We've seen some absolutely corrupt and horrible guardianships

We've seen some absolutely corrupt and horrible guardianships.    We've seen corrupt judges, corrupt lawyers, and corrupt judicial officials.   What we have seen is only the tip of the iceberg as the toll on health care is 700%.

The foregoing notwithstanding there are honest judges, honest lawyers, and honest judicial officials out there.   Hell we might even have some honest political figures!    The guardianship situation is a legitimate program that has real social value even if it is being misused and the criminal members of the legal profession have brought their own brand of ISIS terrorism to America.   Fortunately Jerome Larkin and his ilk are in the minority and ultimately he (they) will get his due!  

I've seen guardianship work, and I've seen probate judges actually uphold the law.    Take a look at the case of the Illinois In Re Neprozatis.  (Neprozatis vs White).   The problem is that one bad apple pollutes the entire barrel.

I've read the e-mail.  It assumes that dishonesty in the probate division is routine and unless there is a check and  balance system the elder cleansing is going to continue unabated. I believe that such is absolutely true, but, we have to make all court proceedings affordable and not enrich the legal profession more than necessary.   

We do have a check and balance system - at least in Illinois.  The check and balance is the Illinois Department of Revenue and the United STates Department of the Treasury (IRS).    By enforcing the tax laws and assessing taxes pursuant to the criteria of 18 USCA 371 we make criminal activity by a judge at his own risk.   Anyone who aids and abets the crime of elder cleansing also finds himself/herself in the trick bag.

Here is how it works:

A senior citizen is railroaded into guardianship.    By definition the statute has to be violated. (755 ILCS 5/11a - 1 et seq).    The petition and the procedure 755 ILCS 5/11a - 10 require not only due process, but the petition to be proven by clear and convincing evidence.

The proof must meet the standard of 755 ILCS 5/11a - 3b and the Americans With Disabilities Act.   This is a very high standard and as illustrated by the Sykes case 09 P 4585 (and the Alice Gore case, Carole Wyman ****) when corruption enters into the picture it is quite obvious and overt.   The guardian is a fiduciary!   This we create the threshold of tax liability.

Each individual who aids and abets the guardian in breaching his/her fiduciary responsibility is a co -conspirator pursuant to 18 UsCA 371 and 18 USCA 242.    A co-conspirator enjoys joint and several liability.   Thus, when Mr. Larkin aids ***** in garnering the Au from the mouth of Alice Gore, and **** does not inventory the AU found, Larkin enjoys the tax liabilty with *****.   (Pursuant to the doctrine of constructive receipt) Larkin is liable for the taxes, interest and penalties on all the gold removed from Ms Gore's teeth even if the guardian only took ****>    

If the IDR and the IRS did their jobs they would not only enrich the sovereign but deter Larkin's assaults on the First Amendment and the gold mining in the teeth of the elderly and disabled.   18 USCA 371 is very broad -- Larkin's liability is clear -- to avoid liability all he has to do is what he is drawing money from the public to do.   The nameless, faceless, bureaucrat making the assault on America's values effective is NO MORE!

Employment in government is not a benign endeavor - the public is entitled to a days work for a day's pay.  

 

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com