From JoAnne Denison
Please see the great email below! I was admitted in 1985 and was told corruption was soooo bad before the Greylord indictment of about 90% of the judges in Cook County, that cash envelopes were commonly given openly at Christmas passed right over the bench that the judges were sworn to keep impartial.
Are we the only attys that care? I can’t even get other attys that I know well to become interested in fighting the obvious corruption in the court. I ask them to read the blog, sign the petitions and they don’t.
I have one case that was clearly “paid” and up on appeal. $750,000 in attys fees down the drain because of a case that was fixed. I think the judge knew what she was doing was wrong, because of course I filed a detailed Motion to Reconsider, never got yelled at and when OC asked the judge to yell at me, she refused. When she simply said “motion denied”, it was almost like she was apologizing for having sold out.
Other attys see this, but walk on by……..
take care all,
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Apr 7, 2012 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: see email I wrote to Elaine from NASGA
In 1961 when I was admitted to the bar Illinois (or rather Cook County) was having one of its paranoia sessions. We actually had two Court systems competing. We had the Superior court run by the republicans and the Circuit Court run by the democrats. Except in the Chancery Division bribery was so prevalent that several judges were reputed to have cash registers on the bench to keep track of the cash flow.
In the Chancery Division we had several judges who were fantastic. Not only could you get a fair trial but it was speedy and honest. Of course this may have something to do with the clients and lawyers who appeared. A case was received from the client, and the two lawyers immediately got together and agreed to whatever facts we could. We then agreed to whatever issues we could. This left few facts and few issues for determination. Armed with stipulations we visited the judge. He attempted to resolve the issues, and those that could not be resolved were set for trial.
Trials were straight forward and the plaintiff was required (if he wanted to win) to put on his case in the morning session (1 1/2 to 2 hours) and the defendant by the end of the day. If the case dragged on the lawyers just had not done their job. We were all friends and even socialized together. None of us made alot of money as we churned out cases without any fluff! Do not get me wrong – we did very well, but our clients were not frightened by the postman delivering the bill.
In the Courts in which we had cash register judges the judge was aware that no every lawyer played the game, and those who did not were apt to rock the boat. I was so naive that I lived in this world and had no idea who was on the take and who was not! The revelation occurred when a Judge called me on the telephone and said: “the bid is five.” I had no idea what he was talking about. When I found out I was outraged! and just prepared my case with an eye on an appeal. My buddies guided me with great care so that I crossed every t, and dotted every eye. (The case settled after the Judge ruled against me – the other lawyer’s offer of settlement was “what do you want?” I told him and it was agreed. I do not know who talked to him, if anyone, all I know is that he kept me busy with referrals for a very long time). (I never told him about the telephone call “the bid is five.” )
A judge has no immunity to protect him from corruption. If he/she obtains any unauthorized benefit or remuneration he commits a Federal or State crime. This does not mean he/she cannot do alot of damage and/or many not get away with corruption for a long time – however – the wages of sin are not very attractive. I feel that with the Sykes transcripts and the statements that are recorded a very nice opportunity exists for the Fed to repopulate one or more of its prisons with some law trained people. The Sykes case with its large horde of gold coins, it lack of Sodini notices, its obvious intimidations, it extra-judicial proceedings (the sanction action against me and seizure of Gloria Sykes assets), the suppression of the videos of Mary Sykes, the ‘cover-up’ by the guardians etc is an excellent vehicle to be a first step in the fight against Elder Abuse and Financial Explotation of the elderly.
My point is that there are honest judges out there, honest guardians, and a great number of ‘good people.’ These people are the solid core of our justice system and we want them to give us honest and candid decisions mandated by the facts and law. We want them to make unpopular decisions as well as popular decisions(whether ‘right or wrong’ ) as the facts dictate. For this they need immunity. In the ARDC complaint filed against me the admission that no investigation was made and that the Administrator had no knowledge as to whether or not the allegations that I am reported to have made is true or false is a disgrace and indicative of an ethically challenged system – however, it the decision to bring the complaint was motivated by honest and integrity and not an attempt to silence dissent I would support it. If as I believe the complaint was brought to supress my First Amendment Rights the author and those who provided the inducement for the filing ought to be brought to the bar of justice.
My point – the baby should not be thrown out with the bathwater. This fight is not going to be easy or quick.
Sent: Saturday, April 7, 2012 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: see email I wrote to Elaine from NASGA
according to Barb Johnson — author, “Failed Justice – Behind the Black Robes” probate judges in Mass do not even need to be attorneys, and lay people untrained in law can be appointed as probate judges. Likewise according to Barb …… the Mass probate/family court system is fraught with political patronage.
Barb was summarily disbarred for life — she has since moved to Costa Rico —– if you wish to chat with her …. and she is very welcoming and responsive feel free to write her at barbjohnson74 at gmail.com
, her soapbox is abolishing judicial immunity.