I noted that too. At first the IARDC was of the opinion that the Sawyer case held that an attorney could NOT criticize a law, a statute, a court proceeding a judge or his decision. I have published that on my blog repeatedly it is exactly the opposite–that a lawyer can in fact criticize a judge, a law, a statute, a court proceeding and a decision. So they have given up on everything but the judge.
Here’s the problem. Many judges, I have found from the public records, (many in Atty Lanre Amu’s case have this problem), have highly suspicious XXXX records. Now the proof of the corruption lies in the actual XXX records. But if you go before that judge, ask for a change of judge and a subpoena of his XXX records, the IARDC will go after you because, well, from Atty Amu’s case, judges are perfect, they never have bad ideas and never do anything wrong and are incorruptible as the Lord and Master himself and the entire Holy Family–Yeshua, Joseph and the two Marys.
I have talked to the authorities about this problem, I have begged them to get the XXXX records and let me know when it is “safe” to reopen these cases and get my clients justice and eliminate the corruption.
I have heard nothing.
It’s a system, a deeply ingrained, highly troubled and unjust system that has gone on with impunity for decades.
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Dec 18, 2013 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: just a case cite I ran across