“There is no dispute the elder cleansing is wrong. There is no dispute that a ‘cover up’ of corruption by a public official (such as Larkin) is wrong. It is an axiom that any jurist that tolerates such wrongful conduct as elder cleansing, directly or indirectly is corrupt”
The concept that appears to be lacking in Illinois judicial circles is that any public office including that of a judicial official creates a public trust. Judges are elected to serve the public interest by resolving cases and controversy. The Administration of justice is a solemn responsibility and when perverted by corruption, including intellectual dishonesty, cannot be tolerated in a free society. Operation Greylord was the tip of the iceberg and the remnants today have surfaced not only in more overt corruption such as we are seeing in the Elder Cleansing cases arising in the Probate Division of the Circuit Court of Illinois, but in the assaults on the Federal and Illinois Constitution by the nadir of the legal profession.
The deliberate misrepresentation of the rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States (such as the Sawyer case) by the IARDC attorneys is a mere demonstration of the intellectual dishonesty that Mr. Larkin and his unprofessional hordes practice as they assault reason and the ‘Core Values’ of the republic in their prosecution and cover up of the serious felonies of elder cleansing.
The ultimate insult to America is when the ‘conscience of the legal profession’ (i.e. the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission cites as authority their decision in the Amu case as authority. One has to search long and hard to find such arrogance and perversion. Dred Scott was an embarrassment to modern lawyers as it fails to recognize the core value of America – i.e. Equal Protection of the Law for everyone regardless of race, color, creed, National origin, religion etc.
This concept is the lynch pin of America regardless of whether or not certain members of our society degraded themselves by attempting to enslave others. The rationalizations notwithstanding slavery in all its forms was and is wrong.
The commission lawyers (and the rubber stamp panel) in citing Amu degrade themselves by knowingly acknowledge that they approve of the racial nexus that the case reeks of! Mr. Amu was the clear victim of the racial bias of a public official (Jerome Larkin) who openly and notoriously acted to deprive Mr. Amu of his ‘equal protection of the law’ and his Right of Free Speech. Mr. Amu had every right to protest the actions of Judges who by their silence do not contest their corruption even if he has a deeper hue to his skin than the average citizen of Wilmette, Illinois. (Mr. Amu is of the Negro race and an immigrant from Africa) Practicing Law while Black is not a disciplinary offense – but racial discrimination by judicial officials is a violation of the 14th Amendment, 42 USCA 1981, and 1983. It is also a violation of 18 USCA 242 and just about every canon of ethics that requires decency from a lawyer.)
The citing of the Amu case by the commission is an insult to every lawyer who has ever practice law in the United States of America. In fact the case itself is an abomination that should never have been brought.
The act of bring such as case as the Amu case is a per se breach of the public trust. It is sad, but the assault on the First Amendment by Mr. Larkin and the commission in attempting to silence individuals who happen to be attorneys who complained of corruption is quite common and appears to be an established policy of the Illinois Supreme Court. Allowing Larkin to engage in his assaults on the First Amendment is a breach of trust by the Court. This is fact whether the action by Larkin, the Court, or those he acts in concert with are just engaged in the commerce of providing a little extra non- budget compensation to certain favor jurists or ‘covering up’ and doing the commission’s bit to wage war on the elderly and the disabled.
What is also sad is that the major ‘cover up’ that Larkin is engaged in is protection of dishonest miscreants who prey on the elderly and the disabled. Larkin is aware that:
1. Federal law (Americans with Disabilities act) requires that public entities provide the disabled with a reasonable accommodation so that they can enjoy the privileges and immunities that all citizens enjoy. A reasonable accommodation is not ravaging their estates, isolating them from their prior lives or drugging them out of their minds so that they are easy prey and lucrative objects for guardians and other health care pirates.
2. Federal law (Americans with Disabilities act) prohibits 42 USCA 12203 retaliation against persons (including lawyers) who seek the enforcement of Federal Law, and Illinois law 320 ILCS 20/4 prohibits disciplinary proceedings.
3. The railroading of senior citizens and disabled people into guardianships for profit (such as was done in the Sykes case 09 P4585) is wrong.
4. Separating and isolating a senior or disabled person from family, friends, and prior life is wrong.
5. Misappropriating (by the use of the guardianship) the assets of another person is theft and wrong.
6. Depriving another individual of their liberty and/or human rights is wrong.
There is no dispute the elder cleansing is wrong. There is no dispute that a ‘cover up’ of corruption by a public official (such as Larkin) is wrong. It is an axiom that any jurist that tolerates such wrongful conduct as elder cleansing, directly or indirectly is corrupt. There is no case and controversy as to the wrongful actions concerning the guardianship of Alice Gore, Mary Sykes et al. They are examples of corruption and wrongful conduct. They are an example of numerous felonies being openly and notorious committed in Illinois and unfortunately in many of States.
No matter how Jerome Larkin and those he acts in concert with [18 USCA 371] to ‘cover up’ the obvious felonies and wrongful conduct everyone knows that he and his ilk are nefarious people who are intentionally using their public offices in derogation of not only their oaths of office but the core values of America. Such is pure ‘corruption!’ Right always will be Right no matter how much clout or intimidation that the miscreants can assert. Larkin’s shameful reincarnation in Illinois (in the Amu) case of Jim Crow became a permanent stain on the Judicial history of Illinois when attorned to by the Illinois Supreme Court. It is rare that a Supreme Court disgraces itself so completely in public.
The fact that the 4th Estate has been silent as to Illinois’ shame does not mitigate it. It just makes us sad to see a proud Sovereign State fall so deep into the cesspool of corruption! At some point in time the people of Illinois will have to rise up and remove the cancer that has permeated its borders and deal with problem.
France and the world last week received a ‘wake up’ call when terrorists invaded a newspaper and assaulted FREE SPEECH. The people of the State of Illinois have similar terrorists in their bosom who wish to assault FREE SPEECH. Larkin and his band of terrorists are more sophisticated than their colleagues at ISIS – they elder cleanse their victims before they assault the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights!
I requested an HONEST complete and comprehensive investigation. JoAnne Denison joined in the request. Amu complied with his Himmel requirement. Indeed Larkin knew that each of us took an oath to defend the Constitution, yet, instead of complying with his Oath, Larkin and the Agency of the Supreme Court of Illinois (and the Illinois Supreme Court) retaliated! Amu, in an action that had an obvious racial nexus, was summarily suspended. I went through a kangaroo set of mesne proceedings before being suspended. And JoAnne is going through a similar set of mesne proceedings; however, with Seth Gilman indicted for Hospice fraud and government starting to prosecute health care fraud, it is rumored that Larkin is desperate to shut down Denison’s blog – he is reported to be filing or has filed a petition before the Supreme Court for her interim suspension for three years.
Illinois is at a crossroads. Larkin is his radical Muslim jihad against lawyers who comply with 18 USCA 4 and the Constitution of the State of Illinois and the United States of America has not to this point used automatic weapons in his assaults against Free Speech, but, his action is no less reprehensive and wrong. No rationalization can justify Larkin’s assaults or his breach of his duty as a public official. Time is fleeting! The window to save Illinois and the Nation is closing. Elder Cleansing today is a cottage industry; however, tomorrow it can be the 4th Reich! Free men and women have to rally against the Jihad by corrupt judicial and other public officials against our BILL OF RIGHTS AND OUR ELDERLY AND DISABLED CITZENS!
 “it hardly needs elaboration to make it clear that the question of the total insufficiency of the evidence to sustain a serious charge of professional misconduct, against a backdrop of the claimed constitutional rights of an attorney to speak as freely as another citizen, is not one which can be subsumed under the headings of local practice, customs or law. “ In re SAWYER, 360 U.S. 622, 640, 79 S. Ct. 1376, 1385, 3 L. Ed. 2d 1473, 1485-1486, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 1744, 30 (U.S. 1959)
 The Denison, Ditkowsky and Amu cases prosecuted by the IARDC do not involve any charge of Contempt of court or actions before a Court. They all involve 18 USCA 4 compliances by the attorneys that Larkin persecutes. Amu complained of judges he believed to have been ‘wired’ or had a conflict of interest, Ditkowsky requested an Honest complete and comprehensive investigation of the elder cleansing of Mary Sykes 09 P 4585, and Denison repeated the request in her blog. Cynthia Farenga, Adam Stern, and Peter Schmiedel the attorneys who complained to the IARDC to successfully prevent an Honest complete and comprehensive investigation tried to induce a judge to impose sanctions so as to prevent Ditkowsky from doing a FRCP 11 investigation. When they were unsuccessful the made application to Larkin and his commission to do indirectly what they could not directly. Larkin as part of his Jihad responded with Disciplinary proceedings aforesaid.
What is interesting is that had the Court thought that any of the charges were significant it would have to meet the standard:
In order to support a conviction for criminal contempt under § 401(1), the record must establish beyond a reasonable doubt the following four elements:
First, there must be evidence that the defendant engaged in some conduct that can be considered “misbehavior.” See Vaughn v. City of Flint, 752 F.2d 1160, 1167 (6th Cir. 1985). Second, that misbehavior must amount to an “obstruction of the administration of justice,” see id., an obstruction that “must be … actual, not …  theoretical….” See id. at 1168 (citing In re McConnell, 370 U.S. 230, 234, 82 S.Ct. 1288, 8 L.Ed.2d 434 (1962)). Third, the contempt must occur in the presence of the judge imposing the summary determination of criminal guilt. See id. at 1167. Finally, the defendant must have formed an actual intent to cause the obstruction of justice. See Id. Thus, the improper act must be “a deliberate or intended violation, as distinguished from an accidental, inadvertent or negligent violation.” Id. at 1169 (quoting TWM Manufacturing Company v. Dura Corp., 722 F.2d 1261, 1272 (6th Cir.1983)).
In re Moncier, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78458, 68-71, 2008 WL 1808547 (E.D. Tenn. Apr. 7, 2008)
Before his Commission Larkin must meet the standard of clear and convincing. To the Illinois Supreme Court’s interpretation in Amu and also in Ditkowsky clairvoyance is sufficient.
 The Amu case is extremely disturbing as it represents not only a racial nexus motivating wrongful action against an attorney for speaking out, but, the acceptance of the proposition that government will accept the assertion that some of its citizens are not to be afforded equal protection under the law. The Illinois Supreme Court in first granting an interim suspension of Attorney L. Amu allowed a major injustice to be consummated by a racist enjoying the mantel of the ‘conscience of the 2nd oldest profession’ and when it affirmed the racism disgraced itself and the State of Illinois! The Court’s indifference to this racism creates a very dark day in the history of Illinois!