NOW COMES the defendant, by pro se, and asks the court to hear her motions separately from the start of jury selection process on May 15, 2000 and states:

1. That the defendant presently is charged with one count of harassment by telephone, 720 ILCS 135/1-1 and one count of harassment by electronic media, 720 ILCS 135/1-2.
2. That the defendant has requested a conference to clarify All About Motions -- motions that moved the state to dismiss on leave, whereby the state unacceptably infringed upon multiple sovereign rights of the defendant's right to pursue her stolen properties, but which motions the judge later proclaimed to be frivolous. Sounds like a Catch 22 -- so the motions that got her off "provisionally" are now frivolous. But if they got her off -- even provisionally with NO PAPERWORK shown her from the State she adds -- and should not have, does that not verify her motions of the state's incompetent prosecution, whereby does that not verify the substance of many of her other motions?
3. That this case is related to a major civil suit that the defendant is working upon and will file if necessary, meaning if her civil protests and collections campaigns do not do the job, wherein she will be suing for at least $600,000,000 and 100% control of the business that she developed Wrox Press and this fact alone makes her case far more substantive than a simple "harassment" charge.
4. That her motions which she has painstakingly researched at law libraries and in the Holy Bible, a suitable source for law as the courtroom does have "In God We Trust" emblazoned loudly and notoriously upon its wall, seem to her to be substantive yet have been regarded by the Court as frivolous.
5. That the defendant has requested a conference with the judge and others in the case so as not to be in front of the judge ex-parte to clarify what is frivolous about "many" of her motions and to do her best to be compliant about future motions as well as to use for consideration in motions she may consider withdrawing.
6. That the defendant wants to withdraw her motions that she agrees are frivolous, but will not be willing to withdraw motions that she does not agree are frivolous and wants the right to have these motions thoughtfully and publicly addressed and also have the right to thoughtfully, respectfully and publicly object in open court when she is in disagreement to their frivolity factor in order to preserve her rights on appeal.
7. That her motions relating to her right to get witness addresses and ask for expert witnesses are necessary to be addressed now and before we begin jury selection in order for the defendant to obtain addresses and begin investigation of witnesses and in order to be granted a fair trial.
8. Whereas the defendant does object to her motions being called frivolous without explanation considering its her freedom, dignity and/or money that's on the line, when the defendant is guilty of nothing but protecting her own creation which in itself is protected by laws of contract, honor and good faith yet as yet has not been protected by any law enforcers and is guilty of nothing but protecting her own rightfully owned properties yet is being subjected to a criminal prosecution which in no reasonable person's mind is a desirable situation. See what happens when you're minding your own business, making a billionaire millions more? You get fired for being a success so he can impress his bride, whose department he wants to give as a wedding present until he discovers the bride, like himself, can't actually run the thing, then upon your firing you don't get your commissions and other monies you earned and which are supposed to be protected for you under the law but no law enforcer will enforce, then when you have the audacity to loudly complain and moan, you find yourself facing jail on criminal charges but no one seems to care about prosecuting the real criminal in this case. Whew! Let's face it: he who has the gold rules independent of all those glorious words in our Constitution and statutes of law books ... and the defendant thought serfdom ended with the founding of these great United States of America.