On September 3, 2009 a 17 year old girl was convicted of battery for defending herself. Judge Grant Wegner was the judge that convicted her. This judge was over heard by the 17 year old girl her father and her sister telling the States Attorney Brenda Karales that he did not like Judge F. Keith Brown (pictured above) and that all African Americans that came before him were going to be convicted. This information was made known to the Chief Judge F. Keith Brown who did nothing. Subsequently this girl was convicted of battery. Judge Grant Wegner is a resident judge in Kendall County he went to high school and graduated from Oswego High School and up on graduating from law school returned home to Oswego. Once Judge Brown was made aware of Grant Wegners position he was suppose to have reassigned Grant Wegner.
In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified." Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988) (what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) (Section 455(a) "is directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is actually biased.") ("Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. §455(a), is not intended to protect litigants from actual bias in their judge but rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process.").
The Court also stated that Section 455(a) "requires a judge to recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). In Pfizer Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that "It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he believes that he has received justice."
The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that "justice must satisfy the appearance of justice", Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954). A judge receiving a bribe from an interested party over which he is presiding, does not give the appearance of justice.
"Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989).
Further, the judge has a legal duty to disqualify himself even if there is no motion asking for his disqualification. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals further stated that "We think that this language [455(a)] imposes a duty on the judge to act sua sponte, even if no motion or affidavit is filed." Balistrieri, at 1202.
Not only was Judge F. Keith Brown supposed to have removed Judge Grant Wegner, Judge Wegner was suppose to remove himself. Negroes like F. Keith Brown have became complacent with their status. Instead of using their position to help blacks they use it to help whites. Grant Wegner flat out stated to Brenda Karales Kendall County Assistant States Attorney that he did not like Judge Brown. However Judge Brown has defended Grant Wegner where an African American youth was concerned knowing that Judge Grant Wegner did not like him. There is not a need for Negroes like F. Keith Brown if he is not going to make sure that justice is served in the black Community; we are going to do everything in our power not to re-elect F. Judge Keith Brown.