Joe Rosner
State Rep. write-in candidate Joe Rosner has a page on his web site that lists the violations of the United States Constitution which he believes incumbent Democrat Jack Franks, an attorney, has violated.
The Jack Franks image that Joe Rosner uses on his web page.
The Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel.
Attorney Jack D. Franks has been known to ask for a body attachment while a defendant was walking up to the judge’s bench.
Body Attachments are court orders very similar to warrants of arrest that are issued in criminal cases.
If you owe money or are suspected of owing money to a client of Attorney Franks he may ask that you be arrested, handcuffed and taken to jail.
Questions about record keeping at Attorney Franks’ law firm leave open the possibility that people who have made payments on schedule suffer humiliation and loss of freedom until they can prove they’re not deadbeats.
A Body Attachment orders and directs law enforcement officers to seize the body of the person named in the order and hold that person in custody pending further orders of the court.
= = = = =
More tomorrow.
Cal has to be actually supporting Jack Franks by publicizing these bizarre, pointless and laughable “accusations” by his opponent.
The more this guy writes the better Jack Franks looks.
This is kind of a stretch….
I haven’t seen Jack request a “body attachment” for a defendant walking up to the bench in a courtroom, but I heard him request several one day when I was visiting a civil courtroom.
It was routine for Jack to make the request, and the judge granted them without any questions.
So, Joe, it’s not “bizarre, pointless or laughable.”
About the record-keeping at the Franks’ law firm in Marengo.
It held a $131 check for one of its clients for over a year.
At one point it claimed the check had been returned to the maker of the check, a Crystal Lake law firm.
When I suggested to the intended recipient of the $131 check that he demand a copy of the cover letter by which the Franks’ law firm had returned the check, they “just happened” to find it and released it to the client.
The Court should question every request for “body attachment” and require an explanation from the lawyer as to why the Court should grant it.
If Melissa believes it’s a stretch — you know you’ve left reality behind.
What does this issue have to do with the election for State Representative in the 63rd District?
Dangerous waters to accuse a lawyer and the awarding judge are violating someones 6th amendment rights don’t you think?
I missed where Joe went to law school on his bio.
A body attachment is a relatively simple, often used method of requiring a person’s presence in court after they have received numerous court orders to appear in court and have failed to do so.
They are always preceded by a ruling finding the person in contempt of court for failing to appear after being personally served with court orders.
Mr. Rosner is flat wrong in this accusation and should publicly apologize to Mr. Franks.
And, a person picked up on a body attachment is able to post bond, usually $100 and secure his release.
If the person still fails to appear in court, a second body attachment issues and the bond goes up.
Once the person shows up in court and responds to the reason for the original contempt finding the proceedings end.
And Gus did you miss the part in your own story where “the judge granted them without any questions”?
And here, on a VERY conservative blog this guy’s tirades are being laughed at- not a great sign for a Republican Candidate.
Cal….
Love the cartoonist drawing of Jack Franks from Mr. Rosner’s web site.
He has the DEMON growl.
What happened to the DEMON set of horns ?
Jack Franks should get to work at his present elected position and do something that actually makes a difference in the lives of all residents in the State Of Illinois.