AND IF YOU ARE ON THE NORTHSHORE AND GET COMCAST, TUNE INTO BEV COOPER’S SHOW COOPER’S CORNER TO SEE WHAT KEN AND I HAVE TO SAY.
from: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Mar 11, 2014 9:40 PM
To: Jo Anne M Denison
The arrogance of our favorite miscreants has no bounds. They are so used to having the court kiss their GMs that even in the Federal Court they have little problem with misrepresenting the facts. The recitation of the facts in the Motions filed by these defendants has little relation to the allegations actually made. The Statute of Limitations argument is almost amazing. With the bad deeds still going on the miscreants are trying to say that we knew from day one that they were amoral individuals and therefore on day one the Statute of limitations commenced. Further as they committed an assault on the First Amendment the tort statute for physical abuse (2 years) should apply.
What apparently has our favorite miscreants worried is that as we develop evidence of criminal behavior we will be sharing it with law enforcement. What this means is that is the information that you dug up on Larkin, Farenga’s husband et al can be accessed by law enforcement at the click of a mouse. The depositions of the miscreants similarly will be available to law enforcement.
At some time in the future, I expect that the IARDC will have an administrator who takes the duty imposed on him seriously and will not be a vehicle to ‘cover up’ the actions of PS. MS. AS, CF et al. Therefore, I have no trouble sharing the information that we ascertain with the next administrator of the IARDC.
All that said, JoAnne, now that the IARDC proceeding is behind you, we have to start marshaling the information that has been collected. For instance – Farenga’s husband has an unusual number of real estate transactions. Gloria checked the records as to his political campaign contributions and found that also suspicious. The 60K tax lien against Stern (not disclosed by the IARDC) is also part of the mix. The failure of Larkin and at least some of the attorneys on the IARDC staff of not filing the ethics disclosure statements is interesting. Why they have not been called on it is similarly enlightening. Larkin and his group spend a large amount of State money.
Tonight as I was driving home a caller called on one of those talk shows and asked the question as to how an elected official reported on his ethics report a net worth of y dollars, earned z dollars and when he left office had a net net worth of three times y plus z dollars. His question was how did law enforcement and particularly the tax man not question the highly unlikely net worth of the public official.
I guess the explanation is that the public institutions are not open on weekends and the savings add up! It could not be that the public official participated in the disappearance of the 1.5 million dollars from the Gore Estate, or the disappearance of the gold coins from the Sykes estate. Such would be heresy and unethical to say out loud especially if it is true.
It is no wonder that Larkin is willing to spend every dollar in the IARDC treasury to make certain that no lawyer can without fear write to law enforcement concerning corruption!