How does the ARDC charge a lawyer with BLOGGING- horrors!

okay to publish?  we also need to encourage everyone on all the probate blogs to write to the ARDC and state that they vehemently disagree with the ARDC and they do NOT want my blog censored or monitored for “defamation”I only engage in fair reporting and my opinion.For them to regulate my blog via their “Complaint”, constitutes a violation of my First Amendment rights.  In no manner does it “cast dispersion” on the profession or the courts.
the charges:
making a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or
with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning
the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory
ofñcer or publie legal ofñoer, in violation of Rule 8.2 ofthe
Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct;
I have published nothing but the truth or substantial truth–anyone disputing this has the option of posting a comment or additional information and I have never turned any such comment request down. no comment or comment request has ever been received by me to this blog with any complaint.  The vast majority of comments are laudatory in nature and ask that the blog continue on.
b. conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation, in violation of Rule 8.4(e) ofthe Illinois
Rules of Professional Conduct;
see above.  all I do is run a blog.
C. conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice,
in violation of Rulo 8.4(d) of the Illinois Rules of
Professional Conduct;
see above, all I do is run a blog.  the blog includes comments by the public.  only the ARDC has posted this.  No one has ever said anything similar on my blog.
d. presenting, participating in presenting, or threatening to
present criminal charges to obtain an advantage in a civil
matter, in violation of Rule 8.4(g) of the Illinois Rules of
Professional Conduct; and
As it explains in the disclaimer on the blog, no one herein is accused of any crime or should be considered to have been threatened with being reported with criminal behavior.  I have never had any commentor say they felt in danger of being accused of criminal behavior.  Furthermore, if a relative steals from an estate 99% of the time, all the estate does is ask for restitution and payment plans–criminal prosecution is rarely attempted, and there are nearly no convictions by a family member.
e. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice
again, it is only the ARDC that charges this.  I have never received such a comment on my blog.  anyone is free here to post any rebuttal and no one has.or to bring the courts or the legal profession into disrepute.

this blog is not run by, supported by or associated with “the courts” or any part of the “legal profession.”  It is my blog, my observations, thoughts and opinions.  Thoughts and opinions are not actionable, per SCOTUS, no matter what the ARDC accuses me of.  I may sit in court blogging, my clients and others might email me and I pass it directly onto you, the reader, but I have no official sponsorship by the courts or any law firm or organization relating to the legal field.

—–Original Message—–
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Feb 4, 2013 9:51 AM
To: NASGA , probate sharks , JoAnne Denison
Subject: Unethical Government Behavior

The ramifications of the ARDC complaint filed against JoAnne Denison are enormous.   Every citizen should read them and weep!  
It is most significant that the issue raised is a ‘core’ Constitutional basic – i.e. the right of a citizen to speak, communicate with 3rd persons, and protest not only violations of the law directed against her, but 3rd persons as well.   This Constitutional issue is so important that it is addressed as part of the ‘Constitutional Test’ that is administered to pre-teens who seek to enter High School.   The hue and cry concerning the 2nd Amendment while serious is nonsense compared to the ‘moment’ that the attack launched on the “First Amendment” raises to the well being of the republic.   Whether I have a gun that fires a bullet, air pressure, water or a bb means nothing if I cannot speak out and be heard!
The thought of lawyers who work for the State of Illinois not knowing or ignoring this basic right is a travesty and indicative of an ethical standard on the part of a governmental entity that is at the nadir of human conduct.   Lawyers who advocate in the United States of America an abolition of basic First Amendment Rights do not deserve to practice law in America.
Ken Ditkowsky
PS - Ken, just so you know, all my kids have read my complaint and even THEY KNOW this blog is protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s