While I was reading some silly poem advocating prayer in schools (is that during each chem class or just the harder ones?), I found this much more fun website with all the major SCOTUS constitutional law cases:

http://www.constitutionfacts.com/us-supreme-court/landmark-cases/

read and enjoy.

what I don’t understand is there are protests, but where are the voters?

http://chicagoantieviction.org/2014/08/neighbors-friends-protest-eviction.html?showComment=1414293113287

According to its website, Robert Harris was appointed by Timothy Evans and Timothy Evans is selected as presiding judges by the judges themselves.

http://www.publicguardian.org/publicGuardian/

What about Quinn and her keeping Mildred in a nursing home against her will?

Quinn is an associate judge and she is appointed by the presiding judges.

So I guess we can’t directly blame the voters for this mess.

I want to thank the anti-eviction coalition for bringing this case to the attention of the public.  Thank heavens for blogs.

JoAnne

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Oct 25, 2014 6:19 AM
To: Tim NASGA , Probate Sharks , Harry Heckert , “JoAnne M. Denison” , “J. Ditkowsky” , Nasga Us , Eric Holder , Matt Senator Kirk , Chicago FBI , “FBI- ( (” , Chicago Tribune , BILL DITKOWSKY , SUNTIMES , Janet Phelan , Ginny Johnson , “ComplaintAdmin ADA (CRT)” , Illinois ARDC , Bev Cooper , FOX News Network LLC , “Y. ACLU” , Scott Evans , Diane Nash , Barbara Stone , Edward Carter , ISBA Main Discussion Group , Fiduciary Watch , Cook Sheriff , Cook County States Attorney , “tips@cbschicago.com” , “Mr. Lanre Amu — Honest Atty Unfairly Persecuted By ARDC” , The Wall Street Journal
Subject: October 25, 2014 –
What is amazing is the fact that we tolerate so many corrupt political and judicial officials.    For as long as I can remember Cook County Illinois has had corrupt political figures as part of our landscape.   Voter fraud was a tradition.   One political figure actually pointed out the philosophy of the political structure when he stated:

 “why should a person lose his franchise to vote just because he died!”

Indeed, the dead marched to the pols and voted for the party of their choice!     Similarly, we had some of the best judges money could purchase.    Prosecutors were quite candid during operation Greylord in their dismay at finding so many judges being purchased.    Two hundred dollars purchased the chief judge of the Chancery Division.

Today, the improvement is negative.    Openly and notoriously senior citizens and the disabled are being abused and exploited by judicial appointees whose avarice is unlimited.    The Bill of Rights is assaulted and gang raped at the Courthouse by blackrobed criminals who are protected by highly paid public officials such as Jerome Larkin.   In case you were not aware, Larkin was employed to protect the public from exactly the corruption that can be observed any day (Monday through Friday) on the 18^th Floor of the Daley Center. [1]     Somehow Larkin got confused and he openly and notoriously acts in concert with the *****(censored!)

It may be beating a dead horse, but, a pollution that Jerome Larkin brings to the legal profession in aiding and abetting and/or acting in concert with the corrupt jurists, guardians, and assorted felons is intolerable.      I have been urging an HONEST intelligent, complete and comprehensive investigation of Larkin and his co-conspirators (including his over-paid attorneys at the IARDC) so as to root out and prosecute the elder cleansers who rob the elderly and the disabled of the American dream, but, in reality that is not enough.

The following article I copied from the internet makes the point:

Church should not fear change, pope says at close of Bishop’s gathering

Under a brilliant blue sky in St. Peter’s Square, Pope Francis beatified the late Pope Paul VI on Sunday. The lavish ceremony comes at the end of a two-week-long assembly of bishops that revealed

Reuters

Corruption is like “bad breath,” says Pope Francis, “it is hard for the one who has it to realize it; others realize it and have to tell him.”

In an address to a delegation of the International Association of Penal Law this morning, Francis commented on a variety of troubling international legal issues, including the widespread problem of corruption, which he called “a greater evil than sin.”

According to Francis, remorse is possible only when one is aware of evil, which is not the case with a corrupt person.

“The corrupt person does not perceive his corruption,” the Pope said. “For this reason, it is difficult for the corrupt person to get out of his state through remorse of conscience. More than forgiven, this evil must be cured,” he said.

“The scandalous concentration of global wealth,” said Francis, “is possible through the connivance of political authorities.”

“Few things are harder than opening a breach in a corrupt heart,” Francis continued. “When the personal situation of the corrupt becomes complicated, he knows all the loopholes to escape as did the dishonest steward of the Gospel.”

“The corrupt person goes through life taking the shortcuts of opportunism,” said the Pope, “with an air of innocence, wearing the mask of an honest person, which he begins to believe.” The corrupt person “cannot accept criticism, discredits anyone who criticizes him, tries to belittle any moral authority who would question him, does not value others and insults anyone who thinks differently. If the balance of power permits, he persecutes anyone who contradicts him.”

Unfortunately, according to Francis, the problem is widespread.

“Corruption has become natural, a personal and social custom, a common practice in commercial and financial transactions, in public procurement, in any negotiation involving State agents,” he said.

The panorama is not pretty, and there are no quick fixes.

“What can criminal law do against corruption?” the Pope asked.

“Penalties are selective,” the Pope said. “They are like a net that captures only the small fish, while leaving the big ones free in the sea,” Francis added.

“Still,” says Francis, “the Lord never tires of knocking on the doors of the corrupt. Corruption is powerless against hope.”

[1] Not all the judges on the 18 ^th Floor are corrupt.      Unfortunately, the guardianship cases has exposed several judges whose corruption qualifies for a Nobel prize.      Judge Connors’ evidence deposition at pages 89, to the end demonstrates just how unjudicial the courts have become.    Her August 2009 and August 2010 utterances recorded in the Report of Proceedings in case 09 P 4585 are amazing and demonstrate the corruption of a judge who apparently administered a statute for 12 years without bothering to either read it or understand it.     Had she read it – as an example – she would have known in August 2009 that the petition before her to declare Mary Sykes was defective, no jurisdiction had been obtained, and that she had very specific and very procrustean obligations (pursuant to the Civil Rights Act) as to Mary Sykes.      The statement in her evidence deposition that if someone had called to her attention the lack of jurisdiction she would have vacated her order done things properly and come to the same result represents the apex of corruption and the nadir of the legal profession.

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

The following is in response from a probate victim (GM) whose husband was removed from the home against his will, drugged, placed in a locked down facility.  When she complained, they put a restraining order on her.  $600k is missing from that estate from a predatory Guardian.

—–Original Message—–
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Oct 24, 2014 9:51 PM
To: ** , Main Member Group , Florida E-group , Andy Ostrowski
Cc: Nasga Us , “JoAnne M. Denison” , Barbara Stone , Marti Oakley , Probate Sharks , Tim NASGA , Ginny Johnson , Harry Heckert , “J. Ditkowsky” , Eric Holder , Matt Senator Kirk , Chicago FBI , “FBI- ( (” , Chicago Tribune , SUNTIMES , Janet Phelan , “ComplaintAdmin ADA (CRT)”
Subject: Re: [New post] Lookie here– I told Judge McCarthy NOT to appoint they OPG, they’re evil, and 3,000 petitioners and a case and family on the South Side agree!

http://chicagoantieviction.org/2014/08/in-retaliation-for-protest-public.html

I think this says it all.

How in the heck can the OPG get away with such violations of civil and human rights AND WHEN AGAINST THE ELDERLY?!?!?!

what foxes are guarding this hen house?  The OPG, that’s for sure.

Now poor Janie Thomas lives in a locked down nursing home and her family is isolated from from her.

I warned Judge MacCarthy about this and she ignored me.  She was elected by the voters of the south side and said in her videos she would be “fair and just”.  But then she appoints the OPG for Janie Thomas and says “she has no choice”

Well, yes she did.

It’s like the judges in Roman times throwing the Christians to the lions.  Read or reread the story of Perpetua and Felicity.

http://www.bibleprobe.com/martyr.htm

another good story left out of the “bible” for being too feminist. shessh.

First the red light ticket scandal, where everyone got a ticket, red light or not, turns out to just be a money laundering scheme for the rich and connected:

http://politics.suntimes.com/article/chicago/key-player-red-light-camera-scandal-plans-plead-guilty/thu-10232014-1148am-0

and from Palm Springs, ONE conservator (guardian) is replaced after years of incompetence and abuse:

http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/crime_courts/2014/10/22/ron-olund-maxine-douglas/17748091/

Interestingly enough, read the article carefully and this Conservator had many other clients being neglected by her, and the court did not order an investigation into those wards either.

Scary.

And now we have the Allen Frake estate where millions of dollars in investment properties are unrented, a court appointed nimrod never returns phone calls and is not renting them out at all.  The son, Gary Frake wants to take over the property management, rent them out and ensure profitability, but the court just hands it back to the care nothing guardian of the estate where nothing got done for 20 months, ignoring the son’s and only heir’s pleas for competent management.

Business as usual.

And now from a singular politician who acknowledges rampant corruption and vows to do something about it.  Why aren’t there more?  Why do the American citizens suffer so much?

facebook Andy Ostrowski Andy Ostrowski shared a link: “Family Law Report – Richard Fine Part…“ Family Law Report – Richard Fine Part 1: Judicial Bribery & Corruption t.co SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE Divorce Corp VIDEOS: http://www.youtube.com/user/DivorceCorp?sub_confirmation=1 Joe Sorge interviews Los Angeles attorney, Richard Fine, w… Like · Comment · Share You are receiving this email because you’ve listed Andy Ostrowski as a close friend. Change Close Friend Notifications. View Post

I have to admit, I have never really seen such a letter from an allegedly professional organization.

As you will all recall, after 99 year old Alice Gore was guardianized, out of all the Gore/Cooper family members, a granddaughter was selected to become her guardian by the court and agreed to by the attorneys involved (see letter)–despite the fact the young woman had a long and extremely troublesome history of severe mental illness (which they were all informed of) and being in and out of psych hospitals and treatment!  Next Alice Gore is isolated for 10 months from over 20 long time friends and family, and the next time her beloved daughter sees her, 29 gold teeth (onlays, very expensive) have been pulled. She was perfectly capable of eating, she loved to eat!  With all teeth, she enjoyed steaks, hamburgers– you name it at age 99.  But, it takes too long for her to eat, so some miscreant tied in dentist (Bev has the name) pulls 29 gold teeth to mine them from poor Alice’s body while she is still alive, then they insert a feeding tube because she takes too long to eat.

Now, mind you, Bev Cooper offered to take her mother into her home and feed her herself, and take care of her–but those attorneys and the judge blocked that, instead opting for the mentally ill granddaughter, complete isolation of Alice Gore, pulling her teeth and forcibly putting in a feeding tube all because it takes too long for her to eat and the nursing home staff won’t be bothered!

So this is the response from the ARDC–Ms. Myrrah, who apparently squeals like a squish video victim so loudly it comes right thru in her letter, which I find to be amazingly unprofessional.  Ken’s comments are below too.

Joanne

From Ken Ditkowsky to the Coopers who are shocked with outrage by the tenor of this letter:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwMER1LUp3SjFTMHN5Z1RZUDMtQzI3M0dtQVQ4/view?usp=sharing

same letter with my sticky notes:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwa3Q3MTNqN0Q0QXc/view?usp=sharing

Yep dissidence in the ranks of attorneys protecting human and civil rights is firmly dealt with by the likes of Jerome Larkin, head of the Ill. Atty. Discipline Commission, and not even the U.S. Sup. Ct will move a quill pen to stop it.

Read on from Tom Fields:

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Oct 19, 2014 11:07 AM
To: Tom Fields
Cc: “JoAnne M. Denison” , Barbara Stone , Harry Heckert , Probate Sharks , Tim NASGA , “J. Ditkowsky” , Nasga Us , Eric Holder , Matt Senator Kirk , Chicago FBI , “FBI- ( (” , Chicago Tribune , BILL DITKOWSKY , SUNTIMES , Janet Phelan , Ginny Johnson , “ComplaintAdmin ADA (CRT)” , Cook County States Attorney , Illinois ARDC , Bev Cooper , FOX News Network LLC , Scott Evans , Diane Nash , Edward Carter , ISBA Main Discussion Group , Fiduciary Watch , Cook Sheriff , “tips@cbschicago.com” , Glenda Martinez , Jay Goldman , Garr Sanders , Rabbi Moshe Soloveitchik , Elaine Renoire , Alyece Russell , RosANNa Miller , Robert Sarhan , Mary Richards , “Mr. Ray Kim” , Sylvia Rudek NASGA
Subject: Re: Ken, I Mentioned You in a Comment That I Posted Online at http://www.twcc.com/articles/2014/10/19/i/iran-bans-human-rights-lawyer-from-practicing-law

From Glenda Martinez:

From: Ramsey Bahrawy
Sent: Oct 18, 2014 11:02 AM
To: JoAnne M Denison
Cc: Atty Barbara Stone , Atty Ken Ditkowsky , “Mr. Lanre Amu — honest atty unfairly persecuted by ARDC” , Candice Schwager Law Firm and blog fan , Atty Diane Soderberg blog fan , Atty Susan Brazas Rockford blog fan , Dr Richard Cordero corruption consultant and blog fan , Tom Gearhart Baker Miller Law
Subject: Re: Read last line…to all of us who tried to report our story of – Abuse, Neglect, Financial Exploitation

From: Richard Cordero
Sent: Oct 17, 2014 8:05 PM
To: Jim Davis , newsdesk@wews.com, dstellner@americanpublicmedia.org
Subject: Organizing talkshows into a media force and rallying point for honest judiciaries and public accountability

Strategic thinking to turn a talkshow into a rallying point for those who have experienced judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless wrongdoing, and who can implement a realistic plan of action to expose judges’ wrongdoing, outrage the public, and cause it to make such wrongdoing a decisive issue of the mid-term and presidential elections From a talkshow to a civic movement that brings about public servants’ accountability to We the People:

The People’s Sunrise

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >ol:146

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England

M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School

D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris

Judicial Discipline Reform

New York City

Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com

www.linkedin.com/pub/dr-richard-cordero-esq/4b/8ba/50/

A. An anecdote that shows a talkshow’s potential
for empowering the People

1. The following anecdote provides a realistic basis for a strategy that shows how a talkshow host and guests on a show dedicated to the issue of judges’ unaccountability(* >jur:21§A) and consequent riskless wrongdoing(* >jur:5§3) can turn what normally is a one-off event into a series of shows and then a regular program that serves as a venue for ever more judicial wrongdoing victims to rally and gradually grow into a civic movement that asserts.

2. “[¹] This is how Author Larry Hohol’s homepage, www.TheLuzerneCountyRailroad.com, describes his talk with Host Sue Henry as part of a Barnes & Noble Author Event about his book The Luzerne County Railroad on judicial corruption in Pennsylvania: “The scheduled 20 minute appearance was extended to two hours after the switchboard lit up solid with phone calls from listeners”.

3. It is quite rare for media stations to throw off their carefully matched schedules of shows and sponsors to respond on the fly to even overwhelming audience reaction to their current show. That this happened demonstrates that even within the limited geographic reach of an FM station, i.e., WILK-FM, 103.1, his story of judicial abuse of power and betrayal of public trust stroke a cord with the audience. This experience supports the reasonable expectation that people elsewhere would react likewise to similar accounts because judges have been allowed to engage in such conduct with impunity long enough to have victimized and outraged many people everywhere. They have become Judges Above the Law.”

4.  This anecdote with my comment on it appears in my study of the Federal Judiciary titled Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting.*

* The file containing the study together with emails turned into short articles or letters on specific related subjects can be downloaded through any of the following links. All (parenthetical) blue text references herein are keyed to the several parts and pages in that file. This article is at * >ol:146.

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

or

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqw00v30ex3kbho/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

or

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx26luEuzfjgc1hiZXctZjdLQlE/edit?usp=sharing

or

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/jur/DrRCordero_jud_unaccountability_reporting.pdf.

5. A leader giving direction out of a problem, not a beggar asking for pity

a. You, Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, should use your time on a talkshow to make a professional presentation of the subject rather than of your personal cases. It should appeal to the most people in the audience because it explains the underlying circumstances and forms of judges’ wrongdoing so that as many individuals in the audience as possible feel that you are enlightening their understanding of a most confusing situation:

b.They went to court for justice, but came out abused. They will feel thankful to your for reassuring them that they did not do anything wrong so that it was not their fault. It was the judges who took advantage of them.

c. Compare that approach of giving to the audience to the one where you concentrate on the details of your personal experience and demand that the audience give you their time and attention to show interest in your case and in addition give you their support. This is the attitude of beggars preying on the audience’s pity.

d. You and your colleagues are leaders. You take people to a new understanding of their predicament and show the way for them to deal with it under your guidance. This requires strategic(ol:6) thinking to craft a concrete and realistic plan of action.

6. Appearance segments: problem presentation,

plan of action, audience reaction

a. You can conceive your appearance in three well-defined, purposeful, and integrated segments.

b. Scene setup: presenting causes and forms of judicial wrongdoing

1. Connivance between politicians and judges: At the root of judicial wrongdoing is the connivance between judges and politicians. Politicians help put on the bench people of the same ilk as themselves. They recommend, nominate, confirm, appoint, endorse, donate to, and campaign for, judicial candidates on whom they have something and who will never forget to whom they owe their office.

2. From those judges politicians expect that they at the very least uphold the legislation that they have passed or will pass to enact their political agenda; and that they be lenient toward the politicians if on charges of their own corruption they have to appear in court before those judges or their peers.

3. For their part, judges depend on politicians to be reelected or elevated to a higher court, for they do not have the power to promote their own to a higher court. They are connected by a mutually beneficial relation that is essentially inimical to the fair and impartial application of the law to Joe Schmock, the kiosk on the corner, and you, one-time, run-of-the-mill parties from whom judges cannot expect any problem, never mind any benefit.

4. The question whether appointing, electing, or other form of selecting judges is preferable should be left unanswered. At this point, the only concern is to expose the nature and gravity of judges’ wrongdoing and their practice of it in such widespread, routine, and coordinated fashion as to constitute their and their judiciary’s institutionalized modus operandi. This should outrage the public and stir it up to force politicians to investigate and hold judges accountable and undertake reform.

a. Pervasive secrecy: Judges operate in pervasive secrecy by holding all their adjudicative, administrative, policy-making, and disciplinary meetings behind closed doors. Such pervasive secrecy breeds abuse and ensures their riskless wrongdoing. What is not known cannot be controlled. Uncontrolled power is the hallmark of ‘absolute power, the one that corrupts absolutely’^{28, 32}.

b. Retaliation of judges: Judges can retaliate against politicians that authorize or allow investigations against them by declaring their laws unconstitutional^17a or interpreting them in disregard of their black letter or intent. the power of retaliation that judges wield against politicians who allow investigations against wrongdoing judges to be conducted. In addition, judges retaliate through many forms of chicanery, petit forms of harassment or disregard of procedural requirements that can doom a case and exhaust a party financially and emotionally(Lsch:17§C). This is judicial power wielded as a sword.

c. Forms of wrongdoing: Judges gain material²¹³(jur:27§2), professional⁶⁹(56§§e-f), and social benefits(62§g; a&p:1¶2^nd) from their wrongdoing. This is judicial power wielded as a spoon.

d. Laying out a concrete and realistic plan of action

In this segment, you can briefly describe what you propose to do to establish a fundamental principle underlying the exposure of judges’ wrongdoing

In a democracy, We the People are the source of all public power and the masters of all public servants, including judges, who are hired to perform services for the benefit of the People and are accountable to their masters for their performance. The People did not entrust, and it is unreasonable even to think that they would ever have entrusted, a portion of their power to servants who in turn would make themselves immune to accounting to their masters for their exercise of such power.

e. Hence, you can state that your objective is to bring about judicial reform based on transparency, accountability, discipline, and liability to compensate the victims of judges’ wrongdoing(Lsch:10¶6).

f.  Those principles can be implemented through citizen boards of judicial accountability and discipline(jur:160§8).

5.  Your and the audiences’ experience of judges’ wrongdoing

a. Your experience to illustrate different categories of wrongdoing

b. Each of you and your colleagues can briefly describe, in two minutes or less, a different kind of judicial wrongdoing experience had by you or another person, such as:

i.  foreclosure on mortgages;

ii.  execution of wills

iii. handling of criminal cases and sentencing;

iv. dismissal of complaints against judges

v. appointment of guardians for children or the elderly;

vi. divorce cases involving custody of children or partition of matrimonial assets

c. Take calls from the public

i.  Then the host can open the line for him to take calls from those in the audience who want to give a brief account of their experience with wrongdoing judges. You and your colleagues can comment on it as appropriate to try to highlight what is the most important feature: patterns of wrongdoing that point, not to individual rogue judges, but rather to coordination between judges who thereby make their wrongdoing more riskless, effective, and profitable (jur:122§§2-3)

2.  Using the talkshow to appear as professionals and leaders

Appearing on a talkshow is a great opportunity for you and your colleagues to demonstrate that the problem is not with you: You are not a bunch of sore losers in court; you are not ‘disgruntled litigants’ who have nothing to offer but the hot air of your bumbling pro se handling of your own cases in court.

3. Rather, you are professionals. You have studied the problem and understand its causes and forms: Judges who are held unaccountable by politicians and media people much less courageous than the host(jur:81§1). As a result, they engage in riskless wrongdoing that benefits themselves and a clique of insiders.

4. Neither you nor your colleagues can wing it. To begin with, you should only take to the meeting with host two or three of the most articulate, self-controlled, and knowledgeable people. If you take more, everybody will want to put in their piece of performance and you end up with a discordant mob of people whining about their personal problems. It will make a terrible impression.

5. Remember, this is not an opportunity for you or your colleagues to vent your frustration and anger at the judges.

6. Rather, this is an occasion for you and your colleagues to show to the host that you are a group of highly polished civic movement leaders. You are people who can attract the attention of the thousands and thousands of people out there who have been victimized by judges but who can do little more than scream the pain of the injustice that they have suffered.

a. Thus, be professional.

b. Hold yourself to high standards of professionalism.

c. Make a highly organized and informative presentation of the issue. Practice your roles!

d. Discard personal trivia and choose content that will inform, outrage, and stir up into action the largest audience.

e. Show that you are capable of leading a movement to coalesce all victims of wrongdoing judges into a civic movement. The Tea Party is precedent therefor. However, your main concern is not lower taxes, but rather Equal Justice Under Law administered by judges accountable to We the People.

D. What the talkshow host stands to gain

1. new audience to be tapped and developed

2. At the meeting with the host, you should convince him that there is an untapped audience who can regularly listen to his program and to you and your colleagues. The passionate commitment of that audience in search for justice can attract sponsors. The latter may be regular commercial advertisers or civil rights organizations and foundations willing to underwrite his program. You need to show that you are business people.

3. You show concern for the host’s money-making needs and he takes care of your need to establish an avenue of communication with the public through which the latter can also communicate with you. This is part of strategic thinking. This audience can also express themselves on a website opened by the host and you that can be developed into a money-making center by selling advertisement and receiving donations. You need money to spread your message widely, cover travel expenses, organize presentations and conferences, etc.

4.Launching a generalized media investigation of judicial wrongdoing.

5. The host together with your support can contact journalists that to let them know there is a story worth investigating and an audience avidly awaiting their reports: the story of judges’ wrongdoing. This work needs your leadership.

6. Eventually, it can become a self-reinforcing process because the more the audience share their experience of judicial wrongdoing victimization and journalists report their findings, the more public outrage will be provoked and the stronger the demand will be for more investigation and reports.

A. That is how you can launch a Watergate-like generalized media investigation of judges’ wrongdoing. It can be guided by a query with a proven devastating impact in that it caused the resignation of President Nixon in 1974 and the incarceration of all its White House aides(jur:4¶¶10-14). It can be reformulated thus:

1. What did President Obama and the Supreme Court Justices know about Justice Sotomayor’s wrongdoing –suspected by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico- with the complicity of the other justices, judges, and staff of the Federal Judiciary, and when did they know it?

2. Consider the case of Former Arizona Superior and Appellate Court Judge and Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and the alleged corruption in Arizona courts^144d

3. Hold out the prospect that the public outrage provoked by the audience’s experiences and the journalists’ findings can turn judicial wrongdoing and reform into a dominating issue of public debate that be-comes decisive of the impending mid-term election campaign, which will lead right into the primaries and the 2016 presidential election campaign. An outraged public can force politicians to:

a. take a public, unambiguous stand on judges’ wrongdoing;

b. call for official investigations of judges’ wrongdoing

c. undertake judicial legislated(jur:158§§6-7) judicial reform that imposes concrete duties of transparency, accountability, discipline, and liability on judges and their judiciary to compensate their victims.

There is no doubt that your meeting with the host and eventually with other media people like him offer a great opportunity to turn it into a multiplier of your presentation to the public and journalists of the causes and forms of judicial wrongdoing and the need for reform. It can be the beginning of the formation of a civic movement that forces politicians to undertake such reform and holds judges accountable: the People’s Sunrise(ol:29).

You can be the leader in building with hosts and journalists a Coalition for Justice that multiplies those presentations.

I look forward to hearing from you all and in light of the facts discussed at ol:19§D, will appreciate it if you would acknowledge receipt of this email.

Dare trigger history!(jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

Judicial Discipline Reform

New York City

Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com

Watch the interview with Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., by Alfred Lambremont Webre, JD, MEd, on the issue of exposing judges’ wrongdoing and bringing about judicial reform, at:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2362oh_dr-cordero-u-s-judiciary-goes-rogue-99-82-complaints-vs-judges-are-dismissed-u-s-justice-sonia-sotom_news

and

Dr. Cordero: U.S. Judiciary goes Rogue – 99.82% complaints vs. Judges are dismissed; U.S. Justice Sonia Sotomayor hides assets with impunity.

See also:

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >ol:135

or

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqw00v30ex3kbho/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >ol:135

or

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx26luEuzfjgc1hiZXctZjdLQlE/edit?usp=sharing>ol:135

or

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/jur/DrRCordero_jud_unaccountability_reporting.pdf >ol:135

www.linkedin.com/pub/dr-richard-cordero-esq/4b/8ba/50/

******************************************************

Dear Readers;

Since it is entirely rare I get to share with you a letter from a probate victim to a court, I wanted to especially thank the Frake family for allowing me to do this and they encourage others to do the same.

The letter can be found here and after reading all of this, ask yourself, why is the probate court allowing James Stouffer to visit with Allen Frake at all?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwZ0E1TDAtZl8xQjA/view?usp=sharing

Note the allegations in the case of missing money, false testamentary documents, wrongful actions, coercion, duress, etc. and the family’s objections to Stouffer’s visiting AF at all.

And a special thanks to Mike Messner, nephew for writing this and for sharing it with us all.

JoAnne

And in the style of Jerome Larkin and managing Illinois Attorneys, we have the following new article:

Students passing out Constitution say Southern Oregon University threatened them

        

Text Size: A A A

“When you open it up to free speech that means anyone anywhere can come on here and do that and that might create some other challenges for this campus that we’re not prepared to manage.”

Well, this blog made the Washington Post, even if my copyright case was dismissed, Ken, Janet and Gloria can still sue for copyright infringement and so can many others of you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/10/14/no-its-not-copyright-infringement-when-attorney-discipline-authorities-copy-your-blog/

My comment:

I am the attorney in question, and I can assure you that I am not the only one writing about the Corruption in the Mary G Sykes case. The blog can be found at http://www.marygsykes.com and http://www.justice4every1.com.  Since beginning the blog, we have had numerous people provide information, assist in an investigation actively blocked in the court by the attorneys involved (Peter Schmeidel, Harvey Waller, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga).  Judge Stuart “suddenly retired” from the bench after she lied at my trial and the transcript was changed.
This blog and the writing of myself and probably more than 50 other individuals are crucial to stopping corruption in the State of Illinois where we have had more governors in club Fed Med than all the states combined.
The 18th floor of the Daley center in the probate division is one of the most notorious and troubled areas there is  No lawyer (except myself, Mr. Ken Ditkowsky and Mr. Lanre Amu) will speak out and stop the corruption.
And for all of you that say journalism doesn’t make a difference, I note that many troubled attorneys are now rarely seen on the 18th floor of the Daley center.  And the judge in charge when Alice Gore was isolated for 10 months and 29 gold teeth (onlays) were removed from her mouth by a tied in dentist “suddenty retired”.  The judge in the Sykes case recently and “suddenly retired.”
I AM one of the few attorneys making a difference and it’s through the blog.  What a bunch of weenies you all are is all I can say.  I am not in flames  I AM THE FLAME.  The Washington Post journalists should be in awe of my simple blog and my followers to work hard, very hard to stop corruption in its tracks by simply talking and publishing about it.

he Isolation of the Elder Cleansing victim from family, friends, and past life.

As Florida victim’s families are writing their affidavits that will be submitted to law enforcement as complaints against an assorted group of corrupt judges, their appointees, various lawyers, and those who had and are currently aiding and abetting the felonies associated with elder cleansing, the excuses that are advanced to curtail social intercourse between the families and the designated victims.

The common trend is to suggest that there is an interference with the ‘order’ of things by the family members who protest the isolation, the usurpation of the liberty and property Constitutional Rights of victim and family, and the studied and systematic deprivations of the victim to hasten death.      In each case wherein ‘elder cleansings’ are the goal of the miscreants guardian makes some form of application to the Court to bar or punish the vocal protesting family member.   Retaliation for protest is swift for not only the protester but the victim as well.

The Statutory authorization for guardianship recognizes that guardianship is not benign, but an active intrusion on the core Rights of American citizenship of a targeted elderly or disabled person.   The guardian is thusly delegated only those rights which are absolutely necessary to reasonably accommodate the deficiencies that the disability has created in the ward.    In this regard the Court is only able to obtain jurisdiction when and if a petitioner who alleges a disability can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the ward has a disabling disability that needs reasonable accommodation as a starting point.    The petitioner must prove the disability and its extent and nature.   Then and only then can to court determine who, if anyone, should address the disability and manner in which it is to be addressed.

Corrupt Judges and their appointees regularly ignore the Constitutional protections afforded by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment and ravage the estate with generous remunerations for a host of appointees and their attorneys.    In Illinois a guardian ad litem is appointed ostensibly to be the eyes and ears of the Court.    In the Sykes case Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern were appointed.   They refused to report to the Court a large number of emergency room trips by Mary Sykes including one that the plenary guardian admitted was caused by neglect.    In point of fact it is fair to suggest that they and Attorney Peter Schmiedel acted as a cadre of attorneys for the plenary guardian.   In an effort to prevent me from investigating the Sykes case they filed a Sanction Petition against me knowing that the Court had no jurisdiction over me.    The corrupt judge entered the sanction finding against having actual knowledge of a lack of jurisdiction.    (I had to address the matter before the Appellate Court of Illinois to vacate the sanction).    In the Gore case, Guardian ad Litem Miriam Solo has been accused of orchestrating the appointment of a plenary guardian who was herself disabled and had a guardian appointed for herself.    (Gore is the case in which 1.5 million dollars disappeared and Mrs. Gore’s teeth were prospected for their Gold filings.)

The key in just about every case is the isolation of the elderly and/or disabled victim from their prior lives.     The most common excuse accepted by the Court for this act of abuse is that certain protesting members of the victims’ family are agitating the disabled and elderly victim.    The Court then in horror enters orders that restrict contact between the loving family and the elderly or disabled victim.   Thus, when a Barbara Stone observed the horror that had befallen her mother she was ripe to be charged with bogus criminal conduct that the Court knew or should have known was not only a violation of Federal and State law, but a crime against humanity.     Cynthia Farenga complained that Mary Sykes was agitated after talking to her younger daughter.    Similarly, excuses were found of a similar nature to prevent Mary’s younger siblings from even having telephone contact.   Ditto in the Gore case and hundreds (if not thousands) of others.

Agitation of the elderly or disabled victim is an interesting concept.     Why would an elderly or disabled person not be agitated by being separated from his/her family, friends and prior life?    The elderly person might have a bit of a hearing loss and even a bit of memory loss, but, to lose one’s freedom and be subject to the whim and caprice of a 3 ^rd person is quite a devastating situation.   Reasonable accommodation for a hearing loss is not appointment to two guardian ad litem, a plenary guardian, and rape of the estate and the incarceration of the elderly person – it is a hearing aid!

A basic concept of human existence is “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”     Thus, it is not unusual that medications have side effects.    One of the most common side effects is a malady that interferes with some prior activity.    Pain, memory loss, and other intrusive side effects are all together more common to the aging population.     It is indeed an agitating event to recognize that you lost your freedom because you took a prescribed medication and the cure is worse than the disease.

To give you an example of the side effects work.    Several decades ago, I had a corneal transplant.   To ward off rejection I was given a commonly used medication.    Among the side effects listed on the label of the medication was manic behavior.    Another was Depressive behavior.     For about a month the drug had no visible side effects and then very manic behavior set in.    I was happy as lark!    Pollyanna had nothing on me; however, without warning and extremely suddenly I woke up one morning thinking of suicide.   Fortunately for me I recognized that something was wrong and got off the medication.    The termination of the medication restored me to the equilibrium that I enjoyed prior.     Had I not been shocked by the fact that I had an episode that was foreign to me – such could have been an excuse to elder cleanse me.    You can bet your bottom dollar I would have been agitated!

Nevertheless the corrupt judges are ignoring the facts and in most cases not holding the type of hearings that are necessary to determine if 1) there is a disability that needs attention and 2) the extent and nature of the disability.     It is tragic that there are judges who are so corrupt that they do not take their responsibilities seriously due either to incompetence or unauthorized remuneration.   It is tragic that these judges appoint as guardians their cronies to positions that inherently deprive the elderly and the disabled of their constitutionally guaranteed rights, privileges and immunities for profit.    It is even more tragic that there are lawyer disciplinary groups such as the Illinois Attorney Registration and Distortion Commission administered by Jerome Larkin that openly and notoriously obstruct justice, aid and abet, and act in concert with the miscreants in the quest for pecuniary wealth of the elderly and disabled.    It is tragic that health care funds are being stolen from Medicaid, Medicare and other State and Federal programs by these individuals.

The Holocaust directed at the elderly and the disabled cannot be effective if the Court enforce the Constitutional limitations on guardianship and the directives of the Americans with Disabilities Act.     The facade created by the disreputable for profit guardians and their corrupt fellows of needing to isolate the elderly and the disabled because family agitates the victim has to be addressed as a ‘red flag!’ depicting the discrimination of elder cleansing.

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

Here is the article, and here is my response

When Can You Be Sued For Introducing Copyrighted Works At Trial? Almost Never, But Plaintiffs Keep Trying

I asked to post in  nutshell, 1) the ARDC also infringed the copryights of Janet Phelan and Gloria Sykes who are award winning journalists and JP already has her book out “Exile” and the ARDC never bought a copy of that; 2) others have posted not expecting or giving the ARDC perission to use their creative writings either.

How do you explain the fact that these published and non published authors had their creative writings essentially stolen by the ARDC?  They did not give permission.  The ARDC did not buy their books, nor did they promise to even buy a future copy of movies, books and documentaries?

Further, no case law reporter puts copyrighted materials on a website, but the ARDC does just that.  It’s not transformative.  It’s just theft.

The ARDC copied 8000 pages of my works, and the valuable works of others, not paying one dime to anyone. The N.D. Ill. Judge St Eve just rubber stamped what they wanted and didn’t give a whit it was nothing but theft.

Not a one of the authors–Phelan, Gloria Sykes, myself, KKD, Rosanna Miller, John Howard Wyman, Dominic Spera, Janet and Delores Bedin, and many many other abused in probate, were just not paid at all for their stories or writings, but the ARDC took them all–far in excess of what they needed for trial and without regard to the suffering of these individuals.

But the kicker?  This professor also put on HIS blog, 4 of my proprietary images put into a header.  I paid $700 for the artworks in that header and he just steals them.  Never contacts me and never asks any permission.

I get it.  He is at a big lawfirm, I am nothing.  I make very little money, I struggle day to day to provide free or low cost legal services to those victims of civil and human rights violations and probate victims.

The publication of his article, and the kicker to steal my little bit of intellectual property (book and paintings) is just like a further kick in the stomach.

Please visit his website and leave a comment that what he says is wrong, dead wrong, and the probate victims are opposed to the theft of their works by the ARDC and now by a megal legal firm that has money and power.

Joanne

PS —  You will note that I did not use the Foley and Hoag logo in this post to promote my blog, or their artwork.  Foley and Hoag are nothing but base infringers, don’t use them.  No morals, no ethics.

first some Halloween fun.  Now I used to make up masks like these for Halloween, but it scared the little kids, so now I just do “really strange” like a Katie Perry wig, silver skin and a sparkly blue dress and gold top hat and boa.  They giggle.  Little kids won.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/juliegerstein/33-totally-creepy-makeup-looks-to-try-this-halloween?bffb&utm_term=4ldqpgp#3t774ia

Next for something Halloween scary and real:

A flash grenade thrown by police in Georgia left a 19 month old toddler fighting for his life when it was thrown into the crib to scare residents during a “no knock” raid on a house for guns, drugs and cash.  The result?  No guns, drugs or cash.  Normal family–now with $1 million in medical expenses.

I hope these police officers realize that the life of one toddler IS worth stopping the “no knock” nonsense.

Any idiot can turn in a false report, and now it can be done by text and emails.

Please pray for this family and that our (idiot) legislators realize that “no knock” simply does not work. The judges aren’t careful enough, and the police don’t have a clue, but then again, do any of us.  If you’re going to do something dangerous like that, you’d better be sure that you know there are no women and children around and that the perp has an actual sighting inside the house and the perp is judged more dangerous than the lives of others living inside the house.

That was not done.  Now the taxpayers have to pay for a stupid lawsuit and this family is perhaps ruined forever?  The perp?  A nephew that never went to that house anyway.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mikehayes/how-a-meth-deal-and-a-botched-raid-left-a-baby-maimed#3t774ia

The venality of the situation defies description.  There was a time once when we valued the lives of women and children living in a home, now we have turned back into Neanderthals.

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Oct 11, 2014 6:41 AM
To: Eric Holder , Eric Blair , Probate Sharks , Harry Heckert , “J. Ditkowsky” , “JoAnne M. Denison” , Tim NASGA , Nasga Us , Matt Senator Kirk , Chicago FBI , “FBI- ( (” , Chicago Tribune , BILL DITKOWSKY , SUNTIMES , Ginny Johnson , Cook County States Attorney , Illinois ARDC , “ComplaintAdmin ADA (CRT)” , FOX News Network LLC , Bev Cooper , Scott Evans , Diane Nash , Edward Carter , ISBA Main Discussion Group , Fiduciary Watch , Barbara Stone , “JoAnne M. Denison” , Alyece Russell , RosANNa Miller , Robert Sarhan , Rabbi Moshe Soloveitchik
Subject: Remember the Maine!

Roseanne, I know you have been through an awful lot in your case, but what you sent is precious:

As many of you know, Janet Phelan is a trust fund beneficiary, and like many cases stuck with crooked lawyers in crooked courts, tens of thousands of dollars fall off of her accountings.

Here is her filing:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwVDVNVzhWeXgwQ2M/view?usp=sharing

As with other court room victims that approach Ken and I for advice, we tell them to write ASAP to the authorities (states attorneys and FBI) and news media and to the judges and lawyer’s disciplianary boards until justice is done.

But see the games they play with these issues and how it all appears to be rigged and tied in.  Why can’t Janet file without charge evidence of corruption and Fraud upon the Court by Attorney Eggbratten?  Isn’t this one of the most crucial issues today?  Integrity of the courts, judges and lawyers?  Is this a central feature of dozens, if not hundreds of blogs today?  YES, YES and more YES.

Allegations of corruption, lost funds and manipulation of accounts in probate should be given the highest priority by the courts.

see below

JoAnne

From: Janet Phelan
Sent: Oct 11, 2014 11:48 AM
To: kenneth ditkowsky , “Cifu, George” , “virginia.magana@riverside.courts.ca.gov”
Cc: Eric Holder , “JoAnne M. Denison” , Probate Sharks , Harry Heckert , Tim NASGA , Nasga Us , Matt Senator Kirk , Chicago FBI , FBI- , Chicago Tribune , “J. Ditkowsky” , SUNTIMES , Barbara Stone , Cook County States Attorney , ComplaintAdmin ADA CRT , Toni Eggebraaten , FOX News Network LLC , Jay Goldman , Janet Phelan
Subject: RE: Resending…RIP 1200177 filing

George Cifu in the Probate Division denied receiving your or my emails. Furthermore, after his senior gave me permission to email the file, George told me it would not be accepted via email.

Furthermore, George is now saying (in contradiction to the information I was given by his senior and also his supervisor) that I may not apply for a waiver of fax filing fees (the waiver form was attached to the pleadings and filled out according to instructions).

I was able to get the fax sent again late in the afternoon yesterday. I am not terribly concerned at this juncture whether or not they say they receive it or whether or not they falsely deny my filing due to the waiver issue.  They have violated so many laws here that a few more isn’t going to faze me that much.

Rock on in the free world,

Janet Phelan

---

Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 15:19:41 -0700
From: kenditkowsky@yahoo.com
Subject: Fw: Resending…RIP 1200177 filing
To: george.cifu@riverside.courts.ca.gov; virginia.magana@riverside.courts.ca.gov
CC: askdoj@usdoj.gov; joanne@justice4every1.com; verenusl@gmail.com; vahrh1135@aol.com; timlahrman@aol.com; nasga.org@gmail.com; matt_abbott@kirk.senate.gov; chicago@ic.fbi.gov; civilrights.cv@ic.fbi.gov; tips@tribune.com; jdit@aol.com; letters@suntimes.com; bstone12@hotmail.com; statesattorney@cookcountyil.gov; ada.complaintadmin@usdoj.gov; toni@eggebraatenlaw.com; writejanet@live.com; foxnews_7d7b711af105dca690ab56169c0ff242@newsletters.foxnews.com; jnjgldmn@aol.com

 Just to make certain that there is evidence of Ms. Phelan’s filing I am forwarding her documents from Chicago, and sending copies of the Attorney General of the United States, several blogs, the FBI, the Justice System and various news organizations.   I have also copied Ms. Eggebraaten.

It is time to stop the nonsense and start applying the core principles of America.   What has happened in this trust is deplorable and wrong.

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Janet Phelan <janet_c_phelan@yahoo.com>
To: “george.cifu@riverside.courts.ca.gov” <george.cifu@riverside.courts.ca.gov>; “virginia.magana@riverside.courts.ca.gov” <virginia.magana@riverside.courts.ca.gov>
Cc: “kenditkowsky@yahoo.com” <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>; “janet_c_phelan@yahoo.com” <janet_c_phelan@yahoo.com>; “janetcphelan@yahoo.com” <janetcphelan@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 5:09 PM
Subject: Resending…RIP 1200177 filing

George,

We just spoke and you told me you did not receive the email with the pdf of my filing for Riverside Probateattached. I am resending it from another account. Please confirm receipt.

Thank you,

Janet Phelan

541 708-3534

JoAnne Denison, Executive Director
Justice 4 Every1, NFP
5940 W. Touhy Ave, #120
Niles, IL 60714
Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Email me at JoAnne@Denisonlaw.com
Cell Phone 773-255-7608
Work Ph 312-553-1300 or 847-600-3421
efax 312-376-8842
See our website at www.justice4every1.com

Please note that this message may contain confidential or attorney client communications.  If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and destroy all emails you have received in both your inbox and trash or other folders which may contain same.  Thank you.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2014/10/nursing_home_chain_with_big_oh.html

According to an article found by Ken Ditkowksy in the Cleveland Plain Dealer: a$38 million dollar settlement for severe and grossly negligent patient care.  Bed sores, infections, malnutrition and dehydration–issues repeatedly brought to the attention of the probate courts in Illinois and what did Judge Quinn tell me just a few days ago when I brought up the continued hip pain of Allen Fracke, his drooling (indicating use of psychotropic drugs which are contraindicated in the elderly by the FDA), never explained hip pain and muscle wasting?  She said she was referring it to the Guardian of the Person! This is the same entity that has not investigated these issues for more than about a month now.  The 18th floor sure does have some strange ideas about who to use for an investigation (someone ignoring the problem or giving lip service to it in the past) and how to do it (hand the complaint back to the person(s) ignoring it in the first instance.

At least the feds are doing something in Ohio.  I hope and pray they do more from the reports I receive in Chicago and Illinois about drugging, drooling and keeping seniors from going home that want to go home.  But there is huge profits to be made from keeping someone in a nursing home, so our elders stay there–even if they never wanted to go.  (Sykes, Wyman, Gore, Frake, etc.)

Back to the article

from Gloria

http://www.ada.gov/5yearadarpt/iii_constitionality.html

III. PROTECTING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE ADA

The historical experience that Title II reflects is also documented in the decisions of this and other courts, which have identified unconstitutional treatment of disabled persons by state agencies in a variety of public programs and services. With respect to the particular services at issue, Congress learned that many individuals, in many States, were being excluded from courthouses and court proceedings by reason of their disabilities. A Civil Rights Commission report before Congress showed that some 76% of public services and programs housed in state-owned buildings were inaccessible to and unusable by such persons. Congress also heard testimony from those persons describing the physical inaccessibility of local courthouses. And its appointed task force heard numerous examples of their exclusion from state judicial services and programs, including failure to make courtrooms accessible to witnesses with physical disabilities.

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Oct 9, 2014 8:26 AM
To: Richard Cordero , GLORIA Jean SYKES , Candice Schwager
Cc: Tim NASGA , Probate Sharks , Harry Heckert , “J. Ditkowsky” , “JoAnne M. Denison” , Nasga Us , Eric Holder , Matt Senator Kirk , Chicago FBI , “FBI- ( (” , Chicago Tribune , BILL DITKOWSKY , SUNTIMES , Ginny Johnson , “ComplaintAdmin ADA (CRT)” , Illinois ARDC , FOX News Network LLC , Bev Cooper , Scott Evans , Diane Nash , Cook County States Attorney , Edward Carter , ISBA Main Discussion Group , Fiduciary Watch , Barbara Stone , Cook Sheriff , “Y. ACLU”
Subject: Re: Organizing talkshow hosts into a media force for judicial wrongdoing exposure and reform

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Oct 8, 2014 6:02 AM
To: Barbara Stone
Cc: Jeff Weinkle , Sam Sugar , “JoAnne M. Denison”
Subject: Re: adversarial proceedings

from Ken Ditkowsky and that investigation:

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Oct 8, 2014 5:34 AM
To: “timlahrman@aol.com” , “gloami@msn.com” , “JoAnne M. Denison” , Harry Heckert , “J. Ditkowsky” , Probate Sharks , Nasga Us , Eric Holder , Matt Senator Kirk , Janet Phelan , Chicago FBI , “FBI- ( (” , BILL DITKOWSKY , Ginny Johnson , Sam Sugar , Bev Cooper , Carolyn Bevins
Subject: Re: I made a new friend over on this housing blog —-

For some reason, Ken keeps on getting my emails returned.  Kathy commented it might be because he was reported as spam sometime, but I have no spam filter, and it only works sometimes.

We have pretty much gotten used to this sending the emails to 3 or more addresses to me.  It does not happen with any other clients, so…

from Ken

Kathy,

We know that the IARDC engaged a ‘black arts firm’ to copy JoAnne’s blog so anything is possible.  However, the addresses that seem to be blocked is that of JoAnne and that of Fox news.     

The Issue of “discriminatory” elder cleansing is apparently not a ‘hot button issue’ with anyone except the victims and their families.   The parallel is found in the National Socialistic fiasco of the 1930’s.   Benign neglect of the elderly and the disabled appears to be the new National policy across the Board.   Fortunately, life is like a Sine curve and what goes around comes around.   It just seems a bit depressing that we have to relearn all the lessons of the past every time around.   The American Holocaust and the War on the elderly and the disabled will have major adverse consequences.  However, we keep electing the same people so that they can continue to promulgate the pecuniary fortunes of the select *****.

I’ve been watching the governor’s race and cannot help but wondering when the diversion and misrepresentations will stop.    Everyone knows who the miscreants ‘working’ the nursing home scams are!    It takes absolutely no effort to note who has been engaged as attorneys for the major facilities (Burke/Madigan)    It is no secret that the operators literally vote for the nursing home residents delivering thousands of votes for the dominant party’s candidates.   It is no secret that the profit margin on most of the patients placed in these facilities is over 500% and under the table millions of dollars finds it way to ***** and then to the operators.   It is an open secret how the ‘money laundering’ works.   Indeed, law enforcement knows that there are at least three types of currency in use i.e. Cash, beds, and opportunity (such as being appointed by a corrupt judge to a position such as guardian).    ****

The Gillman case revealed the cash flow that passes in the form of referral fees, and how a properly placed guardian can generate for himself and the operator of a “facility” millions of tax free money.   Your aunt’s case demonstrates how effective and how deep the ‘cover up’ is and how effective the official “protection” of the criminal enterprise.   No low life activity is too nefarious to be used in the pursuit of the dollars!    In the Alice Gore case a ‘guardian’ (GAL) orchestrated that prospecting for gold in the mouth of a elderly victim.   

I could go on and on, but everyone has heard all this before.  The fact that someone has gone so far as to attempt to silence me is a good sign.   It shows that some is ashamed of the elder cleansings and his/her participation in the War on the Elderly and the Disabled.  

Thank you for your support and assistance.   It is much appreciated.

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

---

From: Kenneth Ditkowsky [Ditkowsky Law] <ken@ditkowskylawoffice.com>
To: “kenditkowsky@yahoo.com” <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2014 5:45 AM
Subject: FW: Blacklisted?

——————————————-
From: Kathie Bakken[SMTP:K_BAKKEN@ATT.NET]
Sent: October 07, 2014 5:44:44 AM
To: Kenneth Ditkowsky [Ditkowsky Law]
Subject: Blacklisted?
Auto forwarded by a Rule

Hello Ken,

I’m wondering if your email address or your isp may have been blacklisted and that would explain the issue with your emails failing to go through.  It happens when someone reports either your specific email address or another email address with the same isp as having sent spam.

Might bare looking in to.

And while the Probate courts are stuck on Strunk–a decision that says a Guardian can limit the ward from dangerous persons and has descretion in the matter, and which is always cited when the Guardian or GAL wan to isolate and drain in those funny business cases (read Sykes, Gore, etc.)  comes a much more reasoned decision from the 2nd circuit court of appeals.

The case is very interesting for those of you out there (Barbara Stone, Dom Spera, etc. who cannot see or are limited from seeing a loved one) and it helps court abuse victims like Roseanna Miller who wants a habeus corpus.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6066286202479918547&q=%22Gross+v+Rell%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,75,99,107,122,138,162,286,287,288,289,349,350,351,352,380

Good case quotes:

For nearly a year beginning in 2005, Daniel Gross, an octogenarian, had a conservatorship imposed for his estate and person against his will. He was kept in a nursing home for ten months, until a Superior Court judge in Connecticut, citing “a terrible miscarriage of justice,” granted his petition for a writ of habeas corpus and ordered him released. This lawsuit stems from that unfortunate series of events.

It is alleged that a probate court judge signed a facially impossible order that did not comply with the law; the court-appointed attorney disregarded Gross’s wishes to return to his home in New York; the court-appointed conservator forcibly kept Gross in a nursing home, against medical advice; and a nursing home housed Gross with a violent roommate who attacked him. The complaint further alleges that defendant Maggie Ewald, Connecticut’s Long-Term Care Ombudsman at the time, did not act on complaints about Gross’s treatment at the nursing home because of concerns about adverse publicity.

These allegations, if true, might make out a case against the defendants. However, Judge Thomas P. Brunnock, Conservator Kathleen Donovan, Attorney Jonathan Newman, and Grove Manor Nursing Home, Inc. (“Grove Manor”) have asserted absolute immunity to suit: Brunnock has asserted judicial immunity and the other three have asserted quasi-judicial immunity. The District Court agreed and dismissed all claims against those defendants.

The federal common law defense of quasi-judicial immunity applies to Gross’s federal claims, and the similar but distinct state common law defense of quasi-judicial immunity applies to Gross’s state law claims. Connecticut state law is unsettled as to quasi-judicial immunity. Therefore, we certify questions to the Connecticut Supreme Court on the state law claims.

On the federal law claims, we apply the multi-factor test for quasi-judicial immunity set forth by the Supreme Court. However, in this case, application of those factors involves unsettled questions of Connecticut state statutory and common law. Therefore, we ask the Connecticut Supreme Court for its guidance as to these factors. Upon receiving its response, we will decide the federal claims.

Quasi-judicial immunity applies only to Donovan, Newman, and Grove Manor. We affirm the grant of judicial immunity as to Brunnock

The pertinent statute requires the probate court, as a threshold matter, to give the respondent seven days’ notice in any application for an involuntary conservatorship. CONN. GEN.STAT. ANN. § 45a-649(a).^[2] In addition, the notice must be served on the respondent or, if doing so “would be detrimental to the health or welfare of the respondent,” his attorney. Id. § 45a-649 (a)(1)(A). The statute makes no provision for giving notice to the respondent other than by personal service or service upon his attorney.

On August 25, 2005, Judge Thomas P. Brunnock issued an order of notice of a hearing to be held on September 1, 2005, in connection with Limauro’s application. On August 30, 2005, the notice was served on Limauro. However, as the Connecticut Superior Court pointed out in the subsequent habeas proceeding, there was no indication that Gross himself ever received notice of the September 1 proceeding. The parties do not dispute that (1) Gross was entitled to notice of the hearing, (2) he should have been given at least seven days’ notice, pursuant to Section 45a-649(a), and (3) the order dated August 25, 2005, specified that Gross should be served by August 24.

A Superior Court judge would later say that Newman’s conclusion that there was no legal basis for objecting to the involuntary conservatorship “completely blows my mind,” that there was “[n]o support for it,” and that “it just defies imagination…. This was counsel for Mr. Gross and it is obvious to me that he grossly under and misrepresented Mr. Gross at the time.” J.A. 115.

On September 1, 2005, Brunnock appointed Kathleen Donovan as conservator to manage Gross’s person and estate. Connecticut state law provides that the probate court must require a probate bond and, “if it deems it necessary for the protection of the respondent, [it may] require a bond of any conservator” as well. CONN. GEN.STAT. ANN. § 45a-650(g). Donovan never posted a bond.

In April of 2006, Gross was on an authorized day visit to Long Island. While there, he experienced chest pains and was admitted to a hospital. According to the complaint, Donovan came to Long Island with an ambulance and insisted that Gross be returned to Connecticut. When the doctor indicated that this was medically unwise, Donovan nonetheless removed Gross from the hospital against his wishes and returned him to the locked ward at Grove Manor.

Gross alleges in his complaint that there was no reason to put him in the locked ward. He further alleges that Ewald, the state ombudsman, and Donovan, the conservator, were aware of these problems but failed to take steps to alleviate them. The parties do not dispute that Donovan obtained from Brunnock ex parte orders limiting Gross’s contact with family and with counsel; Gross claims that there was no evidence suggesting that such contact was harmful to him. We are very troubled 78*78 by one such order in particular. According to Gross’s complaint, this order restricted Gross’s daughter’s ability to visit him: the visits were required to be on-premises, only once per day, for no longer than one hour. Strangely, it also prohibits her from bringing “any recording devices (visual and/or audio) into Grove Manor Nursing Home.” The restrictive nature of the order, and the prohibition on the use of recording devices, gives credence to Gross’s allegation that there was a conspiracy to deprive him of his rights—and potentially, to prevent the exposure of such injustices.

On June 9, 2006, Gross filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in Connecticut Superior Court. A hearing was held on July 12. Brunnock moved to dismiss, making the (rather remarkable) argument that habeas relief was unnecessary because, if the Probate Court acted without jurisdiction, the conservatorship was void ab initio and Gross could leave Grove Manor at any time. The Superior Court granted the writ:

[O]ut of an absolute caution that somebody else may come in and file [an] appearance in this case, I’m going to grant the writ of habeas corpus[;] I’m going to find in accordance with the statute that he has—is and has been, since September 1, been deprived of his liberty. And at the time of his—of his appointment of the conservator of both his person and his estate, Probate Court lacked the jurisdiction on the basis that he was not a domiciliary and/or a resident of the [S]tate of Connecticut. The conservatorship is terminated as a result of the decision on the habeas corpus and Mr. Gross is free to leave here today.

Gross is asserting federal and state law claims against state officials. The doctrine of judicial and quasi-judicial immunity is, in the main, a creation of the U.S. Supreme Court with regard to federal claims and thus a federal law doctrine. The cases support employing the federal defense of quasi-judicial immunity as against federal claims. However, Gross had also pled state law claims against state defendants. 80*80 Connecticut has adopted tests for judicial and quasi-judicial immunity that are nearly identical to the federal law tests. However, the state law doctrine is conceptually distinct from the federal law doctrine.

The cases indicate that the federal common law on judicial immunities applies even to state officials when they are sued in federal court on federal claims. See Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 87 S.Ct. 1213, 18 L.Ed.2d 288 (1967) (§ 1983 action against local police officers and judges); Tucker v. Outwater, 118 F.3d 930 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 997, 118 S.Ct. 562, 139 L.Ed.2d 402 (1997) (§ 1983 action against New York town justice). We apply this federal test even when the substantive inquiry involves state law. See Tucker, 118 F.3d at 932

Once again, we look to Connecticut law to determine if conservators and court-appointed attorneys for conservatees are entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity, and, if so, under what circumstances. Connecticut law, like federal law, employs a “functional” approach to quasi-judicial immunity. See Carrubba v. Moskowitz, 274 Conn. 533, 542-43, 877 A.2d 773 (2005) (employing a test derived from Butz, 438 U.S. at 513-17, 98 S.Ct. 2894). Carrubba involved state claims (emotional distress and malpractice) against a court-appointed counsel for a minor child. Id. at 536, 877 A.2d 773. The Connecticut Supreme Court noted that Butz involved claims brought under federal law pursuant to § 1983. See id. at 542. However, the Carrubba court did not suggest that the test should be any different when state law claims were at issue, as they were in that case. See id. (stating that it was adopting the Supreme Court’s test for quasi-judicial immunity to determine whether attorneys appointed as counsel for minor children “should be accorded absolute immunity under [Connecticut] state common law”).

Therefore, we certify questions to the Connecticut Supreme Court so that it may decide whether conservators and court-appointed attorneys for conservatees may assert quasi-judicial immunity as to state claims, and the scope of any such immunity, as a matter of state law. The state court’s pronouncement as to those questions will be final.

Even judicial immunity, which provides judges with very broad protection, may be overcome if the judge acts in the clear absence of all jurisdiction or if he is not acting in his judicial capacity. See, e.g., Tucker, 118 F.3d at 933 (citing cases). It may be the case that quasi-judicial immunity may similarly be overcome: for example, if the plaintiff alleges that the actions a defendant took were discretionary (as opposed to in strict compliance with court orders), undertaken in bad faith, intentional torts, etc.

Plaintiff makes several claims against Brunnock, including violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, conspiracy (per 42 U.S.C. § 1985), violation of due process rights, abuse of process, and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. It is unnecessary to parse the specifics of each claim because the only issue on appeal is immunity. We affirm the grant of judicial immunity as to the judge.

“A judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority; rather, he will be subject to liability only when he has acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.” Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356-57, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978) (internal quotation marks omitted and emphasis added). The critical question is whether he had jurisdiction. Id. at 356, 98 S.Ct. 1099. However, there is a difference between exceeding jurisdiction and acting in the absence of jurisdiction:

if a probate judge, with jurisdiction over only wills and estates, should try a criminal case, he would be acting in the clear absence of jurisdiction and would not be immune from liability for his action; on the other hand, if a judge of a criminal court should convict a defendant of a nonexistent crime, he would merely be acting in excess of his jurisdiction and would be immune.

Here, it is undisputed that Brunnock had the power to adjudicate conservatorship applications. The defect arose out of the erroneous conclusion that Gross was a resident of Connecticut. This erroneous legal conclusion is insufficient to strip the judge of immunity.

For the reasons discussed above, we hold that Brunnock is entitled to judicial immunity on state law claims.

Thus, Brunnock did not act in the clear absence of subject matter jurisdiction, and he was not aware of the defects in personal jurisdiction, making judicial immunity appropriate. We therefore affirm the District Court’s grant of judicial immunity to Brunnock and its dismissal of all claims against him.^[8]

Gross pleads several federal and state law claims against the former conservator, Kathleen Donovan: conspiracy pursuant to § 1985, violation of his right to due process, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of fiduciary duty, false arrest and tortious assault, and false imprisonment. The District Court dismissed all of these claims, concluding that Donovan, as a court-appointed conservator acting pursuant to the Probate Court’s order, was entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. The District Court wrote,

Donovan’s argument to extend Judge Brunnock’s judicial immunity to her actions is a simple one as the law is clear and well established. Donovan was acting as an agent of the Probate Court, at the direction and under the supervision of Judge Brunnock. If Judge Brunnock is immune from suit, than [sic] Donovan as conservator acting as his agent or at his direction must be immune.

However, we are not of the view that “the law is clear and well-established.” To the contrary, as we read them, the statutes and case law in Connecticut do not sufficiently enable us to analyze the factors set forth by the Supreme Court in deciding when an individual is entitled to quasi-judicial immunity.

At the outset, we note that Donovan is correct: courts are willing to 88*88 extend absolute judicial immunity to those who “perform functions closely associated with the judicial process.” Cleavinger v. Saxner, 474 U.S. 193, 200, 106 S.Ct. 496, 88 L.Ed.2d 507 (1985). Those who seek this absolute immunity bear the burden of demonstrating that public policy requires such a broad exemption from suit. See id. at 201, 106 S.Ct. 496. The Supreme Court has set forth a “functional” approach to determine whether a particular individual is entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. The factors include

(a) the need to assure that the individual can perform his functions without harassment or intimidation; (b) the presence of safeguards that reduce the need for private damages actions as a means of controlling unconstitutional conduct; (c) insulation from political influence; (d) the importance of precedent; (e) the adversary nature of the process; and (f) the correctability of error on appeal.

Indeed, Connecticut law seems to recognize that, in certain circumstances, conservators can be liable for their official actions. First, a probate court is required by statute to require the posting of a probate bond if it appoints a conservator for the estate of a respondent. See CONN. GEN.STAT. ANN. § 45a-650(g). The court also has the ability, in its discretion, if it appoints a conservator of the person, to require the conservator to post a bond “for the protection of the respondent.” Id

For the reasons discussed above, the District Court’s decision is AFFIRMED in part and CERTIFIED in part to the Connecticut Supreme Court. We affirm the grant of judicial immunity as to Brunnock and the dismissal of the claims against Rell and Ewald. We also affirm the dismissal of the emotional distress claims against Grove Manor.

However, because there is no controlling appellate decision, constitutional provision, or statute in Connecticut that explains whether conservators and court-appointed attorneys for conservatees enjoy quasi-judicial immunity, we certify the following questions to the Connecticut Supreme Court:

1. Under Connecticut law, does absolute quasi-judicial immunity extend to conservators appointed by the Connecticut Probate Courts?

2. Under Connecticut law, does absolute quasi-judicial immunity extend to attorneys appointed to represent respondents in conservatorship proceedings or to attorneys appointed to represent Conservatees?

see the article here:

http://journal-neo.org/2014/10/03/the-dance-of-deception-part-two-the-us-holocaust-museum-caught-covering-up-reports-of-genocide/

I agree with the reporter, Janet Phelan that Hitler’s T4 program started with disabled, unwanted infants, then progressed to older children whom the gas chambers were created because they fought their own death, unlike disabled infants and toddlers, and after that, gas chambers were quickly adapted for disabled and then undesired adults.

Nothing was in writing, there was no documentation. And the T4 evil plan was not utilized in heavily Catholic areas.

It seems that the holocaust museums are just that–stone buildings waiting for another disaster where one human group enmass imprisons and kills off another “undesired” group.

It’s sad that it’s easy to kill off deformed infants and the elderly.  It speaks horrors of modern society.

Further, there is an old saying. and interestingly enough it is from the US Holocaust Museum:

Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps.

Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

So, should the museum delete that page if they do not speak out against those that falsely imprison, drain estates and then kill off the elderly?

Thanks for the great article, Janet