From: kenneth ditkowsky <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: JoAnne M Denison <JoAnne@justice4every1.com>, Probate Sharks <email@example.com>, Tim NASGA <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Nasga Us <email@example.com>, Janet Phelan <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Eric Holder <email@example.com>, “FBI- ( (” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Chicago FBI <email@example.com>, “J. Ditkowsky” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Matt Senator Kirk <email@example.com>, “firstname.lastname@example.org” <email@example.com>, Chicago Tribune <firstname.lastname@example.org>, FOX News Network LLC <email@example.com>, SUNTIMES <firstname.lastname@example.org>, ISBA Main Discussion Group <email@example.com>, “ABAJournal.com” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Candice Schwager <email@example.com>, KRISTI HOOD <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Katherine Hine <email@example.com>, Edward Carter <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Cook County States Attorney <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: WSJ Blogs – Ruling Upholding Offensive Trademarks Could Give Redskins a Boost – Law Blog
Date: Jan 27, 2016 9:58 PM
|I am more interested the Rule of Law that is expressed.
I would like hit the following as hard as I can, to wit:
The more I delve into this elder cleansing scenario the more reprehensible I find the corrupt judges, corrupt lawyers, and the corrupt judicial officials. The situation is absolutely amazing. How in America can public money be used openly and notoriously to promulgate the interests of criminal enterprises?
Let’s look at the Mary Sykes case as an example. The file is 09 P 4585 and is open to the public to view. No portion of the file is under seal, and therefore absent official cleansing by unauthorized miscreants the shame is in public view.
Service of process on Mary. It is an axiom that a Court must gain jurisdiction over a respondent in order to enter any order or judgment. (Even Jerome Larkin cannot misrepresent to the law to dispute that fact). Now let us examine the file.
Where did Mary reside when the Petition was filed? According to communication by Cynthia Farenga with Judge Connors, Mary resided in DuPage County and therefore, Adam Stern, a Cook County attorney, who lived in DuPage County was appointed as the 2nd guardian ad litem. The guardianship statute requires the venue be in the county in which the alleged disabled person resides.
Examine the file – the case was filed in Cook County.
Look at the Summons:
i. The summons that are all unserved do not comply with the statutory requirements.
ii. The petitioner tells a blatant untruth to the Sheriff. She gives the Sheriff instruction to serve Mary at a place in Cook County that Mary does not reside as by force Mary was removed from that place. Such is pure and simple FRAUD.
iii. This fraud is compounded as the petitioner claims that Mary cannot be served and therefore asks for a special process server.
iv. The sheriff wrote a letter denying that his office ever served Mary!By misrepresentation and another fraud the Court proceeded without a proper Sheriff’s return being filed that the proper summons was served upon Mary. Ergo, no jurisdiction no matter how the fraud is sliced up.
d. 755 IlCS 5/11a – 10 requires 14 days prior notice on the immediate family members of a competency hearing. No one even makes a claim that Mary’s relatives were notified at any time. See Gloria Sykes affidavit. The file does not have any claim of service of the 14 day prior notice. Under the Sodini case there was thus no jurisdiction. The 18 USCA 371 co-conspirators with Larkin, the two guardians, and the attorney for the miscreant guardian claim that the relatives knew of the hearing. Unfortunately, Mr. PS, the attorney for the guardian and the guardian ad litem admitted that there was no hearing on competency. Thus, it was and is a fraud on the Court to assert any claim of knowledge.
e. A hearing is required by due process. By its very nature, a guardianship is a judicial forfeiture of liberty, and property rights. Thus, under the fifth and fourteenth Amendments to the US Constitution and Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution a guardianship promulgated and executed without notice and hearing is per se unconstitutional. No matter how you slice and dice this situation the lawyers involved in this Conduct committed serious felonies. 18 USCA 242 conspiracy to deny a citizen due process of law has to be reported to the law enforcement authorities. To prevent the reporting is a violation of 18 USCA 4 and 18 USCA 241. Lawyers who disrespect their duty to defend the Constitution and obstruct justice or cover-up such unconstitutional acts must be not only disbarred, but punished to the full extent of the law.
i. Not only are the corrupt lawyers, corrupt judges, and all who aid and abet their conduct serious felons, but, their conduct cannot be tolerated or condoned.
ii. Under the Americans With Disabilities act, and 755 IlCS 5/11a – 3b the guardianship authorization is severely limited to a reasonable accommodation of the an alleged disabled person. Thus, to use the guise of guardianship to railroad a senior citizen into a guardianship – who may or may not be competent – THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS UPON THE PETITION TO PROVE THE DEGREE OF INCOMPETENCY BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE – brings forth the felonies of mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud (when the bank accounts are accessed) and tax fraud.
The frauds noted are all proven by the Court file in 09 P 4585. Judge Stuart was observed by Court watchers during the kangaroo proceedings brought by Larkin against JoAnne Denison fire denying under oath that she misused her Court jurisdiction to threaten Gloria Sykes in an attempt to ascertain where Gloria kept her own personal assets, and then on cross examination admitted to the criminal offense committed in her courtroom. The altering of the Court record and transcript by persons unknown – but believed to be public employees of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary commission compounds the felonies committed against Gloria Sykes and the Sykes estate. The theft of Ms. Sykes funds has not been resolved, thought Judge Jane Stuart literally fled the bench when her perjury was disclosed.
Law enforcement has not acted to prosecute the criminal actions of the two guardian ad litem, the guardian, and unknown persons. Nor has it acted to prosecute the ‘cover up’ and the 18 USCA 371 and 18 USCA 242 conspiracies to commit theft, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax fraud. Few criminal cases are prosecutable from probate court files, but, the Mary Sykes case is certainly one of them. Prosecution of Jerome Larkin and his associates at the IARDC for their criminal conspiracies will go a long way to restoring public confidence in the Illinois judicial system and respect for the law.
The guardianship cases and particularly Sykes lend themselves to a remedy that does not involve criminal prosecutions, but appeals to the public with even greater joy. For years the public has watched public officials from judges, aldermen, mayors, governors et al go to jail. Club Fed in many cases was a disappointment as the miscreant public officials actually found punishment to be quite enjoyable. They received three square meals a day, a clean place to sleep, recreation, and time to read, study and relax. It was akin to ordering a middle aged person to relax and enjoy life! Only the artificial stigma marred the ‘vacation.’ To the public this type of punishment was *****.
Illinois and the United States of America both are having pecuniary issues. Illinois is on the verge of Bankruptcy. Elmer Gantry cannot talk us out of the fiscal crisis. HOWEVER, Jerome Larkin and his cronies have been well compensated for their perfidy. The public would find it highly satisfying if the United States of America and the State of Illinois would just collect the taxes, interest and penalties due from Larkin and each of his co-conspirators. Larkin and his co-conspirators have no defense! Forgetting about the overt acts that Larkin committed; however, focusing on his 18 USCA 371, 18 USCA 4, and 18 USCA 242 conspiracies in the aggregate Larkin owes more than a billion dollars. The math is very simple.
The breach of fiduciary relationship is a taxable event. Ergo, when the guardian removed and took possession of a million dollars in gold coins on day one, she incurred taxable income of a million dollars. (She did not inventory a single coin and therefore every coin is charged to her taxable 1040 income). When another two million dollars (plus or minus) disappeared the Federal and State income tax on another two million dollars was due from the guardian. As co-conspirators, Larkin and his gang incurred joint and several liability with the guardian. Let’s add up the liability. 1) Tax on three million dollars, 2) 50% tax fraud penalty, and interest at 2% per month until 100% of the principal sum is assessed.
As Larkin, Black, Smart, Opryszek, Loftus, Sang Yul Lee, Splitt, etc. all conspired to aid and abet the theft and cover it up, each enjoyed equal liability for the State and Federal Taxes. Ditto for the theft of Gloria Sykes personal funds! It is quite clear that each of Larkin’s gang (including the volunteer panels that Larkin maintains for his kangaroo hearings) had a positive duty to access file 09 P 4585 or dismiss the attorney disciplinary charges for failure to meet the standard of clear and convincing. There is no immunity for tax evasion or tax fraud. There is no immunity for overt criminal action. THUS, the tax authorities have absolutely no problem in collection of the taxes. Illinois does not need tax increases – it needs tax enforcement!
We need to get the IRS to get their hot little hands into this mess. Larkin and his gang are in this situation for the money – let’s take the incentive out of the picture! Everyone is well aware of the criminal activity and sitting on their hands — let’s make the IRs and the IDR into heros!