|  | | ||
The State of Illinois spends a great deal of money each year under the guise of policing the legal profession. The newspapers publish that the IARDC recommends that x lawyer who had sex will a client be punished, or y lawyer who stole y dollars out of a client's account be punished etc. This work is laudable; however, the IARDC and its administrator Jerome Larkin appear to be engaged in the cover=up of 'elder cleansing.' Many complaints have been written to the IARDC complaining that targeted seniors are being railroaded into guardianships, stripped of their assets and liberty and finally subjected to involuntary assisted suicide (elder cleansing). Two prime examples are Alice Gore and Mary Sykes (Mary Sykes is still alive but her family have been separated from her and believe that she is in the process of being assisted in an involuntary suicide and want to stop it now.)
Certain miscreants have been very active in preventing the family and friends of Mary Sykes from interfering and have even enlisted Mr. Larkin of the IARDC to help. Two loud mouth attorneys ( myself and JoAnne Denison) are being subjected to disciplinary action by the IARDC for attempting to investigate and/or calling upon law enforcement to investigate.
As bit of history: The operation took place in the 1980s. Ninety-two people were indicted, including 17 judges, 48 lawyers, ten deputy sheriffs, eight policemen, eight court officials, and a member of the Illinois Legislature. Many more Judges found it expedient to retire. The IARDC did absolutely nothing positive. In the elder cleansing they are more active - they are out in full force protecting the miscreants.
In the Gore case a 1.5 million dollar estate was dissipated. In Sykes at least a million dollars in collectible coins has disappeared and not a dime accounted for! In Tyler the toll is about 7 or 8 million dollars.
It appears that the IARDC considers discussion of Judicial corruption to be ethically challenged - the question is why? A quick review of the information on the web suggests that 1) Mr. Larkin and at least the lawyers who should be investigating the role of lawyers involved in the scandal involving elder cleansing do not and have not filed the Ethic statements that are required of persons who obtain their remuneration from the State; 2) the IARDC has a history of ignoring Constitutional protections and a history of retaliation against any lawyer who does not believe that the word of the Administrator of the ARDC is handed down by God. In other words a lawyer who does not attorn to the whim and caprice of the dictates of the administrator is going to have license problems. (see the case of Peel vs ARDC decided by the Supreme Court of the United States - and material concerning the blue ribbon commission that investigated Greylord) and 3) a search of the real estate records indicates some very interesting and un=explained transactions promulgated by the miscreants, Mr. Larkin et al.
Why should the IARDC object to a lawyer calling for an HONEST complete and comprehensive investigation of the Mary Sykes case 09 P 4585?
Why have literally hundreds of citizen complaint filed with the IARDC complaining concerning 'elder cleansing' being ignored?
Even though Administrator Jerome Larkin has filed complaints with his commission against me (and Attorney Denison) for reaching out to law enforcement to do an HONEST complete, intelligent and comprehensive investigation and declared that such a request was unethical, I am once again calling out for such an investigation. I also once again invite Mr. Larkin to join in my call! Again I also challenge him with the words: If you have nothing to hide - why are you against law enforcement doing an Honest complete and comprehensive investigation?
Let us go one step further. If Larkin indeed has nothing to hide, let him explain why if he is in search of the truth he does not call Gloria Sykes as a witness in the ultra vires disciplinary proceeding against JoAnne Denison. I understand the next date is March 10. I am sure that Ms. Denison would yield the time to allow Mr. Larkin to call Ms. Sykes as a witness and to ask her the following questions:
were you served with a prior 14 day notice of any proceeding in which your mother's competency was to be adjudicated?
Did you have any prior knowledge that there was to be any adjudication?
Was your mother incompetent?
What do you base your statement upon? (Gloria and all who knew Mary would testify as to all the activities (including Banking and filing a Petition for a Protective order that Mary accomplished).
What property did your mother possess?
What was not inventoried? (about a million dollars in gold coins)
******
As I said - I challenge Larkin to call Gloria Sykes to the stand as a witness. His refusal or failure in my mind and in the mind of all the friends, family, neighbors, and people who have come into contact with elder cleansing is an admission that Larkin is part and parcel of the elder cleansing cottage industry and with knowledge has participated in the denial of Mary Sykes her liberty, property, civil and human rights!
Let me make this very clear - no matter what Larkin's panels or commissions rule, the Law of the STate of Illinois places the burden of proof on the IARDC. Without the testimony of Mary Sykes, Gloria Sykes, Yolanda Bakken any claim that anything on Ms. Denison's blog is untrue is a sham!
The family, the friends, and the neighbors of Mary Sykes know the truth and have complained to Law enforcement and the IARDC that Larkin has demonstrated disrespect for his office, disrespect for the Constitution of the United STates of America and the State of Illinois, and ****. This serious charge pursuant to 18 USCA 4 has been communicated to Law Enforcement. This e-mail is being communicated to law enforcement so that when they do their honest intelligent complete and comprehensive investigation of the elder cleansing cases they will have the admission of Larkin as to his perfidy.
Of course - Larkin could join in the call for the investigation! He also could make arrangements for Ms Sykes to testify!!!
Ken Ditkowsky
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.