Editor's note: This Shark reminds his readers of the possible money laundering of wards' deposits made by officials to a remote tribal bank in Canada. Strangely, this bank had the same initials as a Chicago bank. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
The evidence of a massive conspiracy by Jerome Larkin and a group of dishonest and corrupt jurists, corrupt judicial officials and corrupt political figures to 'elder cleanse' hundreds of senior citizens and disabled people. Like Mary Sykes and Alice Gore these seniors and disabled people have been isolated from their loved ones so that the miscreants could abuse and exploit them. Robbed of their liberty, their savings and other assets, the elderly are herded into guardianships, nursing homes for the profit of judicially or politically appointed predators.
The calls for an HONEST investigation have been met with retribution. Larkin's and the IARDC's conduct in the Sykes case would fit very well in the history of the Gulag, or the Holocaust. Why law enforcement has been so impotent and so shy in collecting the Income taxes that have been incurred by the conspirators is a mystery. The evidence of misconduct is now being destroyed - I understand that about half of the Sykes file 09 P 4585 has been made to disappear. (As Sykes was accomplished sans jurisdiction it is expected that all traces of the file will be purged!
The New York courts have given law enforcement another weapon - It is time to subpeona the e-mails and other communications by wire of Larkin, Black, et al with the miscreants. The article from the Wall Street Journal addressing the lack of any expectation of privacy on the net or face book etc states as follows:
1:57 pm ET
Jul 22, 2015FACEBOOK
Jul 22, 2015
Appeals Court Rejects Facebook Challenge of Search Warrants
- Reuters
A New York state appeals court in Manhattan has rejected Facebook Inc.’s effort to challenge court-ordered search warrants that required the company to secretly turn over information about hundreds of users to New York City prosecutors conducting a massive Social Security fraud investigation.
In a case closely watched by civil-rights advocates and the tech industry, the appeals court affirmed a lower-court ruling that said the warrants didn’t violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Prosecutors obtained the warrants in connection with a sweeping probe of fraudulent Social Security disability claims, including claims submitted by retired police officers and firefighters suspected of faking mental illnesses stemming from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
After workers who filed for federal disability money were seen on Facebook looking healthy, the Manhattan district attorney’s office received a search warrant that required Facebook to hand over records of every posting and other activity associated with close to 400 Facebook accounts.
After complying with the warrants, Facebook went to court in 2013 challenging their scope and the gag order that prevented Facebook from informing users that the company was disclosing its account information. Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance’s office defended the warrants as a legitimate and legal effort to build its case.
After a Manhattan trial judge upheld the warrants issued, the company appealed, drawing support from the American Civil Liberties Union and other tech giants, including Google, Microsoft, Twitter and Yelp, which filed briefs urging judges to declare the warrants unconstitutional.
The Manhattan-based appeals court declined to do so, affirming the lower-court in an opinion handed down Tuesday. The court said Facebook was trying to displace the normal role of a neutral judge as “a constitutional gatekeeper” who ensures citizens are protected from overzealous prosecutions. And the court noted that nothing prevents defendants from trying to suppress the evidence before trial after the warrants have been executed.
Wrote Justice Dianne Renwick:
[The] Supreme Court’s summary denial of Facebook’s motion to quash the search warrants was proper because there is no constitutional or statutory right to challenge an alleged defective warrant before it is executed. The key role of the judicial officer in issuing a search warrant is described generally by the Fourth Amendment and more specifically by state statutes. None of these sources refer to an inherent authority for a defendant or anyone else to challenge an allegedly defective warrant before it is executed.
The appeals court wrote that “to accept Facebook’s argument is to embrace the notion that a warrant is limited only to traditional search warrants authorizing law enforcement agents to forcibly enter and search physical places.”
Facebook had also contested the warrants based on the Stored Communications Act, a federal law aimed at guarding against intrusions on individual privacy. The appellate court wrote that the argument “rests on a misinterpretation” of the law.
A Facebook spokesman told Bloomberg Business that the company was considering its appeal options. “We continue to believe that overly broad search warrants — granting the government the ability to keep hundreds of people’s account information indefinitely — are unconstitutional and raise important concerns about the privacy of people’s online information,” the spokesman, Jay Nancarrow, told Bloomberg.
The district attorney’s office said the investigation led to more than 100 indictments alleging hundreds of millions of dollars in fraud. More than 100 people have pleaded guilty to felony charges for their roles in the scheme.
“In many cases, evidence on their Facebook accounts directly contradicted the lies the defendants told to the Social Security Administration,” Joan Vollero, a spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office, said in a statement Tuesday.
Ken Ditkowsky
