July 27, 2013

State of Illinois
Judicial Inquiry Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 14-500
Chicago, Il 60601
Subject: Judicial Misconduct by Judges Tom Lytton, Mary McDade and
Daniel Schmidt , in the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third Judicial District
RE:

In RE THE MARRIAGE OF: MARK HEXUM, Petitioner/Appellant v.

SHERRI HEXUM, Respondent/Appellee.
Appellate Court of Illinois Case No: 3-12-0234 &
Circuit Court of Peoria County, Illinois Case No: 10-D-633

Judicial Inquiry Board:

Judges Lytton, McDade and Schmidt have violated my Constitutional
and Civil Rights by denying me the right to a fair trial, denying me the
right to due process and denying me the right to feed my minor son
and myself. On July 15, 2013, the listed Judges issued a decision in the
referenced cases where they did the following:

Based their decision and even copied extensive content from the
stricken Appellee Brief.
Intentionally denied my right to address the multiple lies
contained in the Appellee Brief.
Failed to address the two primary issues and basis of the appeal:
o The attorneys on both sides committed fraud.
o The financial position I was put in with a negative cash
flow of $1000/month as a result of fraud, coercion and an
unconscionable judgment from the Circuit Court of Peoria
County IL
Intentionally failed to list that I am responsible for the financial
needs of the children born into the marriage. Specifically that I
was responsible for supporting my minor son and pay their
education expenses

The decision of the Appellate Court is a cover up of the corrupt divorce

trial that occurred in the Circuit Court of Peoria County, case 10-D-633.

Key Dates & Events:

March 2012: Notice of Filing
June 2012: Appellant Brief filed (Attachment A).
July 2012: Appellee Brief filed (Attachment B).
July 2012: Appellant filed a motion to have the Appellee Brief
stricken.
August 2012: Motion to Strike Appellees Brief Allowed
(Attachment C).
December 2012: The Appellate Court recommended waiving oral
arguments stating they could fully consider the captioned cause
with the documents on file. (Attachment D).
July 15, 2013: Judges Lytton, McDade and Schmidt issued their
decision affirming the Circuit Court judgment (Attachment E).
Basis of the Appeal:
On September 27, 2011 a divorce trial commenced where the
primary issue was maintenance.
After some testimony a recess was taken to address unresolved
issues.
The attorneys met with Judge Michael Risinger to determine how
he was leaning regarding maintenance.
I, Mark Hexum, Petitioner / Appellant was told by my attorneys,
Rob and Drew Parker that the judge was leaning towards
awarding 50-60% of my gross pay as permanent maintenance.
I was given the options by Rob and Drew Parker to proceed with
the trial or reach a settlement.
The settlement recited by G. Edward Murphy attorney for Sherri
Hexum, Respondent/Appellee contained the following:
o Mark would take possession of marital home in November
2011
o Mark would pay maintenance starting October 1, 2011
o Mark would pay all expenses of house until it sells
o The parties would split two CEFCU joint accounts
o Cash in life insurance policy worth $26,000 and split evenly
o Mark would pay all college expenses and health insurance
and pay 100% uncovered medical expenses
o Mark would pay base maintenance of $6,250 per month
based on income of $196,764
o Mark would pay 35% of the gross STIP pay he received
o Mark would pay 35% of the gross of any stock options he
exercised even including stock option he was awarded
after the entry of the judgment for dissolution; and

o The agreement also provided for Mark to purchase life

insurance of $250,000 to be paid to Sherri upon his death.
The judgment resulted in me having a negative cash flow of over
$1000 per month and did not even include normal living
expenses I would incur including the expenses for my minor son
who I had custody of and lived with me.
During the recitation of the settlement I interjected multiple
times. This included stating that I could not make the payments,
that stock options had not been discussed, and asked when
could the settlement be reviewed. On every issue I raised I was
shot down while my attorney Rob Parker sat silent.
A motion to vacate was filed October 2011.
A hearing was held on December 5, 2012 where Ed Murphy
stated, Drew Parkers on the phone with him. Rob Parkers here
in person. Yeah I was part of it. All of us were outside discussing
it. He admitted the trial court discussed many options on
maintenance, one of which was Mark paying 50-60%
maintenance
January 27, 2012: Judge Risinger denied the motion to vacate.
February 6, 2012: Judge Risinger vacated his denial of the
motion to vacate and took the matter under advisement.
February 22, 2012: Judge Risinger issued an order denying the
motion to vacate and stated, It is not reasonable that the court
would have ordered the Husband to pay maintenance that was
50-60% of his gross pay. The court concurs with this statement
and opines that unless a court is looking to be reversed, no court
would ever order such an amount. In the instant case, since it
was not ordered nor threatened by this court to be ordered the
point is irrelevant.
February 23, 2012: The final judgment was entered.

The Appellee Brief was struck yet Judges Lytton, McDade and Schmidt
used the stricken brief as the basis of their decision. Their decision
contains text copied directly from the stricken brief. The Appellate
Court recommended waiving oral arguments.
Had I known the Appellate Court Judges were going to use the
stricken brief I would have responded to the lies contained in
the Appellee Brief and I never would have agreed to waive oral
arguments. I am citizen of Illinois and the United States. I
have the Constitutional Right to due process. That right was
taken away from me. My civil rights have been violated.
Specifically I was denied the right to clarify the following:

Contrary to the Appellee stating that the parties requested the

mid-trial meeting of the attorneys with Judge Risinger, in reality
the meeting was prearranged prior to the trial by Rob Parker,
Drew Parker and Ed Murphy. On September 27, 2011, prior to
entering the courtroom and before the trial started, Rob Parker
told me that he and Murphy would meet mid-day with Judge
Risinger to see how the judge was leaning regarding
maintenance. I did not request the meeting. It was not
requested during the proceedings and a request is not in the
transcripts. That is because it was organized before the trial
started.
Contrary to the Appellee stating I was presented many options
on maintenance including 50-60% of my gross pay, in fact I was
presented two options by Rob and Drew Parker. The first option
was I could proceed with the trial and if the judge did award 5060% of my gross pay I could appeal. Drew Parker told me that
the appeal process was long and I risked having to pay legal fees
for both sides. The second option was I could reach a settlement
and not move forward with the trial. I did not see any other
reasonable options so I tried to reach a settlement that was less
damaging than paying 50-60% of my gross for the rest of my life.
I did this while my attorney sat silent.

The above facts are quite relevant to my appeal. Why did Judges
Lytton, McDade and Schmidt fail to mention Judge Risingers February
22, 2012 order stating he never said he would award 50-60% of my
gross pay in their decision? Were they protecting the attorneys that
clearly committed fraud? Were they protecting Judge Risinger who did
nothing knowing for a fact that I was told he would award 50-60% of
my gross pay? Why did the Appellate Court Judges intentionally leave
out of their decision that I was responsible for supporting my youngest
son? Why did they leave out that I am responsible for my sons
education expenses? Because it shows the attorneys committed fraud,
the settlement was coerced, and the judgment is unconscionable. It
sickens me that both the Circuit Court and the Appellate Court have
ignored the needs of my sons.
It appears from the actions of Judges Lytton, McDade and Schmidt that
the decision on my appeal was decided before the appeal process even
started.
A few additional facts:
Rob and Drew Parker
4

The Appellee hired attorney Ed Murphy in July 2011, replacing

Judy Serritella her first attorney. There was a hearing scheduled
for September 7, 2011 at 9 AM to resolve all remaining issues. In
August 2011, Rob Parker told me Ed Murphy wanted to cancel
the hearing. On August 18, I instructed Rob in writing that I did
not want the hearing cancelled. On September 7, fifteen minutes
before the hearing, Rob called and told me, he and Dad had a
teleconference with Murphy and they decided to cancel the
hearing because Murphy was too busy and they would move all
remaining issues to the trial on September 27, 2011. Rob told me
he was going to walk over and inform the judge of the change in
plans. I questioned at the time who were the Parkers working
for? After Judge Risinger issued his February 22, 2012 order the
facts clearly show they were not working for me.

Ed Murphy
Ed Murphy is a liar and very effective at manipulating the court.
His strategy the morning of September 27, 2011 was an
assassination of my character to set the stage for the
prearranged meeting with the Judge. In March 2012, I filed a
complaint against Murphy for his lying and illegal actions with
the ARDC (Attachment F). That effort, like this appeal, proved to
be a waste of time.
Judge Michael Risinger
One would question where was Judge Risinger in all of this? He
has consistently done what ever Murphy told him to do and
worked to protect the attorneys involved on September 27, 2011.
He has consistently decided against me and made it very clear
that I must bury myself in debt or he would send me to jail. He
threatened me with jail in June and July 2012 simply because I
could not afford the maintenance, the mortgages and supporting
my son and myself. I navely relied on the Appellate Court to
right this wrong and continued go further in debt everyday
waiting for their decision.
As Judges Lytton, McDade and Schmidt reviewed transcripts they
must have ignored the following comments and actions from
Judge Risinger:

o December 5, 2011: Judge Risinger, regarding the 50-60%

of my gross pay, stated, I can tell you, I dont recall a
whole lot of this. Whatever went on in chambers, I have no
recollection at all.
o January 27, 2012: Judge Risinger denied the motion to
vacate the judgment. Moments later he learned I was
appealing the judgment. On February 6, 2012 he reversed
that decision and he later issued his February 22, 2012
order.
o February 23, 2012: Judge Risinger stated, And
furthermore, the Court did not consider anything in regards
to the child support other than just I heard, really Ill just
say this, I heard it with one ear, if that means anything to
anybody, about the child support. And frankly until it was
raised in your motion, or argued in the motion for directed
finding rather, I didnt realize that I had let that go. And
its been, you know my policy. I just I get very, very
specific when it comes to the child support. Very specific.
I guess he gets very specific except when it comes to my
son.
Judge Risinger was reassigned from Peoria County Civil Court
January 2013 to a Misdemeanor Court. In March 2013, he made
comments that his sentencing strategies for blacks were based
on their attitude and how they dress. Unbelievable. The solution
was to remove him from the Misdemeanor Court and put him
back in a Civil Court in Tazewell County. Circuit Court Chief
Judge Michael Brandt was well aware of the issues in my civil
court case because he had to review my response to paying Ed
Murphy sanctions in August 2012. That response clearly stated
the issues in this case as described above. Yet, the Chief Judge
re-assigned Judge Risinger back to a civil court.

The Damage:
I have taken out a $25K personal loan, put my car up as
collateral for a $34K loan, taken out a $16K personal loan,
borrowed $50K against my stock and borrowed $50K from my
brother to purchase a home. I had to borrow from my brother
since Murphy retaliated against me and locked up my stock in
January 2013. That was because I obtained a restraining order
against my ex-wife in January for threatening to slit my oldest
sons throat, threatening to slit the throat of the woman I am

seeing and damaging my car. She cannot drive by my street and

if we are in the same public place she must leave.
My youngest son and I have moved seven (7) times in 2.5 years
as a result of this dissolution of marriage. Four (4) of those times
are a result of the unconscionable judgment. We have lived in a
motel and two rental houses. I finally purchased a home
because I could not handle another move.
I lost $13K in personal property that was stolen the Appellee.
After the trial I asked Rob Parker about getting credit for the
equity gains on the marital home from the time I started paying
maintenance. He replied if its not in the transcript then no, like
it was my fault. So, I lost another $13K in January 2013 when the
marital home finally sold. So I paid maintenance and the
Appellee still got half the equity gains while I borrow money for
food.
I have $20K in student loans that I cosigned for my oldest son.
I have cosigned for $20K in student loans for my youngest sons
freshman year of school. He has a federal student loan of $6K.
We are in the process of doing the same for his sophomore year.
From October 1, 2011 January 2013 I borrowed everything to
support my sons and myself. That includes food. That includes
gas to go to work so I could comply with the judgment and stay
out of jail. I did this even though I have what most would
consider a very good income.

Judges Lytton, McDade and Schmidt have violated my Constitutional

and Civil Rights. They have intentionally failed to do the job they were
elected to do. That needs to be addressed.
Moving forward, I discussed options with my attorney. I could request a
re-hearing of the Appellate Court or I could take this case to the
Supreme Court. The re-hearing path would obviously be a further
waste of time. I wasted seventeen months of my life on this appeal,
just to experience additional judicial misconduct. Based on my
experience to date the legal process has failed to protect me in any
way. It has failed to recognize the needs of my sons. I do not have the
patience or endurance to put myself through the Supreme Court
process.
I have done nothing wrong. I simply wanted to end a very bad
marriage. I did not lie. I did not steal marital property. I just wanted a
divorce, a fair settlement and to move on with life. But I have been
lied to, lied about, stolen from and denied the judicial due process that
is my right. Instead of moving on I have spent nearly two years
fighting for my rights and to just be treated like a human being.

I will fix the injustice I have endured, not only for me but to protect
others from those involved in this debacle of justice described above.
For example I have asked the NAACP to review the sentences Judge
Risinger issued to blacks that had the misfortune to be in his court. I
do this because many of those sentenced may not have had a Polo
brand shirt in their closet.
As this case progresses, if I can, I will file criminal fraud charges
against Rob Parker, Drew Parker, Ed Murphy and Sherri Hexum. I will
pursue the mal-practice suit already filed against the law firm Parker &
Halliday. I am requesting the FBI to investigate the corruption in the
Illinois Courts. I am meeting with a reporter to follow the future events
in this case. I am copying the Illinois and United States Attorney
Generals on this complaint. I will hang on to the hope that the judicial
board will take the appropriate steps with Judges Lytton, McDade and
Schmidt.
All this, just so I get a fair divorce. Unconscionable.
Sincerely,

Mark G. Hexum
11123 N. Rhonda Way
Dunlap, IL 61525
(309) 253-9289
Enclosures:
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment

A:
B:
C:
D:
E:
F:

Appellant Brief
Appellee Brief
Appellate Court Order dated August 16, 2012
Appellate Court Order dated December 18, 2012
Appellate Court Decision dated July 15, 2013
ARDC Complaint

cc:
FBI Springfield Corruption Investigation
Lisa Madigan - Illinois Attorney General
Eric Holder US Attorney General