From KDD, fighting for justice in Probate

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jul 29, 2013 8:07 PM
To: “”
Cc: j ditkowsky , “” , JoAnne Denison , NASGA , probate sharks
Subject: Re: this could be relevant

It is relevant in several ways.   1) the profiling aspect has gone un-noticed;  2) the disrespect for the Rule of Law does not raise any concern; 3) unlike the cases in which a senior citizen is profiled and targeted for deprivation of his/her liberty, property, civil and human rights, the media, law enforcement et al are all geared to protect the ‘gun owner.’      Most significant is the fact that apparently we have elected as judges individuals who cannot separate their personal bias from their duty.
Being elected to a position such as judge does not confer respect.   Respect is earned.     The office of judge has a certain degree of respect, but, the person who occupies the office can denigrate it very quickly by the demonstration of incompetence or bias.    Read the Connors’ evidence deposition or the transcript of proceedings of June 25, 2013 before Judge Stuart.  After you read the documents tell me how much respect you have for Judge Connors and/or Judge Stuart!    Tell me how much respect you have for the Judges of Cook County and how you feel about the 2nd oldest profession!
In my long career (over 50 years) I’ve appeared before hundreds of judges.    Let me assure you that the two judges I refer to supra are unique.   I’ve appeared before John Lupe and I’ve never met either a litigant or a lawyer who left his courtroom and did not have nice words to say about him.   I spend over a month on a trial before Judge D. O’Brien.   My clients thought that he was a “God”       Similarly I tried two jury cases back to back before Judge Hubert Will.    I looked forward to go to his courtroom every day.   *****.
The ‘elder cleansing’ cases have exposed us to the nadir of the profession in every way.    If in November 1961 I met Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmiedel and/or Adam Stern I would have chosen a different vocation.     Instead I met ‘real lawyers’ whose word meant something and who were ‘human’ beings.     I met real judges who made tough decisions based upon reason, humor and humanity.    I remember Dan Covelli.    I appeared before him on a case that was screwed up to the point where any decision made was ‘wrong!’    This was the H*** case.    A very large estate had to be distributed; however, the trust documents that were relevant violated the Rule against perpetuity’s and therefore was void.   Without the trust document there were multi=state title problems,  inheritance problems and a host of other problems.
My opponent and I elected to go before Judge Covelli, lay down all the facts as accurately as possible and let him make a decision on how to interpret our documents.    Covelli, put his feet on the bench, lit a cigar, and them directed the Sheriff to lock myself and my opponent in the jury room.   He ordered the Sheriff to let us out only after we had reached an agreement.    We thought he was joking – he was not!    It took an hour and we reached an agreement.   Covelli entered the order as an agreed order and off we went – laughing.    [of course you could not do that today!  today it would be false imprisonment, kidnapping, sexual assault  etc]    Real judges knew the attorneys that they were dealing with and knew the limits!    Covelli handling the Sykes case would have called in the States Attorney on day 1 and demanded an Honest, intelligent, complete and comprehensive investigation when without following the statute Cynthia Farenga (a GAL) sought to interfere with Gloria Sykes assets, and it appeared the 755 ILCs 5/11a – 10 was being ignored.    Even Judge Lupe would have called in law enforcement when Adam Stern’s whoopers started to flow.     O’Brien would have tossed the miscreants in jail when they brought their sanction motion against me!    It was obvious that they were attempting to intimidate me and they knew the Court had no jurisdiction.
Respect is earned!    What we have seen in these ‘elder cleansing cases’ does not warrant respect – it warrants condemnation!    The actions of the IARDC in demonstrating its lack of respect for the Rule of Law as set forth by the First Amendment and the dozen or so Supreme Court of the United States cases pointing out the ‘content related speech’ is not to be impeded by government is not only without jurisdiction but violative Canons of ethics to such a degree as the attorneys engaged in the travesty
 should be disbarred – rather than allowed to accept State of Illinois salary checks!.     Citizens United may not be popular, but the ruling is the RULE OF LAW.     The principles expressed are the RULE OF LAW and every lawyer and every judge is required to pay homage to those principles.   (see Rule 137).    As the same principles are decreed in Alvarez, Brown, et al the core reasoning of Citizen’s United is not going away anytime soon.    The lawyers who do not pay homage to the RULE OF LAW are not worthy of respect.   They have the right to express their opinions, but there is no right to draw a salary check from the State of Illinois to violate my rights, privileges and immunities.   Their is no right to profile Mary Sykes and for Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmiedel et al to have license to  isolate her from her family, her friends, her activities and her property.     Indeed, as there was no jurisdiction in the Circuit Court obtained because of the violation of 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10  (including 10(f)) law enforcement should appropriately do an investigation as to what criminal laws have been violated (if any) but the conduct of Stern, Farenga, Schmiedel and those who worked so diligently to deprive Mary Sykes of her liberty and property.
Ken Ditkowsky

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