Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Unless we were invaded last night by North Korea, we have a FIRST AMENDMENT

Candice Schwager attycandie@gmail.com

12:31 PM (17 hours ago)
Crystal cox case? 

On Sep 19, 2016, at 12:30 PM, kenditkowsky@yahoo.com wrote:
Unless we were invaded last night by North Korea, we have a FIRST AMENDMENT and it is too bad that lawyers have to tolerate some dissatisfied clients saying bad things about them.   The right to protest is universal and protected by America's core values.    

It is too bad that we all are not perfect and it is too bad that from time to time we make poor choices - it is even worse when our choices affected others - but human beings do stupid things, say stupid things ******.     Only a the Political and Judicial elites think that they are without sin and are perfect.   

When Chicago Lawyer Magazine takes up the case of Lanre Amu (guilty - practicing law while black) and JoAnne Denison (exposing judicial corruption in her blog) I and others will have respect for the publication.   It may be fair game in the political arena to have double sided standards, but, in the real world we have laws and rules.  The most important rule is found as Article 1 = FIRST AMENDMENT and in the 5th and 14th amendments.    Clients - like lawyers enjoy this core right - even if they are dead wrong.

Here in Illinois Attorney JoAnne Denison published a blog that exposed judicial corruption including the admission by a sitting judge on page 91 of her evidence deposition that she was ‘fixed/wired/corrupted’   The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (IARDC) being well aware of the fact that such conduct was required by Canon 8.3 to be reported, not only ignored the Judge’s admission but brought ethics proceedings against Attorney Denison.    The fact that the Supreme Court of United States in recent First Amendment cases made it very clear that Attorney Denison’s statements were protected by the First Amendment did not stop the judicial elite at the IARDC) from punishing her.     Their solution was very simple.     Misrepresent the SCOTUS decisions to the Supreme Court of Illinois, do some creative editing to the transcripts and lie.      It worked!
The American Bar Association, and lawyer groups reacted immediately – they joined the herd of inept, immobile, and not participatory protestors.     Their indifference to the plight of their profession was stony silence.      The walk to the gas chamber was covered with rose petals!      The pride of the American legal system was abrogated.      The response was found in the following article, to wit:
Joanne Denison: Hit with ethics violation now that blogging is mature medium
Back when blogging or weblogs was a new medium, the powers that be didn't really know what to do about posts which seemed to violate ethics of a profession, never mind various kinds of law.  It has taken time for leaders in professions, regulatory institutions, trade associations and more to catch up.  But catching up they are.
The most recent example is that the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, reports THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL, has taken action against attorney JoAnne Denison.  On her blog"marygsykes," she allegedly posts content which violates the ethical code of that group.  For example, she refers to entities as "corrupt" without providing what is viewed as adequate evidence.
Denison's use of language is surprising.  Blogging become a mature medium which now is considered subject to all the usual rules of ethics, law, and good taste (at least if you want to continue to work).  The days of the wild west are over, at least for personal blogs like Denison's.  Brandname blogs, with hefty resources, like GAWKER, can still go out on a sensationalistic limb which brushes up against questions of ethics and law.
What happens in this Denison saga could provide important lessons to other lawyer bloggers who push the envelope, for whatever reasons.
 Apparently the author of the above article never heard of the FIRST AMENDMENT, the Supreme Court of the United States, 47 USCA 230, the Bill of Rights, or Scripture.       (I have to beg forgiveness – God’s law is not politically correct and it is a sacrilege to mention it and the Rule of Law in the same breath)
In red I’ve placed emphasis on particular words.     “Which violates the ethical code of that group!”      I would think that these words taken in context would be a serious defamation of the entire 2nd oldest profession.    In fact, the statement is contrary to: 1) the oath of an attorney, 2) Rule 8.3, 3) 18 USCA 4 and the requirements of citizenship in the United States.    Reporting criminal activity of corrupt judges, especially judges who admit on page 91 of their evidence depositions to the being ‘fixed/wired’ is to be encouraged, rather than discouraged.    In fact, the cover-up of such criminal activity is a violation of 18 USCA 371 and a bunch of other statutes.       Thus, we have a lawyer group pointing out that the new credo of American Law is to do overt acts reasonably calculated to assist thieves who happen to have law licenses steal from the elderly and the disabled.
The claim that the blog did not have “adequate evidence” is similarly disingenuous.     Is the admission of the Judge – “adequate evidence.”       Is the Court record 09 P 4585 – “adequate evidence.”      Is the affidavit of an adult child of the elder cleansing victim – “adequate evidence.”      Are testaments and statement found on other blogs, such as Probate Sharks, AAAPG, NASGA, **** adequate evidence?     How about the indictments of Philip Esformes, Seth Gillman, ***** adequate evidence?     
In the political spectrum we have learned to being a stranger to the truth might be an advantage.   Demonizing your opponent might also be an advantage, but the practice of law is a profession to be engaged in by people of high integrity and honor.     At least that is what we were told in law school.      Today, mischaracterization such as is found in the IARDC complaint and pleadings, pure fantasy and distortion as found in the quoted article, and worse are the credo of day.     Today, the Political and Judicial Elite have advanced a new slogan from the knee jerk loyalists to observe – “do not bother me with the truth, you have made up your mind and I do not have the social responsibility to think for myself.
It is time, that we stop being led by the nose and not only think for ourselves, but to act affirmatively.    The Elite have made no bones about the fact that they think we are “stupid”  -  it is time to assert our rights and make the elite actually work for their compensation or enjoy the company the Bureau of Prisons!  (after a fair trial)

From: Chicago Lawyer Magazine <headlines@lbpc.com>
To: kenditkowsky@yahoo.com 
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 10:58 AM
Subject: September 2016: Social media risks // Q&A: In the weeds // and more

Chicago Lawyer magazine
Cover story
Social liability: Lawyer risks
For many attorneys, what’s almost as (if not more) frustrating than ex-customers or ex-clients making complaints widely known on social media sites is the lack of options available to attorneys to defend themselves against online attacks.
The mediation toolbox
Several mediators including Karen Shields (pictured) of JAMS Inc., discuss how their industry often acts as therapists of the court system and investment tools needed to get contentious clients to settle differences.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.