Mercy Housing Criminal Complaint
paralegal...@gmail.com
with a nightmare like this. The facts contained in this allegation
occurred in May of 2008 and the following case is about to be filed:
City of Chicago
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS
740 N. Sedgwick, 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60610
(312) 744-4111 [Voice]
(312) 744-1081 [Facsimile] / (312) 744-1088 [TTY]
Case No.
COMPLAINT
COMPLAINANT'S NAME TELEPHONE NO.
___George M Weinert V 773-222-0922
_________________________________________________________________________________________
STREET ADDRESS CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE
________________________________________________________________________________________
RESPONDENT'S NAME(S) TELEPHONE NO.
_______________Walter Rogers and HAROLD WASHINGTON APARTMENTS, -an
apartment building that is partially owned by
__________________________________________________________________________
STREET ADDRESS CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE
________________an apartment building of MERCY LAKEFRONT SRO doing
business at 247 S. State Street, Chicago, IL 60604 Phone: 312-447-
4500Rd____________________________________________________________________________
DISCRIMINATION BASED ON (CHECK AS MANY AS APPROPRIATE)
(___X)-RACE (___)-COLOR (___)-SEX
(__X_)-AGE (___X)-RELIGION (__)-DISABILITY
(___)-NATIONAL ORIGIN (___X)-ANCESTRY (___)-SEXUAL ORIENTATION
(___)-MARITAL STATUS (___)-PARENTAL STATUS (___)-MILITARY DISCHARGE
(__X_)-SOURCE OF INCOME (__)-RETALIATION STATUS
____________________________________________________________________________________________
DATE DISCRIMINATION TOOK PLACE-LATEST DATE IF CONTINUING
__________________________May 15,2008 -
present__________________________________________________________________
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
(_X_)-EMPLOYMENT (___X)-HOUSING (__X-PUBLIC (____)-CREDIT (___)-
BONDING
ACCOMMODATION
____________________________________________________________________________________________
THE PARTICULARS ARE (ADD EXTRA PAGE/S AS NEEDED)
Jurisdiction
Plaintiff George M Weinert is a 57 year old resident of the Harold
Washington Apartments, owned and operated by the Harold Washington
Corp.
Defendant Walter Rogers at the time of these events was employed as a
“Case Manger” by follow defendant Harold Washington Corp.
Defendant Harold Washington Corporation is a registered Corporation in
the State of Illinois and has as its principal place of business the
Harold Washington. The Harold Washington Apartments is a part of Mercy
Lakefront SRO doing business at 247 S. State Street, Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: 312-447-4500.
Plaintiff and Defendants are all located in Cook County, Illinois and
fall within the jurisdiction of the Chicago Human Rights Commission.
Now comes the Plaintiff, George M Weinert, Pro Se and avers as
follows:
The Parties to this action are:
Plaintiff George M Weinert is a 57 year old resident of the Harold
Washington Apartments, owned and operated by the Harold Washington
Corporation. Plaintiff is a Food stamp recipient and current graduate
Paralegal Student at Chicago’s Roosevelt University and funding his
education via a Perking loan.
Defendant Walter Rogers at the time of these events was employed as a
“Case Manger” by follow defendant Harold Washington Corp.
Defendant Harold Washington Corporation is a registered Corporation in
the State of Illinois and has as its principal place of business the
Harold Washington Apartments. The Harold Washington Apartments is a
part of Mercy Lakefront SRO doing business at 247 S. State Street,
Chicago, IL 60604 Phone: 312-447-4500.
Complaint
The following events arise out of property owner Harold Washington
Corporations failure to maintain their rental property and provide a
safe and healthy living space for their tenants. In order to conceal
these facts, management of the Harold Washington Apartments resorted
to perjury, falsifying court documents, home invasion and assault.
The apartment units under discussion are housed in a three-story
building. They are single residence only and a securely locked outdoor
entrance door that faces the street and an inner door that controls
access to the second and third floor apartments provide 24-hour
security. A desk clerk controls entrance to both doors electronically.
When others come to the building to visit SRO residents, the desk
clerk on duty contacts the resident via the intercom system that
connects to upstairs rooms. If the resident gives permission, the
guest is admitted. If permission is denied the guest is asked to leave
the building. Unfortunately, the intercom system is only useful when
it is properly maintained and in the instant case, it has been and
remains in a woeful state of disrepair.
Incredibly the intercom has remained un-repaired for over two years
despite many twork orders and letters (Via Email) that remain on file
with Harold Washington Apartments and Mercy Lakefront SRO requesting
repair.
Count I Perjury and Falsification of Court Documents IL ST CH 38 32-2
- § 32-2. Unreasonable Seizure. Fourth Amendment Violation. U.S.
Const. Amend. IV.
On the morning of May 15, 2008, “Case Manager” Walter Rogers attested
under oath to the following, pursuant on a Petition for Voluntary/
Judicial Admission. 405 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/3-600. This 'petition' only
requires that a 'spouse, parent' guardian, or substitute decision
maker' call the Police, attest that you are -
'An individual who is mentally ill and because of his or her illness
is reasonably expected to inflict serious physical harm on himself of
another in the near future which may include threatening behavior or
conduct that places another in reasonable expectation of being harmed'
'An individual who is mentally ill and because of his or her illness
is unable to provide for his or her basic physical needs so as to
guard himself or herself from serious harm without the assistance of
family or outside help'
'In need of immediate hospitalization for the prevention of such
harm.'
Directly below the account of the petitioner is a sworn statement in
which the petitioner swears:
1) I do not have a legal interest in this matter
2) I do not have a financial interest in this matter
3) I am not involved in litigation in this matter
1) The Signer, Defendant Walter Rogers is an employee of Mercy
Lakefront SRO the first is perjury
2) The Signer, Defendant Walter Rogers derives his laughable income
from this employ so the second is perjury
3) The Signer, as an employee is an agent of Mercy Lakefront SRO who
is currently involved in an Eviction suit Cook County Circuit Court
2008-M1-701680 with the writer. The third attestation is also perjury.
As a result of this falsification of court documents, by Defendant
Walter Rogers, the Plaintiff was held for eight days against his will
in the John Reed Mental Health Center and deprived of his fundamental
freedom of movement, forcibly prevented from attending five Paralegal
classes at Roosevelt University where he is an honors level student;
in the week preceding the events under discussion, Plaintiff Weinert
was forced to loose three nights of sleep in a dire effort to pass the
courses he was then taking.
A Fourth Amendment seizure occurs only when there is a governmental
termination of freedom of movement through means intentionally applied
to the object of the detention. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. IV.
COUNT II Home Invasion. . 720 ILL. COMP. STAT. 5/12-11 § 12-11.
On the morning of May 15, at around 11:00 AM Walter Rogers knocked on
the door of Mr. Weinert’s single room Mercy Lakefront apartment. Since
the 57 year old Plaintiff was studying for a mid-term the following
Monday and has a Legal Writing class at 9:00 AM the next day Weinert
told Rogers that he was busy and asked him to go away. Walters used
his passkey to enter, accompanied by five Chicago Police officers.
Rogers entered illegally with the intention of forcing Plaintiff from
his home and studies and into a mental health facility though the
Plaintiff is an Honors Level Graduate Student. There was no legitimate
reason for this criminal abuse of authority. Walter Rogers committed
the criminal offense of Home Invasion.
COUNT III. Interference, coercion, or intimidation. 775 Ill. Comp.
Stat. 5/3 209.
Mercy Lakefront has allowed dangerous criminals to reside in their
units and uses fear and coercion to keep residents quiet. In the
instant case, the abduction of the 57-year-old Plaintiff was used to
terrorize the Plaintiff into silence since he was forcefully removed
from his own home, prevented from attending Paralegal classes for more
than a week and subject to negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Plaintiff also suffered thousands of dollars in financial loses
COUNT IV. Criminal housing management. . 720 Ill. Comp. Stat.
5/12-5.1. § 12-5.1.
Management of the Harold Washington Apartments has consistently
§ 12-5.1. (a) A person commits the offense of criminal housing
management when, having personal management or control of residential
real estate, whether as a legal or equitable owner or as a managing
agent or otherwise, he recklessly permits the physical condition or
facilities of the residential real estate to become or remain in any
condition which endangers the health or safety of any person.
COUNT V. Elder Abuse. 20 Ill. Comp. 320 ILCS 20/, 720 ILCS 5/12-19
The heinous abuse of an eight-day unlawful imprisonment has been
covered above; there is more:
Due to my eight-day unlawful imprisonment, my grades suffered, as I
had feared. Since we were in an accelerated six-week term at Roosevelt
(in which we do 12 weeks work), I missed making honors Grades in Trial
and Post Trial Litigation by only five points. I will have to see how
I can make it up.
Despite the criminal conduct and continued abuse of Mercy Lakefront
SRO, I was once more forced to make an appearance in Chicago Eviction
Court on June 24, 2008. The case is in discovery and Mercy Lakefront
is intent on concealing their crimes.
Though I have already taken and completed an on line course (Legal
Ethics) and made Honors the Mercy Lakefront ETE Center continues to
bane me from this internet center in total violation of many state and
federal laws. Red Line Bomber in Training Agnin Mumin continues to use
the facilities of this center to plan additional Jihad attacks and in
fact is a MERCY LAKEFRONT TENANT LEADER! (The Sisters of Mercy seem
quite fond of Terrorists)
Isolation and Hostility of the gangs that control many of these units
continues and Civil Rights violations continue unabated. The criminals
that manage the Harold Washington Apartments have finally managed to
drag this 57-year-old scholar down to their low level. Since Reed
Mental Health is next to the County Jail, they now have managed to
taint my spotless history and I shall be forced to take Legal steps to
repair it. This is very upsetting considering what I still must do –
but the Gangsters, Drug Dealers and Whores could care less:
Since the victim is 57 years of age, the following applies:
A single episode of victimization can “tip over” an otherwise
productive
self-sufficient older person’s life. In other words, because older
victims usually have fewer support systems and reserves – physical,
psychological, and economic – the impact of abuse and neglect is
magnified, and a single incident of mistreatment is more likely to
trigger a downward spiral leading to loss of independence, serious
complicating illness, and even death. “
Elder Mistreatment; Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation in an Aging
America –
Copyright 2003 by the National Academy of Sciences
There are many things that the Racist abusers who operated Chicago’s
Mercy Lakefront SRO wish to remain hidden. Here are some of these are
the facts about Elder Abuse and Neglect in Illinois
The ongoing abuse is a clear violation of Illinois Law 720 Ill. Comp.
Stat. 5/12-19. Abuse and Criminal Neglect of a Long Term Care Facility
Resident
§ 12-19. Abuse and Criminal Neglect of a Long Term Care Facility
Resident.
(a) Any person or any owner or licensee of a long-term care facility
who abuses a long-term care facility resident is guilty of a Class 3
felony. Any person or any owner or licensee of a long-term care
facility who criminally neglects a long-term care facility resident is
guilty of a Class 4 felony. A person whose criminal neglect of a long-
term care facility resident results in the resident's death is guilty
of a Class 3 felony. However, nothing herein shall be deemed to apply
to a physician licensed to practice medicine in all its branches or a
duly licensed nurse providing care within the scope of his or her
professional judgment and within the accepted standards of care within
the community.
(b) Notwithstanding the penalties in subsections (a) and (c) and in
addition thereto, if a licensee or owner of a long term care facility
or his or her employee has caused neglect of a resident, the licensee
or owner is guilty of a petty offense. An owner or licensee is guilty
under this subsection (b) only if the owner or licensee failed to
exercise reasonable care in the hiring, training, supervising or
providing of staff or other related routine administrative
responsibilities.
(c) Notwithstanding the penalties in subsections (a) and (b) and in
addition thereto, if a licensee or owner of a long term care facility
or his or her employee has caused gross neglect of a resident, the
licensee or owner is guilty of a business offense for which a fine of
not more than $10,000 may be imposed. An owner or licensee is guilty
under this subsection (c) only if the owner or licensee failed to
exercise reasonable care in the hiring, training, supervising or
providing of staff or other related routine administrative
responsibilities.
COUNT VI. Retaliation. 20 Ill. Comp. Stat. 105/.
Plaintiff has filed numerous complaints against Harold Washington with
government agencies, news media and on line across Chicago and the
USA. Harold Washington Corp. managers have retaliated since 2004 and
shall not stop until the law stops them.
This complainant brings a retaliation claim under Title VI or under a
Title VI
regulation that prohibits retaliation. For example, most agency Title
VI regulations
provide that “[n]o recipient or other person shall intimidate,
threaten, coerce, or
discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering
with any right or
privilege secured by [Title VI], or because he has made a complaint,
testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an
investigation, proceeding or hearing under this subpart.” 28 C.F.R. §
42.108(e) (Department of Justice Regulation).
COUNT VII. Prohibition On Retaliatory Conduct By Landlord. . Chicago
Tenant Landlord Act Title V - S-12-1 50
The current Eviction case, the one defeated in 2005 and the Unlawful
Detention in the instant case are all examples of a violation of this
prohibition.
.
COUNT VIII Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII
Mercy Lakefront also acts as an (B) Employment Agency. For any
employment agency to fail or refuse to classify properly, accept
applications and register for employment referral or apprenticeship
referral, refer for employment, or refer for apprenticeship on the
basis of unlawful discrimination or citizenship status or to accept
from any person any job order, requisition or request for referral of
applicants for employment or apprenticeship which makes or has the
effect of making unlawful discrimination or discrimination 25 on the
basis of citizenship status a condition of referral.
COUNT VIII. Title VI 1968 Civil Rights Act
The above unlawful discrimination is also a violation of Title VI of
the 1968 Civil Rights Act. Title VI prohibits discrimination on the
ground of race in any program or activity receiving federal financial
assistance. 42 U.S.C. § 2000d. The United States Department of
Education administers federal financial assistance to education
programs and activities and is authorized by Congress to effectuate
Title VI in those programs and activities. 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-1.
COUNT IX. Residential Rights. Illinois Law Section 92.
No resident shall be deprived of any rights, benefits, or
privileges guaranteed by law, the Constitution of the State of
Illinois, or the Constitution of the United States solely on account
of his other status as a resident of an establishment, nor shall a
resident forfeit any of the following rights:
(1) the right to retain and use personal property and a place to
store personal items that is locked and secure;
the right to refuse services and to be advised of the consequences of
that refusal;
(3) the right to respect for bodily privacy and dignity at all
times, especially during care and treatment;
the right to the free exercise of religion;
the right to privacy with regard to mail, phone calls, and visitors;
the right to uncensored access to the State Ombudsman or his or her
designee;
(7) the right to be free of retaliation for criticizing the
establishment or making complaints to appropriate agencies;
The right to be free of chemical and physical restraints;
the right to be free of abuse or neglect or to refuse to perform
labor;
the right to confidentiality of the resident's medical records;
(11) the right of access and the right to copy the resident's
personal files maintained by the establishment;
(12) The right to 24 hours access to the establishment;
It has also been held that landlords who provided services and favors
to minority group tenants but not to white tenants violated federal
housing laws (§ 5[a], infra),
COUNT X. Criminal housing management. Chicago Landlord Tenant
Ordinance. 5- 12-070
The landlord shall maintain the premises in compliance with all
applicable provisions of the municipal code and shall promptly make
any and all repairs necessary to fulfill this obligation. Chicago
Landlord Tenant Ordinance. 5- 12-070 . (Prior code 5193-l-7; Added.
Council Journal of Proceedings, September 8, 1986, page 33771)
Landlord Harold Washington Corporation has never acknowledged their
obligation to repair this vital communications device and has instead
chosen to fix blame on the tenant for its repeated malfunction. Since
the resident is called by a loud “Beep Beep” coming from the unit’s
speaker. This malfunction at odd hours is extremely irritating but has
been ignored until the abuses that led to the crimes under
examination.
COUNT XI. Abuse of Process
The plaintiff can readily demonstrate:
An unsuccessful Eviction Suite was brought against Plaintiff in 2004
that ultimately was resolved when a jury found Against Lakefront SRO
and for George Weinert on November 16, 2005. Circuit Court of Cook
County, Municipal Division, 04M1 728602
The Jury believed that this 2004-2005 Eviction lawsuit or judicial
proceeding was brought against the plaintiff without probable cause;
The prior lawsuit or judicial proceeding which was a silly dispute
over an alleged $47.00 debt that never existed was brought against the
plaintiff with malice; and
A Jury found Against the Harold Washington Corp and for George Weinert
on November 16, 2005 and the prior lawsuit or judicial proceeding
terminated in the plaintiff's favor. Parrish v. Marquis, 172 S.W.3d
526 (Tenn. 2005). Id.
Plaintiff is once again being persecuted in the form of a second
Eviction Attempt . Circuit Court of Cook County, Municipal Division,
2008-M1-712407 that is scheduled for its next status hearing on August
September 25, 2008. Mercy Lakefront is going to keep dragging this 57-
year-old Paralegal Scholar to court until they get it right.
Abuse of process, as distinguished from malicious prosecution, arises
when a legal proceeding, although set in motion in proper form,
becomes perverted to accomplish an ulterior or a wrongful purpose for
which it was not designed. Butera v. Boucher, 798 A.2d 340 (R.I.
2002).
Count XII. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress 38 Am. Jur. 2d,
Fright, Shock, and Mental Disturbance §§ 4–7. C.J.S., Damages § 64, 23
Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 185 § 4
Do the actions taken by Defendant Rogers in physically preventing the
57-year-old Plaintiff from attending the Paralegal classes at
Roosevelt University that he had already paid #2,100.00 for meet the
definition of “conduct that exceeds all bounds usually tolerated by
decent society? Gagnon v. Housatonic Valley Tourism Dist. Com'n, 92
Conn. App. 835, 888 A.2d 104 (2006). West's Key Number Digest, Damages
57.22.
Because of this eight-day detention at Reed Mental Health Center,
Plaintiff also suffered a decline in his honors grades. Since
Plaintiff was involved in six week accelerated academic term in his
Legal Writing and Trial and Post-Trial litigation courses and only had
a week to make up the mid-term, five assignments and other work he was
forced to miss this Conduct is extreme and outrageous, for purposes of
intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, when it is so
outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all
possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and
utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Foster v. Crandell, 638
S.E.2d 526 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007); West's Key Number Digest, Damages
57.22.
The actions taken by Defendant Rogers and the resulting eight-day
unlawful imprisonment are certainly extreme and outrageous. The
"extreme and outrageous" threshold for claims of intentional
infliction of emotional distress is narrowly limited to conduct that
exceeds all possible bounds of decency, and which would arouse
resentment against the actor and lead to an exclamation of
"Outrageous" by an average member of the community. Kautzman v. Mc-
Donald, 2001 ND 20, 621 N.W.2d 871 (N.D. 2001); West's Key Number
Digest, Damages 50.10. This treatment of a 57-year-old man attending
part time classes in an effort to help himself and to rise out of
desperate poverty goes beyond all possible bounds of decency.
"Outrageous conduct," for purposes of intentional infliction of
emotional distress, is defined as conduct which goes beyond all
possible bounds of decency and which is regarded as atrocious, and
utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Larsen v. Banner Health
System, 2003 WY 167, 81 P.3d 196 (Wyo. 2003); West's Key Number
Digest, Damages 50.10.
Since Defendant Rogers acted as a “Case Manager” he was in a position
of authority that could be exploited to harm Plaintiff and had
knowledge that his actions would indeed produce that result. In an
action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff
may be able to establish that the defendant's conduct was outrageous
by proving the defendant occupied a position of authority over the
plaintiff, or was in a position to affect the plaintiff's interest,
and the defendant's conduct constituted an abuse of that position; the
defendant acted with knowledge that the plaintiff was peculiarly
susceptible to emotional distress; or the defendant's conduct
consisted of a pattern or course of conduct that continued over a
period of time. Milton v Illinois Bell Telephone Co, 101 Ill App3d 75,
56 Ill Dec 497, 427 NE2d. The 57 year old Plaintiff has made it widely
known that his studies at Roosevelt University are his number one
concern and Defendants were aware that physically preventing him from
completing them would cause severe emotional distress.
The ongoing Eviction cases outlined supra adds additional authority by
inference since it implies deprivation of crucial living needs.
Plaintiff was denied fundamental liberty for eight days; what is more
crucial than that?
In Dominguez v Equitable Life Assurance Society, 438 So2d 58 (Fla App
1983) (insurance company cut off disability payments to the plaintiff
without justification. This conduct was found to be outrageous, in
part because the insurance company had knowledge of the plaintiff's
disabilities and thus knew of the plaintiff's susceptibility to
emotional distress.) This continued that cause of action may be based
on proof of campaign of harassment or intimidation]; Mubarez v State,
115 Misc2d 57, 453 NYS2d 549 (1982) [recognizing pattern of conduct as
factor in determination of outrageousness of conduct].
Wherefore:
Defendant Walter Rogers and Harold Washington Corporation are liable
for damages and criminal penalties. The person who is primarily liable
for the intentional infliction of emotional distress is the person
whose conduct caused the plaintiff to suffer emotional distress.
Plaintiff requests the Court to issue a Restraining Order prohibiting
Management of the Harold Washington Apartments and all employees from
engaging in future abusive actions aimed at the Plaintiff and
compensate Plaintiff for tuition costs lost, time wasted at market
rates as well as Pain, Suffering and Mental Anguish. Plaintiff
requests the imposition of Punitive Damages as a result of these
crimes in amounts the Court deems reasonable and to prevent future
abuses of this nature.
I swear or affirm that I have read this Complaint (this page and
additional page/s)
and that it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge,
information and belief.
_______________George M Weinert V_____________________
______________________
Signature of Complainant Date Signed 9/20/2008
http://mercylakefront.blogspot.com/