What "wrongful conviction" are you talking about, felon Foulks? Is it the one in which you stood there in front of a judge in Rolling Meadows and said "I'm guilty as charged"? And you did that voluntarily, no? You weren't under duress? Nobody was bending your nails back, right? No one was standing there with a whip, correct?
You have a lot of pluck, felon Foulks, saying your guilty plea led to a wrongful conviction without offering one whit of explanation as to what you mean. Tell us the facts, felon Foulks. You have this forum for all the cabdrivers of the City of Chicago to air it out.
I don't want the recommendation of a felon. Stay the devil away from me. Keep your trash compatriots away from me. Poo.
Funny, instead of talking about the real issue here, you have all resorted back to useless banter and negativity. You all claim to care about this industry yet you seem to only care about badmouthing each other.
Mr. Nathan, aren't you the one who posted the following comments?
"I apologize, Peter. I won't refer to Mr. Foulks felony background again. It has no place on this web site. Even though it reflects on his credibility, I should never refer to his being a common criminal, and I humble myself for referring to him as a low-life. I should never have done that. After all, it's irrelevant to his worth as an organizer that he is an admitted felon."
I don't know you personally, but I assume a lawyer of your caliber would be a man of his word. Why haven't you kept it? Especially as a lawyer, I'm sure you've seen people wrongfully convicted, or felons who are good people but have maybe slipt up, lost their way if you will. Should we judge a person completely based on one mistake of the past?
"Fatlu Hall", your only contribution to this topic is, "see, I told you so. I said they wouldn't be punished." So what, you said that in a post on an internet forum. What did you actively do to see justice served? Were you at the courthouse? Did you organize a protest? Did you circulate a petition urging the state's attorney to upgrade charges? Did you help write this law? Saying I told you so and then attacking Mike Foulks isn't very helpful, is it?
Mr. Foulks, you spend so much time trying to prove yourself right and bickering with these people on this forum. For what? Just because someone calls you names doesn't mean you have to call them names back. Maybe you could try to be the bigger person, no?
To all of you on this forum, I can't believe there is not one ounce of common ground you can all share. Don't you all have the same goal of improving our industry? There's no level of compromise that can be reached? I'm not asking you all to agree with each other. I'm not asking you all to like each other. I am asking you all to show each other the most basic form of human respect. You can have disagreements without personal attacks.
All you have done with this topic is turn it into another way for you to attack each other, when in reality, not one of you mentioned the real issue here. Why isn't the law making the attack of a cabdriver a felony being upheld? Why are cabdriver attackers still being charged with misdemeanors? Most important, what can we do to change it, either individually or collectively?
My name is Faarax J. I don't mean to judge, but I feel someone has to be the voice of reason on this forum. I believe this because I believe there is enough collective talent and energy on this forum alone to effect real change in this industry, and I hate to see it wasted with bickering.
Feel free to attack me or try to say I'm someone else. Honestly, I really don't care. I do my best everyday to improve the image of cabdrivers in the eyes of the public by the way I conduct myself. It may not be much but its the best I can do with my time and resources. Can you say the same?
Let's go over your comments, Faarax J.
...instead of talking about the real issue here, you have all resorted back to useless banter and negativity.
WHAT DO YOU PERCEIVE TO BE "THE REAL ISSUE HERE"?
You all claim to care about this industry yet you seem to only care about badmouthing each other.
NOT ME. I'M JUST IDENTIFYING A LOUSY FELON AS BEING A STINKING CRIMINAL WHO CANNOT BE BELIEVED ABOUT ANYTHING. HE HAS NO CREDIBILITY AND SHOULD BE GENERALLY DISTRUSTED BY DECENT AND UPSTANDING CITIZENS.
Mr. Nathan, aren't you the one who posted the following comments?
"I apologize, Peter. I won't refer to Mr. Foulks felony background again. It has no place on this web site. Even though it reflects on his credibility, I should never refer to his being a common criminal, and I humble myself for referring to him as a low-life. I should never have done that. After all, it's irrelevant to his worth as an organizer that he is an admitted felon."
YES. I MADE THOSE SARCASTIC COMMENTS. ARE YOU SUCH A STONE-HEAD AS NOT TO APPRECIATE SARCASM? I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT.
I don't know you personally, but I assume a lawyer of your caliber would be a man of his word.
WITH HONORABLE MEN AND WOMEN, I AM A MAN OF MY WORD. WITH REGARD TO LOUSY STINKING FELONS, I DO WHAEVER I CAN TO EXPOSE THEIR EVIL TO THE LIGHT OF DAY.
Why haven't you kept it?
I HAVE.
Especially as a lawyer, I'm sure you've seen people wrongfully convicted,
HERE YOU PRESUME FOULKS WAS "WRONGLY CONVICTED". BUT THIS FELLOW HAD TO HAVE ENTERED A GUILTY PLEA TO BE CONVICTED OF THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM TO GET A 24 MONTH FELONY PROBATION.
WHO EVEN KNOWS HOW HORRIBLE A CRIME HE WAS ORIGINALLY CHARGED WITH? OR HOW MANY CRIMES? MANY MAY HAVE BEEN DROPPED IN EXCHANGE FOR HIS FELONY PLEA OF GUILTY.
HOW DARE YOU PRESUME HIS CONVICTI0N WAS WRONGFUL? ON WHAT CONCEIVABLE BASIS DO YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION?
or felons who are good people but have maybe slipt
up, lost their way if you will.
NUTS. FELONS ARE SCUM. YOU WANT YOUR DAUGHTERS SLEEPING WITH FELONS? YOU WANT A FELON FOR A SON-IN-LAW? GO SLIP WITH YOUR FELON FRIENDS, FAARAX. IT SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT YOU.
Should we judge a person completely based on one mistake of the past?
YOU BET WE SHOULD!!!
UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Rule 609(a) specifically), EVIDENCE OF A FELONY CONVICTION IS ADMISSIBLE TO IMPEACH A WITNESS IN ANY CASE FOR TEN (10) YEARS AFTER THE SENTENCE IS COMPLETED.
THE FEDERAL RULE WAS ADOPTED IN ILLINOIS LAW IN PEOPLE v. MONTGOMERY (you'll find it in volume 47 Ill.2d, but I can't remember the page off the top of my head). THE MONTGOMERY CASE WAS ADOPTED FOR CIVIL LAW IN 1975 IN KNOWLES v. PANOPOLOUS (66 Ill.2d). THE KNOWLES CASE HAS BEEN FOLLOWED IN 25 MORE CASWES OVER THE LAST 33 YEARS.
FOULKS IS A FELON, AND HE DESERVES NO CREDIBILITY.
To all of you on this forum, I can't believe there is not one ounce of common ground you can all share.
THERE IS PLENTY OF COMMON GROUND WE ALL SHARE. I AM PREPARED TO WORK WITH ALL MEN OF DECENT CHARACTER TO BRING ABOUT POSITIVE CHANGE IN THE TAXI INDUSTRY AND TO ACHIEVE DRIVER SAFETY.
Don't you all have the same goal of improving our industry? There's no level of compromise that can be reached? I'm not asking you all to agree with each other. I'm not asking you all to like each other. I am asking you all to show each other the most basic form of human respect. You can have disagreements without personal attacks.
WHEN FELON FOULKS EXPLAINS THE BASIS FOR HIS CLAIM THAT HE IS PURE AS THE DRIVEN SNOW AND STOPS ASSAULTING OTHERS WHO POST ON THIS FORUM, WE'LL GET SOMEWHERE. aLTHOUGH FEW PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE LIKES OF HIM AT THIS POINT.
All you have done with this topic is turn it into another way for you to attack each other, when in reality, not one of you mentioned the real issue here. Why isn't the law making the attack of a cabdriver a felony being upheld? Why are cabdriver attackers still being charged with misdemeanors?
EASY ANSWER TO THIS: BECASUE CHICAGO POLICE DON'T ENFORCE THE LAW AND BECAUSE PROSECUTORS AREN'T PRESSURED TO SEE TO IT THAT IT'S PROSECUTED TO THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW - IT'S A LOT OF WORK, AND THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO DO IT.
Most important, what can we do to change it, either individually or collectively?
WE NEED TO GO TO COURT AS A GROUP IN EVERY CASE AND TO PUT PRESSURE TO BEAR ON THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS, THE POLICE AND WHOEVER WE NEED TO IN ORDER TO GET THEM TO DO THEIR JOBS.
My name is Faarax J. I don't mean to judge, but I feel someone has to be the voice of reason on this forum. I believe this because I believe there is enough collective talent and energy on this forum alone to effect real change in this industry, and I hate to see it wasted with bickering.
YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT ABOUT THIS, FAARAX J. GET FOULKS TO STUFF A RAG IN HIS THROAT AND WE'LL GET SOMEWHERE.
Feel free to attack me
THERE'S NO REASON TO DO THAT. YOU ARE A MAN OF GOOD WILL, AND WE ALL RECOGNIZE IT.
or try to say I'm someone else. Honestly, I really don't care. I do my best everyday to improve the image of cabdrivers in the eyes of the public by the way I conduct myself. It may not be much but its the best I can do with my time and resources.
YOU ARE RESPECTED BY ME, AND I AM CONFIDENT YOU ARE RESPECTED BY OTHERS TOO.
Can you say the same?
I CERTAINJLY CAN SAY IT OF MYSELF.
Donald Nathan
lawyer nathan,
you are such an f-ing big blowhard i don't even know how to address you. why dont' you shut your big fat trap!!
i read posts on here only occasionally, cause i dont have a computer, but i agree with faarax and enger. could you f-ing try to be civil? it's a wonder your'e no in chains if this is how you behave in a courtroom. your logic is not logical. your thinking and deciding to post what you think is fuzzyfuzzyfuzzy. you are such an idiot. and i dont even LIKE mike foulks, but who CARES what he did when? why you gotta attack him? who the f are YOU anyway? we drivers are out here working struggling, some of us are organizing and trying to unite to fight the city. we really don't need you to join in discussions here. you do no good with your 'felon foulks' remarks. it's so petty, it just makes me think your'e a petty person.
think on it this way: the founding fathers of this country were 'lousy stinking criminals' to the f-ing blowhard meddlesome lawyers who sided with the f-ing English.
you and wolf were so eager to jump in and agree with enger about decorum, but the first chance you get you start acting like babies in 2nd grade. why don't you go torment foulks on his forum, and leave the rest of us out of it? we are truly SICK of it!!
that wasn't sarcasm, you dolt, that was you reneging on your promise. a true man with honor does not differentiate between who he will be a man of his word to. what kind of f-ing stooopid logic is that?! does that mean you can lie and cheat and steal from those you consider 'felons' no matter what they might have been accused of by our (IN-)justice system? do you not even pay atttention to the news about how many unjustly accused persons are being exonerated every day by DNA evidence? you truly believe our justice system is JUST!? you mlust be stupieder than you look. and i'm sure you look pretty stoopid.
please go away. and you too foulks. and whoever all those fake posters are. the long eared father of fools stuff was actually funny for awhile, but no more. just all go a2way.
I'm happy to indulge you, Jeff. The point has been made, and I note that Foulks has backed off for the time being relying on general boredom with his situation to carry him past criticism. No one really cares, I suppose, what his criminal history is in the taxi industry.
So let's get on with the issues that concern us: driver safety, a fare increase, the right to benefits when hurt, the need for pensions and disability pay, control of gas prices, etc. Pick the issue and let's march forward on more important topics. I'm sure we're all ready to move on to more important things.
Thaddeus J B. is more like it or perhaps Thaddeus B.S.
If you had read the posts Ted, you would have seen that Mike was saying these attackers would get years in jail/prison. Mike is still young and he doesn't know any better. We never get true justice that is due to us. We are seen as second class. Do you still have the girlfriend? If I remember right, you didn't have the time to post here due to your involvement.
I did not do anything to help Njuba. I figured that a guy that gets scared and jumps from a moving vehicle should be in another line of work. Thank God he didn't get hurt. He's a doe in the woods and those service men that talked tough to him will walk. This doesn't make Njuba bad, just am pointing out the fact that Ted wouldn't have found himself in the same situation. Neither would I. Again, glad Njuba's OK and can you say the word green? No not about the environment. Perhaps around the ears....
I feel like calling Mike and demanding say 100k or so to leave him alone. What are the penalities for this Mike? What if I continue to do it? Are they as hard in the first district as in the third?
