Monday, May 30, 2016

PRACTICING LAW WHILE BLACK IS NOT AN ETHICALLY CHALLENGED ENDEAVOR, EXCEPT IN ILLINOIS

 

Inbox
x

kenneth ditkowsky

8:47 AM (21 hours ago)
to illinoisgov, FBI-, Eric, ABAJournal.com, Lanre, me, Janet, Illinois, jelarkin, KRISTI, ilhouse51, ilsenate20, ACLU, JoAnne, Cook, ilrep49, ABA, Ditkowsky, Jay, Nasga, newseditors, Chicago, Andy, Candice, Tim
During the kangaroo hearings at the IARDC I noticed that the only prospective spectator to this public proceeding to be excluded was Diane Nash.    Ms. Nash, a civil rights icon, was told that there was no more room in the hearing room by Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary people and therefore she was excluded!    When I hear about this outrage, I was 'outraged' as there was an empty seat right adjacent to my seat.   To exclude an Icon of the Civil Rights movement Mr. Larkin's minion had not been candid and denied public accommodations to a hero of the Selma march and the Civil Rights March on Washington.

I wrote Mr. Larkin an e-mail on more than on occasion.   I solicited one of those apologizes that routinely are given to acknowledge a mistake - intentional or not!    Of course not even the routine insincere words were not communicated  - LARKIN WAS DEFENDING Jim Crow and his policy of selective racial discrimination.   Step and Fetch it racial policies are the new standard - an independent citizen who has a dark hue to his/her skin who is not lock step into the racial policies of the dominate political elite is a none person.    Apparently, Ms. Nash in supporting Ms. Denison by her appearance forfeited her dignity as an American and was openly and notoriously discriminated against.

Fortunately, Ms. Nash has been enrolled in America's hall of fame and her contribution to American Democracy cannot be diminished by corrupt judicial and public officials who reside in the cesspools of their own making.   Indeed, while I took the incident seriously, Ms. Nash laughed at the pettiness of Jerome Larkin and his 18 USCA 371 miscreants.    Unfortunately, the Lanre Amu situation is much more serious.    Crain's Chicago Business is reported to have made averments virtually identical to that of Mr. Amu in one situation; however, Larkin's kangaroo court with not a scintilla of evidence determined (pursuant to the standard of clear and convincing) that Mr. Amu was not telling the truth!  

What has happened here in Illinois appears to be that a full court press has been promulgated to protect the corrupt judge, political figure, public figure ***** and the IARDC has designated itself (with public funds) to protect the criminals from gadfly attorneys.

I know that I am compounding my ethical lapse (in the view of larkin) but once again I demand an HONEST INVESTIGATION.     
 


----- Forwarded Message -----
From: 'Lanre O. Amu <loamu@aol.com>
To: kenditkowsky@yahoo.com; jelarkin@iardc.org;
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: iardc complaint against jerome larkin et al


'Lanre O. Amu, P.E. (Illinois '89), B.C.E. (U of MN, '84), M.S.C.E. (U of MN, '86), M.B.A. (UIC, '89), J.D. (1995)
0909 301 3007  0815 781 6971



-----Original Message-----
From: kenneth ditkowsky <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>
To: jelarkin <jelarkin@iardc.org>;
Sent: Sat, May 28, 2016 6:34 pm
Subject: iardc complaint against jerome larkin et al

 To:  Jerome Larkin, individually and as Administrator of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary commission (IARDC) and the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary commission.
From:  Kenneth Ditkowsky
Date:  May 28, 2016
Subject:   Challenge to you to tell demonstrate that a public office is a public trust, and formal complaint concerning your ethically challenged and illegal conduct.
Cc:    All interested parties, Honorable L. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States, Justice Department of the United States, Attorney JoAnne Denison, States Attorney of Cook County,
 
Dear Mr. Larkin, and the IARDC Commission,
 
With the pending scandals that are about to unfold in Washington concerning the participants in the current Presidential race, the public is going need an affirmation of the principle that a public office is a public trust.    I understand that you are the last people to be considered to demonstrate that principle.   Mr. Larkin’s conduct in violation of 18 USCA 4, 241,242, 371, 1341 etc. is a cornucopia of deceit, and perfidy.     Subordination of perjury, perjury, conspiracy, and outright theft are the cornerstones of IARDC procedure and purpose.    Few openly nefarious ‘cover-ups’, obstruction of justice, and spoliation of evidence are notoriously exhibited to the public.
 
Infamy will preserve the analogy of Ms. Denison’s blog to yelling fire in a crowded theater, and the intentional misrepresentation by IARDC lawyers in the name of Mr. Larkin of the holdings in Sawyer and Alvarez.     The assaults on the First Amendment by the IARDC and Larkin are akin to ISIS terrorism, however, the ability to marshal the cover-up of the corruption evident in the Mary Sykes case 09 P 4585 (Circuit Court of Cook County) is beyond the pale.     Knowing that guardianships were limited in scope because of Illinois and USA Constitutional core values,  co-conspirator attorneys Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmiedel and others used the Illinois guardianship act to openly and notorious isolate Mary Sykes so that her estate could be  looted.   (I’ve estimated the booty at $3,000,000 dollars).   
 
Mr. Larkin, Ms. Black, et al have accused me of not telling the truth concerning the Mary Sykes case.    The allegation while unspecific accused me of defaming a group of judges claiming that they acted without jurisdiction and without following the law.    Similar averments were made concerning Ms. Denison; however, the Commission added the offense of publishing the corruption in her blog entitled MaryGSykes.     After my kangaroo trial (and during the kangaroo hearing concerning Ms. Denison) a letter surfaced authored by Cynthia Farenga complaining that our averments of corruption had been published in the Probate Sharks blog.    Disciplinary proceeding followed.     Exculpating evidence was barred, and requirement of clear and convincing proof was modified to mean – Larkin clairvoyance!      The Subpoena of the Mary Sykes file, which verifies the truth of every averment made by Ms. Denison and myself was exclude from the evidence.       The rationale was obvious – the ‘fix’ was in and therefore exculpating evidence had to be kept out of the record.
 
Unfortunately, the Judges whose corruption was being protected could not be totally orchestrated.  (Subordination of perjury).     Judge Connors admitted at page 91 of her deposition that she was ‘wired’ (and/or ‘fixed’).    She testified that had she known of the jurisdictional deficiencies she would have stopped the proceedings, fixed the problem, however, the same result would have occurred.    Judge Stuart outright lied.   First she denied chaining Gloria Sykes (the daughter of Mary Sykes) in her courtroom – in an effort to torture from her the location of her (Gloria’s) assets, and then she (under cross examination) admitted the same.     Larkin solved this problem by attorning to a slight modification of the hearing transcript to eliminate the perjury.     Such spoliation of evidence appears to be quite common in lawyer disciplinary actions[1].      
 
By way of background, as it appears that the IARDC and lawyer disciplinary commissions have during the relevant time period had the policy of interpreting the guardianship statute to not being an accommodation as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act, but as a forfeiture of all human and civil rights.    Interestingly enough the Illinois legislature (as well as the legislatures of most of the States of the union) make it abundantly clear that:
 
 (b) Guardianship shall be utilized only as is necessary to promote the well-being of the person with a disability, to protect him from neglect, exploitation, or abuse, and to encourage development of his maximum self-reliance and independence. Guardianship shall be ordered only to the extent necessitated by the individual's actual mental, physical and adaptive limitations.  755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b
 To make certain that senior citizens such as Mary Sykes, Alice Gore, **** are not exploited (as actually occurred) the person seeking a guardianship must prove not only the incompetency but the degree of incompetency by CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE.      (This is the same standard that is applicable to the IARDC disciplinary proceedings)      It is respectfully suggested that in neither proceeding is even the lowest standard of evidence (burden of proof) required.  (See page 91 of Maureen Connors evidence deposition)
 
Of course, in kangaroo proceedings the result desired by the 18 USCA 371 cover-up is achieved.     It is achieved with or without a scintilla of evidence.      The orchestration of such is the subject of this letter of complaint.     Rule 8.3 and 18 USCA 4 required both JoAnne Denison and myself to offend Ms. Farenga, Ms. Black, Mr. Stern, Mr. Larkin, Ms. Sharp, ***** and all the other attorneys who have participated in the actual miscreant conduct or its cover-up.      As for Ms. Denison, Mr. Lanre Amu, ***** (including myself) to not offend Mr. Larkin and his 18 USCA 371 cover- conspirators we also would be subject to possible obstruction of justice averments.     We however stood up to be counted and continue every day to demand Honest investigations, collection of the Federal and State income taxes (including interest and penalties) from the 18 USCA 241,242,371 co-conspirators, and abrogation of the cover-up.     NB.   It is my calculation that each conspirator jointly and severally owes very substantial taxes to the USA and the State of Illinois.   For instance, in Sykes @$3 million dollars is due; in Gore $1.5 million, Tyler 8 million *******.   [2]
 
My challenge.      It appears at this point in time that Jerome Larkin and his 18 USCA 371 co-conspirators are not going to get away with their perfidy.      The term “cover up” is going to be a very serious charge and the ‘great unwashed’ are not going to be led by the corrupt political and judicial machines in a euphoria of procrastination, deception, ******.
 
Therefore, let us get right to the chase.     While Larkin has consistently refused to detail the charges made against either JoAnne or myself, it is clear that each charge has to do with the Sykes case and the issue of judicial propriety.     Being more specific each charge has to do with whether a corrupt judge ignored a lack of jurisdiction to effectuate the elder cleansing of Mary Sykes.     All the evidence is in the Mary Sykes file 09 P 4585.     This file will unequivocally determine: 
1.       Jurisdiction
2.       Whether safeguards of the Constitution were complied with
3.       Whether a wrongful forfeiture occurred as to Mary’s liberty and property rights.
 
My challenge is for Mr. Larkin or any of the accused miscreants to produce out of the original file 09 P 4585 (Mary Sykes) the following documents.      If the documents are not produced, honor requires Mr. Larkin and each of his co-conspirators as well as each of appointed guardian ad litem to surrender their law licenses and confess to the United States of America their part in the elder cleansing of Mary Sykes.    Simply put – let us put this matter to rest right now!
 
1)      Jurisdiction.     In order for a person – disabled or not, the court must meet the due process standard of notice and hearing.    The person who is to be adjudicated must be personally served with summons.   The Summons must meet the criteria of the statute 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10, which is very specific and the criterion procrustean as there may be a taking of constitutionally protected Rights, privileges and immunities.    In addition, there may be a stranger having control over another person’s property.
 
a.        Challenge:    Produce a copy of a summons that was actually personally served on Mary Sykes prior to any hearing on her competency that sought to ascertain the extent and nature, if any, of any disability that Mary Sykes might have actually suffered from 755 ILCS 5/11a -3b    This is important as the legislature wanted in writing appropriate warnings so that the rights of the alleged disabled person were protected[3].
 
b.      Challenge:  Produce a Sheriff’s return of Summons in proper form attesting to actual service on Mary Sykes and the compliance with the Statute...    This is particularly important as oral information must be given the alleged disabled person[4].
 
c.       Challenge:    Produce affidavits of notice being given to next of kin (close relatives, near relatives) prior to any hearing that was intended to obtain the information required by 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b.   This is jurisdictional pursuant to 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10.[5]   The people who should have received the prior notice include both of Mary’s sisters and Gloria Sykes.
 
 
2)       Constitutional Safeguards.      As human and civil rights are subject to forfeiture notice and hearing are prime requirements of due process.      The statute is very clear, to wit:
 (b) Guardianship shall be utilized only as is necessary to promote the well-being of the person with a disability, to protect him from neglect, exploitation, or abuse, and to encourage development of his maximum self-reliance and independence. Guardianship shall be ordered only to the extent necessitated by the individual's actual mental, physical and adaptive limitations. 
Thus it is apparent that this is a very serious hearing and cannot be obviated by agreements of the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the petitioner.   Actual evidence must be presented that is clear and convincing that the alleged incompetent is in fact incompetent.   Actual evidence must be presented as to the extent of the disability and how a reasonable accommodation must be obtained.
Challenge:     produce a transcript of the proceedings in which a 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b hearing was indeed conducted as to the competency and extent thereof of MARY SYKES.    As the Court provides a court reporter for these very serious hearings the official court reporters office should have either filed or have available for transcription such a hearing[6].   
As Mr. Larkin and the IARDC had the burden of proof to prove disciplinary breaches by both Denison and Ditkowsky if the IARDC can not produce the appropriate materials referred to supra, Larkin and every attorney involved directly or indirectly should resign his/her position immediately and surrender his/her law license as each is a participant in a very serious FRAUD.       
 
If the IARDC and the miscreants can produce from the original file, either in its present form or the sanitized version that has evolved each of the Challenged items both JoAnne and yours truly deserve the punishment meted out plus and I will publicly acknowledge that fact and make a formal apology.  HOWEVER if the IARDC, Larkin, Farenga, Black, Smart, **** cannot produce the appropriate returns of service from the Sheriff of Cook County, the affidavits of prior notice of the hearing required by 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b, and a transcript of that hearing each of the attorneys, including the 18 USCA 371 IARDC attorney/attorneys  should resign and surrender his/her license to practice law[7]  
 
This ‘elder cleansing’ is a very serious business.     Core Rights of citizens are being violated and confiscated along with their life savings and quality of life.   In the 1930s and 1940s when the Nazi hordes were systematically prospecting in their victims mouths of the gold in their teeth were shocked and outraged; however, when **** orchestrated a similar scenario not only is not a word of protest forthcoming, but the Illinois Supreme Court and the IARDC join in a massive cover-up and attornment.
 
The gantlet has been thrown.        Are we willing to accept less than HONESTY and Honor from our public officials?     If so, WHY?       A public office is a public trust.      As Americans we are entitled to HONEST public officials who have actual integrity – not the nadir of society and our population.      Larkin – put up or shut up!     
 
Let me suggest that if you cannot produce a majority of the items demanded supra you are admitting to some very serious felonies that not only diminish you but all around you.     Everyone makes errors and thus Americans are universally forgiving.    Intentionally preying on the elderly is one of sins that cannot be forgiven!     Your failure to either produce the items demanded or make restitution for your crimes against the ‘great unwashed’ is unacceptable.
 
Demand is made to the IARDC and the Illinois Supreme Court to enforce the Rule of Law equally and if Larkin and the miscreants who have acted in concert with him cannot produce the evidence required by this complaint appropriate punishment be handed out to Larkin and his 18 USCA 371 co-conspirators.
 
Respectfully submitted,


[1] It should be noted that the affidavits of Gloria Sykes, Scott Evans et al verify every statement that either Denison or yours truly makes concerning these cases.     In the Alice Gore case, which does not appear to part of the original charges the offending Guardian ad Litem was accused by the Florida Attorney General of fraud – she was noted to have filed a claim as an heir to an estate that she was a stranger.  (See Probate Sharks blog).    Her benefactor, a large nursing home operator, has been fined by the USA and others for various Medicare, Medicaid **** frauds.   The Gore Estate is reported to have extreme irregularities attorned to by the presiding judge****    The Holocaust becomes quite relevant to the Gore case as it was disclosed that the avarice of the judicial officials including prospecting his Mrs. Gore’s mouth for the gold in her teeth.     Naturally, Mr. Larkin could find nothing amiss with the collecting of gold from the teeth of elder cleansing victims.
[2] As Illinois is on the verge of Bankruptcy and the legislature want to increase the taxpayer burden, it is now quite appropriate to collect from each of the miscreants their joint and several liability.   It is my supposition that each of the lawyer defendants is guilty of not reporting the tax liability on his/her 1040 Tax return.    Had they done so *****.     
[3] This will be interesting as the Clerk of the Circuit Court has admitted that she did not even have such a form printed at the time of the Mary Sykes scenario was unfolding.    The form summons thus had to be specifically drafted by the attorney representing the petitioner.    It does appear that the wrong form summons were presented to the Sheriff of Cook County.    These summons were not served because Mary was not a resident of Cook County – she had been abducted and removed to DuPage County.    This bit of legerdemain suggested FRAUD was evident on day one.    
[4] The Sheriff of Cook County wrote a letter denying any return of summons, however, Mr. Schmiedel claims a bench service.      He does not claim that the 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10 form summons was ever served, nor has he claimed that the procedure required as followed.    
[5] No prior notice has ever been claimed to have been given to Gloria Sykes (daughter), or two either of the two sisters of Mary.     Even the kangaroo panel could not ‘find’ that notice was given, they instead said that the two sister had knowledge of some hearing.
[6] Interestingly Adam Stern wrote to Gloria Sykes an e-mail in which he disclosed that no such hearing had been had.   The incompetency was determined by the two guardian ad litem meeting with the Attorney for the petitioner and the judge signing the order presented.    If the e-mail is accurate, a key element of due process is missing (along with notice) and the proceedings are so tainted that gross criminal conduct has occurred in the Circuit Court of Cook County and not only must the offending judges be removed from office, but they are the attorneys attorning to such procedures must be subjected to serious disciplinary proceedings that include disbarment.    Contrary to Mr. Larkin’s assertion – this offense against the Constitution of the State of Illinois and the United States of America is so obscene as to warrant criminal prosecution of the offending attorneys.    Each of the attorneys and each of the judges involved knew of should have known that 18 USCA 241, 242  and 42 USCA 1983 were openly and notoriously violated.        This lack of propriety coupled with the theft of a million dollars in Gold Coins (see Gloria Sykes affidavit on file in both the Ditkowsky and Denison disciplinary files) suggests some additional felonies!     Exactly how the IARDC can ignore Ms. Sykes’ affidavit and the lack of due process is a mystery that suggest felonies galore!
[7] The attorneys on the various panels who were not independent enough to object to the kangaroo proceedings in the Denison and Ditkowsky proceedings are not being given a pass -  they also are co-conspirators and wrongdoers as they rubber=stamped the cover=up in the Sykes case.     Attorneys take an oath to uphold the Constitution.    Upholding the constitution is not consistent with attempting to silence the exposure of judicial (or political) corruption.    

Sunday, May 29, 2016

Hillary and Bill Clinton dodge 'death tax' by putting their New York home into trust - despite presidential candidate's efforts to make the wealthiest pay more

Hillary and Bill Clinton dodge 'death tax' by putting their New York home into trust - despite presidential candidate's efforts to make the wealthiest pay more

  • Hillary and Bill Clinton have created residence trusts for their Chappaqua, New York home to legally evade the so-called 'death tax'
  • The tactic is often only used among the top one per cent of the nation to reduce their estate tax bills and leave hefty gifts for their children 
  • The Clintons purchased the Chappaqua home for $1.7million in 1999, and it is now estimated to be worth $1.8million  
  • By moving the home into trusts, any increase in the property's value is outside the Clintons' estates, and therefore out of the IRS's reach 
  • The decision is common among multi-millionaires, as only estates worth more than $5.45million face an estate tax, which tops out at 40 per cent
  • Throughout the current presidential campaign Hillary Clinton has been calling for estate tax reform that would raise taxes for wealthy Americans
  • The tax would apply to estates exceeding $3.5million per person at a top rate of 45 per cent 

Hillary and Bill Clinton have been using financial planning strategies to reduce their exposure to the so-called 'death tax' that she wants to raise, new documents have confirmed.
The couple have created residence trusts for their Chappaqua, New York, home, a tactic often only used among the wealthiest to reduce their estate tax bills and leave hefty gifts for their children.
Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton has been calling for estate tax reform, demanding taxes on high-income and wealthy Americans are raised.
But because of the trusts, the couple could avoid the higher taxes suggested in her reforms.
Hillary and Bill Clinton have created residence trusts believed to be holding their  Chappaqua, New York, home in an attempt to reduce estate tax bills on the multi-million dollar houses
Hillary and Bill Clinton have created residence trusts believed to be holding their Chappaqua, New York, home in an attempt to reduce estate tax bills on the multi-million dollar houses
The Clintons created residence trusts in 2010, with one under Bill's name and one under Hillary's name. They believed to hold the family's Chappaqua, New York, home (pictured), which was purchased in 1999 for $1.7million and is now worth $1.8million
The Clintons created residence trusts in 2010, with one under Bill's name and one under Hillary's name. They believed to hold the family's Chappaqua, New York, home (pictured), which was purchased in 1999 for $1.7million and is now worth $1.8million
The couple also has a Washington, DC, home (pictured), which they bought in 2001 for $2.8million and is now worth more than $6million. The DC home is not in a trust
The couple also has a Washington, DC, home (pictured), which they bought in 2001 for $2.8million and is now worth more than $6million. The DC home is not in a trust
The Clintons created residence trusts in 2010, with one under Bill's name and one under Hillary's name, according to the presidential candidate's public financial disclosure report.
The trusts are believed to hold the couple's home in Chappaqua, New York. Their home on Embassy Row in Washington, DC, is not in a trust. 
Because the couple has two residence trusts on the New York home, they can set different term lengths for each trust, and if one of them dies the other's trust wouldn't be affected. 
The couple also have two life insurance trusts, which can help cover the costs of estate taxes.
All of the trusts were confirmed in financial declarations filed by Clinton last week. 
They bought the Chappaqua home in 1999 for $1.7million, while the DC home was purchased for $2.8million in 2001. 
The move to put the New York home in trusts is common among multi-millionaires, as only estates worth more than $5.45million face an estate tax, which tops out at 40 per cent.
By moving the home into trusts, any increases in the properties' value - also known as capital gains - are outside of the Clintons' estates, and therefore out of the IRS's reach when they die.
Although the house would not currently appear to be caught by estate tax itself, putting it in the trust prevents that becoming possible in the future - which is entirely possible if house prices rise, or equally if the estate tax ceiling is lowered, in line with Clinton's plans.
The move will also exclude most of the home's values from the IRS's calculation that will determine how much of their estate is taxable. 
It would cut the amount Chelsea Clinton would pay estate tax on by $1.7 million - although she is still likely to face paying a substantial sum as her parents' net worth is estimated at $110 million by Fortune. 
As an additional benefit if she is gifted the Chappaqua home, she would pay tax at the rate which applied when the trust was opened - regardless of whether her mother gets her way and increases it. 
Hillary Clinton slams Trump's 'tax plan for the wealthy'
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Play
LIVE
Mute
00:00
Current Time 0:00
/
Duration Time 0:55
Fullscreen
Need Text
Video Quality
576p
540p
360p
270p
MinimizeExpandClose
When the residence trusts' terms run up, the property will be transferred to a beneficiary, who is likely Bill and Hillary Clinton's daughter, Chelsea Clinton
When the residence trusts' terms run up, the property will be transferred to a beneficiary, who is likely Bill and Hillary Clinton's daughter, Chelsea Clinton

Following the residence trust terms, the properties will be transferred to a beneficiary, who is most likely to be Chelsea Clinton. The terms of the trust do not have to be publicly disclosed.
Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton released an estate-tax plan that would raise taxes for high-income and wealthy Americans, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The tax would apply to estates exceeding $3.5million per person at a top rate of 45 per cent, rather than the current $5.45million per-person exemption and a top rate of 40 per cent.
As a result, each year the tax would affect 0.4 per cent of estates, rather than the 0.2 per cent the tax effects currently.
Though the Clintons' decision to put their home in trusts contradict's Hillary Clinton's tax plan, Don Williamson, director of the Kogod School of Business at American University, told Daily Mail Online that move was 'good estate planning'.
'Bill and Hillary take the house and they put it into a trust. In that trust they're allowed to stay and use the home for X number of years. Then, it belongs to Chelsea,' he said.
Williamson gave an example in which he suggested the Clintons put a $1million home into a residence trust for 20 years.
By moving their New York home into trusts, any increases in the properties' value - also known as capital gains - are outside of the Clintons' estates, and therefore out of the IRS's reach when they die. Pictured above, Bill and Hillary stand outside their Chappaqua home in 2000, shorty after purchasing it
By moving their New York home into trusts, any increases in the properties' value - also known as capital gains - are outside of the Clintons' estates, and therefore out of the IRS's reach when they die. Pictured above, Bill and Hillary stand outside their Chappaqua home in 2000, shorty after purchasing it
'Estate plans say that when they give the house to a trust, it's put into a fair market value of say, $1million 20 years from now,' Williamson said.
He added: 'Discount [the home's] rate for 20 years, so the gift they have to report on their gift tax return would only be $200,000, rather than a million, and that house is only going up in value.
'The house might be worth $5million when Chelsea gets it. So Chelsea has received $5million at little wealth transfer value.'
The Clintons' Chappaqua home is currently valued at $1.8million, while the DC house has ballooned to more than $6million, according to Zillow. 
After the house is transferred to the beneficiary - likely Chelsea - Bill and Hillary will either have to leave the house or pay rent to the owner of the estate.
For the asset to move completely out of the estate, the Clintons would have to completely outlive the terms of the trust. 
Typical trusts last for approximately ten to 15 years to maximize the property value discount, according to Bloomberg.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3597733/Hillary-Bill-Clinton-dodge-death-taxes-putting-multi-million-dollar-home-trusts.html#ixzz4A21Hyx1V
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

my computer appears to be under attack

my computer appears to be under attack - so as I want this challenge to go out - I have to use whatever vehicle available. This e-mail is a serious challenge to Larkin and his co-conspirators to either put up or give up their law licenses

Inbox
x

kenneth ditkowsky

12:45 PM (14 hours ago)
 
To:  Jerome Larkin, individually and as Administrator of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary commission (IARDC) and the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary commission.
From:  Kenneth Ditkowsky
Date:  May 28, 2016
Subject:   Challenge to you to tell demonstrate that a public office is a public trust, and formal complaint concerning your ethically challenged and illegal conduct.
Cc:    All interested parties, Honorable L. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States, Justice Department of the United States, Attorney JoAnne Denison, States Attorney of Cook County,
 
Dear Mr. Larkin, and the IARDC Commission,
 
With the pending scandals that are about to unfold in Washington concerning the participants in the current Presidential race, the public is going need an affirmation of the principle that a public office is a public trust.    I understand that you are the last people to be considered to demonstrate that principle.   Mr. Larkin’s conduct in violation of 18 USCA 4, 241,242, 371, 1341 etc. is a cornucopia of deceit, and perfidy.     Subordination of perjury, perjury, conspiracy, and outright theft are the cornerstones of IARDC procedure and purpose.    Few openly nefarious ‘cover-ups’, obstruction of justice, and spoliation of evidence are notoriously exhibited to the public.
 
Infamy will preserve the analogy of Ms. Denison’s blog to yelling fire in a crowded theater, and the intentional misrepresentation by IARDC lawyers in the name of Mr. Larkin of the holdings in Sawyer and Alvarez.     The assaults on the First Amendment by the IARDC and Larkin are akin to ISIS terrorism, however, the ability to marshal the cover-up of the corruption evident in the Mary Sykes case 09 P 4585 (Circuit Court of Cook County) is beyond the pale.     Knowing that guardianships were limited in scope because of Illinois and USA Constitutional core values,  co-conspirator attorneys Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmiedel and others used the Illinois guardianship act to openly and notorious isolate Mary Sykes so that her estate could be  looted.   (I’ve estimated the booty at $3,000,000 dollars).   
 
Mr. Larkin, Ms. Black, et al have accused me of not telling the truth concerning the Mary Sykes case.    The allegation while unspecific accused me of defaming a group of judges claiming that they acted without jurisdiction and without following the law.    Similar averments were made concerning Ms. Denison; however, the Commission added the offense of publishing the corruption in her blog entitled MaryGSykes.     After my kangaroo trial (and during the kangaroo hearing concerning Ms. Denison) a letter surfaced authored by Cynthia Farenga complaining that our averments of corruption had been published in the Probate Sharks blog.    Disciplinary proceeding followed.     Exculpating evidence was barred, and requirement of clear and convincing proof was modified to mean – Larkin clairvoyance!      The Subpoena of the Mary Sykes file, which verifies the truth of every averment made by Ms. Denison and myself was exclude from the evidence.       The rationale was obvious – the ‘fix’ was in and therefore exculpating evidence had to be kept out of the record.
 
Unfortunately, the Judges whose corruption was being protected could not be totally orchestrated.  (Subordination of perjury).     Judge Connors admitted at page 91 of her deposition that she was ‘wired’ (and/or ‘fixed’).    She testified that had she known of the jurisdictional deficiencies she would have stopped the proceedings, fixed the problem, however, the same result would have occurred.    Judge Stuart outright lied.   First she denied chaining Gloria Sykes (the daughter of Mary Sykes) in her courtroom – in an effort to torture from her the location of her (Gloria’s) assets, and then she (under cross examination) admitted the same.     Larkin solved this problem by attorning to a slight modification of the hearing transcript to eliminate the perjury.     Such spoliation of evidence appears to be quite common in lawyer disciplinary actions[1].      
 
By way of background, as it appears that the IARDC and lawyer disciplinary commissions have during the relevant time period had the policy of interpreting the guardianship statute to not being an accommodation as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act, but as a forfeiture of all human and civil rights.    Interestingly enough the Illinois legislature (as well as the legislatures of most of the States of the union) make it abundantly clear that:
 
 (b) Guardianship shall be utilized only as is necessary to promote the well-being of the person with a disability, to protect him from neglect, exploitation, or abuse, and to encourage development of his maximum self-reliance and independence. Guardianship shall be ordered only to the extent necessitated by the individual's actual mental, physical and adaptive limitations.  755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b
 To make certain that senior citizens such as Mary Sykes, Alice Gore, **** are not exploited (as actually occurred) the person seeking a guardianship must prove not only the incompetency but the degree of incompetency by CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE.      (This is the same standard that is applicable to the IARDC disciplinary proceedings)      It is respectfully suggested that in neither proceeding is even the lowest standard of evidence (burden of proof) required.  (See page 91 of Maureen Connors evidence deposition)
 
Of course, in kangaroo proceedings the result desired by the 18 USCA 371 cover-up is achieved.     It is achieved with or without a scintilla of evidence.      The orchestration of such is the subject of this letter of complaint.     Rule 8.3 and 18 USCA 4 required both JoAnne Denison and myself to offend Ms. Farenga, Ms. Black, Mr. Stern, Mr. Larkin, Ms. Sharp, ***** and all the other attorneys who have participated in the actual miscreant conduct or its cover-up.      As for Ms. Denison, Mr. Lanre Amu, ***** (including myself) to not offend Mr. Larkin and his 18 USCA 371 cover- conspirators we also would be subject to possible obstruction of justice averments.     We however stood up to be counted and continue every day to demand Honest investigations, collection of the Federal and State income taxes (including interest and penalties) from the 18 USCA 241,242,371 co-conspirators, and abrogation of the cover-up.     NB.   It is my calculation that each conspirator jointly and severally owes very substantial taxes to the USA and the State of Illinois.   For instance, in Sykes @$3 million dollars is due; in Gore $1.5 million, Tyler 8 million *******.   [2]
 
My challenge.      It appears at this point in time that Jerome Larkin and his 18 USCA 371 co-conspirators are not going to get away with their perfidy.      The term “cover up” is going to be a very serious charge and the ‘great unwashed’ are not going to be led by the corrupt political and judicial machines in a euphoria of procrastination, deception, ******.
 
Therefore, let us get right to the chase.     While Larkin has consistently refused to detail the charges made against either JoAnne or myself, it is clear that each charge has to do with the Sykes case and the issue of judicial propriety.     Being more specific each charge has to do with whether a corrupt judge ignored a lack of jurisdiction to effectuate the elder cleansing of Mary Sykes.     All the evidence is in the Mary Sykes file 09 P 4585.     This file will unequivocally determine: 
1.       Jurisdiction
2.       Whether safeguards of the Constitution were complied with
3.       Whether a wrongful forfeiture occurred as to Mary’s liberty and property rights.
 
My challenge is for Mr. Larkin or any of the accused miscreants to produce out of the original file 09 P 4585 (Mary Sykes) the following documents.      If the documents are not produced, honor requires Mr. Larkin and each of his co-conspirators as well as each of appointed guardian ad litem to surrender their law licenses and confess to the United States of America their part in the elder cleansing of Mary Sykes.    Simply put – let us put this matter to rest right now!
 
1)      Jurisdiction.     In order for a person – disabled or not, the court must meet the due process standard of notice and hearing.    The person who is to be adjudicated must be personally served with summons.   The Summons must meet the criteria of the statute 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10, which is very specific and the criterion procrustean as there may be a taking of constitutionally protected Rights, privileges and immunities.    In addition, there may be a stranger having control over another person’s property.
 
a.        Challenge:    Produce a copy of a summons that was actually personally served on Mary Sykes prior to any hearing on her competency that sought to ascertain the extent and nature, if any, of any disability that Mary Sykes might have actually suffered from 755 ILCS 5/11a -3b    This is important as the legislature wanted in writing appropriate warnings so that the rights of the alleged disabled person were protected[3].
 
b.      Challenge:  Produce a Sheriff’s return of Summons in proper form attesting to actual service on Mary Sykes and the compliance with the Statute...    This is particularly important as oral information must be given the alleged disabled person[4].
 
c.       Challenge:    Produce affidavits of notice being given to next of kin (close relatives, near relatives) prior to any hearing that was intended to obtain the information required by 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b.   This is jurisdictional pursuant to 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10.[5]   The people who should have received the prior notice include both of Mary’s sisters and Gloria Sykes.
 
 
2)       Constitutional Safeguards.      As human and civil rights are subject to forfeiture notice and hearing are prime requirements of due process.      The statute is very clear, to wit:
 (b) Guardianship shall be utilized only as is necessary to promote the well-being of the person with a disability, to protect him from neglect, exploitation, or abuse, and to encourage development of his maximum self-reliance and independence. Guardianship shall be ordered only to the extent necessitated by the individual's actual mental, physical and adaptive limitations. 
Thus it is apparent that this is a very serious hearing and cannot be obviated by agreements of the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the petitioner.   Actual evidence must be presented that is clear and convincing that the alleged incompetent is in fact incompetent.   Actual evidence must be presented as to the extent of the disability and how a reasonable accommodation must be obtained.
Challenge:     produce a transcript of the proceedings in which a 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b hearing was indeed conducted as to the competency and extent thereof of MARY SYKES.    As the Court provides a court reporter for these very serious hearings the official court reporters office should have either filed or have available for transcription such a hearing[6].   
As Mr. Larkin and the IARDC had the burden of proof to prove disciplinary breaches by both Denison and Ditkowsky if the IARDC can not produce the appropriate materials referred to supra, Larkin and every attorney involved directly or indirectly should resign his/her position immediately and surrender his/her law license as each is a participant in a very serious FRAUD.       
 
If the IARDC and the miscreants can produce from the original file, either in its present form or the sanitized version that has evolved each of the Challenged items both JoAnne and yours truly deserve the punishment meted out plus and I will publicly acknowledge that fact and make a formal apology.  HOWEVER if the IARDC, Larkin, Farenga, Black, Smart, **** cannot produce the appropriate returns of service from the Sheriff of Cook County, the affidavits of prior notice of the hearing required by 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b, and a transcript of that hearing each of the attorneys, including the 18 USCA 371 IARDC attorney/attorneys  should resign and surrender his/her license to practice law[7]  
 
This ‘elder cleansing’ is a very serious business.     Core Rights of citizens are being violated and confiscated along with their life savings and quality of life.   In the 1930s and 1940s when the Nazi hordes were systematically prospecting in their victims mouths of the gold in their teeth were shocked and outraged; however, when **** orchestrated a similar scenario not only is not a word of protest forthcoming, but the Illinois Supreme Court and the IARDC join in a massive cover-up and attornment.
 
The gantlet has been thrown.        Are we willing to accept less than HONESTY and Honor from our public officials?     If so, WHY?       A public office is a public trust.      As Americans we are entitled to HONEST public officials who have actual integrity – not the nadir of society and our population.      Larkin – put up or shut up!     
 
Let me suggest that if you cannot produce a majority of the items demanded supra you are admitting to some very serious felonies that not only diminish you but all around you.     Everyone makes errors and thus Americans are universally forgiving.    Intentionally preying on the elderly is one of sins that cannot be forgiven!     Your failure to either produce the items demanded or make restitution for your crimes against the ‘great unwashed’ is unacceptable.
 
Demand is made to the IARDC and the Illinois Supreme Court to enforce the Rule of Law equally and if Larkin and the miscreants who have acted in concert with him cannot produce the evidence required by this complaint appropriate punishment be handed out to Larkin and his 18 USCA 371 co-conspirators.
 
Respectfully submitted,


[1] It should be noted that the affidavits of Gloria Sykes, Scott Evans et al verify every statement that either Denison or yours truly makes concerning these cases.     In the Alice Gore case, which does not appear to part of the original charges the offending Guardian ad Litem was accused by the Florida Attorney General of fraud – she was noted to have filed a claim as an heir to an estate that she was a stranger.  (See Probate Sharks blog).    Her benefactor, a large nursing home operator, has been fined by the USA and others for various Medicare, Medicaid **** frauds.   The Gore Estate is reported to have extreme irregularities attorned to by the presiding judge****    The Holocaust becomes quite relevant to the Gore case as it was disclosed that the avarice of the judicial officials including prospecting his Mrs. Gore’s mouth for the gold in her teeth.     Naturally, Mr. Larkin could find nothing amiss with the collecting of gold from the teeth of elder cleansing victims.
[2] As Illinois is on the verge of Bankruptcy and the legislature want to increase the taxpayer burden, it is now quite appropriate to collect from each of the miscreants their joint and several liability.   It is my supposition that each of the lawyer defendants is guilty of not reporting the tax liability on his/her 1040 Tax return.    Had they done so *****.     
[3] This will be interesting as the Clerk of the Circuit Court has admitted that she did not even have such a form printed at the time of the Mary Sykes scenario was unfolding.    The form summons thus had to be specifically drafted by the attorney representing the petitioner.    It does appear that the wrong form summons were presented to the Sheriff of Cook County.    These summons were not served because Mary was not a resident of Cook County – she had been abducted and removed to DuPage County.    This bit of legerdemain suggested FRAUD was evident on day one.    
[4] The Sheriff of Cook County wrote a letter denying any return of summons, however, Mr. Schmiedel claims a bench service.      He does not claim that the 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10 form summons was ever served, nor has he claimed that the procedure required as followed.    
[5] No prior notice has ever been claimed to have been given to Gloria Sykes (daughter), or two either of the two sisters of Mary.     Even the kangaroo panel could not ‘find’ that notice was given, they instead said that the two sister had knowledge of some hearing.
[6] Interestingly Adam Stern wrote to Gloria Sykes an e-mail in which he disclosed that no such hearing had been had.   The incompetency was determined by the two guardian ad litem meeting with the Attorney for the petitioner and the judge signing the order presented.    If the e-mail is accurate, a key element of due process is missing (along with notice) and the proceedings are so tainted that gross criminal conduct has occurred in the Circuit Court of Cook County and not only must the offending judges be removed from office, but they are the attorneys attorning to such procedures must be subjected to serious disciplinary proceedings that include disbarment.    Contrary to Mr. Larkin’s assertion – this offense against the Constitution of the State of Illinois and the United States of America is so obscene as to warrant criminal prosecution of the offending attorneys.    Each of the attorneys and each of the judges involved knew of should have known that 18 USCA 241, 242  and 42 USCA 1983 were openly and notoriously violated.        This lack of propriety coupled with the theft of a million dollars in Gold Coins (see Gloria Sykes affidavit on file in both the Ditkowsky and Denison disciplinary files) suggests some additional felonies!     Exactly how the IARDC can ignore Ms. Sykes’ affidavit and the lack of due process is a mystery that suggest felonies galore!
[7] The attorneys on the various panels who were not independent enough to object to the kangaroo proceedings in the Denison and Ditkowsky proceedings are not being given a pass -  they also are co-conspirators and wrongdoers as they rubber=stamped the cover=up in the Sykes case.     Attorneys take an oath to uphold the Constitution.    Upholding the constitution is not consistent with attempting to silence the exposure of judicial (or political) corruption.    
 


From: kenneth ditkowsky <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>
To: Dr. Sam Sugar
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 5:20 AM
Subject: Re: Elder Cleansing

Dr. Sugar has provided us and reminded us of one of the core values of Democracy - IT IS POSSIBLE TO DISAGREE and not be disagreeable.   Except for those on this e-mail list who are allied with the elder cleansers we all have the same goal - ELIMINATE THE CANCER OF ELDER CLEANSING AND BRING BACK TO OUR LAND HONESTY, INTEGRITY, AND HONOR.

Each of us, in our way has stepped up to try to make a difference and I am confident that such will be MO of the future.   All of us have experienced frustration and anger.   I personally am made livid by the misrepresentation of the case decisions, the law, and the facts by the lawyer disciplinary commissions in their overt effort to protect the corrupt judges, corrupt lawyers, and corrupt public officials who are ravaging the lives and estates of the Elderly.  My disdain for political figure who talks the talk and does nothing has no boundaries of disgust.   And yes, the throw out the baby with the bathwater - the sky is falling crowd do not rate very high on my list.   

In my five decades as a lawyer I've seen my share of corruption and had to fight through it, but I've seen Americana!    I cannot tell you all the good feelings and pride that I've experienced - Only Americana can generate so much pleasure!   We have a few bad apples in the barrel - we have to pluck them out!   The rest of the barrel is filled with pure wonder!

Even in the political arena, which appears to be pretty depressing, there are signs of hope, honor and integrity.    It may be partisan, biased, a forbidden subject, stupid, **** but even though his programs and ideas were discredited in 1936 and I disagree with most of them, we have on candidate who is garnering tremendous numbers of votes for the nomination for president because he is HONEST.   He really believes all that stuff he says!   The other two are ******.    The minor party candidates *****.

As Dr. Sugar puts it - I may disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to say it.    Ditto for me.

All that said - it is time to push government and particularly the honest people in our government to do an HONEST INVESTIGATION  and to restore dignity and honor.   Getting old should not be a crime in America that allows corrupt political and judicial figures to prey on the elderly for their profit.   The Lawyer commissions acting in violation of 18 USCA 371, 18 USCA 241,242 should be denuded of their corruption and should protect the public from administrators such as Jerome Larkin *****.  Courts should adjudicate dispute pursuant to the Rule of Law, not the avarice of corrupt political and judicial figures.   

With the grace and assistance of the Divinity and a great deal of hard honest work, we will prevail and restore to America its core values!    We are not a stupid as we look or as that Yale Professor and the General think!  

    
 


From: Dr. Sam Sugar
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:17 PM
Subject: RE: Elder Cleansing

To all on this list
I am hesitant to reply to this email but will do so only because arguing among ourselves and throwing insults and accusations around only empowers or abusers further.

The clearly stated purpose of AAAPG is to educate, advocate and legislate. 

Educate:
We have expended tremendous energy and resources to bring media attention to expose  the national probate racket. We have about 300 victims families as affiliates all over the country.  We have a sophisticated website as well as a Facebook and twitter presence. We have created dozens of white papers housed on our website to explain to the uninitiated what this racket is all about. We have created a full length documentary "Broken" which is on our Youtube channel and website. We are in the midst of a professional Hollywood Documentary movie the blows the cover off the racket even more. We have been in every major Florida newspapers repeatedly, on the front page of the Wall Street Journal,  have done countless interviews, podcasts, white papers--all to educate the public. We have taken out paid advertising in Miami and Palm Beach County to warn people of the racket which has resulted in multiple inquiries of concerned people of the public for more information and in one case we reached out to personally assist an elderly couple  who were highly likely to be ensnared in the racket were there not intervention on our part.
We have reached out to other advocacy organizations to unite and those efforts are ongoing because there is strength in numbers.

Without a groundswell of public support, reforming, let alone abolishing guardianship is a pipe dream. Him the guardianship racket is a well kept secret until millions of people understand what a threat it is to their own well-being little of significance will happen. It takes organization, time, money and commitment to move forward and our small group of dedicated advocates is doing the very best it possibly can. 

We have every reason to the extremely proud of our successes

Advocate:
To my knowledge we are the only group that has interceded on a personal level to advocate for the release of improperly imprisoned wards in particularly egregious guardianships with amicus curiae briefs, Direct contact with Abusive guardians and judges, assisting with the production of countless exposés in Florida and major Florida newspapers, direct  Personal confrontation with predatory guardians ( which has resulted in at least one of them immediately resigning), appeals to judges, direct contact with predatory lawyers to advise them that they are under scrutiny ( which has resulted in one lawyer resigning from the case).
I've gone to the trouble and expense personally of becoming a certified examiner in the state of Florida for the purpose of rendering honest examinations in cases where such examination might result in the restitution of someone's rights. The fact that one such examination had actually been done for Ward has resulted in what we hope will be a successful suggestion of capacity in the near future.
We have met with every possible government official as well State Attorneys throughout the state of Florida. We have met with federal officials, political candidates, media personalities, consultants and anyone else whom we thought would be helpful to our cause. We continue to pursue the engagement of a highly visible public personality to be the voice to the public on our issue.

Ours is the only advocacy organization I know of that has created national surveys for guardianship which have been quoted in articles throughout the country. Our organization has sent out and received responses to multiple FOIA requests help shed light on the statistics regarding guardianship in Florida.

Legislate:
Our small group was indeed instrumental in the passage of Senate Bill 5 and Senate Bill 232 two years running. That track record is absolutely unique and remarkable in that not one cent was spent on lobbying. We were our own lobbyists

 These were not perfect bills and they are not perfect laws now, But they are now law and they do represent significant progress. They have brought attention to the racket and a small number of the racketeers have actually run away as has been the case in Nevada, as has been the case in Palm Beach County Florida where to crooked judges were reproved from the probate court and where a crooked Guardian is still under intense pressure and likely will be indicted as a result of our efforts. Progress is excruciatingly slow.  This process will go on for many years.

 AAAPG will continue to work with the legislature where we are now well known.  Legislative bills have to be approved by 140 Legislators and hundreds of their Aides and assistants all of whom have unique perspective on the world and on guardianship.  Abolition of guardianship may be of marvelous dream but in our world the successes we've had in our legislation program are remarkable and trendsetting across the country. Rather than focus on one small aspect of the issue such as isolation as others have somewhat successfully done, we prefer to look at the racket as a whole and attack it where it is vulnerable. The problem is that it is not very vulnerable because it takes place over the signature of the judge regardless of how corrupt the judge might be. We have made inroads on back channels to the Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court who is now fully aware of the stench emanating from these courts. We remain hopeful that that relationship will bear fruit sometime soon.

Each year we will propose more stringent legislation to attack different aspects of the racket. Our goal this year  will be set a cap on fees, though that will be an extremely difficult thing to do. We need to refocus our efforts on corrupt judges which populate these probate equity courts. We continue to dedicate our uncompensated volunteer efforts in a sincere endeavor to prevent the next guardianship and to help wherever we can in guardianships that already exist. We continue to persistently ask for federal intervention in the guardianship racket.

Our group is now known nationally. We have gravitas, we have a track record, we have brand-name recognition and we have accomplished far more, in my humble opinion, than any other group in the country. We're more than just a repository of horror stories or a place to whine about Injustice.

Every advocacy group in the nation is worthwhile and needs support. We must be careful that we do not become our own worst enemies simply because our agendas are different. I would be thrilled if our efforts were no longer needed because guardianship had been abolished. On that day we will all celebrate together. But until that day we must recognize that guardianship has been around for many hundreds of years, it is ingrained in our culture and legal system and it creates lots of jobs and lots of money especially for the large minority of criminal predators. Equity courts are ingrained the Constitution. 

The racket has no incentive to change today. The racket functions with impunity because so few people know it exists and because so many people still believe that the American judiciary system is actually honest and free of corruption. We of course know differently.

This is my answer. I am a pragmatist and a realist. I am not a revolutionary. I believe the system is badly and perhaps impossibly broken and intrinsically corrupt. I believe that the national and state Bar associations (controlled by the State Supreme Courts) who own and run this country are the root cause of abusive guardianship and the enablers of predatory guardians and downstream stakeholders. I believe that abusive guardianship is a microcosm of the cancer that has engulfed our country and is metastasizing everywhere we look. That cancer is spawned by corruption and greed.

I wish the best of luck to everyone trying to eradicate this cancer.

Sam Sugar MD