assure legal, social and economic justice; provide opportunity for the fullest development of the individual; insure domestic tranquility; provide for the common defense; and secure the blessings of freedom and liberty to ourselves and our posterity - do ordain and establish this Constitution for the State of Illinois. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
 While you may disagree in fantasy and by delusion: the reality of these words commands a balanced budget, without pension promises of any kind that do not include us all.  That is the price of what is commanded here. Truth does not care what you want, it simply is, what it is!
ARTICLE I BILL OF RIGHTS SECTION 1. INHERENT AND INALIENABLE RIGHTS All men are by nature free and independent and have certain inherent and inalienable rights among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights and the protection of property, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)

             While you may disagree in fantasy and by delusion: the reality of these words commands: that to secure ourselves and the children for a future that is justified, each and every contract or deal or expectation, of any kind made without the true and legitimate consent of all the people by vote within this state on its own matters: shall not be honored unless our own majority shall so decree. By public vote/ one vote per citizen, adequately informed of the need to register, and having paid taxes;   decides.  There are NO legal avenues/ NO COURTROOM opened to complaint for either or any side:   this is our state/ this is our vote/ these are our debts/ this is our future.  THAT INCLUDES the fact NO federal lawsuit regarding the true and actual autonomy of this state called ILLINOIS,  to decide for ourselves the business of this state by public vote of our people; shall not be violated or contaminated by federal rule.  Your option is:   don’t like it/ then move!  By vote we decide; no exceptions/ and by that vote we SHALL pay what is agreed to, whether taxes go up or down.  You have no recourse, what is agreed to honestly and with true intent:   must be paid.        BE CLEAR, SO THE VOTE SHALL BE TRUE!   THIS IS VALID AND REAL, BECAUSE PROMISES WERE MADE BY OUR EMPLOYEES FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT: which we cannot afford to pay/ which we did not consent to by equal bargaining status/ which we gave no authority to do/ and which have clearly bankrupted us, and intent to enslave our lives, and these children;  for their purposes, NOT for anything called justice, respect, or reality defined by the truth of what can honestly be paid.
SECTION 2. DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law nor be denied the equal protection of the laws. (Source: Illinois Constitution.) “

Your ability to interfere with that law/ including the courts ability to write or enact rules in controversy to that law: does not exist.  This lawyer suggests that “he lacks nothing, regarding notice of a summons to come to the court and defend”/ through the various documents, I have submitted.  And in fact knowing that these documents each seek to establish the requirements of the court, so as to comply with any complaint he submits/ does sustain and establish DUE PROCESS as is the law: IS HIS COMPLIANCE, not mine.  Knowing that I having filed as a pro se plaintiff cannot and should not be expected:   to know the different and irrelevant clerical considerations of a courtroom.  Justice is greater than that!
BECAUSE IT IS CLEAR the lawyer intends to keep this information hidden away/ thereby insuring through the extortion that consequently exists:   nobody gets to defend themselves without a lawyer.   OR enter the promise and guarantee of DUE PROCESS WITHIN THE COURTROOM , because money holds them at bay.  Because lawyers and judges have created “the rules” by which they then control who gets to own the courtroom/ and thereby extort from the people whatever they demand.  This is more than travesty, it is outright anarchy within a courtroom of this state.  Because the purpose that does not honor justice and the search for truth or democracy is flagrantly in violation of every agreement that is the government of this people. 
Democracy admits to this:    WE THE PEOPLE    OWN THIS NATION/ WE THE PEOPLE OWN THESE LAWS/   WE THE PEOPLE    OWN THIS COURTROOM/ WE THE PEOPLE ARE DEMANDED TO PAY, thereby with full and absolute right to participate in the process directly;  as we see fit regarding debts and contracts and promises/  AND WE THE PEOPLE    OWE OURSELVES THE RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE FULLY IN A COURTROOM OF LAW.  IT BELONGS TO US!   Democracy belongs to us/ BY OUR VOTE, we do rule this government of ourselves.
You are the employee/ thereby you are instructed to insure and create the MAXIMUM potential for all the people who need protection under the law, to achieve that very thing, for themselves.   In the alternative of this, the reality as is clearly evidenced by this trial: proves  BARRICADES, have been erected/ VIOLATIONS to or against our democracy and its guarantees to me and this people have been created/ DESERTION OF DUTY has become epidemic/ and JUSTICE has been thrown to “the wolves”, who want nothing but power/ pride/ and greed for themselves; TO ENSLAVE US/  rather than serve us, as equals called  WE THE PEOPLE.  Our right to redress trial is absolute, no further evidence than is currently known need exist.

The only complaint proven by this lawyer is: he chose to obstruct justice/ because HE DID NOT COMPLY with the orders of the court:   a legal notice.   To create the possibility of serving a summons by addressing the need to present names and addresses so that could in fact be done; according to the requirements of this court!  Instead, this lawyer whines and cries “we don’t have to give him no information”/  BECAUSE without it:    HE CANNOT SUE.  Therefore we win.  
THIS IS, A direct and intentional denial of due process/ the relationship required for justice to be served.  It is an absolute violation of:   the intent of OUR constitution both state and nation itself/ because it proves an intent to control rather than adjudicate for the people.   The object of a summons is to notify the defendant, that he has been sued.  In terms of a governmental agency such as is the state of IL:    The sovereign immunity of WE THE PEOPLE through our constitution/ thereby ownership of this state called IL:   did NOT grant to our employees that they may do, spend, demand, or expect anything they want.  Rather they are our employees: hired to do what we demand or want them to do!  It is NOT the other way around/ you do what we demand, is that not true: why else are you paid?   This matter of redress:   the accounting of our employees/ a demand to know “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” of what you have done to our state/ to ourselves in this reality of time.  Adheres  to constitutional truth:  WE ARE THE OWNERS HERE!   Not you.  The people of this state called IL in participating within the  fundamental promises we have made to ourselves as a state: through redress/   shall now seek the truth/ and re-establish the business of this state as we see fit.  This is democracy in action, our rights/ exceed your authority as an employee. 

SECTION 5. RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION The people have the right to assemble in a peaceable manner, to consult for the common good, to make known their opinions to their representatives and to apply for redress of grievances. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
This constitutional right embodies the subpoena power, and its authority of the people, to demand their employees shall come forward and declare by the evidence in a courtroom, what we demand of them:   we demand to know everything in full, without anything, being hidden from us!  So that every employee;    Is to be legally responsible for every word, our employees could present (if you know this is a lie, and fail to disclose it to us/ we will hold you as the same: LIAR)  and  be accounted as a lie:   making punishment by law/ the rule of we the people against you, possible: THIS MUST OCCUR IN A COURTROOM. 
You are the employees:   this is redress trial according to the constitution whereby we the people decide as a state, by the legal right of democracy:  if we must/ or we will take our employees of this state called IL, to court.   For the distinct purpose of demanding TO KNOW THE TRUTH, AND ONLY THE TRUTH, no lies/ regarding our situation in this state.   We are the owners/ we are the people who must pay the price for what you have done/ we have an absolute right to examine, demand, define, investigate, and determine what is the truth: by having our employees come forward to explain whatever we ask that is relevant to the information needed in deciding what our future will be.                  That is the short and concise statement of intent for this trial.

 All indications are: WE ARE BANKRUPT/ because our employees failed us completely.  But even so, because this is a democracy we must go through the trials of redress, to properly give all the people their say in determining if AS A STATE:   we do or do not choose, to take our employees to court/ if we do or do not demand to decide what our future shall be.  By our own vote on the fundamentals and realities of democracy in this contractual business known as, the functional means by which we govern ourselves.  NOT because we want too/ but  because we must.

This state has been summoned to court, by its constitution.  I as a citizen here have been given the right by constitutional law: to ask the question of this people called the state of IL.  Do you believe as do I/ that we have no choice; we must understand the truth of our situation?   These are initiating questions due in a courtroom so as to ascertain, if by consciences: we the people agree.  Majority rules/ or the jury itself,  decides how great the majority must be to create a quorum.  The employees of this state, shall be provided  subpoenas: as reality proves who must stand to represent the others.  That fundamentally is the job of those who must be represented to choose among themselves/ or be called by jury at a later date.  This trial is NOT “the state trial of accountability”/ THIS TRIAL, is for redress, the determination by jury trial among the jurisdictions of this state.  To create:  The decision and its expansion across the state, of the same base legal constitutional foundations: to decide IF WE THE PEOPLE shall or shall not demand that a state trial of accountability shall occur.  Because it is our legally constitutionally guaranteed right to do so/ the test of evidence in this initiating trial is lessened: because it is a choice, NOT a judgment.  It is democracy in action; or more distinctly our will and merit to create this trial for our state;  decide for ourselves, by vote of the people.   Once the people have spoken through their juries/ THEN we do go to trial, or redress is dismissed: dependent upon that outcome.  Because the people refused, and agreed let our employees decide.  I have the legally authorized constitutional right to ask; as this constitution applies directly to every citizen who legally resides in this state.   But only WE THE PEOPLE, have a right to demand accountability, from our state.  That is not a personal right/ unless the law allows.  Democracy does not allow me to demand accountability; it only allows us, to demand accountability, because we are owners here.  The difference is,  this trial to decide what the people demand for themselves in this state of IL:   REQUIRES a quorum, to begin.  Therefrom we know it is a constitutional mandate to create the legal circumstances by which a quorum can exist.    ITS CALLED DEMOCRACY, plain and simple.

Argument

Personal jurisdiction is granted to me through section 5 of the IL constitution as indicated above; the right to initiate a redress trial, because I am a citizen here.

In this courtroom, those citizens who declare I shall take responsibility for the people who surround me and cast my vote for their concerns and mine as well:  if chosen by lottery to do so.   Shall then peacefully assemble as a jury to determine for the rest, if this state REQUIRES our attention, as WE THE PEOPLE;    above and beyond what our employees have done, or been able to do.   Whether for us as a state united;   we believe, with the common cause of defending ourselves from further tragedy; if we must take control of the business and political  functions of this state/ for now.  The common good, is a foundation that ACHIEVES JUSTICE; rather than playing with words, rules, or engaging in the purpose of mayhem; by not providing the necessary information as was requested.  The common good searches and obeys what is true/ DISCARDING WANT;   because consequences have already proven that lies abound.  The failure of our employees so clear and certain;   is in fact contempt for justice/ and IS the intent to rule OUR LIVES rather than serve us.  The lawyers attempts to  use  this courtroom by strictly self-serving purposes/ as do so many of our employees;  clearly proven by the evidence of debts.  That is in direct violation of the demand for due process and legal rights as are guaranteed to me by our constitution.  DUE PROCESS,  provided to me by this state called IL; includes access to all pertinent or required information to achieve that stated goal, within a courtroom of this state.  Thereby the lawyer waives, “a flagrant violation” of the preamble for this state:   our instructions to those who serve us as governing representatives; and declares himself immune from due process or the need to help, sustain, or search for justice for this people. “   The preamble of the IL constitution reads in part:
”in order to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people; maintain a representative and orderly government; eliminate poverty and inequality; assure legal, social and economic justice; provide opportunity for the fullest development of the individual; insure domestic tranquility; provide for the common defense; and secure the blessings of freedom and liberty to ourselves and our posterity”

It is my view: by the damage apparent/ our employees have failed on all counts:   to adhere to, protect, establish, defend, or in any way secure the blessings of our work and our lives unto ourselves/ or these children and their future.  In the alternative it is absolutely clear that our employees have not only sought to take every good thing for themselves/ BUT HAVE IN FACT ESTABLISHED CONTRACTS AND MEANS TO transform our lives, by their purposes:   TO ENSLAVE US ALL.
Let it be clearly understood, that no resource claims “the money”/ ONLY PEOPLE SAY, we owe them !  Or more simply: every debt represents a person who says, “I WAS PROMISED”/ by somebody or some expectation of right!  Only people say, we must pay them whatever they claim is their legal right:    to retire far beyond what we can have for ourselves/ to claim their legal right for healthcare and all manner of benefits and vacation that we cannot have or afford  for ourselves/ to claim they deserve greater pay than we can have for ourselves, or any other expectation that is not equivalent to our own situation as we the people responsible for these bills: somebody has to pay, is that not right.   To assert we have no right to our day in court, as provided by constitutional law: is a criminal fraud/ a trespass or treason,  against the rule of law. 
I say, for the people of this state and me:   LET THE CONSTITUTION RULE/ provide redress.  Let the boundaries and realities of OUR LEGAL RIGHT as citizens who have been abused and used as slaves be given the opportunity to see for ourselves:   WHAT IS TRUE/ &  WHY you deserve so much more than do we.  Because we are literally, NOT fictionally the owners here.
I SAY, for the people of this state and me:   by state trial of accountability, we take back our state and determine what in fact you are entitled too:  as provided by our democracy/ as is true to ourselves and our needs as well as yours.   Thereby,  WE WILL VOTE, one citizen equals one vote: we will do this for ourselves/ should we go to trial.  Majority shall rule the day.

  Because the evidence suggests, we have been ravaged and raped by our employees; akin to being chained in the bowels of a ship, transporting us to where we have never been before: bankrupt, and enslaved;   because our employees STOLE too much.  That, is for the people to decide/ by their choice/ and by their knowledge & understanding,  of the evidence presented.
This trial is by the constitution: a citizens right  to declare as the legitimate need called our reality;   that legal demand for  redress,   for the people of this state. The creation of a majority, under the rule of law:   to decide if we will demand the true and legitimate authority that is ours.   To break the contracts, not found to be justified/ to serve notice of thieves and thugs who seek to make us slaves by the burden of their ways on our lives.  By the truth of DEMOCRACY ITSELF, called we the people,  are the rulers here.  Which means literally this is our right to decide.   So the people prove the truth, this is indeed “their democracy”, not your rule:   which means literally    WE DECIDE!.   By  establishing the truth of what is fair/ just/ and equal treatment for us all; we do present our justice/ our reality as a state defending itself.   This shall be, Our reality as is life and state within this courtroom.  It is our choice, which means:   WE NEED NOT, “be perfect”!  The burden of justice within a courtroom of this state or nation TO WE THE PEOPLE!    Is NOT dependent upon “clerical considerations” or mute points called rules.  Rather the law emanates from the constitution into the courtroom, and the law from its power to the people: a judge only serves to provide fair play, equal access, mercy as is needed, and the fundamental merit that is intent to obey the law, rather than abuse it.  Lesser things, are  NOT to rule procedure.   Constitutional intent does that/ and I am well within constitutional intent!

  JUSTICE is a guaranteed right, inherently protected for each and every citizen under its jurisdiction: BY DUE PROCESS.  The reality, not the whim or opinion of what is right!   My stated jurisdiction is under the protections, of the constitution of this state of IL:   I have a right/ the courts have a duty/ the people have a responsibility to consider my complaint.  It is without doubt for the future:   that these trials are limited to a known time frame, once every four years or so/ so as to incorporate this vote into the elections to be held.
The defense lawyers stated jurisdiction before the court is a claim neither he,  or this court  is  responsible to the people.  Neither he or this court need comply, support or sustain this demand:    for establishing redress of grievances as is the law,  before this people called the state of IL.   He is correct, that I must establish the claim for redress, by filing within the court.  He is absolutely arrogant and outside the law, when suggesting, that to establish my claim:   he has no responsibility to the constitution or the people. I have established the claim:   WE ARE IN TROUBLE HERE/   therefore redress as is the LAW, for addressing that need & it is my legal right called due process/ and his responsibility as an employee of this state,  to support the law.  But to demand “perfect service” in group of employees and agencies as is the state of IL so diverse and distributed as to cover this entire state, as is established by  hundred’s of thousands of employees. Is an obstruction/ not due process of law: I am entitled to the names and addresses whom I should serve. 

 Redress: notice of the legal intent to cause WE THE PEOPLE to take notice, and be addressed by the court with their own option as owners to choose.  MUST be delivered to those fundamentally responsible for its actionable results.  I have summoned the court (our constitutional employees charged with obeying the law)/ I have summoned the governor (our employee representing each and every person representing our interests/ and theirs,  as employees of this state)/ I have summoned the attorney general (the legal representative charged with representing these employees and us)/   I have summoned the IL internal revenue service (the people who collect the money that makes the payment of our employees possible: serving them notice of our intent to strike).   The term strike is used:   because we are to become united as one state, determined to make our agreement known to all by our vote, one citizen/ one vote.  And we will withhold from those who do functionally govern our actions, their own reward/ their own option to choose:   until our needs and demands are met. 
In so far as the individuals who are  responsible to these employees or to we the people as owners: for their legal testimony/  who shall then stand in court to testify before us as owners.   More need not or cannot be determined until the people have had their say/ chosen their complaints, in accord with mine.  Or more simply let the people choose first: if they will or will not demand this trial of accountability, for the state.
That means as this lawyer for the defense has stated in his own testimony: and restated on defense exhibit A, page 2 paragraph 2-3 .  It Is repeated :  “ The defense rather proves my case himself: page 3 of the memorandum 2-211 “in actions against the public, municipal, governmental..summons may be served by leaving a copy with the chairperson...clerk...president...or other officer corresponding thereto in the case...”   There is no mention of who may or may not leave said information! There is no identification of an individual to be served or a specific office: BUT THERE IS the rights provided by article 3 of the US constitution providing that I may indeed take my state to court. Do you prefer federal court?  Making certified mail eligible, as is consistent with federal rules for summons:   because the mail is not a party to the action/ and I did authorize it to do so on my behalf.

 Consequently as has been demanded in the past.  PROVIDE THE NECESSARY PAPERS AND INSTRUCTIONS/ ADDRESSES/ AND NAMES.  I will comply, and with that:    ALL assertion that the details of this court case can dismiss it:      DO COMPLETELY DISAPPEAR!  IT IS your job to do so!  Is that NOT what justice and the rule of law demand?  Prove it is not so.

Here again I DO demonstrate “reasonable and due diligence in service of process.  The facts are/ the defense refuses to obey the rule of justice, which is to accomplish the law/ and provide for the people, their own protections as are guaranteed to them by the constitution.  He refuses to obey, and obstructs that law/ is that not a criminal offense?
To be summoned is to be notified of a demand to appear in court.  To refuse the necessary participation thereby establishing the law in a courtroom: as protection of the people through this constitutional demand;   is nothing more or less than a failure to properly appear in court by the defense.  That means in the alternative: that a default judgment is appropriate in my favor.  It is the defense who has demonstrated contempt for process/ it is the defense who has purposely sought to impede and destroy the purposes and intent of constitutional law.  Let him prove otherwise.

The court is reprimanded to recognize FEDERAL LAW, and rules of procedure as is consistent with the nation.  YOU ARE NOT authorized to create impediments to justice.  You ARE NOT authorized to play with constitutional intent, or avoid justice for this democracy called we the people.  You ARE NOT summoned to play the child, and hide under “mommy’s skirt” just because you don’t want to be responsible for what you have done.   Your complaints are dismissed:   because you refuse to comply with the procedures necessary for me to   to comply with the court;   the constitution which governs it/ proves I am correct.  I have a right/ you have a duty!   You refuse to provide the names/ addresses/ and options for those who will deliver the subpoena.  That DOES exist as the only true impediment here.  YOU CHOSE TO HIDE/ that is not a “legal excuse”:   to run away from justice and law is punishable in court.
Constitutional law governs this state/ there is no issue on jurisdiction: because this lawsuit is against or about this state!  This legal demand is for the LAW, that is constitution guaranteed, to me a citizen of this sate;   as written within our constitution thereby declaring you are to obey; as employees of this people.  You have no legal standing to assume anything less, than the law shall be obeyed.  Simple and plain.  It is the intent and the words,  of constitutional law that defines a democracy.  It is traitorous, to create rules that subsequently betray that law and its democracy;   or imply that justice has no place or opportunity here.  It is the defense that stands in the way of compliance by specifics, without an honorable function in justice.  THEY CHOOSE to avoid the law, with games, pretending they can steal the law from us as a democracy.    By that train of thought, the constitution has no meaning.  Or more simply the rebellion is over; and they rule our lives instead.

Democracy has its own power to render judgment.  Democracy has its own power to establish jurisdiction over those who attempt to rule our lives/ or are employed by us to represent and make decisions that affect our lives.  Democracy has the power to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendants because the constitution provides due process and it provides redress of grievances: NEITHER IS BOUND, by an irrelevant rule/ or the refusal of a defense attorney or court;   to respect the law, to respect this state/ or to respect me or this court of we the people.

This redress of grievances case is about: THE FAILURE of our state government employees to avoid bankruptcy/ the failure of our state government employees to sustain and create a foundation for the future/ the failure of our state government to TREAT US AS EQUALS;  instead of giving themselves everything they wanted.  This is about the FAILURE OF STATE EMPLOYEES to accept reality, and avoid spending our money on arrogance and utter foolishness for a few. without any common sense for all.  A statement that is consistent with the “box built on the football stadium” here at the UOF I in Urbana Il/ for one hundred and twenty one million dollars: plus maintenance and upkeep: OF OUR MONEY.
AND EVERY OTHER COMPLAINT SUCH AS THE CITIZENS OF THIS STATE SHALL IMPOSE FOR ACCOUNTABILITY ON THEMSELVES to rule over their employees. THROUGH THEIR JURIES, and by their own vote.
We the people shall  Decide this redress of grievances:   EITHER,   yes we shall demand of the employees of this state a true and correct accounting/ or not.  Its our choice/ not yours.  This is our courtroom for this purpose;   we provide the money/ we provide everything: its your job!   Which means the job of a judge is to punish and perfect the disciplines necessary: to create the truth, and  to punish an intentional liar.  Let the evidence be fair/ let it be clear and plain so all the people understand.  Then let us vote.

 Let our state BE,   RETURNED TO TRUTH AND REALITY, as best we can.  NO MORE LIES/ STEALING/ CHEATING:   NO MORE USING OR ABUSING OUR LIVES!  No more consuming every resource or destroying the future every child must have.
That is within the conceptions of a courtroom responsibility to this people.  That is the short and concise purpose of trial.

As to an affidavit:   YOU HAVE my written statements.  YOU HAVE my payment and signature before the court.  You want more: provide the form.  YOU HAVE my demand to support the law and comply with the purpose and procedures of DUE PROCESS, under constitutional redress of grievances for this state.  Which means you failed to provide the legal addresses/ and are thereby found in contempt.  Because you are responsible for the information only you are entitled to.  If I were to select someone more specific than I have done/ YOU WOULD literally tell me “this is the wrong person/ therefore I cannot proceed”. That is again contempt.   To remove this disgrace, YOU are thereby responsible for providing the names, addresses, and means by which these people can be subpoenaed as you request.  I do not refuse/ I have summoned the proper parties: if you want more then provide the information that I may indeed have my day in court.    I am withheld by you, from accomplishing the tasks set out by you: that is conspiracy and collusion to defraud.  That means you are in contempt of the law, and the people:   and should be legally reprimanded for deliberately  obstructing justice. For interfering with a legal demand, as is consistent with constitutional law/ thereby“potentially imprisoned”.  It is perjury to assert, that I have not done due diligence in this matter: the deliberate intent to mislead the court; regardless of the method.   This is not justice, by the hand of a defense attorney hiding in rules without honor: but this is being done in a courtroom of law.  How do you plead!

IT IS FURTHER NOTED AND ACCUSATION MADE:
State the purpose of this attorney in by providing:   a counterfeit:   “order of the champaign circuit court” within the defense attorneys submission with his “reply in support...”   This did not come from the court/ he “Made it himself”/ what then is its purpose if not to mislead me?
Is it not for all intents and purposes an attempt to delude me into thinking this case is already decided?  What other purpose does it have?   To the common pro se litigant:   many if not most would assume “this is from the court”/   does it not look like it is from the court. Does it not say case closed?   Does the lawyer NOT play the judge/ writing his verdict for the judge; acting as judge?  Indeed he does.   Is this lawful/ from an assistant attorney general; does he not know better?
This is not an alternate position statement/ this is a literal and real criminal  coercion fully and deliberately intending to influence my own demand for due process within the law/ under redress of grievances as provided by the constitution of this state called ILLINOIS.  And assert “I am removed from this court”.  How is that within the law; prove it.

In conclusion;
We turn to the   rules of practice of the circuit court sixth judicial circuit to reveal what their rules are:   for TAKING FROM THE PEOPLE their money: demanding we shall pay.

“As to information hearings: rule 1.11 (c) in the event the county board fails to comply with rule 1.11 (b) (2)   I am Paraphrasing some here: “the judges shall give notice of a legal hearing to the county board with a copy of the petition, and meeting not less than 21 days hence.   By placing such notice in an envelope having prepaid first class postage with the US POSTAL service.... the judge may direct that a subpoena issue to any witness deemed appropriate....   Even so the judge decides if he wants a new courtroom built/ not the county board.
(4) the judge may also order that such construction by US MAIL shall be mailed not less than fourteen days prior to hearing.  If the witness does not respond or fails to appear:   measures including prison may emanate from the judge without hearing

In other words with regard to our money/ with regard to the fact we have been turned into slaves at the judge discretion for the construction of a courthouse;  that he or she finds acceptable.  We have no say.  Get called to testify as I have done with the defendants in this case;   while I have no rights by the defendants position/ the judge can imprison anyone he likes if they do not conform to his needs.  While I have had no opportunity to adequately defend myself heretofore as to the failures of our employees. While these employees have been stealing everything they could/ extorting everyone they could deny a service too/ destroying the future for us all.     The judge spends our money without even true and real construction of evidence:   BECAUSE HE CAN or does,  interpret the findings however he wishes. Should this not be addressed as well?

REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES IS THE LAW!  DUE PROCESS OF LAW SEEKS TO ESTABLISH JUSTICE/ not deny it, with irrelevant rules.  That is stealing democracy/ that is open rebellion against this people.  Throwing or causing us to be in bankruptcy or close thereto:  is akin to “legal anarchy”.  Their obvious demand:   WE CAN MAKE THESE PEOPLE PAY, for what we want/ because we can sign their names to the debt, and run away with their money.  In other words, they believe “they own the court/ and can do anything they want: as dictators do”. 
The constitution provides redress, through the court; by a citizen demand for accountability.  The failure to obey this law, IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.  Prosecute able, and imprison able because you broke, and intended to break the constitutional law guaranteed to this people.  OUR GOVERNING DEMAND as a democracy given and responsible by oath;  UPON YOU.  Your oath to us, that you would obey this constitution we provide as our government of the people.   Our agreement among ourselves: that THIS is who we are!        The failure to respect that, is contempt for this democracy/ this state of IL.
The failure to respect and accept the fundamental truth of law which is the hierarchy established by law built upon the foundation of its predecessors.  Or more specifically the greater law wins/ and more critically:   CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND ITS INTENT;   RULES THE COURTROOM AND THIS STATE AND NATION!  Nothing is greater, apart from national constitutional demands as are consistent with state rights of autonomy.

  This defendant complains he need not obey the same procedural requirements as would be required in criminal court.  Would a case fail if the defendant says “I refuse to testify”?  No, it would not.   The rules that are acceptable within federal district court for this nation in regards to subpoena/ are fundamental and fair; you have no case.  This lawyer, “Refuses his own defense”, when it proves to be in fact,  in favor of my own position/ and opposed to his;  as defined above.  These are NOT issues of law/ they are complaints in procedure; and the defense refuses to comply with the necessary procedural information he requests: therein proving contempt.  The conspiracy to defraud this state of their law as would be a judicial decree (the counterfeit order) as suggested by the defendant.    I suggest would not be wise.  Because law is law, and the constitution rules the court; one way or the other.
Either that, or our employees are in open rebellion and assembling the traitorous path, to destroy our democracy.
This judge and this governor are sworn to obey, defend, and protect this IL constitution; as may be others.  Breaking your oath is NOT “a wise thing to do”!
Because it was not recognized at the time: that this courthouse did not simply represent Champaign county alone/ but includes Dewitt, Douglas, Macon, Moultrie, and Piatt as well.    The composition of the court must include, and be increased to:   24 jurors instead of twelve to encompass a realistic number to represent the increased population.  If there is a courthouse in each of the counties they may hold their own “initiating trial for redress, filing this lawsuit and adding as they wish”/ in each county (therefrom a jury of twelve, is sufficient): but they have only one vote, for the jurisdictional district.   Combined together majority rules/ if a tie, their vote fails.  Each of the respective “initial redress trials” are about judicial districts which legally represent their district; instead of counties.  This is a legal right, not a political one.
THIS IS A LEGAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF ILLINOIS/ I am merely a citizen residing therein; exercising my constitutional right to due process for this state.  Which means, even if I die/ the case goes on.