Important mainly because of the people in the conversation.
Click to teach Gmail this conversation is not important.
Click to teach Gmail this conversation is not important.
Inbox
| x | |||
|
8:47 AM (21 hours ago)
 | | ||
| ||||
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.
Ken Ditkowsky
----- 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
Email: loamu@aol.com
-----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
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.