Accoring to the Supreme Court of Illinois, where some claims they have been defamed, the defendant is allowed a “litigation defense.” Most of the time this applies to attorneys that make statements about a case before, during and after the case is filed, but it can also apply to litigants.
So what has the Supreme Court of Illinois said about “defamation” in the wake of SCOTUS and the New York Times defamation case (Google this or see my prior post if you not familiar with this ground breaking case, I believe with an unanimous or near unanimous result)? In Catalano v. Pechous, where a Berwyn Alderman acoused the council of fraud in selecting a new city garbage vendor (of all things), this is what was said:
“The finder of fact must determine whether the publication was indeed made in good faith. Professions of good faith will be unlikely to prove persuasive, for example, where a story is fabricted by the defendant, is the product of his imagination, or is based wholly on an unverified anonymous telephone call.”
However, in the Sykes case, while the inventory was swiped by CT, we have several relatives who have told me the million in Au coins exist. Further, KDD in his business records for estate planning purposes relates the story of the gold coins. AS and CF keep on telling the court that the gold coins are “imaginary”.
There is nothing on this blog that hasn’t been related over and over by at least several family members and over the years. AS and CF barely know CT. I know her and KDD and GJS and Mary and the family and close friends for years and years–half a dozen people over and over relate the same story.
I also know numerous attys complaining the Circuit Court records are a disaster, Pacer could have come in there 10 years ago and fixed the system, and now Mary bears the brunt of it.
KDD says all the files in Sykes have returned, that they were swiped by the FBI, but I will let you all know when I have gone through them, most likely early next week.
While I do hope the FBI is investigating Sykes and other probate cases and will do something about the situation, with the complaint against me which is purely protected under the First Amendment, I strongly wonder about that.
I will publish my thoughts and reactions on the complaint later. I am truly not happy that the ARDC is infringing my copyright rights either. They need to take my 16 paragraphs of creating writing out of their complaint. I have no idea if they offer or get paid to publish those complaints and that turns my “unpublished” work into a “published one”. This means I have to file for a copyright right away and I have to be aware of how they sell their issues and rights. It’s not worth it. They have no authorization to publish my works, esp. if these writings go to Lexis or Westlaw and they receive money in return.
I would like to know, would not you?