From Ken Ditkowsky –Critical internet radio programs covered by 1st Amendment

Date: Feb 25, 2016 11:18 AM
If we focus solely on the elder cleansing cases (and those related thereto) the future looks bleak as the amounts of money that is available to be garnered by the cadre of corrupt judges, lawyers, judicial officials is over whelming.   With the election coming up the political elite look to the nursing and sheltered care facilities and realize that if there are 360 resident residing in a facility by nursing home (or sheltered care) operator can deliver 360 votes in the primary to the operators favorite candidate and in the general election even a few more.  (Death in some venues does not disenfranchise).
However, in a case that parallels the Disciplinary proceedings that many lawyers who have exercised their First Amendment Rights have had to endure, the Texas Court recognized the fact the First Amendment is important and no matter how expedient it may be for a politically corrupt prosecutor, being elected (or appointed) as a prosecutor still limits his/her authority to the RULE OF LAW and the Bill of Rights.
To reiterate it has been and is my position that:   Andy has an absolute right to mentor a radio program wherein his guests are critical of certain favored interests.  Lawyers like Jeffery had a right to represent their client’s interests vigorously even if a sundry judge is offended.  Lawyers whose skin color is too dark for Jerome Larkin can complain of obvious conflicts of interest of certain protected judges.   I can demand an HONEST investigation; and JoAnne can join with me in the call for an Honest investigation and even publish the call and practices that she and public deem corrupt in her blog – MARYGSYKES.
In a similar manner, Rick Perry as the governor of Texas can veto appropriations for a favorite political person who got caught drunk driving without having to face First Amendment violating inappropriate criminal prosecutions.   See:
The violation of Governor Perry First Amendment rights might now be pecuniarily remediable = as he is part of the political elite and he was the Governor of the State; however, they are remediable at the ballot box ****.
The violation of the rights of Lanre, Jeffery, Andy, ***** not been tinged by partisan politics (as far as we know) are more serious as Jerome Larkin and his counterparts are using the State mechanism (Lawyer Disciplinary Commissions) to advance their own economic and political interests.    They are also more serious as the lawyers affected have to seek remedy in ‘wired’ proceedings in which the decision is not going to be on the merits, but whether or not certain favored individuals pecuniary interests are served.
The unlevel playing field is so obvious.   If a lawyer were to attempt to argue that Dred Scott was the law of the land, disciplinary proceedings would commence first in the courtroom and them before a disciplinary commission.   The reason:  Lawyers are required by their oaths and rule to NOT MISREPRESENT THE LAW and to be candid with the trier of fact.   HOWEVER, if anyone with familiarity with the English language were to view the documents that the Larkin administered IARDC submitted to the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois he/she would note that Larkin argues that the Alvarez case is authority for Larkin’s assault on the First Amendment.  Unfortunately, Larkin has committed the cardinal sin – he not only is misrepresenting the decision, but he adopts one of the argument specifically rejected by the SCOTUS.   The Supreme Court did not hold Larkin in contempt, nor did it suggest that disciplinary proceedings commence against him for his ethically reprehensible conduct – it ignored the strict prohibition in Alvarez, Sawyer, ****** and suspended JoAnne for three years.
In Florida ***** there has been similar results.
However, there is hope — Governor Perry faced up to the Jerome Larkin look a like in Texas and the Court stood up to be counted in favor of Due Process, the Rule of Law, the Bill of Rights and most importantly the First Amendment.   Such is a victory for all of us!
The Chicago Tribune (in its second section) today carried an article pointing out that the government was lax in enforcement of laws protecting the Nation from health care fraud.   I mention this because such as not been a secret.   Seth Gillman’s indictment has been news for over a year and his plea of guilty very significant – but the Tribune (and the rest of the media) have been silent.   Even the Omnicare 150 million plus fine and subsequent sale for 12.4 billion dollars has been almost an open secret.   The Sykes and Gore case inspite of their horror garnered only silence *****
Once against – -however, it is progress that the Tribune is acknowledging the woeful enforcement of laws relating to health care fraud by our government.   Maybe a tribune reporter and the newspaper would be induced to wander over to the Daley Center, get out on the 12th floor and pull file 09 P 4585 and observe – no summons as required by statute served, no prior 14 days notice, no hearing, no compliance with the law – however, three million dollars plus stolen!    (He might even ask why there were two guardian ad litem in an estate which had an inventory well under $100,000.00).   The Alice Gore case *******
Why the cover=up?
If you don’t know, I certainly and not going to tell you!!!

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s