L. Lee Whitnum v. Connecticut Office of the Chief State's Attorney, et al.

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES iii A. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION and JUDGE'S NAMES 3 B STATEMENT OF THE CASE 3 C. SUMMARY 3 D. RELIEF REQUESTED 5 E. ARGUMENT 5 I. THE 12 CAUSES OF ACTION NEED DISCOVERY AND NORMAL DUE PROCESS 6 II. THE 11TH AMENDMENT DOES NOT BAR A DAMAGES ACTION AGAINST STATE PLAYERS............................................................................. 7 III. ORAL ARGUMENT WAS DENIED 7 IV. JOHN WHALEN DID THE BIDDING OF HIS “BUDDY’ JANE EMONS AND KEVIN KANE ALLOWED IT - THE HISTORY, THE CRONYISM............ 8 V. PROSECUTOR JOHN WHALEN REOPENED THE RING-AND-RUN DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT WAS ‘ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED’............ 10 VI. JOHN WHALEN REFUSED TO ADJUDICATE FOR YEARS FORCING THIS LITIGANT TO APPEAR MORE THAN 35 TIMES IN NORWALK CRIMINAL COURT. 11 VII. MAGISTRATE MERRIAM PASSING JUDGMENT ON WHALEN’S INNOCENSE IN HER ORDER WAS INAPPROPRIATE AND PROOF OF BIAS. 12 VIII. MAGISTRATE MERRIAM RESORTS TO LYING. ACCUSES THIS LITIGANT OF NOT SEEKING SPEEDY TRIAL.......................................... 13 IX. MAGISTRATE MERRIAM ABUSED ‘FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM’ AS IT IS SUBJECTIVE. LIE #3 13 X. MAGISTRATE SARAH MERRIAM DEFENDED JOHN WHALEN IN HER RECOMMENDED RULING WITH A LIE. 14