From Ken Ditkowsky on preparing Appellate documents

To: Sunita Advaney <sunita@eparalegals.net>
Cc: JoAnne M Denison <JoAnne@justice4every1.com>
Subject: Re: Motion to Reconsider
Date: May 17, 2016 10:42 AM
You are correct, however, it is quite obvious that the Supreme Court of Illinois is not going to grant the petition under any circumstances – unless the individual judges feel they they might have a bit of culpability.   Threatening Judges is not useful or practical, except, when the fix is in – as it is in these cases you have to send the message.   
How do you do it?
Answer:  it is probably a losing proposition, but you have to very subtlety point out that the proceedings were absurd and so devoid of due process that further appeal is going to occur.  AND if you get the raw end of the shaft – the end is not in sight.
Does this work?   Ultimately yes.  
Why?   Public officials suffer from strong cases of paranoia.   to become a public official (especially a judge in Cook county) you have to either do something unseemly, or you have to turn your head while someone else does something inappropriate.   (I am not going to spell this out!).   Thus, exposure of past sins is a constant fear.   In addition there are sins that just occurred – these can be a simple as referring to a female employee as “honey bunch!” (NYT article on Donald Trump).    Yes, out of context it is disrespectful; however, *****.   I used to refer to my wife as “Goody Two Shoes!”    (That was because she tried so hard to never do or say anything inappropriate – I on the other hand went out of my way to be obnoxious)
Lawyers do not get to be on the Supreme Court bench because of their legal acumen.    The get there because of their political skills!    There is a question as to whether some judges are in need of a guardianship!    
Now let us apply this situation to real life.   Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are not accidents.   8 years ago neither Sanders or Trump could have won enough votes to capture any primary or garner a single delegate.    why the difference?
A Yale professor got on television and told us that the reason ******* received he support it got was because the American people are stupid.   Recently another Administration lackey told us how the Iran deal was sold to twenty something members of the press and the Stupid American public.  In fact, the contempt for the intelligence of Americans exhibited by our elected leaders – this is not just Obama administration people – it is cross board arrogance.
In our Universities we have bunches of narrow minded students and faculty who want to censor all opposing thought – and they are rubbing our noses in it.   Hillary Clinton’s UBS deal and her campaign rhetoric is a reaffirmation that she and her republican and democratic allies have little respect for you and me.
the truth of the matter is she is right – we are not worthy of respect as we have consistently elected people of low morals and high degrees of intellectual dishonesty.
Now – getting back to basics.    The people in power, especially judges, are well aware that they are walking very close to the line.   If they cross the line they could be a Dr. Richard Fine, Grant Goodman (Ariz), Lanre Amu, JoAnne Denison *****.    If that happens- bingo – disgrace, dishonor, *****.
No matter how Judge Connors twists, turns, or postures she admitted on page 91 she admitted to being wired.   No matter who Jerome Larkin postures he is aware that Mary Sykes was railroaded into her elder cleansing scenario and Alice Gore was not robbed of the gold in her teeth by nazi storm troopers – it was a guardian ad litem with connections to nursing homes that orchestrated the atrocity.   It was obvious that avarice was her credo and Larkin and his gang of 18 USCA 371 hoodlums *****.
Yes, the individual members of the Supreme Court of Illinois might routinely deny the motion, but they do not know if the SCOTUS having it in the record might cheat the 17,000 to 1 odds and look at this case!   Or the Wall Street Journal might *****, or ******.
As your mother used to warn – doing bad things has consequences.   Doing the good and/or the right thing may not have consequences – most of the time it yields good consequences.   Arguing for Justice for Mary Sykes or Alice Gore is not a vain act – it makes us feel virtuous.   It also might attract the 1 in 17ooo chance!
To: Sunita Advaney <sunita@eparalegals.net>
Subject: Re: Motion to Reconsider
Date: May 17, 2016 4:05 PM
sunita, you fail to note, where is the judge and where is the otherside?  In the case of the ARDC, the lines are blurred. The ARDC acts as judge, jury and executioner in one neat package.

also, we are not before the trial court judge. we are before the Illinois Sup. Ct.  and Ken is right, on multiple occasions 7 justices have had an opportunity to do the right thing, pick up my pleadings and make a stink over the fact my case is defaming  the State of Illinois.
what should happen is that one justice, one brave justice, should have picked up my pleading and done a “In re Weddigen” concurring opinion on it and wrapped the flag around himself and made a glorious grandstand for Truth, Justice and the American Way.
there’s still a chance.  the elections are coming up, candidates with poor records on protecting the rights of the people are searching for some BS grandstanding, and this is the perfect case for one party to redeem itself.
political prisoners, grave injustices are always fodder for errant pols.
my blog just gets more and more popular.  probatesharks is now getting 10,000 hits per day
joanne
Advertisements

One thought on “From Ken Ditkowsky on preparing Appellate documents

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s