From Dan Devine–an article on protecting seniors

Protection of elder rights 24 hours a day

By Richard Devine
Cook County State’s Attorney
Our job as prosecutors isn’t always easy. We not only deal with heartbreaking violent crimes, we also run across clever con artists who deliberately target victims because they’re elderly or vulnerable. We’ve seen caretakers who mistreat their charges pitifully—and steal from them in the meantime. We’ve seen cold-hearted cases of financial exploitation. And we’ve seen home repair fraud schemes that operate almost like corporate firms. A recent Sun-Times series outlined the kinds of crimes I’m talking about. I’m sure some of you read it. If you did, you learned that what we handle isn’t often pleasant. The cases are sometimes pathetic, and sometimes our work is tragically sad.
Recently, though, I had an unusual task — much nicer than the normal routine. This time, it was my job to hand out money. Let me tell you about it. It involved a case that had more than 100 victims. The victims were all elderly, and none of them were rich. But each had made at least one solid investment in their lives: they each owned a home.
As I said, they weren’t rich. Their houses were often small and deteriorating. Some of these men and women had lived in their homes for decades. Their houses didn’t look like much, but they were the only real assets these people had. And then those homes became the target for a clever ring of con men.
The con artists worked out of two companies. One was Senior Citizens Remodeling, Inc. The other was the Senior Income Reverse Mortgage Corporation. They approached homeowners one by one and convinced them that they could improve the value of their homes. The sales people were well spoken, sophisticated and persuasive. They spoke of new roofs, brand new garages, new electrical and plumbing systems. They convinced the victims to take part in a federally funded “Reverse Mortgage” program. That program allowed the homeowners to borrow against the equity in their homes.
Then, when the loan checks came, the con artists stepped in and took the money up front. They promised to do repairs and renovations. They promised to make things better and increase the worth of the old homes. But they never showed up to do the work. Or if they did, they often did the jobs only halfway, or worse.
The owners were trusting. At first, they thought they were making a smart move. Slowly they learned they were wrong. They started calling the company, again and again and again. They did what they could, but they got nowhere. To their detriment, they had believed the promises and they were left with nothing. There was another part to the scam.
When the mortgage company arranged the loans, they charged lender fees that were out of line and above federal limits. In most cases, the victims never even knew it. But I’m pleased to tell you that that’s not the end to the story. When we got wind of the con, our office went to work. We took action against both the remodeling company and the mortgage company they worked with. After long months of legal work, we reached a settlement with the mortgage company early last year. That settlement for $200,000 was paid.
Then, later in the year, we reached a settlement with the remodeling company, too. The scam company was ordered to pay full restitution to its victims, and $50,000 in fines on top of that. After that, our office had another job to do. We sorted through the evidence to try to find all the homeowners. By the time it was over, we’d found 164 elderly people who’d fallen victim to the cold-hearted scam. Next, we had to figure out how much money the con artists scammed from each one. In many cases, it amounted to thousands of dollars. The best part came last.
Last month, it was my job to start giving the money back. That was a pleasant task. We got a lot of smiles and a lot of thank you’s. One man, who is 82 years old, joked about it. He told me he didn’t like the scam companies, and was glad to see them go out of business. “I like YOUR company,” he told me.
Of course, our office isn’t exactly a company. But we try to operate in a business-like way. And we try, whenever we can, to protect the vulnerable and the elderly. To do so, we’ve taken up new legal tools and a new system of organization. Three years ago, we reorganized. We created a special “Seniors and Persons with Disabilities Division” made up of experienced felony trial attorneys. The attorneys rotate duty so that someone is on call 24 hours a day.
These specialized prosecutors handle their cases vertically. That means they go to work when a call comes in from police and work the case from beginning to end, from the preliminary hearing, to trial, all the way through to sentencing. It may be a financial exploitation case, a case of abuse or neglect, or a violent crime. Whatever the case, we find that elderly victims are more comfortable if they can rely on one attorney throughout. It takes away some of the intimidation that courts can cause, and it’s worked. We’re proud to say that our new division had a conviction rate of over 90 percent last year.
We also have specialized personnel in our Victim-Witness program, who help guide elderly victims through the legal process. When it’s needed, they offer transportation and other assistance as well. Beyond that, our office drafted new laws to fit the crimes. We’ve written laws that help strengthen the testimony of older victims, and we drafted groundbreaking legislation that tackles identity theft, another crime that often hits the elderly. We’re doing what we can to protect the vulnerable citizens of this city.
As I said earlier, the job can be sad. And it can be frustrating, but not always. I’d like to finish by reading you a letter we got after we handed out those checks last month. This was from a man named Harlan Naas, one of the victims in that home repair fraud scheme.
“Thank you for making my holiday season the happiest in a long time,” he wrote. “I am age 81, undergoing cancer treatment, and had less than $100 to spend when the $3,200 check arrived.”
That’s why we do what we do.
Please remember that at the State’s Attorney Office, it’s our job to protect you. If you believe that you or someone you love has fallen victim to fraud or exploitation, please contact us. It’s our job to do what we can.
********

\

I just wonder where Atty Devine was when we asked the states attorneys offices to protect Mary G. Sykes.  Instead she was fleeced of hundred of thousands of dollars–which the attorneys said would be used for her care–but it went to the attorneys!   She was guardianized and railroaded into this “crime” without due process-no evidence of service of process with Sheriff Dart and it was a done deal with Adam Stern and Cynthis Farenga and all Mary’s rights were gone, she was stripped of her home, her nearly $1 million in valuable coins (and discovery was suprressed on those at my trial and by the probate court whenever the GAL’s Stern and Farenga said so, or Harvey Waller or Peter Schmeidel said so.  My trial was a joke with the Tribunal believing every dumb thing out of the mouths of Judge Jane Louis Stuart (who lied on the stand and was subsequently forced in the sudden retirement, likely by the FBI), now Aicha MacCarthy who was on the bench on this case when Mary G Sykes was narcoticed to death, placed in hospice and on drugs despite being a staunch Roman Catholic who put in her last POA to prolong her life by all means.

Where is the hue and outcry over the death of one lone woman from Norwood Park neighborhood in Chicago, her home sold by the probate flying monkeys for pennies on the dollar, stripped of her all her rights, isolated from 20+ former friends and family.

I understand that the Catherine Falk Organization is getting the Aging Parental Reunification Law passed in Utah right now, please pray for them to get this done.  I believe in California it is on the Gov’s desk for signature.  Please pray it is signed right away.

In the case of Gloria Sykes, she is now dead, being narcoticed to death, no funderal, no announcements, no obituary, embalmed while the Guardian waited.  No tox screen, no autopsy.

What about the other seniors.  At least Mary has quite a few voices–Gloria, Kathie, Ken, myself and others–willing to go to the ropes and beyond for one little old lady we knew and loved well.  But there are others–Ms. Lipinsky’s mom was narcoticed to death after she plead with Ms. Lipinsky, a beloved daughter not to leave her with the evil sis, but Ms. Lipinsky had to, there was a court order.  Not long after her mom too was narcoticed to death “in hospice”, and the sis made sure there was no tox screen, no autopsy and no questions, a quick cremation.

please pray for the below bill:

http://www.catherinefalkorganization.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Peter-Falks-bill-NY.pdf

And if you get a chance, go to their website and show your support

Another good story to read is on the dangerous of psychotropic meds and how they are frequently used in nursing homes far too often and generally as chemical restraints.  Of course, none of this is legal in Illinois where the patient has to give consent to the use of such drugs, warned of the side effects and given alternatives, but it happens all the time, so please be aware and protect your loved ones.

http://www.news10.net/story/news/investigations/2015/06/17/45-area-nursing-homes-rate-below-average-for-the-use-of-antipsychotic-drugs/71258022/

Advertisements

Copy of Petition to SCOI for a Supervisory Order

Dear Ms. Farenga, Mr.Stern, Mr. Schmiedel,
Attached hereto is the Motion of attorney JoAnne Denison that was electronically filed by Ms. Denison (via my office) with the Illinois Supreme Court.
This Motion seeks in part that the Illinois Supreme Court order an investigation of the Elder Abuse/Financial Exploitation cases – such as the case of Mary Sykes in which sans jurisdiction a plenary guardian was appointed who is reported to not have inventoried a large number of gold coins and other valuables.
By the United States Postal Service  mail a copy of the document is being mailed to the ARDC as it is an interested party.
In the interests of justice and the interest of Mary Sykes and the other persons similarly affected, we invite you to join with us in requesting an HONEST complete and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes matter and in particular, the admitted lack of the service of the 14 day notices required by 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10.
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

From Ken Ditkowsky, as it was in 1961

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Feb 25, 2013 10:26 AM
To: JoAnne Denison , NASGA , probate sharks , yjd
Cc: states attorney , Cook Sheriff
Subject: Fw: Firing bad judges – NEWS: (Cook County) How clout keeps court cases secret

On November 28, 1961 I took the same oath that every lawyer in the State of Illinois is mandated to take.    A few days later I tried my first case in the Superior Court of Cook County and a couple of days later tried a case in the Circuit Court of Cook County.    In 1970 by the ‘blue ballot’ Constitutional convention the Superior Court merged with the Circuit Court.
The practice of law in 1961 -62 was quite different from what exists today.    Lawyers belonged to the same fraternity.    95% of us were friends and we had an interest in solving our client’s problems rather than churning their files and bankrupting them.    When a case came into the office, the lawyers discussed the case and determined what, if anything, could be agreed upon.  We then submitted the matters that were in issue to the Judge.   Most of the time the ‘Judge’ would cut to the heart of the issue and the matter would be further reduced in complexity.     The net result that except of very few cases trial and expense was avoided.     Oh, there were clients who would not settle for love or money, but, most of the lawyers could be said to have had an agreement to agree.    What we did not have was the ‘take no prisoners’ approach that exists today.
Yes, in 1961 were had corruption and some of it was blatant.    The perniciousness of the corruption was as bad as it is today; however, the big difference was that we did not have as many pious public officials and organizations fostering it.    When a court file was not open to the public, the lawyers, the judge, and everyone else knew that there was hanky/panky going on.     Most miscreants were not anxious to broadcast their “motion to fix.”     Most judges wanted no part in the ‘game’ and they acted accordingly.   There of course were a few who played the ‘game’ but the Chicago Daily News and the Chicago Tribune reporters made them very nervous.      A Sykes case as an example would have been addressed on day one – the guardian ad litem, assuming that they were innocent would have covered themselves with detailed reports to the Court.    As an example, Mr. Stern upon observing the extensive remodeling going on at the plenary guardian’s home would have reported this to the Judge and would have reported Ms. Gloria Sykes statement concerning that event.      The pending Motion for a Protective order filed by Mary Sykes would have disqualified the plenary guardian on day one, and 755 ILCS 5/11a – 10 would have been carefully observed.
Ms. Gloria Sykes reported the disappearance of the Court file in Sykes.    It has now reappeared – so there is hope that it is in the same condition that it was prior to its disappearance!
Mr. Mayor – thank you for forwarding the article.   Chicago is not ready for reform – we cannot even obtain an honest, complete and comprehensive investigation.   The two Chicago newspapers are apparently disinterested in the fact that senior citizens are being deprived of their liberty, their property, their civil rights and human rights right now in Chicago.     Mary Sykes has suffered for more than 3.5 years!
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

The First Amendment and Attys JoAnne Denison and Kenneth Ditkowsky

From: JoAnne M Denison <jdenison@surfree.com>
To: kenneth ditkowsky <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: The First Amendment and Attorney JoAnne Denison.

okay to publish?and many of these stories act as if these cases are MY grievances that I’m airing and they’re not. (Some of the news stories did get this wrong and said that I was petitioning for guardianship, when I was not, but many corrected that and said I only filed an appearance and then was disqualified because I notarized a document, and then a couple years later started the blog when the Sykes case drug on and was clearly without jurisdiction and then via the probate victims’ blogs I was finding a similar disturbing pattern of cases not following the Illinois Probate Act with large amounts of funds uninventoried, no jurisdiciton, etc.).
I am REPORTING these stories, I am calling for an INVESTIGATION by the authorities and by the ARDC because courts are acting without jurisdiction and the authorities are not investigating and they should.  The probate victims come to me AND you Ken and they wonder why they are not getting the basic forms of justice–due process, notice to all relatives so the court can be fully informed and appoint the best guardian, inventory of all assets and possible assets belonging to the estate.  Millions in about half a dozen cases reported directly to me are uninventoried and missing.  The family and legatees/heirs want to know why.

I am REPORTING on corruption in the Illinois courts so that it can be brought to light and eliminated.  The regular news does much of this.  Why not me?  Why not you?

Subject: The First Amendment and Attorney JoAnne Denison.

Ms. G___ S____ in an e-mail  furnished me with a list of some of the blogs that are carrying the JoAnne Denison story.    The attack unconstitutional attack on Ms. Denison’s First Amendment Rights by the Illinois ARDC is not unprecedented.   The First Amendment is often not held in high regard by government when it decides not to be transparent or decides to obviate the rights of a particular group of people.    Government with something to ‘hide’ or that is embarrassed by its own conduct is usually behind the miscreant conduct.   A review of the Mary Sykes case 09 P ____, pending in the Probate Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County  is clear in disclosing a quagmire of bad behavior by ‘judicial officials.’     In Sykes and in all of these situations, the victims are senior citizens, the disabled (with money) and their families.
It is our belief that the ARDC did not receive a mandate to suppress Attorney speech and therefore lacks jurisdiction.   The ARDC’s mandate comes from the Illinois Supreme Court and that Court is bound by the decisions of the United States Supreme Court.    The Alvarez, NY Times, et al decisions are clear in pointing out that ‘content’ based speech cannot be suppressed.    That is not to say that the same speech might under the right circumstances be subject to defamation suit, but government (including the ARDC) does not have standing to prevent the publication. l
In light of the history of Illinois and the 15+ judges who went to jail in the Greylord scandal and the number of Illinois high ranking political types that are in jail the ban on suppression of free speech is vital and a core basis of America.    The blogs who are reported to have carried the story are:
Ken Ditkowsky

The Stated Policy of the ARDC–DO NOT, and I repeat, DO NOT CALL FOR AN INVESTIGATION!

Yep, that’s it.  After Greylord and 2 Illinois governors sitting in club fed med, the ARDC is following along party lines and is telling both myself and Ken, go ahead, do what you want but never call for an investigation!  Senior are robbed, deprived of life, liberty,  property, forced to enter the worst and most dangerous nursing homes in the nation, BUT NEVER CALL FOR AN INVESTIGATION!

I don’t know about you, but that’s the lamest thing I have ever heard in my life. 

That’s what it is all boiling down to.  Apparently the ARDC is nothing but part of the official  CYA Illinois civil servant club.  They must have a lot of CYA in their computers and copiers, that’s all I’m saying.

So my 10 page complaint about censoring me and this blog, ignoring the relatives of Gore, Tyler, Bedin, Sykes, Wyman who are furious with the courts for probate abuse of their grandmas, are supposed to do just what?

In any case, Atty Ditkowsky and my ARDC cases march along.

See below:

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Feb 22, 2013 8:06 PM
To: Tim NASGA , NASGA , GL– , Steven D Schwartz
Subject: You are invited to join with us in our petition to the Illinois Supreme Court

On Tuesday I intend to file on behalf JoAnne Denison the Motion to the Illinois Supreme Court for an HONEST, complete and comprehensive examination of the “judicial officials” who the Illinois ARDC is protecting.    In Cook County the rogues gallery is believed to have at the top of the list such illuminaries as:   Miriam Solo, Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga et al.
If you have been allegedly injured by any of the “judicial officials” you are invited to request that the Court give you leave to join with us, incorporate by reference and make part of your petition the JoAnne Denison motion so that you can request the Supreme Court of Illinois to require the Illinois ARDC to actually do its duty and protect the public from miscreants who are reported to have engaged (and are engaging) in a pattern of conduct designed and reasonably calculated to deprive senior citizens of their liberty and property.
As Gore has 1.5 million, Tyler approximately 8 million, and each of the other estates large sums of money there is a real incentive for at least the taxing authorities to be interested.    A breach of fiduciary relationship is a ‘taxable event.’   This generates ‘ordinary income.’   The failure to report the income is tax fraud.   A civil tax penalty of 50% plus interest at 5% can go a long way to provide the revenue that the president has been seeking.    In the Sykes case the United States of America should after all more than 3.5 years should have income taxes due it of at least a million dollars.    Aiding and abetting tax fraud is a criminal offense and accessories during the commission of the tax fraud bear the same responsibility as the person responsible.
I do not believe that the Supreme Court delegation to the IARDC was intended to include helping them fend off the victims, the families of victims and a few assorted attorneys (JoAnne and yours truly) who keep raising this point!    JoAnne and I both are under the impression that everyone is equal under the eyes of the law and therefore, law enforcement ought to conduct an investigation of Solo, Schmiedel, Stern, Farenga et al and determine who is correct in their assertions.   In Sykes as an example it is very clear that Farenga, and Stern were appointed by a Court that lacked jurisdiction – that is most troubling!    Mary Sykes therefore has been denied her rights and property for 3.5 years by a court that lacked jurisdiction.     If your loved senior is in a similar situation – the time is now to join with us.
Illinois does not need another Greylord or Son of Greylord.   Two governors, and a bunch of legislators in jail is enough.   If the Illinois ARDC does its job maybe we can have our judges in black robes and sitting on benches deciding disputes rather than in orange jumpsuits in prison cells.   Just a thought
Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

What is the standard of the ARDC in free speech? Or, Where is my refrigerator for my Chilled Speech?

That is what I found in Ken’s case.  It was clear the ARDC panel thought that for a lawyer, the burden was on the lawyer to prove the statements were true by clear and convincing evidence and not the other way around.

The the ARDC brought in two miscreant, nefarious lawyers (according to NASGA’s “most wanted list”) who obviously lied through their teeth and said there was “nothing wrong” with the Sykes case.  Well, Sykes is on appeal.  I doubt that the appeals court would even come close to saying the appeal was frivolous, so are we lawyers all supposed to stand by and say nothing because that’s a safe position?  The ARDC won’t slam some time wasting 10 page complaint on our desks at the whim of the lawyers involved.

Think of the unfairness to the families.  They don’t want that.  They like my blog I have heard.

I think the ARDC is dragging everything out on Ken’s case and they might be doing that on mine too because if GJS wins on appeal, (which should happen hands down if the Ill. Ct. of Appeals does its job), we will both be vindicated we were in fact telling the truth about jurisdiction and the ARDC panel had bricks for brains.  I have the Wyman case too up on appeal, and that should be another case clearly lacking jurisdiction.

I believe therefore it will be up to the LAWYERS and the PUBLIC to demand that lawyers have the right to free speech and the ARDC will just have to DEAL WITH blogging.

I maintain a lawyer cannot blog and watch every word.  Further, what words are we prohibited from using?  What words should be “chilled” in put in the refrigerator?  What words and phrases must be frozen, never used and put in my freezer until hell obtains exactly the same temperature?  What do they want us to say?  And if the warm and cozy words and phrases they will accept and can be put by the fire are outrageous lies but it makes the ARDC attys feel warm, cooey and safe, what then?  Must we say them so we have something to say?

Monitoring speech and thought is not only near impossible, it is actually impossible.  SCOTUS knows that.  It’s clearly the slippery slope, the wedge with the edge, a falling star in a black hole.

What words, what phrases, what inferences?

The ARDC has not said.  In Ken’s trial, they seemed to not like the fact he was incessantly calling out for an investigation by the authorities.  Well, probably GJS was responsible for most of that, but still they never knew who was pounding Officer Pecks with 500 emails one weekend.  Ken clearly wanted to take the credit for that one, but I’m not sure.

Again, exactly how is the ARDC using its $450 annual lawyer fees and tax dollars to investigate and control.  SCOTUS says “there must be a problem to solve” if the state wants to control speech.  And, there must be a “clear solution.”  And finally both must be subject to “strict scrutiny” (which is actually saying “fat chance.”)  I see none of that here.  Just a whole lot of vague, unsolvable territory.  Sham proceedings.  Reverse standards of what Congress and SCOTUS has promulgated.

What solution can there possibly be in putting this blog into my freezer?

I can’t make ice cubes out of it, you know!

Is my blog a problem in need of solving? The ultimate solution: censorship!

On 2-20-13, I published a post regarding a most amazing case, Brown v. Entertainment Merchants–complete with dozens of quotes as to how under the First Amendment the government has absolutely no interest in censoring or regulating content based speech and that speech covers not only my blog, but apparently it can cover the trashiest of computer and Wii-Fi games and what not, ie, Grand Theft Auto (GTA).

From Brown:
Because the Act imposes a restriction on the content of protected speech, it is invalid unless California can demonstrate that it passes strict scrutiny—that is, unless it is justified by a compelling government interest and is narrowly drawn to serve that interest. R.A.V., 505 U.S., at 395, 112 S.Ct. 2538. The State must specifically identify an “actual problem” in need of solving, Playboy, 529 U.S., at 822–823, 120 S.Ct. 1878, and the curtailment of free speech must be actually necessary to the solution, see R.A.V., supra, at 395, 112 S.Ct. 2538. That is a demanding standard. “It is rare that a regulation restricting speech because of its content will ever be permissible.” Playboy, supra, at 818, 120 S.Ct. 1878. *** end of quote.

So is the ARDC saying that my blog is a “problem in need of solving?”

Now, as any parent knows, GTA and perhaps Postal has got to be about the trashiest, most obnoxious, detestable, despicable digital media games out there.

The US Supremes says this is “content based speech” and the government cannot regulate its dissemination to even children.

You know, this is the game where you get to rob whatever–a bank, a 7-11, a gas station, kill the clerk, pay for a hooker in an alley, beat her up or kill her, and you get points!  That’s right, points for evil deeds.  You can even get points for killing a cop during your robbery. (I wonder if they have demerits for feeding the poor, or donating clothes).

I digress.  The game is a parental nightmare and a horror show.

So my question is, why is the ARDC going after my blog and saying I cannot speak out against corruption, I am lying about it (despite the fact the court records are published here, the evidence is published here and the blog is complete in and of itself)–when the US Supremes have said you have to leave even the worst and most despicable of trashy video games alone–it’s protected speech?

Can ANYONE answer that one?

What if a lawyer wrote that game or portions of it?  Would the Illinois ARDC go after that lawyer?

What if my blog were put into book form and sent to the ARDC, could they draft up a complaint against a book?  Can they ban a book or discipline a lawyer in the US for writing a book about corruption in the courts?

Are we fast approaching the decline of our democratic, open and free speech civilization where the ARDC will start rounding up and banning books?  Will they have the Illinois sheriff do it?

Inquiring minds want to know.

In Germany in the 1930’s the Gestapo took away all the weapons from the Jews.  A Jew was shot on sight, frisked in the street and shot if he had any weapon–gun or knife.  When that was done, the Gestapo then went and rounded up Jewish lawyers in the courts and banned them from practicing law.

The slippery slope, the wedge with the edge.
While the US Supreme Court has clearly spoke, apparently not all lawyer have heard–apparently the lawyers at the ARDC have not heard.

A 2011 decision. The latest. Confirming over 100 years of free speech case law that I get to say what I want unless someone can prove it is blatantly false or made up–and even then, as long as it is clear it is satire or my imagination, I don’t think they can regulate that either.

What if Lewis Carroll were a lawyer?  Could he have written Alice in Wonderland, clearly making fun of royalty as pompous asses?

I still have a lot of questions that no one has answered.

Is the next step book burning?

 

Just so you know, Attys Jerome Larkin, Haspel and Opryczek, you are free to posts your comments here.  I won’t ban them and you can link anywhere you please.

I WILL FREELY GIVE YOU FREE SPEECH, why do you not afford me the same courtesy?