Preparation of a time line

The purpose of a time line is to provide law enforcement with a concise, accurate, and usable set of facts upon which they can evaluate the claim that you are presenting to them.      In particular, the object of a complaint to law enforcement is to obtain an HONEST INVESTIGATION coupled with an accurate and honest evaluation of the facts of your case.   Ergo, innuendos, adjectives, conclusions and attempts at persuasion are counter-protective.    An intelligent law enforcement agent is well aware, as an example, that a judge who accepts something of value from a litigant is dishonest, a crook, and a criminal and therefore does not need to be told.     An unusual fact, such as the Court file being devoid of a Sheriff’s return or a notice to the next of kin.     The fact of the file revealing that the petitioner directed the sheriff to serve summons on the elderly person in Cook County, when the elderly person respondent was living with the petition in DuPage County speaks for itself.    The investigator does not have to be told that there is something wrong.

The time line should be objective and as accurate as possible.     If dates are not readily available, the time line should endeavor to make that clear and arrange events in chronological order.      The preparation of the time line should be annotated with documents.     For instance:

1.      Date   – Summons filed seeking Sheriff to serve respondent with summons.     Copy of summons attached as exhibit 1.   Note:   Sheriff directed to serve summons on respondent at 11234 x street, Chicago, Illinois.   See docket entry 12 – being a letter from GAL John Doe to Court requesting a 2nd GAL to be appointed as respondent resides in DuPage County.    Copy of letter to Judge attached as exhibit

2.      Date – Court appoints Adam **** as GAL   see Doc entry.

Later on in the time-line when the chronology is appropriate.    The time will reveal–

1.      August 2010 – Court appearance before Judge M*** C****.     Status – File reveals:  1) service of summons has not been had.     No summons in the file directing Sheriff to serve respondent in DuPage County.   2) no physician’s affidavit in file.    See Transcript attached hereto and made part hereof as exhibit 45.    NB.  Note GAL and Court stating to Petitioner that Dr. X has been co-operative and has testified in the past as to incompetency.   See lines 20, 21 page 5 of transcript of proceedings.

In certain instances, the clerk has prepared the record for appeal.    You will find that every page of the record is numbered.   References to those numbers are important.    The more relevant information that you provide the investigator the better.

Indeed, the preparation of a timeline is tedious work and time consuming.     The frustration of being given the runaround is equally frustrating and not productive.     An HONEST INVESTIGATION is going to require someone to detail all the facts and to put them into a discernible form.    The preparation of an accurate time line not only provides you with all the facts and documents “in hand” but it also provides the investigator with a bird’s eye view of the entire situation, a list of witnesses, and documents.

If after the relevant tim line has been accurate and concisely prepared it would not be out of line to write cover letter.    In this cover – letter you can vent your gripes.    For instance, the fact that the Judge was in August 2010 giving legal advice to the Petitioner is grounds for you to suggest that the Judge’s conduct was wrongful.    The Judge is not on the bench to aid a Petitioner, the judge is there as a trier of fact and pursuant to Illinois statute 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3 and following the Petition must prove the incompetency and the degree of incompetency by clear and convincing evidence.    A judge who is an advocate has breached the public trust as the judge is, pursuant to the Federal and State Constitution required to protect the interests of the respondent.    

The judge is not protecting the respondent when the aforesaid judge is advising the petitioner as to what physician will be available to perjure himself.    If you read the statute that I cited you will note that the guardianship is limited – it is limited to only those disabilities that they respondent actually inhibit the respondent from enjoying the benefits of his/her citizenship.     This is consistent with ADA – not the holocaust or the gulag! 

I am not concerned as to the form the complainant wishes to use – it is important that all the salient and important facts be accurately provided the investigation.  The object is an HONEST INVESTIGATION and evaluation.   The conciseness of the fact recitation is also important.   There are literally millions of senior citizens who have been drawn into this travesty and are being denied their basic CONSTITUTIONAL  RIGHTS.     It is important that your situation receive that HONEST INVESTIGATION and all the miscreants have some sleepness nights.

Ken Ditkowsky

Lawyer and civil rights activist.