1. WILL THIS COURT ADDRESS THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT AND BOTH THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT AND APPELLATE COURT OVER ILLINOIS RULE OF EVIDENCE 801 AND SECTION 725 ILS 5/115-10.2(a), AND THE IMPROPER REMISSION OF HEARSAY STATEMENTS?

2. WILL THIS COURT ADDRESS THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT AND THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT ON THE PEOPLE v. TIM GOVERNOR OF STATE OF MIND HEARSAY STATEMENTS REGULATING ONLY A DECLARANT'S PERSONAL FEARS/FRIGHT CORE, BEING RELEVANT TO A DEFENDANT'S STATE OF MIND AND THE LIKELIHOOD OF IMPROPERLY DEMONSTRATING PROPENSITY?

3. SHOULD THE EXTREMELY PREJUDICIAL HEARSAY TESTIMONY OF A DECLARANT WITH WELL DOCUMENTED MENTAL ILLNESS BE ADMISSIBLE IN A MURDER TRIAL? SHOULD THAT DECLARANT'S DEMONSTRABLE LIES ABOUT SEXUAL INSTANCES OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RENDER INADMISSIBLE HER PRIOR STATEMENTS INTRODUCED UNDER THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HEARSAY EXCEPTION?

4. WILL THIS COURT ADDRESS THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT'S RULING ESTABLISHING THE THREE PRONG ADMISSIBILITY THRESHOLD FOR LIFE INSURANCE EVIDENCE (SEE PEOPLE v. GOINS AND PEOPLE v. MITCHELL) AND THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT'S RECENT DECISION TO DISREGARD THAT THRESHOLD AND RELY SOLELY ON INFERENCES?

5. SHOULD THIS COURT ESTABLISH, IN CASES OF ALLEGED ACCIDENTAL HOMICIDE INVOLVING DROWNING OR OTHER ARGUABLY ACCIDENTAL DEATHS, CASES IN WHICH REASONABLE MEDICAL HYPOTHESES CONSISTENT WITH ACCIDENTAL DEATH HAVE BEEN PROVIDED, A MORE STRINGENT STANDARD OR AT LEAST A REQUIREMENT OF CLOSER SCRUTINY FOR THE FINDING OF THE REQUISITE CRIMINAL AGENCY?

6. WILL THIS COURT ADDRESS THE CONFLICT BETWEEN ILLINOIS REVIEWING COURTS OVER THE PROPER STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR CLAIMS OF DELIBERATE PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT, AND EXAMINE ONE IN ARISING TREND OF PROSECUTORS EMPLOYING DELIBERATE MISCONDUCT AND DECEPTION AS A MEANS TO BOLSTER WEAK, INSUBSTANTIAL CASES?

7. WILL THIS COURT ADDRESS A PATTERN OF PROSECUTORS USING GOVERNMENT POWER AND COURTIERS, POSSIBLY TO DEMOTE EXPERT OPINION TESTIMONY AS A MEANS TO BOLSTER WEAK CASES THROUGH COURT SANCTIONS ON WITNESSES AND SPECULATORS, TACTICS THAT MIGHT WHICH WOULD NOT OTHERWISE EXIST? SHOULD THIS COURT ESTABLISH STANDARDS IN ASSESSING OF EXPERT OPINION TESTIMONY AS REQUIRES MORE STRINGENT EXAMINATION OF ALL UNDERLYING FACTS AND METHODOLOGY UPON WHICH THE OPINION IS PREDICATED?

Whether the Illinois Appellate Court and Illinois Supreme Court erred in their rulings on the admissibility of hearsay statements, the proper standard for insurance evidence, the standard for proving criminal agency in accidental death cases, and the standard for deliberate prosecutorial misconduct