Guilty Without A Trial

Kay Kim was committed to a mental health institution on September 25, 2009 without a trial. In the USA it is possible for the court to commit an individual without a fair trial. All the cases against Kay Kim were misdemeanors and because the prosecutor does not any evidence against her they have been delaying and avoiding a trial since 2005. The Statue of Limitation for the first three cases had expired. The Statue of limitation for the last case will expire on November 5, 2009. The Judge with the collaboration of forensic psychiatrist Dr. Parker reports that she is a danger to the community and should be committed to a mental institution if the court concurs. Dr. Parker is not aware that the statue of limitation on a misdemeanor case is one year. Dr. Parker believed that Police do not lie. Dr. Parker evaluation is based not based on any scientific test but on his whim and fancy. Dr. Parker has given three different evaluations on Kay Kim – every report includes provisions that meet the request of the court. In his first report (2004) he certified with medical certainty that Kay Kim has a mental illness that has no cure but she can represent herself in court. Dr. Parker met the Judge on other unrelated business and the Judge ask Dr. Parker to give a second opinion to see if Kay Kim is able to represent herself or assist counsel. In his second report (2005) Dr. Parker again certified with medical certainty that Kay Kim has a mental illness that has no cure and she is incapable of representing herself or assist counsel but he recommended that she needs not be committed to a mental institution. In 2009 the Judge asked Dr.Parker for a third evaluation. In the order on May 1, 2009 she asked Dr. Parker “to determine whether Kay Kim is of sound or unsound mind on the date (2005,2006,2007,2008) of the alleged offence(s) and whether the defendant has the comprehension sufficient to understand the nature of these proceedings and aid his attorney in his defense and whether the defendant can be restored to competency in the future.” So accordingly Dr. Parker gave an identical evaluation to that of Dr. Callaway. Dr. Callaway specified that Kay Kim need not be committed. This time Dr. Parker Dr. Parker again certified with medical certainty that Kay Kim has a mental illness that has no cure and she is incapable of representing herself or assist counsel but he recommended that if the court concurs she needs to be committed to a mental institution because Kay Kim is a risk to the community. If Dr. Parker is correct how can Kay Kim represent herself in the small claims court against the corporate attorneys of State Farm Insurance on September 23, 2009. The Hon Judge Robert Spear from Perry Township was impressed with Kay Kim’s argument and commented that she proved liability and entered judgment in her favor. Kay Kim has also represented herself pro se, in three Federal Law Suits (Case: 1:09-cv-00829-DFH-JMS, 1:08-cv-1644 SEB-DML and 1:05-cv-1611Guilty without a trial 1

SEB-JMS). Kay Kim is currently representing herself in the 7th Circuit of Appeals. Kay Kim has answered and followed all the Rules and Procedures of the Federal District Courts and US Appellate Court. On what basis did Dr. Parker certified that Kay Kim is incapable of representing herself or assist counsel. Kay Kim has been living in the same condominium community for 10 years. There are about 250 separate families living there. Over the same period there was no complaint from the neighbors. If Dr. Parker is right there should be a few hundreds or thousands arrest. From May 1, 2009 (the date the Judge ordered the evaluation) till September 25,2009 (the date Kay Kim was committed) there was no violence or complaint on Kay Kim. In fact since the 2007 case there is no complaint on her. How can Dr. Parker in his right frame of mind certified with medical certainty that Kay Kim must be committed. If Dr. Parker is sincere and believed his evaluation it is his duty by law to put Kay Kim on involuntary commitment. Instead Dr. Parker seeks the court concurrence to commit Kay Kim. The law specifies that Dr. Parker must be a disinterested psychiatrist. Even though Dr. Parker is employed by Indiana University he has a personal vested interest in the prosperity of the mental institutions. Dr. Parker in on the Board of Directors of many mental institutions and it is financially beneficial to him to provide a constant supply of new patients to the mental institutions. Kay Kim’s release from the mental institution depends on Dr. Parker and his crony(ies). Since Dr. Parker and Indiana University is been sued by Kay Kim in the 7th Circuit of Appeals shouldn’t his testimony be disallowed. The Court should provide Kay Kim with a truly disinterested psychiatrist for a second opinion. The court failed to provide due process to Kay Kim in violation to the Bills of Rights. The Court also removed Kay Kim rights to self representation without a competency hearing. The Court did not provide Kay Kim an opportunity to cross examine the testimonies of the psychiatrist. The Court did not provide counsel for Kay Kim to stop the commitment. The Court did not allow Kay Kim to subpoena evidences for her case. An indefinite commitment is too harsh and unwarranted punishment for a misdemeanor case. I believe there is a God and if the Court cannot provide justice the Almighty God will take care of everything. I like to attach the beautiful article “God’s Wings” which I found in the web.

God's Wings After a forest fire in Yellowstone National Park , forest rangers began their trek up a mountain to assess the inferno's damage.

One ranger found a bird literally petrified in ashes, perched statuesquely on the ground at the base of a tree. Somewhat sickened by the eerie sight, he knocked over the bird with a stick.

When he gently struck it, three tiny chicks scurried from under their dead mother's wings. The loving mother, keenly aware of impending disaster, had carried her offspring to the base of the tree and had gathered them under her wings, instinctively knowing that the toxic smoke would rise.

She could have flown to safety but had refused to abandon her babies. Then the blaze had arrived and the heat had scorched her small body, the mother had remained steadfast.... because she had been willing to die, so those under the cover of her wings would live.

'He will cover you with His feathers, And under His wings you will find refuge.' (Psalm 91:4)

Guilty without a trial 3