See below.  I think this is about the third one I have filed. They are all starting to blur together.

It’s all corruption, and I can bring these motions at any time, and every day I find more and more corruption, more and more paths I simply file another Motion to Reconsider my Discipline.

I have done nothing wrong other than write a blog about what is actually going on in probate and guardianship court, day after day. Statements by real attorneys, statements by sitting elected judges.  And all of these shenanigans have been reported and complained about on other probate blogs, so I am not the only one.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
MR 27522
In Re:

JOANNE MARIE DENISON Attorney-Respondent-Appellant
Reg. No. 6192441
v.

Illinois ARDC,
Petitioner – Appellee

Commission No. 2013 PR 0001

Motion to Reconsider Order of 1/15/16

NOTICE OF FILING
TO:
Attys Steven R. Splitt, Sharon Opryszek, Melissa Smart and Jerome Larkin
ARDC, One Prudential Plaza, 12th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60601 via USPS, postage prepaid

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on February 16, 2016, I have electronically filed my Motion to Reconsider Order of 2/4/16, a copy of which is attached and served upon you, by filing an original document and twelve copies with the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Illinois in Springfile via USPS first class mail postage prepaid from Niles, IL 60714 and mailing a copy to your offices at the address above.

Respectfully Submitted

/esign/joannemdenison/
JoAnne Denison, Pro Se
JoAnne Denison
Denison & Assocs, PC
5940 W Touhy Ave, #120
Niles, IL 60714
Ph 312 553 1300, Fax 312 553 1307
joanne@denisonlaw.com

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
MR 27522
In Re:

JOANNE MARIE DENISON

Attorney-Respondent-Appellant
Reg. No. 6192441
v.

Illinois ARDC
Complainant-Appellee Commission No. 2013 PR 0001

ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED
Motion to Reconsider Order of 9/21/15
MOTION TO RECONSIDER ORDER OF 2/4/16
Prefatory Statement – the Illinois ARDC has begun a war on Honest Attorneys and innocent victim Citizens demanding judicial accountability in the Illinois and US Probate courts.

Now comes Respondent, Joanne M Denison, and respectfully moves this honorable court to reconsider its Order of January 15, 2016 assessing fees and costs against in the amount of $17,554.58 and its Order of 2/4/16 denying reconsideration of its 9/21/16 Order for running a blog which discloses in detail numerous frauds and criminal schemes perpetrated upon innocent Illinois citizens and their families in the Illinois Probate court system, and nationwide which are unethical and immoral and illegal, and how the ARDC dismisses valid citizen complaints regarding lawyers and courtroom vendors in Probate. The Respondent has not neglected any clients, has not stolen anything or engaged in any ethical or immoral misconduct, the basis for filing an action against her was primarily a “go after” proceeding that discussed in detail problems and issues in Probate Court and presented the positions of scores of families in Probate who had experienced horrendous injustices and allowed them to freely discuss their complaints and grievances in an open, free and democratic manner.

The grounds for this motion are:

1) Respondent never received a copy of any petition for excess costs in the amount of $17,554.58 which was allegedly filed on Oct. 9, 2015;
2) Respondent has not been presented with an itemized listing of the allegedly “excessive costs”, nor any receipts;
3) On or about January 11, 2015 Respondent did in fact file a Motion for Reconsideration of the 9/15/16 order suspending her which was based upon new case law and a Harvard Law Review article on Occupation speech, all of which confirmed that her blog which contained political speech should be fully protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution and Article 1, § 10 of the Illinois constitution, which effectively contested the ARDC’s position that it is somehow owed $17,000+ from a charity, Justice4Every1.com which runs the Subject Blog in question. Stealing from a charity is definitively the nadir of the legal system.
Respondent does not believe that her blog is subject to attack via the ARDC’s “go after” proceedings, under both US and Illinois constitutions. At her trial, numerous family and friends of Mary Sykes, appeared and either testified or attempted to testify, that all statements made on the Subject Blog at http://www.marygsykes.com were in fact true, and that:
1) Mary Sykes was competent at the time she was guardianized (https://vimeo.com/38694743) and
2) she never received a Summons or Complaint as required under the Illinois Probate Act, her elderly sisters were never informed of the time, date and place of guardianization (Exhibit A at ARDC trial),
3) Mary Sykes repeatedly requested an attorney, and she was never given one;
4) the case was filed in the wrong venue–she lived at the time in Naperville and had to be served there;
5) her $1 million home was appraised in Feb. Of 2012 for $750,000 and was sold two months later for $213,000 to a real estate investment company;
6) she stated in her POA for Health Care that her younger daughter Gloria Sykes was to be her guardian, if one were to be appointed, and this directive was repeatedly ignored by the court;
7) she stated in her POA for Health Care that she wanted to live in her own home and have her two daughters care for her there and this directive was ignored repeatedly by the probate court and the two GAL’s Stern and Farenga and the Guardian and her attorneys;
8) Videos on Vimeo.com consistently show that in Dec. of 2009 was competent, had clear and lucid thinking and was engaged in higher level cognitive thinking and reasoning (https://vimeo.com/38694743). This Video was not allowed to be played at trial.
9) Scott Evans would have testified at trial that in Dec. Of 2009 Mary played cards with her Norwood Park Card club and “beat the pants” off of everyone else. The card game? Canasta.
9) in July of 2014, the Respondent and 3 other citizen witnesses, who were also close friends and family of Mary Sykes found her at a nursing home in Naperville–Sunrise of Naperville and took 40 minutes of video showing her to be competent, clear thinking and lucid and able to engage in higher cognitive reasoning and decision making. Mary was walking and talking and engaged in her environment and the persons around her. She was a strict vegan and a devout Roman Catholic and did not believe in hospice or psychotropic drugs. Approximately 20 other senior citizens sat nearby, propped up in wheelchairs in front of a TV which droned on. It is believed that these seniors citizens were drugged with illegal chemical restraints and that Mary had been place in a facility were the use of chemical restraints were common and accepted. The attorneys involved, each of Stern, Farenga, Schmeidel, Soehlig knew or should have known of the use of illegal chemical restrains before placing Mary there.
9) Sometime after leaving the facility, Respondent learned that Naperville police had had a conversation with an Officer Krakow who demanded that she destroy her video of Mary (Mary had given permission to video tape her, the staff said nothing during the 40 minute time period) and most importantly, this running down Respondent in a parking lot and threatening her with arrest only occurred after a conversation had taken place with Attorney Stern. At the ARDC trial, Officer Krakow’s testimony was he remembered nothing about any incidents which transpired at the nursing home. (Cite).
10) on May 22, 2015, Mary was narcotized to death. Gloria Sykes, the younger daughter was called at 3 pm and told she had to be at the nursing home by 5 pm or she “would not be able to see her mother”. When Gloria arrived, her mother was drugged so heavily her mother could not move and could not speak, although she desperately tried to speak to Gloria. The next day, the Guardian took Mary’s body to Suerth Funeral home in Chicago and demanded she be embalmed on the spot (to reduce or eliminate any traces of toxins and psychotropic drugs in her body, that no death announcements be made and that Mary’s body be entombed as soon as possible. Upon information and belief, the Funeral Director found this extremely odd but complied. Mary G. Sykes had no wake, no funeral, no death announcements were placed in any publication or online, save those by the younger Daughter Gloria Sykes. The death certificate lists “natural causes and dementia” as the cause of death, but less than one year prior, Mary G. Sykes showed no evidence of dementia, when 4 close friends/family of hers saw her at a nursing home in July of 2014, she was clear thinking, lucid and able to engage in higher cognitive level reasoning. This death needs to be investigated and the ARDC must be directed to investigate this death and the attorneys involved in the case–Stern, Farenga, Schmeidel and Soehlig who stood by and watched Mary Sykes’ constitutional rights be continually denied her, and then knew or should have known she was drugged to death, and failed to arrange for an autopsy and tox screen.
The ARDC also fails to inform this honorable Court that during Respondent’s Review Board hearing, Gloria Sykes stood up and announced before all witnesses there that the blog was in fact true, that she could confirm all the statements made and that the ARDC’s proceeding was only a sham to protect clouted attorneys.
It is not the policy or stated mission of the Illinois ARDC State Agency to institute and then manipulate and handle “go after” proceedings in a war against honest attorneys Denison, Ditkowsky and Lanre Amu (who was convicted of practicing law and helping poor immigrant Africans “while black”). It is the stated policy of the Illinois ARDC to protect the integrity of the legal profession and to protect the public against unscrupulous attorneys. This the ARDC refuses to do in a steadfast manner, leading to hundreds of blog posts based upon actual client interviews of their experiences in the Illinois and US Probate Court system.

C. New Case Law and Law Review Articles require the Reconsideration of the 9/21/16, 1/15/16 and 2/4/16 Orders
1. In particular, the following case law has been issued since the original filings in June, 2015: Weddigen, Ill. 4th Dist, 4-15-44 and Rosemond v. Markham, 13-CV-42, E.D. Kentucky doct #48 and a new Harvard Law Review Article, Occupational Speech and the First Amendment by Paul Sherman and the Institute for Justice, Vol. 128:183 based upon the Rosemond case.
Respondent herewith incorporates by reference her entire ¶ C (herein ¶ D) from her prior Motion to reconsider filed on or about January 11, 2015, which was decided before her Reply and Motion to File a Reply was considered by the Illinois Supreme Court which issued a Denial on or about February 4, 2016. In this Reply, the Respondent pointed out the cases the ARDC cited which were all blatant misrepresentations of on point Appellate case law and Supreme Court law. This argument is incorporated herewith below.

D. Continued Case Misrepresentations by the Administrator:

1) In re Sarelas, 50 Ill.2d 87, 277 N.E.2d 303 (1972). Not at all apposite to a First Amendment Blogging case. In this case, Sarelas “Exhibited a continuous course of conduct…by instituting groundless lawsuits against members of the bar, the bench and laymen… by those who crossed him. In re Sarelas, 50 Ill. 2d 87, 98-99, 277 N.E.2d 313, 219 (1971). This case is not an appellate decision and cannot be cited as precedent. (Stanford and Harvard Rules of Citation). The undersigned’s discipline involved a blog and blogging about corruption to warn the public and is a First Amendment question, not a frivolous lawsuit question. No statements were made in court, and no judges were insulted or denigrated on a face to face basis. More important, all statements made were in accord with other Probate blogs (elderabuse.com, NASGA, Probatesharks.com, etc.) and they all decried the mantra in probate of “target, isolate, medicate, drain the estate, eliminate and cremate” – a most grave problem that the ARDC does not acknowledge and refuses to remedy.
Correct and non misleading quotes from the 7th circuit case in Sarelas: “Some judges are dishonest; their identification and removal is a matter of high priority in order to promote a justified public confidence in the judicial system.” and “[i]f Palmisano had furnished some factual basis for his assertions, then we would need to determine whether either the Constitution or principles of sound judicial administration permit a sanction–for an attorney is not absolutely liable for every statement that turns out to be incorrect. It would unduly quell investigation and exposure of corruption to disbar an attorney who publicized suspicious conduct, just because the suspicions were dispelled. Palmisano, lacked support for his slurs. Id.

2) In re Palmisano, 92 CH 109, 70 F.3d 483 (7th cir. 1995) involved an attorney who made false and misleading statement by calling Judge Siracusa “Frank the Fixer”, Judge Lewis a “crook”, further stating that “most cases in Illinois, in my experience are fixed, not with the passing of money, but on personal relations, social status and judicial preference”, “Chief Justice Peccarelli (sic), your response…[is corrupt] in the 18th judicial circuit”, etc. Each statement appears to be made in a case, not on a blog, and therefore is inapposite. Mr. Palmisano did not furnish any factual basis for his assertions.

3) In re Hoffman, Review board:
a) Judge Patrick T Murphy:
In February 2008, after receiving unfavorable rulings from a Circuit Court Judge, the Respondent participated in a conference call with the judge and another attorney. During the conference call the Respondent stated to the judge “you are a narcissistic, maniacal, mental case” and “you should not be on the bench.” A few days later, the Respondent sent the judge a letter, in which the Respondent said “I must bluntly state that you appear to have serious mental issues involving extreme narcissism and illusions of grandiosity which effectively interferes with your ability to act as a judge.”p.1

b) Judge Heineken
The Respondent described the administrative hearing as a “kangaroo court” and a joke.” (Adm. Ex. 29 at 206, 230). He further stated “this is no more a fair hearing than they had in Russia when they were operating under the Soviet system” and “I don’t pretend that this can be a fair hearing.’ (Adm. Ex. 29 at 230-31)
*****
In this case, if the Respondent believed he had grounds for a grievance against Judge Murphy, he could present his claims to a proper authority. However, by choosing to make insulting and offensive comments to the judge, his conduct was clearly unnecessary, inappropriate, and exceeded acceptable bounds of professional conduct. P.26
*****
The Respondent further asserted that “after Judge Murphy became so upset during that [February 8, 2008] conversation he entered what he called a possible Rule 137 sanctions order against my client,” and “I believe that was done in retaliation and as a result of his narcissistic personality disorder.” p.32

Response to Hoffman citation: All of Mr. Hoffman’s statements were made during court proceedings, none were made in the news or on a blog. Mr. Hoffman appeared in these cases, and in some he made offensive and insulting statements directly to the court, to other attorneys and litigants. It is these insulting statements that impugned the integrity of the judges involved. Respondent Denison never spoke personally to any of the judges involved, nor did she insult or denigrate them to their face. Instead, the Subject Blogs presented only the facts and evidence in the cases. One judge would be forced to retire approximately six weeks after trial because she changed her testimony on the stand, and a changed transcript would later appear and the Tribunal ignored the obvious tampering in the case. That is what happened. The blog reported on the facts. The Hearing Board and Tribunal just denied the facts, struck witnesses left and right who would confirm the facts and only allowed attorney and judge witnesses who are part of the problem of “target, isolate, medicate, drain the estate, eliminate and cremate”. The treatment of Ms. Kathie Bakken and Ms. Yolanda Bakken was particularly shameful. Eliminating the testimony of Ms. Gloria Sykes would would say the blog was truthful was a horrendous problem. Eliminating the testimony of Mr. Scott Evans, a former military intelligence staff member with formerly top secret clearance rating was equally as problematic in the proceeding. He would have testified that in Dec. 2009 when Mary Sykes was guardianized, that she was competent, lucid and clear thinking and that when she played canasta, a complicated card game, with her card club, she beat the pants off everyone. Further, refusing to look at a Vimeo video showing Mary G Sykes to be lucid, clear thinking and with higher cognitive functioning in December 2009 when she was guardianized is extremely troubling.

Respondent Denison has done none of what Sarelas, Hoffman or Palmisano did–insult and denigrate judges to their face in open court rooms and public areas. All statements made were on her Blog together with pleadings, evidence and transcripts, and the Tribunal and Board did not differentiate between her opinions and whether she was presenting the opinions of others. No judges were insulted or denigrated to their faces. Nor were any litigants. Nor were any of the attorneys involved: Schmeidel, Farenga, Stern or Soehlig. Moreover, dozens of witnesses supported her and the blog is very popular with approximately 100 views per day, and is now over 100,000 views total. The Tribunal refused to look at any documents and evidence, transcripts and affidavits on the Blog which supported the comments made. Most of the comments, were not in fact those of Respondent, but came from family members and members of the public who were in fact probate victims themselves. The Tribunal did not differentiate between any blog posts that emanated from Respondent versus those emanating from the public and court room corruption victims.
In the present case, more than adequate exhibits, documents and testimony were proffered by Sykes family members to show support for all blog posts. The Mary G. Sykes case 09 P 4585 lacked jurisdiction, a safe deposit box was drilled without authorization, all discovery was quashed to find assets and by the own admissions of the attorneys involved, her $750,000 home was sold for $213,000 to a “real estate investment corporation.” Further, on May 22, 2015, Mary Sykes was narcotized to death and there was no tox screen and no autopsy. Her body was quickly entombed without death announcements, a funeral or wake. GALs Stern and Farenga, appointed to protect Mary from harm, grossly negated their fiduciary duties.

E. The Administrator fails to acknowledge Appellate case law on the First Amendment as follows:

Administrator asserts that running a blog about corruption is akin to shouting “fire” in a crowded theater. This is an incorrect standard. Schenk v. US was decided in 1919 and overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio. Constitutional Law 101 teaches all law students these principals. The government cannot regulate the media. New York Times v. Sullivan.

New York Times v. Sullivan correctly states:
“Any system of prior restraints of expression comes to this Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity.” Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U. S. 58, 372 U. S. 70 (1963); see also Near v. Minnesota, 283 U. S. 697 (1931). The Government “thus carries a heavy burden of showing justification for the imposition of such a restraint.” Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe, 402 U. S. 415, 402 U. S. 419 (1971).
*****
“The greater the importance of safeguarding the community from incitements to the overthrow of our institutions by force and violence, the more imperative is the need to preserve inviolate the constitutional rights of free speech, free press and free assembly in order to maintain the opportunity for free political discussion, to the end that government may be responsive to the will of the people and that changes, if desired, may be obtained by peaceful means. Therein lies the security of the Republic, the very foundation of constitutional government. [Footnote 6] Id. At 719-720.

As we stated only the other day in Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe, 402 U. S. 415, 402 U. S. 419, “[a]ny prior restraint on expression comes to this Court with a “heavy presumption” against its constitutional validity.”

These are but a few examples of the actual holding the ARDC wants to ignore.

Alvarez correctly states:

(a) The Constitution “demands that content-based restrictions on speech be presumed invalid . . . and that the Government bear the burden of showing their constitutionality.” Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 542 U. S. 656, 660.
Content-based restrictions on speech have been permitted only for a few historic categories of speech, including incitement, obscenity, defamation, speech integral to criminal conduct, so-called “fighting words,” child pornography, fraud, true threats, and speech presenting some grave and imminent threat the Government has the power to prevent.
The Government’s three examples of false-speech regulation that courts generally have found permissible do not establish a principle that all proscriptions of false statements are exempt from rigorous First Amendment scrutiny.

The ARDC misrepresents the law when it says the First Amendment does not apply to attorney speech, and especially when that speech is on a blog and not made in a courtroom or other proceeding. The ARDC admits the speech is political in nature, yet it does not protect the political speech.

Citizens United v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 130 S. Ct. 876, 175 L. Ed. 2d 753, 558 U.S. 310, 78 USLW 4078 (2010) states:

Because speech is an essential mechanism of democracy—it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people—political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it by design or inadvertence. Laws burdening such speech are subject to strict scrutiny, which requires the Government to prove that the restriction “furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.” WRTL, 551 U. S., at 464,127 S.Ct. 2652. This language provides a sufficient framework for protecting the interests in this case. Premised on mistrust of governmental power, the First Amendment stands against attempts to disfavor certain subjects or viewpoints or to distinguish among different speakers, which may be a means to control content. The Government may also commit a constitutional wrong when by law it identifies certain preferred speakers. There is no basis for the proposition that, in the political speech context, the Government may impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers. Both history and logic lead to this conclusion. Pp. 896 – 899.
The Administrator has been well made aware of these cases, but does not read the US Constitution and refuses to give it force and effect.

In the Direct TV v. Imgburgia, 577 U. S. ____ (2015) case it was stated:

No one denies that lower courts must follow this Court’s holding in Concepcion. The fact that Concepcion was a closely divided case, resulting in a decision from which four Justices dissented, has no bearing on that undisputed obligation. Lower court judges are certainly free to note their disagreement with a decision of this Court. But the “Supremacy Clause forbids state courts to dissociate themselves from federal law because of disagreement with its content or a refusal to recognize the superior authority of its source.”
The Federal Arbitration Act is a law of the United States, and Concepcion is an authoritative interpretation of that Act. Consequently, the judges of every State must follow it. U. S. Const., Art. VI, cl. 2 (“[T]he Judges in every State shall be bound” by“the Laws of the United States”). Id. at p. 7.

And In Re Sawyer, 360 U.S. 622, 79 S.Ct. 1376, 3 L.Ed.2d 1473 (1959), is in accord, but is always mis-cited by the ARDC:

From Sawyer:
We start with the proposition that lawyers are free to criticize the state of the law. Many lawyers say that the rules of evidence relative to the admission of statements by those alleged to be co-conspirators are overbroad or otherwise unfair and unwise; that there are dangers to defendants, of a sort against which trial judges cannot protect them, in the trial of numerous persons jointly for conspiracy; and that a Smith Act trial is apt to become a trial of ideas. Others disagree. But all are free to express their views of these matters, and no one would say that this
sort of criticism constituted an improper attack on the judges who
enforced such rules and who presided at the trials. This is so, even though the existence of questionable rules of law might be said in a sense to produce unfair trials. Such criticism simply cannot be equated with an attack on the motivation or the integrity or the competence of the judges. And surely permissible criticism may as well be made to a lay audience as to a professional; oftentimes the law is modified through popular criticism; Sawyer 19, 20 1959, 360 U.S. 622, 79 S.Ct. 1376, 3 L.Ed.2d 1473 (1959)
To the charges made and found (criticizing Judge Wiig’s decision and the Law in question), it is irrelevant whether the Smith Act case was still pending. Judge Wiig remained equally protected from statements impugning him, and petitioner remained equally free to make critical statements that did not cross that line. We find that hers cannot be said to have done so. Accordingly, the suspension order, based on the charge relating to the speech, cannot stand. Sawyer 19, 20 1959, 360 U.S. 622, 79 S.Ct. 1376, 3 L.Ed.2d 1473 (1959)

F. The Order of 1/15/16 assessing costs in the amount of $17,500+ must be reversed.
Finally, the $17,500+ fine imposed by the ARDC for running a Blog supported by probate victims and their families is just plain immoral and unethical. Respondent does not have that kind of money–she runs a charity–Justice 4 Every 1, NFP which is supported by contributions, and so far there are none. She does not ask for contributions, nor has she received any. The point of the NFP is to not make a profit, not make the sufferings of any court corruption victims any greater than they already are. Her mission is to help those in need, and that is what she does. Respondent has already submitted affidavits and declarations of scores of court corruption victims that she has helped–almost always without any pay, and to the benefit of the legal profession and society. This is well published on her Blog. The ARDC knows this and monitors her blog carefully and daily. Attached as Exhibit A are current balances of her checking and savings. For the ARDC go after her for helping corruption victims is just plain immoral and unethical.
Further, while the ARDC asserts it served Respondent with notice of the $17,555 claim, it did not. It has not provided Respondent with any proof she was served or that she received any notice of the claim. In addition, it is an excessive award against a person who now dedicates her life to helping court room victims and makes little money herself.
That Order must be vacated.
F. Conclusion
Because the Administrator continues to mislead the court in its pleadings, and because the US Supreme court made it clear in the Direct TV case that US Supreme Court rulings are not mere suggestions, but the Illinois Supreme Court and its ARDC Hearing Board and Tribunals are directed to follow them, the Orders of Sept. 21, 2015 and Feb. 4, 2016 must be vacated to conform to the rulings of the US Supreme Court in United States v Alvarez, 132 US. Ct 537, Brown v Entm’t Merchants Asss’n 13 S. Ct 2729, Ashcroft v ACLU 124, et al., In re Weddigen, Rosemont v. Markham and other cases which direct that the government cannot regulate private speech on a blog that is simply discussing corruption in the courts and presenting evidence of that corruption. No judges were maligned or insulted to their faces, citizens were shown how to write proper grievances to the authorities and such speech is and should be fully protected by the First Amendment.
A proposed Order is submitted herewith.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

/esign/joannemdenison/
JoAnne M. Denison

Prepared By:
JoAnne M. Denison, Atty. No. 6192441
Denison Patents, Inc.
5940 W Touhy Ave, #120
phone: 312-553-1300
fax: 312-553-1307
http://www.denisonlaw.com
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com

1.On or about February 4, 2016, a letter was issued by the clerk which was not signed by the clerk or anyone. Further, while Respondent prepared an Order form for signature by 9 Justices of the Illinois Supreme Court, that Order form was required, but not used. How is this? How can the string of corruption be uncovered, when no one is willing to sign these Orders? Is it to limit liability and just blame it on some staff hired by the Court? Respondent’s entire case rests on Fraud upon the Court and these odd “orders” seem to be evidence of corruption, yet no one can track the corruption because no Justice is willing to sign these court orders. The Hon. Ann Burke should be recusing herself because she is apparently involved in the handling of Mr. Ditkowsky’s case and Mr. Amu’s case by catapulting a relatively unknown and inexperienced attorney (Anna M. Loftus) to the position of a Cook County Circuit judge after their fixed convictions for 3 and 4 year suspensions.

2. From Wiki: Canasta (/kəˈnæstə/; Spanish for “basket”) is a card game of the rummy family of games believed to be a variant of 500 Rum. Although many variations exist for two, three, five or six players, it is most commonly played by four in two partnerships with two standard decks of cards. Players attempt to make melds of seven cards of the same rank and “go out” by playing all cards in their hand. It is the only partnership member of the family of Rummy games to achieve the status of a classic.

The game of Canasta was devised by Segundo Santos and Alberto Serrato in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1939.[1] In the 1940s the game quickly spread in myriad variations to Chile, Peru, Brazil and Argentina,[1] where its rules were further refined[2] before being introduced to the United States in 1948, where it was then referred to as the Argentine Rummy game by Ottilie H. Reilly in 1949 and Michael Scully of Coronet magazine in 1953.[3] The game quickly became a card-craze boom in the 1950s[4] providing a sales avalanche of card sets, card trays and books about the subject.[5]

The card game has very complicated rules of scoring:
Point values for cards in Canasta
Card Value
3♦, 3♥ 100 (200 each if all four held); 3♣, 3♠, 4, 5, 6, 7 – 5 points;
8, 9, 10, J, Q, K – 10 points; 2 (Wild), A – 20 points; and Joker (Wild) – 50 points

3. Sunrise of Naperville is part of a system that proudly discloses that if you place a senior at this facility, they will pay the “fried or relative” $2,000. Seniors for cash. This has been reported on the Subject Blog at (cite). Respondent is asking at this time that discovery be sent out to each of Farenga, Stern, Schmeidel, Soehlig and Waller to determine how much money they have received since 2009 per year from their nursing home placements and to disclose all written documents which refer or relate to same. It is utterly disgraceful, immoral and unethical that seniors in Illinois can be sold by court appointed attorneys for cash kickbacks from nursing homes.

4. The actual conversation was very cagey. Officer Krakow asked to see Respondent’s phone and if she had taken any video or pictures. Respondent replied “yes”. Officer Krakow then asked Respondent to destroy those pictures. Respondent said she did not want to–the videos were important and precious to Gloria Sykes. Officer Krakow responded that if she did not destroy pictures and video of Mary, then he would consider that action as “non compliant to his directions.” Respondent asked if that mean he would arrest her. Officer Krakow replied, “yes.” Respondent replied that “she thought it was illegal for him to ask her to destroy her pictures and video on her personal cell phone.” Officer Krakow responded, “what is it with you people that you are always concerned about the law and how things are illegal?” Respondent replied “it is important to obey the law.” He then watched her destroy the pictures, and he asked her to confirm all were destroyed. Respondent complied, only under threat of arrest.

5.This has now been confirmed with the debacle over one attorney Seth Gillman, who was indicted for $100 million in health care fraud stolen from senior citizens in Illinois who were wrongfully upgraded from basic general services to hospice services (tho they were not at death’s door) because GIP services were $167 per day, but hospice services were $760 per day. Numerous blog posts attest to the fact the ARDC was informed, but did nothing. Recently in a letter to the Chicago Tribune on Feb. 8, 2016, former employees stated that (rather than being protected by the ARDC), Seth Gillman had run off with health care insurance premiums, 401k funds, and other property belonging to employees. The ARDC stood by and did nothing, but instead put their efforts into “go after” proceedings against Denison, Ditkowsky and Amu for telling the truth to the public. (See Exhibit B, hereto)

cc: Chicago FBI

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned attorney – Respondent herewith certifies that an electronic copy of her Motion to Reconsider Order of 2/4/2016 in the above entitled cause was submitted to the Clerk of the above Court for filing on February 16, 2016 On that same date, the undersigned mailed one copy to the person named below in an envelope deposited in a US mail box in Niles, IL, with proper postage prepaid. An original and twelve (12) copies of the Motion will be sent to the Clerk upon receipt of the electronically submitted file stamped pleading.

Atty Steven Splitt and Clerk of Court
Attn: ARDC, One Prudential Plaza, 130 E. Randolph St, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
via first class mail, postage prepaid
/esign/joannemdenison/_

JoAnne Marie Denison

STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)
COUNTY OF COOK )

I hereby declare that JoAnne Denison appeared before me, and signed the above Certificate of Service February 16, 2016

________________________________________

a notary public for the State of Illinois
My Commission expires _____________
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

In re: Joanne Marie Denison

Attorney-Respondent

No. 6192441

by the Illinois ARDC,

Petitioner
MR 27193

Supreme Court No. M. R. 27193
Commission No. 2013 PR 0001
from
Case No. 2013 PR 1
Motion to Reconsider Order of 9/21/15
ORDER

Now comes the above Honorable Court and having been advised of the premises of Respondent’s Motion to Reconsider,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

___________ Motion to reconsider GRANTED and orders of 9/16/16, 1/15/16 and 2/4/16 vacated.
___________ Motion to Reconsider DENIED
______________________________ ________________________________
Justice Justice

______________________________ ________________________________
Justice Justice

______________________________ ________________________________
Justice Justice

______________________________ ________________________________
Justice Justice

______________________________
Justice

Prepared by
JoAnne M Denison
Justice 4 Every 1, NFP
5940 W. Touhy Ave, #120
Niles, IL 60714
phone 312-553-1300
joanne@denisonlaw.com

From Ken Ditkowksy, this appears to be business as usual in Illinois nursing homes where a 21 year old felon and nursing home employee raped a 69 year old woman, and no one is responsible.  For sometime now, Ken has been telling everyone the way the nursing homes operate to perpetrate frauds and conspiracies that Medicare and Medicaid cannot trace is they slice up ownership of the nursing home businesses into a string of corporations.  In the US, unlike Europe, there is no space on the incorporation form or annual reports for the simple phrase “true owner of corporation”, ie, just who the heck is in charge or control of this operation?  Who is the major shareholder?  If the corporation bilks the elderly and kills them off, hires a felon to clean, but that felon instead rapes and beats an older woman, who will answer to those charges and take responsibility.

Urge Illinois and your US congress person to change corporate law and require that at least one person be named the “true owner” of the corporation. Who gets all the profits? Who manages the business?  Which head or heads are in control of the corpus or body of the corporation?

Read on:

Omnicare Sues Nursing Home Owner Over Alleged $28M Debt By Lance Duroni Law360, Chicago (August 11, 2014, 1:46 PM ET) — Omnicare Inc. sued a prominent nursing home operator in Illinois court on Friday, alleging his facilities have failed to pay the company for more than $28 million of pharmaceuticals and other medical supplies over the past decade. Eric A. Rothner and dozens of nursing homes that he owns or controls have been “consistently delinquent” in paying Omnicare, violating a host of purchase contracts between the parties, the Des Plaines, Illinois-based pharmacy company alleges in a complaint filed in Cook County Circuit Court. According to the suit,… Are we seeing a falling out?   Ken Ditkowsky www.ditkowskylawoffice.com From: kenneth ditkowsky <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com> To: JoAnne M. Denison <joanne@justice4every1.com>; Tim NASGA <timlahrman@aol.com>; Probate Sharks <verenusl@gmail.com>; Nasga Us <nasga.org@gmail.com>; Bev Cooper <bev.cooperscorner@yahoo.com>; Janet Phelan <janet_c_phelan@yahoo.com>; J. Ditkowsky <jdit@aol.com>; Jay Goldman <jnjgldmn@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:50 PM Subject: Please read the following article – am I missing something? Owners — but not in charge October 01, 2009 | By David Jackson | Tribune reporter Bryan Barrish and Michael Giannini take pride in their Elgin nursing home, Maplewood Care. “We’ve owned that facility for 17 years and have 203 beds in that facility,” Barrish said, “and over that time we’ve had well over 1,250,000 patient-days.” But when it comes to days like the one in January when a 21-year-old felon allegedly raped a 69-year-old woman, the complexity of Maplewood’s business model allows Barrish to assert: “I have nothing to do with day-to-day operations at Maplewood Care and neither does Mike.” They are the owners who aren’t in charge. State records show Barrish and Giannini have an ownership or consulting role in 13 Illinois nursing homes. Each facility is run by a separate corporation, whose ownership is divided among family, business associates and trusts, state records show. Each corporation has a board of directors whose names are not public. Each facility hires its own administrator to run day-to-day operations. For nursing home services from bookkeeping to dietary consulting, the facilities hire SIR Management Inc., a firm created 18 years ago by Barrish, Giannini and longtime nursing home partner Eric Rothner. Attorneys for the three have said in court documents that SIR “manages” the homes, and three of the homes last year paid SIR a combined $1 million in “management fees,” according to facility cost reports filed with the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services. But when the homes face lawsuits alleging negligence, Barrish said, SIR is “dismissed (from the suits) every time, because we are not management.” An attorney for Barrish and Giannini cautioned the Tribune against mentioning SIR in an article about the alleged rape at Maplewood Care. “Any reference to SIR would be disingenuous, unfair and defamatory,” Howard Hoffman said by e-mail. “SIR merely provides consulting services to many long-term care facilities and has no operational responsibilities as to any of them.” After a reporter noted that SIR’s Web site said it “manages the operation” of nursing homes owned by Barrish and Giannini, SIR’s site was changed. “Maybe we’ve used the term inappropriately,” Giannini told a reporter. “But the definition of the management was consultant. It wasn’t as defined by Webster’s dictionary.” SIR also figured in a painful episode that threatened the future of the two men’s business. In 2002, Giannini and Barrish paid a $2 million settlement to the U.S. Justice Department after pleading guilty to felony money-laundering charges. Authorities alleged that they joined a 1995 conspiracy to make false claims for incontinence supplies. Also pleading guilty was Salvatore Galioto, who was listed as an organized crime associate in a 1997 Chicago Crime Commission chart. Barrish said the plea was “a business decision,” asking: “Do we fight it and risk 2,000 employees, 2,000 residents and partners and their future or do we make this agreement and be able to survive?” Federal authorities could have excluded the partners from participating in federally funded health care programs for five years, court records show. But the lead prosecutor wrote a letter citing their cooperation in the case and urging that they not be barred. The two men reached agreements in which they gave up operational control over most of their nursing homes for five years, and ceded their positions directing SIR Management Inc. Court records show Barrish and Giannini’s wives took their places on SIR’s board. The men entered into oral employment contracts with SIR that enabled them to “be employed so long as … each desired,” their attorney wrote in 2006 court papers. The partners said those years-ago events have no bearing on facilities they now partly own. “This was an isolated incident,” Giannini said. “We were asleep at the wheel.”     by Taboola   Sponsored Links   NB.These are Eric Rothner’s partners!    Rothner is having trouble with the Arizona authorities!    Apparently he was feeder for Passages (Gillman).   So were others of the Orthodox Jewish cabal that is so ‘big’ in the nursing home business.    Ken Ditkowsky www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

See below. This is a huge and major case in Chicago, but I do not see it mentioned in the Suntimes or Tribune–why?

Go look at the Sun Times website today–no mention under “news”

http://chicago.suntimes.com/category/7/71/news/

And look at the Chicago Tribune website today–no mention under “news”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/

For some reason a $100 million indictment for Medicare Fraud isn’t news according to these publications.  Likely restitution will be awarded, and restitution of $100 million to Medicare isn’t news?

The Ill. Atty Regn and Discipline Comm. has got to be kidding. What group of clouted attorneys and judges are they protecting that Gillman is indicted in Jan. of 2014, all during this time, the ARDC continues to persecute and prosecute myself and Lanre Amu for disclosing fruads on the public such as these?

• Guardianship bill gets unanimous support
• Appeals board reverses another VA executive’s punishment
• State to hold training sessions on investment fraud

National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse Fighting Back Against Isolation: Travis Campbell and Catherine Falk Join Forces Joe Roubicek: The Criminal “Civil Matter” Health worker charged with stealing from elderly person she cared for Fighting Back Against Isolation: Travis Campbell and Catherine Falk Join Forces Posted: 07 Feb 2016 11:00 PM PST When a loved one is in the hospital, you naturally want to be at the bedside. But what if the staff won’t allow it? What happens when a loved one is wrongly isolated from family and friends? Glen Campbell’s Son Travis Campbell and The Daughter of the Late Peter Falk, known as “Columbo” are speaking out about the importance of adult visitation legislation [the Campbell~Falk Bill] which coincides with the push of the Peter Falk Bill. After Catherine Falk was a victim herself in the attempts to see her ailing father, Catherine’s former probate attorney drafted the Peter Falk Bill in 2011 and the first draft was handed to Assemblyman Gatto. After many amended drafts and hard work by her former lawyer, Catherine took one of the amended drafts to other states. California passed the visitation bill in 2015. Catherine has since broadened her scope beyond just an adult child seeking visitation with an ailing parent but for all wards in isolation within Conservatorships/Guardianships exposed to abusive guardians who isolate our loved ones. Now Travis Campbell is in the same predicament. He too is in a fight for his right to see his ailing father Glen. How can we put an end to this isolation that continues to impact society as a whole? The mission is to go to every state in this country to pass a very important Bill/Law protecting the rights of families, specifically when a family member is being isolated from his/her loved ones or there is elder abuse involved. Let’s all join together to make this bill a reality! Source: Fighting Back Against Isolation See Also: Catherine Falk Organization NASGA:  Legislative Action Joe Roubicek: The Criminal “Civil Matter” Posted: 07 Feb 2016 10:30 PM PST “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.” Mark Twain January 1991 – The house was perfect for this sting operation, unoccupied and up for sale by an owner kind enough to lend it out for a couple of days. The most important feature about this house was its plumbing, which happened to be in excellent condition. It had to be for the whole case could … Well, go down the toilet. A 75-year-old woman, an actress provided by chief LaGraves of the prosecutor’s office, was wearing a hidden microphone, sat patiently on a couch in the living room waiting for the doorbell to ring. Soon she would be presenting herself as a poor, frail and confused old lady, just ready for the taking. Our technical unit had set up a video camera that spied on the exterior east wall of the house from inside a neighbor’s home. A detective was parked a half block up the road, waiting to give the signal when the suspect arrived, and three more detectives sent by the camera and the neighbor’s house. Two patrolmen cruised a couple blocks away, ready if called upon, and a special prosecutor, Mark Springer, stood by his desk for progress reports. The bait was set, everyone just waiting for the suspect to arrive. He was considered a figurehead in a tunneling fraud operation that had burned victims for tens of thousands of dollars each. His real tools weren’t a shovel or backhoe – they were deception and extortion. Michael Angove, or “Mike The Plumber,” was known to dig a mountain of dirt for a mountain of cash that he demanded from elderly homeowners, using their limited mobility and dependency on others against them. Dorothy Darling, an 80-year-old disabled woman, was one of those victims. She called for a plumber because her toilet made a constant leaking noise. She didn’t know that the plumbing was actually in good condition. A “leaking flapper,” the small rubber piece that keeps the water in the tank, could have been easily fixed with a $10 repair kit. After Angove of A Aachen Plumbing in Fort Lauderdale checked it out though,he left Dorothy’s bathroom and went to his truck to begin a very different type of repair. He grabbed a shovel and dug a one-foot-deep hole by the side of the woman’s house, filling the hole with water from the garden hose. Full Article and Source: Joe’s Cases: The Criminal “Civil Matter” Health worker charged with stealing from elderly person she cared for Posted: 07 Feb 2016 10:00 PM PST Mia Vela A home health care worker is charged with stealing from an elderly person she was hired to care for, according to a news release from the Bartlett police. Mia Vela, 40, of the 15000 block of Turlington Avenue in Harvey, was arrested Wednesday and charged with a class 2 felony count of financial exploitation of an elderly person or a person with a disability, police said. According to police, Vela was hired in July 2014 as a home health care worker to care for a 61-year-old Bartlett resident. Police said Vela stole approximately $10,000 from the victim’s bank account and made approximately $5,000 worth of unauthorized purchases with the victim’s credit card. Vela was given a $75,000 bond Thursday at the Cook County court facility in Rolling Meadows. Full Article & Source: Health worker charged with stealing from elderly person she cared for Guardianship bill gets unanimous support Posted: 11 Feb 2016 11:03 PM PST The Florida Senate on Wednesday unanimously backed the expansion of the state’s regulation of guardians who care for frail elders, including allowing the state Department of Elderly Affairs to discipline private guardians who violate care standards. At the same time, a similar measure cleared its final House committee, meaning the bill is now ready for a floor vote in the House. “We all recognize there is a problem,” said Sen. Nancy Detert, R-Venice, who has called the bill (SB 232) her top priority for her final regular session in the Legislature. The measure follows up on a law that Detert helped pass last year to curb abuses in the adult guardianship system, including regulations on public guardians, who are appointed to care for incapacitated seniors who are poor. The new bills extend a series of regulations and state oversight to private guardians, who now must have a background screening and meet certain training requirements. It would include a system for investigating complaints and disciplining private guardians. “It left a whole segment of the elderly open for abuse and they have been targeted, especially wealthy older women,” Detert said, adding it is a problem not only in Florida but across the nation. She said Florida would have “the strongest laws” in the country if the bill becomes law as anticipated. “I know you will agree that protecting the elderly is one of our top priorities,” Detert said. In a tribute to Detert, the 39 other senators agreed to become co-sponsors of the legislation as it heads to the House. Earlier in the day, the House Judiciary Committee unanimously backed a bill (HB 403), sponsored by Rep. Larry Ahern, R-Seminole, that would expand the Department of Elderly Affairs (DOEA) power to monitor and regulate public guardians to include private guardians. All the guardians would be required to register and would be regulated by the DOEA’s renamed Office of Public and Professional Guardians. “Under this bill the office can investigate allegations of abuse and fraud and take disciplinary action when warranted,” Ahern said. Ahern cited the press reports of abuses of elderly Floridians as one of the motivations for the legislation. The Herald-Tribune’s December 2014 series, “The Kindness of Strangers,” highlighted cases of frail seniors who had been taken advantage of by unregulated private guardians. “We don’t want to read another story about someone who has been appointed by the courts and given complete autonomy over a person’s life and estate and uses that position to take advantage of the person they were entrusted to protect,” Ahern said. The House committee also heard from Doug Franks, who has fought to remove his mother from a private guardianship in Pensacola. “This bill is going to put some oversight on this where before we had no oversight on professional guardians,” Franks said, adding he wanted to eventually see stronger laws, including criminal penalties for guardians who abuse their trust. Under the current law, Franks said it is difficult for family members to “get their parents back because once they’re in guardianship, professional guardianship, they can’t get out.” “It’s not like foster care where you get a chance to get your children out. When they’re in guardianship, forget it,” Franks said. The legislation has the support of the AARP and the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops. Detert said the legislation also has the backing of Gov. Rick Scott and DOEA Secretary Samuel Verghese. The bill provides $822,000 in funding for the DOEA’s expanded guardian office, which will include six full-time employees. Full Article & Source: Guardianship bill gets unanimous support

Appeals board reverses another VA executive’s punishment Posted: 11 Feb 2016 10:30 PM PST WASHINGTON – An appeals board has handed the Department of Veterans Affairs a third straight reversal in a high-profile executive malfeasance case, this time voiding the dismissal of the embattled director of the Albany-Stratton VA Medical Center in New York. But VA Deputy Secretary Sloan Gibson is vowing not to reinstate the director, saying the Veterans Choice Act that Congress passed in 2014 gives him the authority to discipline staff, intensifying a growing battle between VA and the Merit Systems Protection Board, which hears appeals from federal employees about punishments. “I am disappointed that the MSPB judge in this case did not afford my judgment the deference the Choice Act envisioned, but I will nevertheless continue to hold VA senior executives to the highest standards of conduct regardless of the risk of having my decisions overturned,” Gibson said in a released statement after the decision to reverse the dismissal of Albany-Stratton Director Linda Weiss. “Because of this high standard, I do not intend to return this individual to any position, in Albany or elsewhere, where she would be responsible for patient care or safety.” Veterans Affairs officials have withstood criticism from lawmakers, who have harangued them routinely for not punishing executives accused of wrongdoing. Now department leadership faces a new challenge: an appeals board that is routinely voiding disciplinary actions, contending the VA is going too far in their punishments of executives. In announcing the decision of Judge Arthur S. Joseph to overturn Weiss’s dismissal, the Merit Systems Protection Board did not give reasons for the decision, saying it will be released by Feb. 16. “This is yet another MSPB ruling that defies common sense,” said Jeff Miller, R-Fla., the chairman of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs. “It will likely force VA to create a do-nothing job for an employee it has no confidence in.” At times, judges have struggled with Veterans Choice Act rules that force them to adjudicate VA appeals within 21 days. In one recent ruling, a judge who reversed VA’s proposed demotion of St. Paul (Minnesota) VA Regional Director Kimberly Graves noted she and the lawyers involved had just 2 ½ weeks to pore over 3,800 pages of documents. William Spencer, spokesman for the Merit Systems Protection Board, would not comment Monday on the Weiss ruling or the board’s disagreement with VA over the department’s authority to discipline executives. A VA spokeswoman said Monday that Weiss received information in March 2015 showing a certain nursing assistant “should not be involved in direct patient care” but did not remove the assistant from patient care until July. The spokeswoman did not offer more specifics. More so, Weiss retired in January after finding out she would be removed and it is unclear what the judge’s ruling means as far as the department’s obligations, the VA spokeswoman said. Two staff members were caught stealing drugs at the Albany-Stratton medical center during Weiss’ tenure as director. One staffer was found in the hospital incoherent with a used syringe nearby, according to the Albany Times-Union. Weiss could not be reached for comment Monday. The week before the Weiss decision, two other VA executives had high-profile disciplinary positions overturned. Diana Rubens and Graves, the directors of the Philadelphia and St. Paul VA regional offices respectively, were found to be involved in a scheme to move themselves to new positions with lesser responsibilities at their higher salaries while also receiving about $400,000 in relocation compensation. VA had recommended Rubens and Graves be demoted and separate judges found both were guilty of wrongdoing. Yet, the MSPB overturned their punishments, finding the VA was inconsistent in its punishments. The MSPB’s decisions also appear to be emboldening Miller to expand the scope of his criticism beyond VA, calling for reform of the entire federal employee disciplinary system. “The MSPB coddles and protects misbehaving employees rather than facilitating fair and efficient discipline,” he said. “And as long as we have a system in place that requires a similar standard to discipline federal workers as it does to send criminals to prison, accountability problems at VA and across the government will only continue.” Full Article & Source: Appeals board reverses another VA executive’s punishment

State to hold training sessions on investment fraud Posted: 11 Feb 2016 11:11 PM PST ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A series of training programs to teach certified public accountants about investment fraud and financial exploitation will kick off this month in Las Cruces. The state Securities Division is holding the programs so CPAs will be better able to “recognize signs of vulnerability to financial exploitation and make appropriate referrals for (those) deemed vulnerable or for those who’ve already been defrauded,” according to a news release. The first session will be held from 10 a.m. to noon Feb. 22 at the Thomas Branigan Memorial Library. Other sessions will be held on March 14 in Roswell, May 24 in Santa Fe and June 7 in Albuquerque. Full Article & Source: State to hold training sessions on investment fraud

http://chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/7/71/1217182/senior-cams-hit-illinois-nursing-homes

From an article in the Suntimes, it is noted that nursing homes have to provide web cams to concerned family members. Good idea.

Editorial: What to know about ‘senior cams’ in nursing homes

Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan

See minutes 50 to 54 (approx)

https://www.flsenate.gov/media/VideoPlayer?EventID=2443575804_2016021147

As soon as he sends me text of the bill, I will post or you can friends him on FB.

thanks

From Ginny Johnson, herself a probate victim and survivor:

I wish to thank Tim for writing this wonderful letter regarding the state of guardianship.

I also want many to note that Tim writes as well or better than most lawyers, especially in guardianship.

To:

Catherine Falk, Marcia Southwick, Kerry Kasem

In re: Legislative Proposal

Dear fellow advocates,

With all sincerity I applaud your efforts, bravery and dedication to bringing about change in the practices of adult guardianship and elder care. I know the story of each of you and in spite of what might be our differences in how to go about bringing change, the one thing I believe we all stand in unity on is that this madness we know and have experienced has to stop.

Our parents and disabled loved ones’ deserve better, and with this in mind I wish to propose the following legislative effort I would support. MANDATORY appeal of all guardianship appointments1 — and here is why;

“`From the time a person is adjudged to be distracted and incapable of caring for his property and effects, until, if ever, he is adjudged to be restored, he has no more legal power to act for himself than as if he were dead … ‘” (quoting: Turner, J. concurring – In re Estate of Doyle, 838 N.E.2d 355 (2005), citing, In re Estate of Kutchins, 169 Ill.App.3d 641, 645-46, 120 Ill.Dec. 114, 523 N.E.2d 1025, 1028 (1988), quoting Bradshaw v. Lucas, 214 Ill.App. 218, 223 (1919). (emphasis added)

The appointment of a guardian is a death sentence, and sadly many of us can today bear witness to the fact that our parents and disabled loved ones’ are in fact dying2 — while held in and under the captivity of a guardianship or other form of discriminatory and unlawful restraint. In addition, for many of you the “parent/child” relationship has likewise been executed3 by a pack of indifferent bigots and thugs who care more about the money involved than they do the terror and horror inflicted while you are being forced under threat and retaliation to witness the lynching4 and crucifixionlike5 treatment of our loved ones’.

________________________________________

1. I would go so far as to say that a mandatory appeal should lie “at all significant stages of the proceedings” (citation omitted).

2. “Medical murder” is not a concept foreign to our country and social policies. See Dr. P. Breggin – The Role of Psychiatry in the Holocaust (1993) at p. 3. The Ohio Supreme Court has recognized that court orders terminating the parent/ child relationship are the equivalent of a family court death sentence. See In re Hayes, 79 Ohio St.3d 46; 679 NE 2d 680 (1997).

4. Not unlike the slave of past history, in adult guardianship, the ward is chained to an impediment from which they cannot readily escape and the family is forced to watch as the slave-master whips the slave, and terrorized the family, to comply.

5. A few years back in discussion with Danny Tate – himself a ward/victim of Southern Baptist upbringing – I commented to his lamenting, no disrespect intended – “[N]ow you know what Christ felt like when he was hanging on the cross while others sat nearby casting lots for his goods.” For those of you who are Christian believers’ – see, Luke 11:46 and 11:52.

Page 2

As a “ward” 6 myself – someone on the inside looking out – I can tell you that access to the already existing appeal and review process7 is first and foremost a way of ending this madness. In fact, I will go so far and say that for the ‘ward’ under guardianship access to the courts period is very high on the list of what we lack most8 –

In sum, and for the sake of brevity – a capital murder defendant facing the death penalty has an automatic MANDATORY appeal – a check system built into the process to check the process itself before ever taking a life. In contrast and in the guardianship arena lives are being lost, death sentences are being handed out – often times ex parte9 — and the likelihood of a ‘ward’ ever seeing an appeal and review process is at best next to non-existent.10

In close, legislation to include a MANDATORY appeal in all guardianship cases is legislation I would support and I believe such an effort, once successful, would serve as the first step and front line defense to stopping the madness and suffering we have all been compelled to endure.

Thank you kindly and in advance for your valuable time and attention. If ever you wish to expound upon this discussion point I am always readily available to talk about solutions that fix the problems at their root cause.

Respectfully,

Tim Lahrman

________________________________________

6. For those who may not know – a “ward” is a person for whom a guardian has been appointed.

7.  In Lane v. Brown, 372 U.S. 477 (1963) the Supreme Court held that “where the state’s own processes substantially impair and impede a litigant’s access to an already existing appeal and review process such processes are unconstitutional.” — and I’ll expound upon this reasoning to add – where that states’ own processes, based solely upon an individual’s disability, substantially impair and impede a disabled litigant’s access to an already existing appeal and review process, such processes are without question, because they are already deemed unconstitutional, patently discriminatory in violation of Title II of the Americans’ With Disabilities Act 1990 (as amended).

8. There exists an inherent conflict of interest between the appointed guardian and the ward where the right to appeal is found. See Matter of Aho, 39 NY 2d 241 (NY Ct. App. 1976). [For those who do not know in NY the Court of Appeals is their state’s highest court and their county trial courts are called the Supreme Court]

9. Most guardianships begin with what is termed to be “a pre-hearing deprivation” for the ward, standing in their own right, never has “a post-deprivation remedy”. This is significant in any constitutional discussion of guardianship and due process.

10. For a ward the right to an appeal is merely illusory because the right to appeal as a ward and on behalf of the ward is in the hands of the appointed guardian, and what are the odds that an appointed guardian is ever going to appeal a decision which they themselves made and imposed upon the disabled ward. See Aho, supra.

Chicago was’t mentioned, but for sure we have our problems, starting with a $200 street vendor’s license to play music or sell goods to support charities.  I’m surprised they haven’t gone after Girl Scout cookies and Boy Scout popcorn and put a tax on that!

By swanksalot on flickr

The state of Texas now requires every new computer repair technician to obtain a private investigator’s license. In order to receive a private investigator’s license, an individual must either have a degree in criminal justice or must complete a three year apprenticeship with a licensed private investigator.  If you are a computer repair technician that violates this law, or if you are a regular citizen that has a computer repaired by someone not in compliance with the law, you can be fined up to $4,000 and you can be put in jail for a year.

#2 Business Privilege License… For Bloggers

By Red Mum on flickr

The city of Philadelphia now requires all bloggers to purchase a $300 business privilege license.  The city even went after one poor woman who had earned only $11from her blog over the past two years.

By erik.w.davis on flickr

The state of Louisiana says that monks must be fully licensed as funeral directors and actually convert their monasteries into licensed funeral homes before they will be allowed to sell their handmade wooden caskets.

#4 Teeth Brushing Regulation

By Morydd on flickr

In the state of Massachusetts, all children in daycare centers are mandated by state law to brush their teeth after lunch.  In fact, the state even provides the fluoride toothpaste for the children.

(Of course they do, flouride is rat poison and companies can either put it in gum, the water supply or toothpaste because otherwise they have to pay big buck to dispose of this hazmat.

• #5 D.C. Tour Guide License

If you attempt to give a tour of our nation’s capital without a license, you could be put in prison for 90 days.

• #6 Raw Milk License

By jami0821 on flickr

Federal agents recently raided an Amish farm at 5 A.M. in the morning because they were selling “unauthorized” raw milk.

Of course this has always been a huge fight between big agra dairy and the little farmer.  Agra dairy claims raw milk is dangerous, when it is not, it actually can kill bad bacteria while preserving probiotics and other nurtirents; the smaller farmer wants to make tons of money from raw milk, which is consider by some to be a medicinal food for many ailments.  And the fight continues….

• 7/14

#7 Pumpkin and Christmas Tree Vendor License

By Jo Naylor on flickr

In Lake Elmo, Minnesota farmers can be fined $1,000 and put in jail for 90 days for selling pumpkins or Christmas trees that are grown outside city limits.

• #8 Untangling Whale Restriction

By Michael Dawes on flickr

A U.S. District Court judge slapped a $500 fine on Massachusetts fisherman Robert J. Eldridge for untangling a giant whale from his nets and setting it free.  So what was his crime?  Well, according to the court, Eldridge was supposed to call state authorities and wait for them do it.

Right.  What an idiot.

• #9 Interior Design License

By kellan on flickr

In the state of Texas, it doesn’t matter how much formal interior design education you have – only individuals with government licenses may refer to themselves as “interior designers” or use the term “interior design” to describe their work.10/14

#10 Additional 1099s to File

By 427 on flickr

Deeply hidden in the 2,409-page health reform bill passed by Congress was a new regulation that will require U.S. businesses to file millions more 1099s each year.  In fact, it is estimated that the average small business will now have to file 200 additional 1099s every single year.  Talk about a nightmare of red tape!  But don’t try to avoid this rule – it is being reported that the IRS has hired approximately 2,000 new auditorsto audit as many of these 1099s as possible.

• #11 License to Close a Business

By TheTruthAbout on flickr

The city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin makes it incredibly difficult to go out of business.  In order to close down a business, Milwaukee requires you to purchase an expensive license, you must submit a huge pile of paperwork to the city regarding the inventory you wish to sell off, and you must pay a fee based on the length of your “going out of business sale” plus a two dollar charge for every $1,000 worth of inventory that you are attempting to sell off.

#12 Labeling Products with Calorie Counts

By Gangles87 on flickr

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is projecting that the food service industry will have to spend an additional 14 million hoursevery single year just to comply with new federal regulations that mandate that all vending machine operators and chain restaurants must label all products that they sell with a calorie count in a location visible to the consumer.

Of course many business are already doing this because what they have learned from studies is that when calories are posted, the consumers actually order MORE food, so it seems both the regulation and the “additional cost” is pretty much nuts.

I know everyone was thinking Chicago, but not yet.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/07/3746990/texas-officials-indictment/

Only two of the elected officials in a remote Texas town were left unscathed after the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) arrested six members under a federal indictment that accuses them of taking bribes and helping an illegal gambling operator in exchange for favors, the Associated Press reported. Those arrested in Crystal City, Texas include the mayor, the city attorney who is also the city manager, two current councilmen, and a former councilman.

“The indictment alleges that these public officials and this businessman solicited and accepted bribes in exchange for official action, such as voting to award city contracts to, waive certain tax payments by, and conduct certain inspections to give unfair advantage to those paying bribes,” Richard Durbin, the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Texas, said in a press release. One of the two remaining top officials was previously arrested on federal charges of smuggling immigrants across the southern U.S. border.

According to the Department of Justice indictment, Crystal City’s officials were accused of using “their official positions to enrich themselves by soliciting and accepting bribes from persons seeking to do business” since February 2015. The city manager, William James Jonas, III, was accused of managing the bribery scheme, in which a contractor provided bribes worth more than $12,000 to city officials in exchange for a city contract and unfair advantages. Ngoc Tri Nguyen, a city councilmember, was accused of providing payment to Mayor Ricardo Lopez, “including $6,000, in exchange for various official acts from Lopez and Jonas.” Nguyen was allegedly running illegal gambling rooms, as well.

Joel Barajas, the remaining councilman without an arrest warrant, said that the city has about $2 million in unpaid bills and was facing bankruptcy.

“For the time being, they remain the elected officials and the representatives of that city,” Durbinsaid.

“Crystal City is a good town,” Maria Sanchez Rivera, a lifelong resident told the Associated Press. “If you do wrong, you have to face your consequences. We’ve got laws for everything and we’ve got to abide by what the law says.”

https://www.causes.com/actions/1781191-sign-the-petition-to-executive-legislative-and-judicial-branch-of-usa

Whether or not the bar associations agree with this, something needs to be done about both family court and probate court where we regularly see kids for sale, disableds for sale and seniors for sale.  Once a wealthy family or wealthy estate appears in these courtrooms, they are then flooded with a sea of tied in attorneys and their court appointed vendors, who frequently come from secret lists, they do not file any ethics reports, their fees are not known until the bill is received, judges rarely, if ever, ask for a competitive bid or budget for a project, and when the money runs out, the senior or disabled is narcotized to death and no autopsy or tox screen is ever performed. In (anti) family court, sole custody is often given to the parent with the largest bank account who pays their vendor bills generously, despite the fact that both parents are fit and both parents should have a co parenting agreement with substantially equal time with the children.

I personally receive scores of complaints every month about cases in probate where significant assets (a million or more) are missing and custody cases where co parenting should have been invoked, but was not even considered.

This petition makes a lot of sense.  Panels can be set up and coparenting, equal division of assets can be done using form agreements without an attorney to save everyone tens of thousands of dollars or more in a divorce. Seniors and disableds should have volunteer assistants to help them pay bills and get reasonably priced help to stay in their homes.  As published before on this blog, Sunrise nursing homes will give any person placing a senior in their homes $2,000 on the spot.

Many things are seriously wrong in Family and Probate courts, please take a look at the petition and sign it.

As you know, this blog advocates for simpler, easier and less costly systems when dealing with disabled seniors and children.  Using numerous attorneys to draft up agreements and handle forms that all of use in our daily lives should not mean that all a family’s wealth is quickly drained.

Thanks

If this isn’t a reason to test all lawyers for psychopathy right now, I don’t know what is

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/anonymous-inc-60-minutes-steve-kroft-investigation/?lf-content=156403203%3A453977912&hubRefSrc=facebook

An investigator from an international corruption prevention NGO poses as a representative of a politician from a West African nation.

All but one of 16 lawyers were interested in helping the representative engage in laundering dirty money in the US.

Every lawyer should know of the “Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.”  Note, no one mentions the conspiracy laws, US tax laws regarding criminal income, etc.

Global Witnesses is the organization.  Hurray for them.

JoAnne

From the story: 16 lawyers, 13 firms in Manhattan.

How helpful are lawyers in moving milions of dollars in suspicious funds into the US?

It is a mineral rich country in W. Africa.

He wanted a brownstone ($10 million), a jet plane and a yacht. he wants to live her nice, but no one to know his name.

The discussions included what to call the money. Not a bribe, special money payments? special business deals? grey money?  black money? tainted money?  honest graft (from the lawyer)?

What do you think? Serious flaws in the US legal system?

see below

© 2016 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

• 

  Steve Kroft

  Few journalists have achieved the impact and recognition that Steve Kroft’s 60 Minutes work has generated for over two decades. Kroft delivered his first report for 60 Minutes in 1989.

 

The US dept of justice has announced the following

http://www.adn.com/article/20150813/its-unconstitutional-ban-homeless-sleeping-outside-justice-department-says

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-files-brief-address-criminalization-homelessness

Justice Department Files Brief to Address the Criminalization of Homelessness

http://www.wsj.com/articles/defining-presidential-down-1454371480

http://www.nj.com/warrenreporter/index.ssf/2015/01/state_takes_child_from_home_ju.html

 

PHILLIPSBURG—A Phillipsburg mother has won the right to sue state employees who charged her with child abuse after her husband allegedly stabbed her and kidnapped their child.

Michelle Mammaro, 29, continues to “seek justice in her case against” the state child services workers and police who “pursued her as a child abuser,” her attorney said today.

The Federal District Court in Trenton ruled that these state employees are not immune from suit for conduct in violation of the constitution rights of parents, and Mammaro has won the right to sue department heads and individual employees of the state Department of Children & Families, its Division of Child Protection and Permanency (then the Division of Youth and Family Services, DYFS) and the Watchung Police Department, Kenneth Rosellini of Clifton said in a press release.

Now this is only a lower court decision, so it is not citable precedence, but you can follow the case on UScourts.com or pacer.gov.

Good decision!