NOW COMES the defendant, by pro se, and asks the court according to Judicial and Attorney Rules of Conduct as well as Freedom of Information Acts, to rein in mis-behavior, subtle and blatant over-zealous actions of prosecutors, provide her with their names and in support thereof states:

1. That the defendant presently is charged with the offense of harassment by telephone, 720 ILCS 135/1-1.
2. That the defendant is representing herself in this case by Pro Se and is aware and has full knowledge that the Court is in a better position to recognize prosecutor misbehavior and over-zealousness than she is.
3. That the media and Bureau of Justice Statistics among other legal statistics reveal a crisis of over-zealous prosecution in Cook County and the defendant has already in these early stages of her trial been victimized by such.
4. That the defendant has been before three separate prosecutors in this case to date and does not know the name of any of them.

1. Prosecutor A. presided at her arraignment that was full of defects on October 28, 1999 and was involved in bringing this selective, malicious prosecution before the court.
2. Prosecutor B. presided at her preliminary trial hearing on November 18, 1999 and made an objection to the defendant's motion for witness addresses without providing any legal grounds, causing the defendant undue stress and harm and causing the defendant to put friends, family and relatives, including an elderly, ailing and recently widowed mother, to much trouble, worry and harassment in order for them to be ready and available to testify for her character on January 27, 2000.
3. Prosecutor C. slandered and libeled her in an admonishing Dismissal Speech at his motion to dismiss this case with the state on leave. In this speech, which should be in transcripts since the prosecutor insisted upon a stenographer, the prosecutor mentioned trespass and various complainants while the defendant is charged only with a harassing telephone call to one complainant, Adam Maclean, and has not been brought up on trespass charges in this case.

WHEREFORE, the defendant moves this court to grant the motion to rein in over-zealous acts by prosecutors in this case and for the court to provide the defendant with the names of every prosecutor representing the state who has touched her case in any way by date certain and that anyone prosecuting her in the future present the defendant with his or her business card, badge or other form of identification before proceeding to represent the state against her, a wrongfully accused taxpayer and law abiding citizen of this county, state and nation.