New Illinois Eavesdropping Law covers up corrption

I believe this is the current version of the bill signed into law by Gov. Quinn.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/98/SB/PDF/09800SB1342ham006.pdf

Very troubling about the bill is that it actually solves no problems and creates more.

First of all, as any honest Chicago lawyer or judge will tell you, or a litigant, the issue of altered court transcripts is huge.  Mine were altered at my ARDC trial.  Judge Stuart then about 6 weeks later “suddenly retired”.  Coincidence?  I think not.

In jurisdictions where the public are allowed to record the police, the incidence and costs of altercations litigated between the public and police drop dramatically.  Ditto for use of police cameras in uniforms and in the cars.  No surprise there.

Recording only help honesty, it does not help a crook.

The question is, who is putting the anti-recording measures in these bills and what do they have to hide?  Why won’t they let Illinois drop down or out of “most corrupt” state in the nation.  Is it really so very hard to be honest for Illinois public servants?

Let’s face it, you write an email, once you hit “send”, it’s gone.  You no longer have control over it.  You make public statements, they should be recordable as news.

What the Illinois legislature doesn’t get about that, I don’t understand.

The public has to be allowed to record in courtrooms and with the police.  The police are not special, but non-recording makes them special–and vulnerable to charges of corruption.

JoAnne

Time to declare ABA model rule 8.2 unconsitutional!

From the attorney blogs:

http://disbarringthecritics.blogspot.com/2014/02/commentary-to-model-rule-limiting.html

http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/litigationnews/top_stories/100512-sanctions-free-speech.html

http://work2bdone.com/live/

Lawyers are beginning to report on their blogs that ABA Model Rule 8.2 saying a lawyer cannot:

Rule 8.2: Judicial & Legal Officials

Maintaining The Integrity Of The Profession
Rule 8.2 Judicial And Legal Officials

(a) A lawyer shall not make 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 officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office.

Is now only being used to silence lawyers that are reporting on corruption in the court system, and in particular, probate.

From the blogs, it is widely reported that the rule was simply “thought up” by the ABA, it has never been passed by any state legislature, federal legislature, and there were no public discussions, legislative history or studies of any kind–and especially those that would look at the chilled speech it created, or what effect it might have at all on the First Amendment.

In other words, it was promulgated in a vacuum, has never been properly studied, and it certainly does not comply with the precepts enumerated in Alvarez, Citizens United and any of the very far reaching recent First Amendment cases that SCOTUS has now mandated as law of the land.

Lawyers are starting to widely and publicly complain all the rule is being used by is miscreants for their own personal felonious nests and featherbedding–something the rule was never intended to do.

The ABA took down about 1/3 of the blog it ran on my 3 year suspension, and has not responded to my direct communication to them, even tho it sent me an auto responder it would.

I also don’t see the comments back up.

What sort of an organization is the ABA and just whom is it protecting from what?

ABA model rule 8.2 needs to be put out with the trash in light of Alvarez, Citizens United, Snyder, and others that take a very broad view that the public can say just about anything, and even lie, and it’s a constitutional right.  Everything written today is so easily verifiable and researchable on the internet, what possible benefit can there be for limiting free speech?

What protections do lawyers and judges need anyway?  Is it even possible to malign the reputation of an Illinois politician, esp. when so many are in the clink at the present time?

It is even possible to insult a judge or lawyer, other than in their own egotistical minds?

This blog told the story that the Emperor had no clothes and continues to have no clothes.

The ARDC then clings to the optical illusion of clothes in a desperate attempt to justify that fact that there exist dozens of valid consumer complaints of a very serious variety against certain favored attorneys on the 18th floor (Sykes, Cooper, Wyman, Bedin, etc.) that it flatly refuses to investigate, and even worse, they send out nonsensical letters of response worthy of the literary skills of those addle minded by some serious mind altering substances.

Rule 8.2 is then used as a sword to chill free speech–a rule the people never passed, the state legislature never passed, and a rule which most of the Illinois public would claim unfairly protects Illinois judges and lawyers–a group that for certain needs no special protections.

Lawyers have constitutional rights and we don’t leave them at the door.  Honest lawyers don’t want or need a code of silence to protect miscreants.  Honest lawyers don’t go after other honest lawyers.

Mr. Steven Splitt has now been replaced as litigation counsel on my 3 year suspension as opposing counsel for the Review Board.

My message to him today is loud and clear:  you are violating my constitutional rights with a “rule” that was never studied, never passed by any legislator, and was implemented without public discussion.  It is now only being used as an excuse by the ARDC to cover up serious issues that it refused to investigate on behalf of the public, leaving dozens of lawyer victims in its wake.

This needs to stop.

Mr. Splitt, you now need to figure out your own karma, your own ethics and morals.

If I were you, I would just quit rather than prosecute an honest attorney.  You can come work with and for me. There may not be much money, but you can start to heal the karmic damage done the ARDC to the likes of Sykes, Bedin, Gore, Tyler, Drabik/Richards and others who have suffered years of horrors on the 18th floor and in other Illinois court rooms.

Or not.  Your karma is only your business, but those experienced in karma, will tell you that the longer to wait to fix your karma, the more of a b**** she will be when you get there. And there is absolutely no avoiding Ms. Karma–she will hunt you and track you down to the ends of the earth and back again.  There is no where to hide from her.

Please join with me in demanding that the ARDC rescind Rule 8.2 so it can start doing it’s job of actually reading the blogs, hauling in miscreant attorneys and disciplining them–the job which was its original mission.

I am doing the work for free now.  I serve probate victims for free or low cost.  Mr. Splitt, now you can do the same.

I promise to make room for you.

Sharon Opryszek has turned me down, Leah Black has turned me down, Melissa Smart has turned me down, but you have a new opportunity to walk with the angels and do a whole lot of good in Illinois, publicly one of the top most corrupt states in the US>

joanne

PS–and today I was supposed to give “a statement” to Ms. Opryszek at 1 pm about another case where the lawyer was acting like a total miscreant and ruined the life of my client for months.  I discussed his bar complaint which he so richly deserves and next thing you know, SO is saying I can’t say that.  I withdrew the email and apologized, but now Ms. Opryszek is demanding documents that don’t exist and that I don’t have and insisting that they must be there.  Turns out she has no idea what the definition of “clipboard is”.  she probably thinks it’s an ISIS torture device.  But what was she doing at 1 pm when she was supposed to be doing my statement?  Eating birthday cake.  That’s right.  And the ARDC operators were on the phones telling everyone about how Mr so and so was in a meeting.  Not.  They were all eating birthday cake from 1 to 1:30.  Then Ms. SO rounds the corner, chewing me out for documents I don’t have and I told her so and then she leaves.  Whew.  The song “Happy” was playing when I got into the car so I knew there are no coincidences.  What obnoxious, rude, insulting behavior.  Her attitude clearly was bordering on “if you don’t have it, you better make it up–or else because you’re on my ‘go after’ list.”  She can stuff her ‘go after’ list.  I’m not interested.

Here’s my response to Ms. SO.  No.  I won’t make up your crappy evidence you want, no matter how much you insult and berate me.  I am an attorney and you can’t insult, berate, extort or coerce a good attorney into lying for you.  Not you or good Lord Larkin himself will get me to lie to make your jobs easier, so just lay off.  You might have gotten away with that with poor Ms. Justine McGinty, but I am not a 19 year fresh out of the country girl.  You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

And that other attorney deserves a big hefty bar complaint against him and I’m saying it again.  the judge wouldn’t sanction him,  so I have no idea why you are all getting involved.  You want to hide behind rule 8.2 so I can’t talk honestly to this other attorney, so be it, but I see no reason to give credence to a rule that was made up without any studies, information or evidence it does any good other than to harass honest attorneys.

JoAnne

From Ken Ditkowsky — when due process, the US and State constitutions become “mere technicalities” to be swept away by errant courts

One of the major problems that the friends and family of the designated victims of elder abuse is frustration and the fact that law enforcement moves so slowly.     The adage:  “Justice delayed is Justice denied” is a truism.     How much time does a 90 year old victim have?     If rescued after in the later stages of elder exploitation and abuse what life does this victim enjoy?
The reason that the scam of elder cleansing is so successful is that time is an enemy – not a friend.    When a criminal guardian (usually a guardian ad litem) tells the Court that the family and friend agitate the victim, and the unthinking (and therefore corrupt jurist) orders supervised visitation a/k/a isolation. The victory of evil over the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State, and the Rule of Law is almost a foregone conclusion.      The simple order entered by a corrupt jurist separates the victim from his, her former life and defeats any reasonable accommodation for any disability that might appropriately be addressed.     For instance, in the Mary Sykes case the simple order of Judge Connors (entered without the required jurisdiction or hearings) removed Mary Sykes from her home, her church, her garden club, her sewing jobs, her mobility (and her vehicle), the companionship of her two elderly sisters, the companionship of her younger daughter, including trips and vacations all over the United States.
For Mary’s liberty was substituted drugs reasonably calculated to turn her into a zombie, day care facilities with little or no stimulation, and the unlimited and involuntary distribution of her estate to the elder cleansers.     Even her pet (dog) was taken from her.    Stimulation (i.e. social intercourse with family and friends who were her companions before she was involuntarily restrained) in the words of Cynthia Farenga – agitated her!    Indeed, had she not been competent she would not have been agitated!    An honest and competent jurist would have recognized that agitation was the expected and predictable reaction that involuntary incarceration in direct opposition to the Core values of America.     The more competent the victim the more agitated they would be expected to become!
The same game plan is reported in just about every one of these elder cleansing cases!      The supervision by the Court appointed miscreants is reasonably calculated to thwart any ADA reasonable accommodation that the elderly or disabled person might accidentally receive!      In Mary’s case separation for the stimulation that the younger daughter provided was a major blow to Mary.     A goggle search of Mary G. Sykes turns up Newspaper articles demonstrating how vital a person she was even at 90.     (She even visited President Clinton!)     Her long term relationship with her sisters was terminated by the void order of Judge Connors doing both sisters severe harm.     As Peter Schmiedel pointed out “ Mary is making wonderful progress!”
When one judge after another refused to address the violations of law that are obvious to everyone time and time again not only is Justice denied, but a serious ISIS type assault on the Bill of Rights is promulgated and carried out.     Even though 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3 (b) reminds the legal eagles of the very very  limited jurisdiction that is provided a guardian as the legislature recognizes the guardianship has infringing on Civil Rights not only is the mandate “reasonable accommodation) ignored, but,  total usurpation of Human, Civil, Liberty, and Property rights removed.
 In Mary Sykes case the Jurisdictional criteria were all sweep aside as technicalities!      For instance, 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10 sets out each criterion.     It states in detail (including how the printing is to long) as to a summons.     The Circuit Court clerk did not bother to print a summons meeting the criterion prior to Mr. Larkin and the IARDC jumping in to aid and abet the criminal conduct.      The Sheriff wrote that he had no record of service of summons so it really did not matter what, if anything, or whether Mary was served with Summons – she was designed to be a victim and as the Court intended to act illegally and contrary to the Constitution – indeed, one fraud on the court more or less did not matter to the elder cleansers and those who acted with them to obstruct justice.  (NB – so that no one forgets – pursuant to 18 USCA 4 I report Mr. Larkin’s felony to the Department of Justice as he acted in concert with the miscreants.  18 USCA 371.    18 USCA 1341, 18 USCA 242)
In a similar manner 11a – 10 requires the close or near relatives to be served 14 days prior to a hearing on Mary’s competency with notice of the aforesaid hearing.     As the miscreants had no intention of allowing such a hearing there was no need to serve the jurisdictional 14 days prior notice.     It thus was ignored!    As Judge Connors pointed out – the same result would have been had whether or not the law was followed!     The need to elder cleanse Mary trumped the Rule of Law.     It should be noted that the three guardians and their attorney admitted that Mary’s two sisters were not disclosed in the Petition for Mary’ to be railroaded into  guardianship and were not notified of any hearing – as no hearing was held so as to determine 1) whether Mary was incompetent and 2) the extent of any infirmity notification.    The corrupt Court signed an order appointing a guardian.
It should be noted that family came to the Court house believing that a hearing was to be held on Mary’s Petition for a Protective order (based upon domestic violence of the Petitioner seeking to be appointed guardian ).     It has been reported that the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the petitioner just prepared an order appointing a plenary guardian and the presiding judge just rubber stamped it.      Any attack on this extra-judicial procedure was meet with threats of sanctions, Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission sanctions – such as suspensions and disbarment!      This was no idle threat.     Kangaroo Commissions were available to demonstrate that Justice in Illinois was what Jerome Larkin said it was!     The United States Constitution, the Illinois Constitution, the Rule of Law and Justice were merely technicalities.     So confident were the conspirators (18 USCA 371) that they decreed that Mary’s younger daughter was bi-polar because she protested the felonies being committed openly and notoriously.
Of course it should be noted as late as December 29, 2014 another of the probate judges when faced with the ADA claim of the younger daughter as to a disability the younger daughter (Gloria) was at the urging of the very people who claimed prior that she was disabled objected to a reasonable accommodation.    GAL Adam Stern authored the order denying the relief that Ms. Sykes requested!     Mr. Larkin’s cadre of aiders and abettors have been  placed of record  –   senior attorney for the IARDC wrote that Adam Stern had been appointed as Guardian ad litem for the younger daughter and therefore the Commission could not engage in an investigation of the ‘elder cleansing’ that was reported. [1]      These miscreants are paid with public funds!
The record in the case of Mary Sykes 09 P 4585 (Circuit Court of Cook County) verifies the statements that I and others have made concerning this abortion of Justice.      Mr. Larkin by suspending my law license for four years and threatening JoAnne Denison with suspension for three years ****  thought that he could intimidate us and eliminate us from standing up to his comrades prosecuting the War against the elderly and the disabled.       Every day we and others are recruiting citizens to man the barricades and resist the American holocaust directed against the elderly and the disabled.     We will continue this quest until Mr. Larkin and his comrades assaulting the elderly and the disabled are brought to Justice and an elderly or disabled person can enjoy the fruits of America citizenship!
Recruitment of legal talent is not easy for the victims of elder cleansing and their families.   Lawyers are intimidated by Larkin and do not want to sacrifice their law licenses for 90 year old victims of elder cleansing.     Lawyer reason that the elderly will die soon anyway!     It too bad!   But why must I place myself on the line and risk losing my ticket to practice Law.     Indeed, such thought is justified.   Do you see the American Civil Liberties Union leading the fight against this horrendous demonstration of disrespect for Liberty?     Do you see the Media decrying the assault on America?     Do you see the Sheriff of Cook County ordering the arrests of jurists who in the presence of his deputies act well beyond their authority and approve of the harvesting the gold from the teeth of an elderly guardianized victim.  Most people have grown up with the caveat – “do not volunteer!”         Health care fraud has a surcharge of 300% and thus the miscreants are flush and have money to distract the cause of Justice and the Rule of Law.     Thus, most victims lie in their own urine in ‘extended care’ facilities doped to the gills as their hard earned savings and assets are redistributed amongst the guardians and those allied with them.    Law enforcement is aware that it has the burden of proof of “beyond a reasonable doubt” so it painstakingly gathers the evidence that crimes have been committed as the victim go to their final rewards!
The families of victims are desperate!     Mary Sykes is not going to live forever!     The plenary guardian is now so bold as to openly exhibit the redistribution of Mary’s estate by sporting expensive jewelry!     The younger daughter has filed judicial proceedings pro se.     Finding a lawyer to represent her is slightly less difficult than obtaining a Motel reservation on the moon for New Year’s 2015.
What can the victims do!    What can their families do?     The desperation manifests itself in rehabilitating action that makes the advocate appear as a ‘kook!’       This conduct accelerates and ultimately eliminates the advocate from all sympathy of his/her peers*****      The miscreants glory in the spectacle.     Any chance of accomplishing the rescue of a ‘loved one’ entrapped by the cottage industry of elder cleansing is lost irrevocably.      Others join groups that profess to be fighting for Freedom of Speech, Civil Rights, etc.     Some of the groups actually are engaged in such activities; however, there appear in some prolific individuals who are using these groups as cover from racial cleansing, religious cleaning and conduct inconsistent with the core values of America.     Thus, indiscriminate associations also claim casualties that obstruct the cause of justice.
Since I have undertaken this fight as a full time matter I‘ve seen many fine people engaged in the defense of America’s core principles not only in the elder cleansing fight but in the outrage against the ISIS assaults on the Bill Rights self-destruct.     I’ve also seen individuals arise who are not interested in Justice but are interested in using the group to promulgate a parochial bias, malady, etc.     I had to block several individuals who advocate that certain religions and races are the root of all evil.   You name the evil and they will name the religious or racial group that they decree responsible.       Hate sells easily and these individuals are persistent marketers.      They and the elder cleansing miscreants share disrespect for Justice and Honor.
Guilt by association is alive and well in America.       Many of us still believe that “birds of a feather flock together.”    Many of us do not see the color “gray!”      We see only “justice” and “injustice.”       In addressing criminal conduct on the part of corrupt judicial officials and corrupt public officials the concept of “any port in a storm” is not appropriate.        “Hurt feelings” is a luxury that is unavailable.     For the bulk of the friends of the elderly and the disabled we are limited to that HONEST complete and comprehensive investigation.  We have to rely upon law enforcement – even if it takes a long time!      I’ve placed my faith in the Justice Department and Senator Kirk.      I’ve done this because I recognize my limitations and that it appears in Illinois that the ‘ fix is in!’      I learned a long time ago that when the ‘fix’ is in you have to ride it out – Benjamin Franklin’s picture on a treasury note is much more persuasive than “little old me!” [2]
The miscreants are looking for any excuse that they can muster to continue on their very lucrative quests.        Being able to discredit us is a winning strategy.       Our cause is just.      We however are imperfect and impatient and like our children we have been trained to want instant gratification.     It is not going to happen.      The pernicious public officials engaging in the cottage industry of elder cleansing are entrenched and flush with the live savings of their victims.      I’ve been reminded many times that Eric Holder (AG) many times has demonstrated that he is a fighter for Justice and a standup guy.    He is reported to have prosecuted Representative Daniel Rostenkowski, the speaker of the House of Representatives for stealing postage.      He and his successor are our hope that we can save some of the elderly and the disabled who are in dire straits.
Victories are fleeting, defeats are forever.     We need a victory.       The Honest intelligent complete and comprehensive investigation that Jerome Larkin of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary commission so vigorously opposes would be a first step victory!     Tax enforcement and seeing the miscreants pay the Federal Income taxes that they owe would be a first step victory!

[1] 17 days later after the younger daughter threatened suit the outrageous prevarication became a ‘typo.’   
[2] As I indicated previously bribes no longer are regularly paid in cash.    Corruption is not only the payment of money.    Yes, it usually boils down to a pecuniary gain – however, corruption also includes accepting (or placing) an individual in a position for which he/she is unqualified.     A judge who does not read the statute that she is administrating is corrupt!    A lawyer who ignores the Constitutional mandates is corrupt.   A lawyer who refuses to recognize ADA is corrupt.*****

From Ken Ditkowsky — his view on assults against the ADA and the 18th floor of the Daley Center

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Dec 30, 2014 6:46 AM
To: Eric Holder , Probate Sharks , “JoAnne M. Denison” , Tim NASGA , Nasga Us , “J. Ditkowsky” , Matt Senator Kirk , “FBI- ( (” , Chicago FBI , BILL DITKOWSKY , Chicago Tribune , SUNTIMES , Janet Phelan , Ginny Johnson , “ComplaintAdmin ADA (CRT)” , Cook County States Attorney , Barbara Stone , Bev Cooper , FOX News Network LLC , Diane Nash , Scott Evans , Fiduciary Watch , “Y. ACLU” , Illinois ARDC , ISBA Main Discussion Group , Edward Carter , Cook Sheriff , Harry Heckert , Glenda Martinez , “tips@cbschicago.com” , “Mr. Lanre Amu — Honest Atty Unfairly Persecuted By ARDC” , The Wall Street Journal , Sam Sugar , Rabbi Moshe Soloveitchik , Eric Blair , “JoAnne M. Denison” , RosANNa Miller , “Jim (” , Alyece Russell , Martin Kozak , Len Holland , Elaine Renoire , Candice Schwager , Tom Fields , Martha Jantho , Rudy Bush , Nancy Vallone , Kathie Bakken , Robert Sarhan , Wsj Lts , “Truthbetoldradio (” , John Howard Wyman , Jay Goldman
Cc: “adacoordinator@illinoiscourts.gov” , Mary Richards , Doug Franks , ACLU of Illinois , “information@iardc.org” , “illinoislawyernow@isba.org” , “ABAJournal.com”
Subject: Americans With Disabilities Act – and the Illinois credo – “do not confuse me with the facts, I’ve made up my mind” erstanding that Judge Evans, the Chief Justice of the Circuit Court of Cook County made a special effort to require the Court system to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.    The Justice Department made in very clear to the Indiana Court system that ADA had meaning a harassment of disabled people (including those who were blind and deaf) were entitled to reasonable accommodation.

Ms. Denison reports today on how a Judge in the Circuit Court of Cook County treated a woman who has a recognized disability.    

**** see post ****

The hostility that is constantly reported by the elder cleansing victims and their families does cease for moment.    The corrupt judicial officials (like Judge M) are as open and notorious as Jerome Larkin and the IARDC in their bias and vendetta against the elderly and the disabled who have been slated for extinction of Civil and Human rights.     Court watchers have reported ex–parte communications between the legal parasites, and corrupt judicial officials.  (Of course the IARDC and apparently the judicial inquiry board do nothing about these communications – censorship and the “exceptions” to First Amendment, and the interpretations of the Canons of Ethics for lawyers apply only to apply to reporting criminal activity involving the Courts.    Operation Greylord was totally unethical in the world of the Cook County, Illinois courts and the IARDC  – however, they very wisely choose to ignore their version of ethics rather than attempt to suspend or disbar the Attorney General of the United States even when he convicted more than a score of judges and forced several score of judges into early retirement.

Now that Ms. Denison has made the events of December 29, 2014 public, let’s see if the court reporter’s notes disappear.    That was the ‘old way’ of dealing with sticky wickets!    Mr. Larkin and the IARDC are bolder – a few words left out of a transcript and a word or two changed accomplishes the same purpose.   (As the Court reporter records the sounds uttered in the courtroom this gambit is dangerous as the changes can be ascertainained.  It leaves a nasty trail.  HOWEVER when pushed by a victim of this wrongful conduct to disclose the recording  it either disappeared, was stolen, lost etc.  We need the Justice Department to obtain the naked recording of not only this proceeding but the questioned misreporting of Judge Stuart’s testimony in the Denison hearings. 

If the law applies to a merchant it certainly applies to the government and particularly the Justice System.    It is time for the law to be enforced and for the Illinois Justice System (and every other State justice System) to comply with the law.   Law is not “do what I say, not what I do!”     Equal protection of the Law is a core value of America!  


 
Ken Ditkowsky
And I would think the investigation of the above court room dramas where Judge M argued forcibly the ADA did not apply to her, grilled a disabled woman, threw out a dog that barked once or twice, ought to be a priority of Chief Judge Evans where the courts are under scrutiny for violations of the ADA (see past posts from the US DOJ emphasizing equal access to the courts and enforcement of the ADA to provide full public access to courtrooms, that translators should be paid for by the courts and that the ADA means seniors should not be marginalized into institutions), should be receiving top priority.
The fact that a sitting judge made fun of myself and Mr. Evans as court room watchers and note takers is also troubling.  Our democratic courtrooms only thrive on being open and transparent.  I have yet to be allowed to use my laptop to blog in 1804.  It always turns into a such a hassle and often detracts from the proceeding when reporting should be seamless.

Can a trained service dog bark under the ADA? Judge Aicha MacCarthy answers the question today, and a whole lot more

Dear Readers;

As you know, there is fairly not much more entertaining than the Sykes case, ARDC decision or not withstanding that this blog is now the MOST DANGEROUS BLOG IN ILLINOIS–and it’s for reporting on the Sykes case.

So, let’s state the facts ma’am and only the facts of what happened to day in court.

1) Gloria files an ADA pleading, and no, I don’t have it yet, but I will get it, I promise.  The essence of the complaint is a) Mary Sykes has rights under the ADA and she is being discriminated against in that b) she is isolated from 20+ former friends and neighbors, including her beloved younger daughter Gloria; c) she can’t live where she wants, which is with Gloria; and d) Gloria’s POA was summarily suspended without notice or hearing, etc.  That’s the gist I got from Gloria today who braved 1804 again, this time with the very formidable Judge M.

2)  We all show up at 10 am, and I would bring out my laptop but I get harassed from the court, AS and PS, and I figure, the ADA is going to be a real kicker out the door today, they’ll hear it first, MOTION DENIED, and I’m outta there.  No reason to fight over the laptop, so I grab some order forms and prepare to take 2 notes:  Gloria steps up, MOTION DENIED.  ADA?  are you kidding on the 18th floor?  What a loser.  Okay, I’m the legal  pessimist today.

3)  Neither Carolyn nor Mary shows up.  No surprise there.

4) AS and PS show up–eventually.  But here’s the weird part.  Judge M keeps on going back and forth from bench to back door, about 3 or 4 times from 10 am to 11 am.  Interesting.  PS is here, but apparently wandering.  AS is waiting, for Godoh, I’m sure.

5)  Finally after about an hour the case is called.  Curiously, Judge M seemed to know where PS was and what he was up to even tho it was not disclosed in open court.  Gloria has been wandering in and out and say PS walked to the back hall and disappears.  Okay, I would put 2 and 2 together, but that takes work.  The ARDC says stuff like that never happens, and Lord Larkin has ruled those are actually 18th floor optical illusions and that’s that.  No more stating the obvious.  Let the reader figure that out.

6)  Right away, the argument ensues between Gloria and Judge M.  It takes on a rather personal, nasty tone for some strange reason.  Judge M declares “no dog and this is my courtroom.”  Gloria retorts with the ADA and the dog is not a service dog like one for the blind or deaf, but a working dog and it is covered under the ADA.  Gloria repeats firmly 1)  I have a disability; 2) the dog mitigates my disability.  Judge M says you have to also assert training.  Gloria:  no I don’t.  Judge M: yes you do.  Gloria:  fine, he’s trained.  Judge M:  Get him out of here.  I already ruled and issued a court order and you’re openly defying me.  Gloria’s friends comply and dog leaves.

So much for that.  I’ve really never seen a judge or any court employee challenge a disabled person and grill them, but hey, this is cook county court, right?  We have judges that jail court room observers for pants too low. Got it. Those weenie disableds with all those problems better get their act together and put together a cohesive legal argument and get it done–or else!

Gloria then argues her motion and her ADA claim about her mother and Judge M just says MOTION DENIED.  Finally.  What I came for. There’s no ADA on the 18th floor, not with all those sick people who need to be billed by attys and gotten rid of, right?

You’d think it was the end, but oh, no, there are more points to be made.

A dog bark is heard.  Judge M flies into a flury over how service dogs don’t bark.  Gloria says Shaggy is a working dog and sometimes, yes, they do bark.  I have to agree with that, even tho I don’t have the immediate authority of Google or Wiki, and I’m a reporter at this point, so I have no need to get involved in all that.

But Gloria argues the dog barking point, the working dog point and Judge M kicks Gloria out.  In fact, Judge is fairly rude and condescending to Gloria, like usu., making faces, laughing at times, probate victims know the rigamarole. So do I.  Yawn.

Gloria leaves.

Here’s the weird part.  Judge M then stands up, arms a flying and points at me and yells “And Mrs. Denison, you can go ahead and write down whatever you want in your notes!”  (in a sarcastic condescending tone) (Since when do court watchers get a comment from the judge???  Interesting)  I leave.  I am mostly puzzled and not at all bothered by the comment other than it didn’t seem appropriate from a sitting circuit judge.

Scott reports later that she then turned to him and yelled at him from the bench sarcastically “Mr. Evans, and you too can write down whatever you want to!”

After I leave get in the hall, Gloria bursts into tears.  I comfort and tell her to leave with Shaggy ASAP.  I trust no one, absolutely no one on that floor.

Shaggy gives a few barks on the way out and I guess that was the cue for Judge M to come a flying off the bench, arms waving about the dog that’s never supposed to bark.

But even with all that, Gloria and Shaggy have already made the turn to the elevators.  They are safe.  My work is done.  Gloria would have gone back on the anteroom work bench in silver bracelets and Shaggy down to the pound for assisted involuntary suicide.

Scott says he heard she wanted to put Gloria in contempt again and arrest her (for a barking working dog).

So I close with this article

http://dogcare.dailypuppy.com/can-service-dogs-bark-1135.html

and I suggest Judge M get a 4G wireless table with google to try to keep up on these things.

But we then made it to Starbucks!  Yeah, Starbucks.

But then a guy in a sheriff’s white shirt and a gun walked up to Gloria and said “lady, is this your dog, you ain’t blind or nothing, he has to leave.”

Groan.

One of our party that shall be kept nameless simply said, “officer, are you trained in the ADA?”  “Well, actually, no I’m not.”  “But you’re a deputy, right, with over 200 hours of training, right?”  “Okay.”  “Maybe you ought to think about getting some ADA training before you talk to this young lady about her dog, okay?”  “Okay.”

He left to give directions to a kid.  Good idea.  He’s trained in getting that kid to the State of Illinois building in the pedway.  Good choice.

JoAnne

More on the US DOJ and the ADA and keeping seniors out of institutions:

http://www.ada.gov/olmstead/documents/doj_hhs_letter.pdf

What a nice holiday present from the US DOJ that recognizes the importance of keeping seniors out of institutions that do not want to be there and that the ADA IS in fact meant to accomplish that goal.

So far, it has been my experience in the Illinois court system they are basically ignoring the ADA when it comes to putting a senior in a nursing home versus his own home (Frake).  Chemical restraints are common to accomplish those goals, even though illegal (Wyman, etc.)

Let’s hope the US DOJ can put out more guidelines and help seniors use the ADA to stay in their homes, avoid chemical restraints, and have freedom to choose their POA and caretaker (Thomas, Sykes) without interference from the state.

JoAnne