IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTY-THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DEKALB COUNTY, ILLINOIS Sane of /ecowors COURT CASENO.:_l! CE 4 SY Plaintiffs), ) ) ) % ) TAce Me@eeoueH ; Defendant(s). ) RZ MYH 9i92 € 1 NOTICE OF MOTION TO: [[] Vacate O Travel Other Mote v Cae SFr Ve sEL oR On Macc 29 ,2oiG, a 1132 gm, oras soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, I shall appear before the Honorable_ Tog “Beavy or any judge sitting in his/her stead, in Courtroom _22.©__, or the Courtroom usually occupied by hinv/her at: [H_ 133 West State Street, Sycamore, IL 60178 (200 South 4" Street, DeKalb, IL 60115 (1 128 East Railroad Street, Sandwich, IL, 60548 Phone#; 98'S 895-678 PrintName: CHances Kio eri Sion Name: Canty poe ‘Notice of Motion Revised 032072016IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE TWENTY-THIR JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DEKALB COUNTY, ILLINOIS STATE Of Seemed CASENO._/ 1 CF YY ) Plaintiffs), } a ) x 8 VS- } g 3 JACK Me Coces YO ) §. Defendant(s). ) APPEARANCE THEREBY ENTER THE APPEARANCE OF (insert the name of the party for whom you are entering your appearance) AND MY OWN AS [ ] REGULAR COUNSEL { ] TRIAL COUNSEL [_] SPECIAL & LIMITED APPEARANCE [ ] SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL LX) PRO-SE { ] COUNSEL IN FORCIBLE ENTRY (| ADDITIONAL COUNSEL ( ] APPELLATE COUNSEL L_] GUARDIAN AD LITEM AND AS (HIS) (HER) (THEIR) COUNSEL IN THE ABOVE ENTITLED CASE. staruspate: 3/29/76 Name: CHeaces Kovsect Lf itaces Kiowett Attomey No.: : Attomey for: __ Wyseze horas pea P2o0~ Se Signature of Atomey Address: (29 ™. Cross Sr City/State/Zip: Sycamore (2 Gar 78 Chances RroneK Print or Type Name Telephone: 81S -B7S-GIBY (White - Cireuit Clerk; Yellow - PL; Pink - DF) Aapenrsace REV: iavazo12IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY STATE OF ILLINOIS STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v ) — CaseNo. 11 CF _4S4 } JACK MCCULLOUGH, ) Defendant. ) EMERGENCY MOTION FOR SPECIAL PROSECUTOR My name is Charles Ridulph and | am representing myself as I stand before the Court as an interested party under the Victim's Right's Act and am asking that a Special Prosecutor be appointed because what Richard Schmack is doing is wrong. Mr. Schmack is presenting assumptions as truth that which the presiding trial judge Hallock and the panel of appellate court Judges had ruled were not admissible as truth. Had these assumptions been argued in court the evidence would have still found Jack McCullough guilty. Mr. Schmack has ignored not only previous judge rulings but also all other evidence, especially he is ignoring the time frame schedule presented in the 1958 state police report; the 1958 memo which declared “Thar it was known that a man was with Maria at a much earlier time than was indicated by previous reports” Mr. Schmack’s response to that was: “When read in context the real meaning of this sentence is that the Ridulphs and their neighbors might have become aware as early as 7:10 that @ man had been with Maria...1t does not mean that the man had actually been with Maria earlier than 6:30-6:45 p.m, just that adults might have become aware of it sooner afier 7:00 than the FBI originally believed.” Here again Mr. Schmack’s assumption is completely wrong. T can testify that a minimum of 45 minutes would have gone by between the time Maria disappeared and the time that we knew of the presence of a man. Even the reports submitted by Mr. Schmack with all the varying times (some ranging up to as much as an hour) show that too much transpired between those two events. Kathy would have walked home to get her mittens. Kathy would have walked back and looked for Maria, Kathy would have come to my house looking for Maria. I would have sent Kathy back to look for Maria. Kathy would have come back to my house saying she could not find Maria. 1 would have went looking for Maria twice going around the block which would have taken approximately 15 minutes each trip, and additionally on one tip I stopped at a house on DeKalb Ave asking if they had seen Maria. This was the minimum amount of steps taken between the time Maria was taken and the time we knew of aman, Several months ago Mr. Schmack presented myself and my sister a copy of his time frames for the crime. 1 asked if he had been in consultation with the investigators who had so thoroughly gone over that aspect of the prosecution had it been brought up in the original trial. He had not. After my review of his time frame schedule, I expressed my many concems and urged him to contact the state police for consultation. He said he had no confidence in the state police investigation. When my sister and I left Mr. Schmack’s office we both said at the same time that we felt as though we should have had an attorney with us. How sad!Richard Schmack began disrespecting Maria, myself, our family and this entire community, the first day of the trial when he sat in the Courtroom, filling out his campaign material, while rolling his eyes, commenting on the Defendant's innocence and socializing with the Public Defenders and the Defendant at their trial table in the front of the Courtroom for everyone to see. Jt was disrespectful then and it was just as disrespectful when he stood before this Court just months ago, shaking the Defendant's hand at the bench and the Defendant said to him for everyone to here "thank you for everything you're doing for me". Richard Schmack has continued to be rude and dismissive to our family and made it clear that he was Jack McCullough’s advocate and not Maria's from the beginning. On Good Friday moming, just minutes before | was to leave home to preach at 2 worship service, I received via email the notification from Mr. Schmack’s office of his intention to request for the verdict to be reversed. Via email! That is typical of the respect or courtesy that he has shown to the Ridulph family. My sister and I felt betrayed. We once again had become the victims, but this time with no one to turn to. The state’s attomey had become the victimizer. ‘My sister Maria was snatched away, raped and murdered, abandoned in the woods. And now, Richard Schmack has abandoned her yet again and he has done so for the wrong reasons. Richard Schmack has reached the conclusion he wanted to reach by manipulating, and picking and choosing bits and pieces from reports which cannot for the most part be verified. He is misleading this Court, the media and the world when he gives his one sided commentary of what the evidence actually shows, He is wrong and he should be required to prove whatever it is he claims to be true and not be allowed to say, I've cracked the case and forget about the Trial Court, the Appellate Court, the post-conviction petition denials, and most importantly, these assumptions and accusations which he has made should be accountable to the highest level of scrutiny. Your Honor, I'm not a lawyer, but how can it possibly be proper for a State's Attorney to say “I've reviewed all of the inadmissible evidence and I've concluded the Defendant didn't do it Tam not a lawyer but I understood completely why those reports were not allowed into evidence. There is simply no way to validate them; just too many discrepancies which cannot be clarified, Mr. Schmack makes so many assumptions over and over that he declares are true or factual. For example: “The disappearance was first reported to the police between 8:00 p.m. and 8:10 p.m.” And yet, in Sgt. Spencer & Trooper Bales report to Lt. Toffant they record that Mrs. Cliffe and Mrs. Strombom saw my mother talking to a policeman at a litle after 7:00 p.m. In addition to that, 1 know of a witness still alive who recalls seeing my mother and my sister Pat at the police station around 7:00 while she was on her way to “Teen Town”. Mr. Schmack has also had placed a great deal of emphasis on the testimony of Katherine Tessier Caulfield concerning the time of her 4H Federation party, He provided copies of newsletters and statements of 4H leaders stating that no 4H meetings ever started at 6:00 p.m. This however was not a meeting as made clear by Katherine Caulfield. It was a social gathering; a federation event for which records were not kept because they were not official events. Mr. Schmack included newsletter articles referencing 4H Federation parties starting at 7:00 or 7:30 p.m., none of which referenced the date of December 3". Katherine Caulfield stands by her testimony. It was ruled credible then and it is credible now. I could go on but I think you get thePoint. Mr. Schmack lists 24 so called facts. Of those 24, I, an untrained spectator, would question or out-right challenge 16. Your Honor, my fear is that we the victims have no voice in these proceedings. Jack McCullough was found guilty by Judge Hallock, the Appellate Court found that there was more than enough evidence to convict and the Defendant's Appeal was denied, The ‘Supreme Court refused to hear it, finding that no reason to further review the matter existed because there was more than enough evidence to convict. But now here we are, with Richard Schmack, the elected State's Attorney representing the Defendant, blasting out to the world that an innocent man was wrongfully convicted. Who's representing Maria? Who is representing us as the victims? Richard Schmack decided to abandon Maria's defense and advocate for the man convicted of her kidnapping and murder. How can he do that? Your Honor, unless you appoint a Special Prosecutor to stand for Maria, she will be left alone again like she was left in the woods in 1957. My litte sister needs your help your Honor! Richard Schmack should be required to prove his case. The Court should hear his so- called “new evidence" and it should be tested by a Special Prosecutor. Or, for that matter Your Honor, since there actually is no new evidence, why can’t this matter just be ended tight now, Ma, Schmack you are out of line! Mr. Schmack should not be allowed to be both prosecutor and defense lawyer, standing solely with the man who confessed to killing my sister, Maria. If Richard Schmack is right, he should welcome the opportunity to prove it. Tam not making this request because I don't like the conclusion Richard Schmack has reached, | am making this request because what he has represented in his filing is misleading and untrue. He should be required to prove his assumptions. Whatever his motives, Richard Schack js on a crusade to free Jack McCullough, a self-admitted child rapist and killer and to allow him to do this goes against everything we as human beings should expect from one another. Your honor, I beg of you to appoint a Special Prosecutor so that someone with no connection to the Public Defender's Office or even this community, can review the claims of Richard Schmack and the Defendant and to handle the matter in an unbiased manner so that we may all know that Justice is being served. Thank you.