Evil Judges threaten a civil litigant for merely filing counter claims–I will keep you locked up–FOREVER

I really need to run a list of the 10 worst judges in probate and probate related proceedings for the year.

So far we have had ridiculous gag orders in the Randy Robinson case, I have had ridiculous incarcerations by Judges Broch and Flannel in central Illinois at the top of the list.

These two frick and fracks even imprisoned a PASTOR, for crying out loud, Pastor Harrison from Milwaukee for 2 weeks until even the locals could not stand that one,  and he was released.

But not poor Andrew Harrison and Lyle Harrison (a Kettering graduate with an MBA). These two insist on, of all things–Illinois and US constitutional rights.  And right in front of Judge Flannel and Judge Broch.

So now two transcripts (which have been altered and that will be reported to the FBI with an affidavit), are published below.

Again, these are on the top of amazing Corruption and Abuse of Power.  Note, they say I will NEVER get my license to practice law back and they’ve got another thing coming.  CORRUPTION IN ILLINOIS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.  And if the ARDC, the states attorneys and even to too great an extent the FBI, will do nothing about it, I WILL.  I will not be shut up about the abuse and MURDER of our elderly seniors at the hand of psycopathic judges and attorneys.

Here is the link to the first one:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwRldmTFpLSWZNWUk

And here is the link to the second

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwMFZER2VBVmYybjA

some highlights:

THE COURT: I had this Mr. Harrison, as well as
13 Andrew Lux Harrison, brought over from the jail earlier
14 in the week to explain to them — for at least Roger
15 Harrison at least the second or third time, I think the
16 second time for Andrew — how ehey can get themselves
17 out of jail. The Order of Adjudication of Indirect
:8 Civil Contempt contains a purge order and all that’s
19 required — as I did explain to them and I think they
20 understood — to effectuate their release from jail is
21 to ask the Court for leave to withdraw their
22 counterclaims in the other litigation matters both in
the Moultrie and Piatt County Circuit Courts. That’s
the only thing that is continuing their — requiring
their continued incarceration, and I explained that

will not effect my order of contempt in this case and
they will remain incarcerated, and I’d explained to them
3 they will remain incarcerated forever until such time as
4 they purge the contempt by withdrawing those
5 counterclaims and they refrain from any other filings in
6 violation of the Court’s order. They’ll be here
forever.
MR. STEIN: (what was the cour’ts order?)
Court:
They could not file without leave of
11 Court, without seeking leave from me before they could
12 file any pleadings in the Sixth Circuit, six counties,

Champaign, Macon, Piatt, Douglas, Dewitt, Moultrie, not
one pleading, and they directly violated that order by
filing in both of those cases counterclaims without
16 submitting them first to the Court and subject the other
17 side to defending or addressing those, and that was the
18 purpose of my order to stop that because of the various
19 and sundry, frivolous — and that’s almost fair, to
20 frivolous pleadings. Frivolous pleadings that these
21 people have filed, and I want them — since they were
22 here without a lawyer, I want to be sure that a lawyer
23 that understands the law on civil contempt can talk to
24 these gentlemen and hopefully make them understand that
25 this is doing nothing for them but continuing their
incarceration.

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

This judge still has not explained exactly how incarcerating someone for civil proceedings is not an Abuse of Power.  Or a psychopathic action.

What I don’t get is are people in Moultrie and Paitt such uneducated hicks they do not know or understand this guy is out of control, a pscyopath who incarcerates civil litigants.

Why not just take him out and shoot him, as they do in N. Korea for filing counterclaims against local cronies for stealing his family’s 1400 acres in the Harry Harrison estate and never inventorying it, never properly closing the estate with a sign off from all the heirs, legatees and Trust beneficiaries?

The case is ridiculous.  Too ridiculous for even a Grishman novel.

You can’t even make this stuff up.

They can change these transcripts all they want, but there’s still no excuse for jailing a civil litigant for filing counterclaims.

Illinois may be currently the most corrupt state and I have to put certain operatives at the OPG and the ARDC at the time of the list, but Ken, myself and Mr. Amu are certainly hell bent at turning that around, and there are dozens of court corruption victims out there who support us and assist us in bringing these inconvenient truths to light.

If anyone thinks were are no ones making no money going no where and we cannot possibly make a difference, they they obviously have never spent a night in a room with a mosquito. (Old African proverb).

JoAnne

Two new lows from the ARDC and Review Board–Banning Mr. Amu and Lying about case law

First, my decision from the Review Board today:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwbEhhNnNfVUN1aFE/view?usp=sharing

Next, the comments of Ken Ditkowsky

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: May 28, 2015 10:46 PM
To: “JoAnne M. Denison” , Probate Sharks , Tim NASGA , Nasga Us , Matt Senator Kirk , Eric Holder , “J. Ditkowsky” , “FBI- ( (” , KRISTI HOOD , Chicago FBI , BILL DITKOWSKY , Bev Cooper , “newseditors@wsj.com” , ISBA Main Discussion Group , “information@iardc.org” , “postmaster@iardc.org” , Federal Bureau of Investigation , Jay Goldman
Subject: Re: Banning Mr. Amu from the ARDC — questions?

Given the state of the Illinois Supreme Court and the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission filing anything with the IARDC is a waste of time and effort.     I read the opinion of Larkin’s kangaroo committee and was shocked that the lawyers on the committee intentionally and deliberately misrepresented the Alvarez case.     
What occurred was not just intellectual dishonesty – it was actual prevarication as to the ruling of the Court.
Ignorance of the Law is said to be no excuse, and lawyers are presumed to know the law.       In the opinion of the Review Board of the Illinois Disciplinary Board it appears that the Administrator and his kangaroo panel intentionally misrepresented the ruling in the recent Supreme Court cases that Ms. Denison cites including but not limited to United States v. Alvarez, 132 S. Ct. 2537, 2544-2545, 183 L. Ed. 2d 574, 587-588, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 4879, *16-18, 80 U.S.L.W. 4634, 40 Media L. Rep. 1953, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 468, 2012 WL 2427808 (U.S. 2012)  
 
In the most dishonest, disreputable, and wrongful manner the panel takes the following words are an exact quote from the Alvarez decision that the Administrator and his stooges misrepresent:
 
The Government disagrees with this proposition. It cites language from some of this Court’s precedents to support its contention that false statements have no value and hence no First Amendment protection. See also Brief for Eugene Volokh et al. as  Amici Curiae  2-11.  HN6 LEdHN[6]   [6] These isolated statements in some earlier decisions do not support the Government’s submission that false statements, as a general rule, [2545]  are beyond constitutional protection. That conclusion would take the quoted language far from its proper context. For instance, the Court has stated “[f]alse statements of fact are particularly valueless [because] they interfere with the truth-seeking function of the marketplace of ideas,” Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46, 52, 108 S. Ct. 876, 99 L. Ed. 2d 41 (1988), and that false statements “are not protected by the First Amendment in the same manner as truthful statements,” Brown v. Hartlage, 456 U.S. 45, 60-61, 102 S. Ct. 1523, 71 L. Ed. 2d 732 (1982). See also, e.g., Virginia Bd. of Pharmacysupra, at 771, 96 S. Ct. 1817, 48 L. Ed. 2d 346 (“Untruthful speech, commercial or otherwise, has never been protected for its own sake”); Herbert v.Lando, 441 U.S. 153, 171, 99 S. Ct. 1635, 60 L. Ed. 2d 115 (1979) (“Spreading false information in and of itself carries no First Amendment credentials”); Gertz,supra, at 340, 94 S. Ct. 2997, 41 L. Ed. 2d 789 (“[T]here is no constitutional value in false statements of fact”); Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64, 75, 85 S. Ct. 209, 13 L. Ed. 2d 125 (1964) (“[T]he knowingly false statement and the false statement made with reckless disregard of the truth, do not enjoy constitutional protection”).
These quotations all derive from cases discussing defamation, fraud, or some other legally cognizable harm associated with a false statement, such as an invasion of privacy or the costs of vexatious litigation. See Brief for United States 18-19. In those decisions the falsity of the speech at issue was not irrelevant to our analysis, but neither was it determinative. The Court has never endorsed the categorical rule the Government advances: that false statements receive no First Amendment protection. Our prior decisions have not confronted a measure, like the Stolen Valor Act, that targets falsity and nothing more.
HN7  LEdHN[7]   [7] Even when considering some instances of defamation and fraud, moreover, the Court has been careful to instruct that falsity alone may not suffice to bring the speech outside theFirst Amendment. The statement must be a knowing or reckless falsehood. See Sullivansupra, at 280, 84 S. Ct. 710, 11 L. Ed. 2d 686 (prohibiting recovery of damages for a defamatory falsehood made about a public official unless the statement was made “with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not”); see also Garrisonsupra, at 73, 85 S. Ct. 209, 13 L. Ed. 2d 125 (“[E]ven when the utterance is false, the great principles of the Constitution which secure freedom of expression . . . preclude attaching adverse consequences to any except the knowing or reckless false-hood”); Illinois ex rel. Madigan v. Telemarketing Associates, Inc., 538 U.S. 600, 620, 123 S. Ct. 1829, 155 L. Ed. 2d 793 (2003) (“False statement alone does not subject a fundraiser to fraud liability”).
 
This section is a discussion of the government’s arguments – not the Court’s decision.   Thus to  claim that the Alvarez Court carved out an exception to content related speech is clearly dishonesty on the part of the Administrator, his attorneys, and his rubber stamp panels.      Let me make the allegation perfectly clear, to wit:    The Hearing panel, the Administrator and the Review panel openly and notoriously misrepresented in their opinion the Law.    Such is intolerable and is totally unprofessional and unethical.     Certainly whomever wrote the opinion in the Denison opinion was aware that he/she was acting fraudulently,      The Supreme Court of the United States has clearly made political and content related speech to be protected by the First Amendment.     It did not single out untruthful statements and it is fair to say that the Supreme in Alvarez rebuked the statement that the Disciplinary Board advances with the words:
 
The First Amendment itself ensures the right to respond to speech we do not like, and for good reason. Freedom of speech and thought flows not from the beneficence of the state but from the inalienable rights of the person. And suppression of speech by the government can make exposure of falsity more difficult, not less so. Society has the right and civic duty to engage in open, dynamic, rational discourse. These ends are not well served when the government seeks to orchestrate public discussion through content-based mandates.

United States v. Alvarez, 132 S. Ct. 2537, 2550, 183 L. Ed. 2d 574, 593, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 4879, *32, 80 U.S.L.W. 4634, 40 Media L. Rep. 1953, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 468, 2012 WL 2427808 (U.S. 2012)
 
For the Record the Court ruled:
 
The Nation well knows that one of the costs of the First Amendment is that it protects the speech we detest as well as the speech we embrace. Though few might find respondent’s statements anything but contemptible, his right to make those statements is protected by the Constitution’s guarantee of freedom of speech and expression. The Stolen Valor Act infringes upon speech protected by the First Amendment.

United States v. Alvarez, 132 S. Ct. 2537, 2551, 183 L. Ed. 2d 574, 594, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 4879, *35, 80 U.S.L.W. 4634, 40 Media L. Rep. 1953, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 468, 2012 WL 2427808 (U.S. 2012)
 
The disgraceful act of Mr. Larkin’s kangaroo committee has reached new lows of dishonesty and corruption.    
 
Unfortunately, the Illinois Attorney Registration of Disciplinary Commission, Mr. Larkin, and those who act in concert with them are mostly lawyers and mostly paid by the public.    As public employees they commit their crimes in the course of their employment and very often are able to get away with serious criminal acts by claiming immunity etc.    The mantel of legitimacy hides many felonies; however, this opinion in the Denison case is so wrong and ethically challenged as to mandate not only an HONEST investigation, but the forfeiture of the licenses of every attorney involved in the prosecution.      Rule 8.3 requires lawyers to complaint of this type of unconscionable acts by lawyers to Disciplinary authorities.      8.3. is thwarted as the ethically challenged lawyers are the Disciplinary authorities!.       18 USCA 4 requires felonies to be reported to law enforcement.     This particular criminal act committed in derogation of the Civil Rights of JoAnne Denison is being reported herewith to law enforcement.
 
 
It is proper to the challenge the law, custom, usage, and even habits.       However, if Mr. Larkin and those he acts in concert with want to challenge a law it is respectfully suggested that the judicial authority of the Supreme Court of the United States should not be challengeable by blatant misrepresentation of the cases and the law!      Indeed, some honesty should be demanded of agents of the Supreme Court of Illinois! 

Next, we have Mr. Lane Amu, an unfairly prosecuted HONEST attorney who was suspended for three years for making honest statements about corruption in three of his cases–statements which were never denied by the judges involved, and all three judges reversed their decisions.  Most notably, one of the judges Lynn Egan, had to resign from her position on the Board of Directors of a corporate entity whom her brother-lawyer represented and appeared before her on behalf of that same corporate entity.  It is most interesting she resigned from that Board, but not as a Judge for her ethical violation.  Mr. Amu’s assertions are showing effects–but the effects are ignored by the Judiciary and the ARDC, but not the corporation involved.

So, what does the ARDC do?  Reverse his decision. Write an apology to him?  Of course not!  They ban him from filing motions with the Clerk of Court of the ARDC.
See the letter:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwbzg3THJZVmVmalk/view?usp=sharing

——————————————-
From: JoAnne M Denison[SMTP:JDENISON@SURFREE.COM]
Sent: May 28, 2015 4:08:12 PM
To: loamu@aol.com; Kenneth Ditkowsky [Ditkowsky Law]; Atty Barbara Stone;
Atty Candice Schwager
Subject: Re: Banning Mr. Amu from the ARDC — questions?
Auto forwarded by a Rule

This is interesting.  So many questions.

1) Why is Lanre Amu being denied access to a Government State of Illinois office?
2) Was there a court order issued?  If so, why was he not served? Who received a copy of the court order, if anyone?
3) What happened to Mr. Lanre Amu is Fraud on the Court.  All orders issued during a Fraud on the Court tained case are void ab initio.  Has there been a ruling on the Fraud on the Court issues he suggests?
4)  Did Mr. Jerome Larkin ban Mr. Lanre Amu from the premises, if not, who did this?  What were the grounds?
5)  Does not Mr. Amu have a constitutional right to gain admittance to the ARDC to file motions?

let me know if you have further questions.  I would like to publish.

joanne

And I have to add, this smacks of the underhanded tactics used in corrupt cases.  I can’t tell you the number of cases I have seen where a probate victim, for whatever reason, loses an attorney, then all victim’s pleadings are struck on oral motion, or they are ignored or lost and forgotten (Sykes, Jones, et alia).  This is not supposed to happen.  It is a constitutional right to be pro se and have one’s pleadings respected.
Orders to ban the filing of further pleadings are simply unconsitutional. They should never be entered, and they never are, by HONEST judges.  And HONEST attorneys don’t move to strike them simply because the litigant is now pro se.  An honest judge is supposed to protect pro se litigants and not summarily strike and ignore pleadings.
And Mr. Tim Lahrman, a probate victim himself, I wish to direct this new article to Mr. Larkin today:
The fight for freedom, democracy, civil and human rights and liberties for senior citizens and the disabled in the US is NOT over.  We will fight.  We will be vociferous.  We will ask those who lie, cheat and steal, take kickbacks, supress Democracy, supress the First Amendment to step down and resign.  We will ask the States Attorneys to do their jobs — or resign.  We will ask the FBI and federal monitors to step into the State Court system and do their job until we achieve justice and dignity for the elderly and disabled persons in Illinois and across the nation.
Justice is Truth in action.

From Barbara Stone–Her RICO and civil damages complaint

After months of being terrorized by the criminal enterprise in Miami Dade Florida known as their Probate Court and Judge Michael Genden and Attorneys Roy Lustig and Mark Raymond (I was also threatened with Sanctions by them, they filed a Motion against me, and I had not appeared in any case in Florida, so you can see how desperate they are to cover up crimes against Barbara Stone and her Mother, Mrs. Helen Stone), Barbara has filed her own Counter Claims in Florida against a number of judges, including her mother’s probate judge Michael Genden, and a number of attorneys involved including the Plenary Guardian and her attorney for all the abuses Mrs. Helen Stone has suffered at the hands of her tormenters.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwZjd3d0hmWW9fMkk/view?usp=sharing

Some highlights:

46. Other attorneys throughout the country are being viciously retaliated by exposing the
rampant corruption and racketeering in the legal system. Attorneys such as Christine Andersen, Esq., Joanne Denison, Esq., Ken Ditkowsky, Esq., Larue Amu, Esq., Jeff Norkin, Esq., Candice Schwager, Esq. and thousands of other honorable attorneys who are complying with their mandate to report wrongdoing that not only violates civil laws but is a criminal danger to society and the public are being viciously retaliated and their law licenses threatened and suspended and they face or have been disbarred for complying with their mandated oath to report. This is the only act that they attorneys are being retaliated against. This retaliatory is solely due to their attempts to report wrongdoing.
17

Barbara was encourage by several sympathetic judges in Florida to seek Whistleblower status.  There are now about a dozen or more attorney across the nation including the above, who have risked their law licenses, including myself and Ken Ditkowsky and Lanre Amu to blow the whistle on corrupt judges and attorneys operating a criminal enterprise out of Probate court.

When Mary Sykes was guardianized without Summons and Petition being served, when $1 million in gold coins went missing and the probate attorneys and court scrambled to quash all discovery, when her home was sold for 20 cents on the dollar, you know that Chicago has the same problems, as does Florida.

All of us–from Barbara Stone to Candice Schwager to Grant Goodman to Lanre Amu and Ken Ditkowsky, blow the whistle, do our jobs and prosecuted and hounded for protecting the elderly and vulnerable, and then they put the likes of Jerome Larkin in as Administrator of the ARDC to cover every thing up, you know there is something seriously wrong with Illinois and the nation.  No one is coming to our rescue or protecting us.

I now have dozens of low cost and pro bono attorneys without counsel. Who will serve them as I did, filing pleadings, asking that seniors and the elderly be protected, that they not be guardianized without proper service and notice to next of kin.

No one is protecting them and Jerome Larkin is running a cover up operation with his own malicious assistants–Melissa Smart, Sharon Opryszek, Steven Splitt (a professor of ethics at John Marshall Law School?), Leah Guiterrez Black, etc. all act in retaliation.  All pretend that this blog is a lie.

I could not figure out why they were all so upset when I mentioned the fires at the OPG and how there were several and they always happened on Friday afternoons.  Now I am aware that the fire killing 6 was first ruled a homocide by the coroner after investigation and that was changed, so why do they accuse me of lying?  An accellerant was suspected also, but nothing came of that.  CNBC backed off on their investigation and some of their reports on the fire have broken links.  I want to know why.  Patrick Murphy was never questioned, as far as the internet reports, but was made a judge.  I want to know why.  Other attorneys have told me some very shocking news–definitely reported to the ARDC, but nothing came out of that.  The attorneys at the OPG were protected.

Barbara’s complaint goes on to say:

Michael Genden with intent thereby extort Ms.  Rochlin to gain an advantage to threaten her to refrain from representing Counter-Plaintiffs mother. The Florida Bar through certain
of its member by written communication maliciously accused counter Counter-Plaintiff of offensesas part of a retaliation to stop her whistleblower against the Florida Bar by attempting to disbar her and deprive her of her reputation an her livelihood and her ability to earn income and in so has malicious exposed her to disgrace in her reputation with intent to gain advantage to force her to cease her attempts to expose their criminal racketeering activities.
245. Further they are trying to force her to refrain from doing what she is required under Florida Bar Rule 4.83 to do.
246. That thru the misuse of criminal proceeding Counter-Plaintiff is being extorted and threatened to silence her whistleblowing activities and gain advantage and have disgraced her reputation by forcing her to wear a public shackle .

Florida is amazing in that Barbara Stone, for speaking out against the severe and continuing abuses against her mother–isolation, drugging, the draining of her estate with churned bills and inflated fees, etc.–Judge Michael Genden, together with the States Attorneys offices has her on electronic monitoring.  She has had an ankle bracelet for over a year, and unless the Federal Court stops this entire mess, the concept of putting civil litigants in leg shackles for reporting Probate Court abuses may easily spread to Chicago.

Ms. Stone pays $350 per month to have a leg bracelet put on her so the miscreants can operate in secrecy and with impunity.

Barbara Stone is seeking Whistleblower status in Florida and with the Federal Court System.  She is claiming no ability to get a fairly heard case in Florida with all the corruption that is going on.  She is asking that her case get transferred to Illinois to Judge Blakey and consolidated due to his expertise in RICO (Racketeering and Influential Crime Organization Act–a statute that aptly fits the current mess of Probate Court in Illinois and Florida.

I have really no idea what the Florida Bar and the Illinois ARDC think they are covering up. When you lie, cheat and steal, it always comes home to roost and turns into a big, ugly mess.

Jerome Larkin has made a career out of protecting favored attorneys–those in the Sykes case– Farenga, Stern and Schmeidel, while persecuting Whistleblowers–Ditkowsky, Amu and myself.

In Florida, the Bar is going after Barbara Stone.  In Texas, they go after Candice Schwager for protecting Human and Civil Rights.  In Arizona, it is Grant Goodman.  In California, there is Richard Fine.  There is also Ostrowski and Bailey in Pennsylvania.  Clear across the nation, miscreant lawyers in bar associations are witch hunting Whistleblower attorneys.

Barbara did a fabulous job out of her Complaint (counter claim) against these miscreants and it should be used as a model for other cases.

Let’s hope that the Federal Courts will start to take this malicious mess seriously

JoAnne

My declaration to the Illinois Supreme Court regarding my Law License Suspension

It hurts only the indigent and middle class, which apparently they do not care about.

Our court system now supports an oligarchy and big business.  Campaign funds to judges are big business and apparently at the top of their list for influence and advice.

Please download and fill out the attached if you want something better, like TRUTH and JUSTICE in our court system, for a change.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwckRjSGZNdXlFeTg&authuser=0

JoAnne

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT
FROM THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION

In Re:

JOANNE MARIE DENISON

Attorney-Respondent
Reg. No. 6192441

Appeal case No. MR 27193 from

ARDC Action No. 2013 PR 0001

DECLARATION TO ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT
TO ALLOW JOANNE DENISON TO
REPRESENT HER PRO BONO/LOW COST CLIENTS

The undersigned doth deposes and saith:

1.     My name is Joanne Denison and my work address is 5940 W Touhy Ave, #120, Niles, IL 60714, and this is in regard to the ARDC’s current nefarious mission to take away my law license for merely running a blog that tells the truth about the fraud on the court and the lack of respect for the US and State Constitutions and the Illinois Probate Act in and without the Illinois Probate System.
2.           I believe it is wrong to go after someone who exposes only the truth.  I believe my blog, now with 80,000 views is extremely helpful to Probate Victims and their families.  The blog represents nothing but the Truth, and anyone who desires can post comments contrary to any fact or opinion stated therein.  There are nearly no corrections on the blog which have been submitted after thousands of post, and those were posted right away.  I believe there were only two corrections and they were very minor.
3.      I further believe it was a scandalous and shameful affair to go after Mr. Kenneth Ditkowsky and Mr. Lanre Amu on a witch hunt with kangaroo courts to suspend them for merely telling the truth about what every other attorney and litigant knows about the Daley Center court system–a court system that has the likes of Rosemary Roti (daughter of Frank Roti, a known New York mobster) as a court scheduler under Presiding Judge Timothy Evans and his two daughters who make $100,000 each as court schedulers.  In addition, Atty Lisa Madigan has not disclosed her true identity to the public, that she is the daughter of Joel Murray and her real name is Lisa Murray and that Joel Murray was a criminal defense attorney from New York representing major drug distributors in New York and then he bought, maintained and operated Simmons Air (later American Eagle) and quit practicing law.
4.      I believe the public is not stupid and would not stand for any of this, if they only knew the truth, but now only the Blogs publish The Truth and mainstream media Protects those who should not be protected.  The ARDC only protects those who should not be protected.
5.  I have made a list of all the pro bono and indigent and lower middle class clients that I have helped since Nov. 2011 when the Blog began, and I can barely keep track of them all. The phone calls and emails are endless with the problems and troubles in probate.  I have no idea how many, probably over 200 persons I have listen to and helped over these past several years.
6.  I am now suspended.  Dozens of clients, the vast majority of which are indigent and lower middle class have been now been left without counsel and I believe and demand that indigent and lower middle class clients should have representation in Probate–or wherever blatant corruption and gross violations of human and civil rights may be found in and out of the Illinois Probate Court system.  The numbers are endless and staggering.  Honest attorneys are threatened all the time in Probate that if they get involved, if they investigate, if they help the innocent, they will be disbarred.  The attorney miscreants and judges wheeling and dealing in probate are open and brazen regarding the harm and terror they inflict upon the innocent families and loved ones of Probate and court corruption victims.  The System is completely out of control and the Public is demanding something better.
7.     I am petitioning the Illinois Supreme Court to allow me to represent lower income and indigent clients because their cases are important too.
8.     I personally don’t care how much money I do or do not make.  The Truth and seeking Justice is far more important to me than that.  Mr. Ditkowsky and Mr. Amu and myself are the real thing, protecting the indigent and lower middle class who have had gross violations of human and civil rights and liberties taken away from them.
9.      The ARDC is not given any permission to post any of my creative writings, including this declaration.  They cannot be trusted to uphold Truth and Justice any longer.
10.     Jerome Larkin, Melissa Smart, Sharon Opryszek, Steven Splitt and Leah Black Guiterrez should be ashamed for what they do.  Jerome Larkin’s job as Administrator or Chief of the ARDC is not to protect the embarrassing secrets of judges and attorneys acting badly.  They were all sworn to uphold the US and Illinois Constitutions, human and civil rights and liberties–which they do not do, despite dozens of valid consumer complaints filed with their State Agency. They do not file Ethics Reports as mandated by the Illinois Ethics Act of 2009.  They are not ashamed they do not do this.  Mr. Steven Splitt, in particular, is suspect as a Professor of Ethics at John Marshall Law School.  I want to know how he can hold his head up and say he prosecutes innocent, honest attorneys before his class at that school.  His behavior is utterly contemptuous.
11.     I am further demanding that each of Jerome Larkin, Melissa Smart, Sharon Oprysek and Steven Splitt: 1) take polygraphs that they know I am telling the truth and the Tribunal assigned in each of the Ditkowsky and Amu cases and my case were kangaroo courts set up as a witch hunt; 2) take psychological MRI’s to show that they are not heartless and soulless psychopaths that have no regard for the pain and suffering that they carelessly and wantonly inflict upon others. (Please note that I, Mr. Ditkowsky and Mr. Amu are willing to do likewise, but you already know the results).  I want the results published, online and at http://www.iardc.org.
12.     Believe me, out of all of this, there will be a time where attorneys will have to take psychological MRI’s to show they are not heartless and soulless psychopaths before they take the Oath of Office.  We have seen the results of allowing such individuals to become lawyers and judges and it is not pretty.
Further declarant saith not.
I hereby declare that the above statements are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge; if called to testify, I would testify as to the same.

Respectfully submitted;

___/esign/joannemdenison/_____
April 30, 2015

From the younger daughter–take a close look at the file–it’s been fudged with. And not just a little….

I would estimate that about 70 to 90% of the Sykes file on appeal has “added material”–that’s right, stuff that was not there in the original appeal.  You can tell because the original appellate bates numbering system was first lined out with thick black marker so new numbers could be put on for the new numbering system.

Click on the page where you can find the “appellate records” on this website.  You will see that about 70% to 90% of pages were “added” and bear no thick black marker redactions.

How does this happen when court files are supposed to be inviolate and the ultimate in trustworthiness?

That’s right!  Is this crazy or what?  You will note that items that were copied and sent on the first appeal have a bates number that is simply blacked out by the clerk with marker.  I would estimate that 90% of items found in those first volumes DO NOT HAVE ANY BLACK MARKER REDACTIONS OF THE ORIGINAL APPELLATE BLACK MARKER meaning tons of items were “recently added” for this appeal.

How DOES that happen, Ms. Dorothy Brown, clerk of court!?!?!?

The younger daughter is esp furious over the fact the “notice of rights” to  Mary Sykes was sent to Naperville, once again, bringing up the question, WHY IS MARY BEING SERVED NOTICES TO THE WRONG VENUE from the Cook County Clerk of Court (logically, the case should have been transferred to Naperville), and why did Judge Stuart and Connors say repeatedly they “did not look at things in the file” and yet the notice to Mary says, of course, write to the Presiding Judge if there are any problems in your guardianship.

GJS has written to the Presiding judge over and over.  Mary has letters placed in the file asking (begging) for an attorney so her rights may be protected.  The court repeatedly ignored these.  the Presiding Judge was informed by GJS about these.

Why bother to send out these notices and waste good postage if the is only a lip service provided by the Cook County Court system?

It’s amazing that when all of these miscreants start to lie and fudge, again, I note that a 10 YEAR OLD GIRL SKIPPING SCHOOL CAN DO A BETTER JOB FORGING A NOTE FROM MOM SHE WAS SICK than Farenga and Stern can lie about the court having jurisdiction and the court strictly following the Probate Act.

Note to miscreants:  your (obvious) tracks will be exposed.  There will be many, many things you will not remember to cover up and many you will not be able to even if you wanted.

I want to personally thank Ms. Pat O’Brien, Chief Clerk of Appeals for bringing this serious file fudging and tampering issue to light.  Ms. O’Brien is doing her job.

What Ken and I want to know is WHY ARE WE BEING PROSECUTED AND PERSECUTED, when the miscreants get a “free parking/get out of jail” card?

JoAnne

Breaking news! SCOI refuses to intervene in my/our case regarding the ARDC and this blog!

Dear Readers;

On Sunday, for some reason, both Ken and myself were in the office and what did we each receive?  A notice from the SCOI (Supreme Ct of Illinois) that they had dismissed our petition for a supvervisory order.

Well, being the eternal optimist, I hope that SCOI might promulgate a new rule that attys 1) are allowed to blog; and 2) blogging regarding content based (non commercial) speech will be afforded the greatest and widest protection; and 3) commercial speech where lawyers claim only victories and no losses will require only one disclaimer on the front page “results not typical, consult a lawyer for greater details on your particular case.”

I talked to KDD, and he says we should just wait and see.  But I already have my Summary Judgment Motion file for when the ARDC allows dispositive motions (for some reason the ARDC rules are backwards.  In the rest of the nation’s courts, dispositive motions only have a deadline so they don’t interfere with the work load required for trial prep, and further they are welcome even at an early stage of the proceeding.  The rule was recently changed coincidentially when KDD started filing a number of dispostive motions in his case.  I’m just noticing.  I’m just saying.)

While my case was dismissed at SCOI, I hope they will take a long, hard look at blogs, esp. those that want to stop and root out corruption in the courts at all levels–and give us some well needed protection.

I still can’t get a copy of KDD’s transcript from his 2 day hearing were allegedly his hearing panel found him guilty of “misconduct” (but nothing official yet), and all for just writing one letter to Mary’s doctor Patel and on the reasonable belief 1) that the court lacked jurisdiction because Mary and the sisters were never properly served and 2) the younger daughter held a valid POA of atty granting her the right to allow KDD to ask for this information.  The rest of the accusations against KDD were for merely calling for an investigation–clearly protected by the US and Illinois constitutions.

Let’s hope that the SCOI will DO THE RIGHT THING and issue some good rules protecting attorneys — an especially those that protect attorneys that speak out against corruption in the Illinois court system and

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Apr 2, 2013 9:41 AM
To: GLORIA Jean SYKES , richard busse indiana attorney , JoAnne Denison , probate sharks , NASGA , “acluofillinois@aclu-il.org” , matt senator kirk , Janet Phelan , AARP , states attorney , Cook Sheriff , “michael@activistpost.com” , Michigan Advocacy Project
Cc: H Heckert , j ditkowsky , Ron Keller , Joseph Hosey , GLORIA SYKES , scott evans
Subject: Re: TRO — Sykes

 Unless I missing something very basic we have a scenario that has been approved that is very un-american  –  i.e. the Courts have abdicated to a small group of individuals their jurisdiction.   These people are allowed to seize the property and the liberty of any senior citizen they desire.    If any friend, relative, or other person intervenes that person is also stripped of his/her rights as an American citizen.   All statutory and constitutional protections are forfeit!    If that person happens to be a lawyer – disbarment or other disciplinary proceedings are commenced.
It is apparent that if Nasga, probate sharks and all the other groups seeking to protect elderly and disabled persons from being explited and/or abused by “judicial officials” and their cronies do not get together and seek an immediate remedy everyone will be ‘fair game.’
The Illinois Legislature has decreed that it is jurisdictional to require notice to be given to new (close) relatives before an individual can be guardianized.    The Courts of last resort in the State of Illinois have ruled that it is indeed jurisdictional however, Mary Sykes for 3 1/2 years has been denied her property, her liberty and her civil rights.  Gloria Sykes cannot even obtain the protections of the Bankruptcy Court, and when she is beaten up by the guardian’s husband and files a criminal complaint she is told to bring the matter to the probate court!
Ok – my friends – this is the Warsaw ghetto all over again!    It is also Birmingham and Bull Connor!  The distinction is that they pick us off one at time rather than in group, but it is just as insidious.
The fact that the victims are chosen not because of their religion or the race is not an exculpation.   The fact that we are not inclined to take up arms is not an exculpation.    The fact that we appeal to chorus and are all talk and no action is an exculpation and empowers those who would and are separating us from our basic American Rights.
I purpose that the leaders of NASGA, Probate Sharks, et al set a time and place for a meeting which we can be Syked (or whatever) and we can prepare action.   Our opinions are:1)  The ballot box is a weapon against the miscreants and those who support them.   2) The Courts are an escape value which have been reluctant to protect ‘senior citizens’ and their friends who are being victimized, but, they have to be addressed. 3) force of numbers.  Every one is a potential victim.   Senator Kirk – who suffered a stroke and is now recovering will face opposition in the next election  –  he is vulnerable to the miscreants.   If we can get him to examine the Sykes case if he is 1/2 the man I believe him to be he will have empathy and recognize – like each of us does – there but for the grace of God there go I.
(Of course if I was the guardian and I did not inventory a million dollars in assets you can bet your bottom dollar that the IRS would have filed a jeopardy assessment against me.    If I was responsible for an old lady’s teeth being removed and her estate being reduced by a 1.5 million dollars I would see so much of the States attorney investigators that my neighbors would be gossiping that I was having an affair with her etc.   however – with the Clout no one is interested!)
Right now the exploiters and abusers recognize that they have the ‘clout’ and we are all talk.   It is time that we are a group fight back.
The first step is to meet, the second step is to organize, the third step is to articulate the issues, the fourth step is to determine which issues are most important, the fifth step is to reach an agreement as to how to address the issues, the sixth step is determine the costs of addressing the issues and raising the funds, and the seventh step is to actually do what we say we are going to do.
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Where is Ken Ditkowsky’s Transcript? An inquiring public wants to know!

Dear Readers;

One of the things which you all know is going on is my Petition (via KKD) to the Supreme Court of Illinois asking for a supervisory order that lawyers can freely blog about corruption in the Illinois court system without interference from the ARDC which somehow finds the subject embarrassing, denigrating, that it brings “disrepute” onto the judges, lawyers and court system that engage in it with impunity.  They are permanently on the “free parking” monopoly space of the Daley center monopoly game.

All the while, the probate blogs have gone mad for years reporting story after story of corruption, theft, embezzlement, uninventoried assets–even murder and all the while looking the other way,

The chasm between the two worlds has to be the width of the average black hole in space.  The length of the Milky Way, half way to infinity.  But I digress into engineering, my first love.

I grew up believing in first amendment rights.  My mother regularly wrote the newspapers regarding any injustices she found in the world and supported them with historical information. She taught me from a very young age that slavery was wrong, equal rights for women and persons of color was right and correct, and there were many, many injustices to fight in a world of corruption and negativity.  Of course, we lived in Chicago–a regular hotbed of injustices to fight.  She was very busy, either reading or writing.  Getting published in the editorial section of the SunTimes was a highlight of her day.

And then along came Greylord and the issues in our Illinois courts were far from over.

And when I first walked into a juvenile court in Illinois and onto the 18th floor of the Daley center, I have to admit, I was quite shocked by the fact that a juvenile client I was representing was told I could not represent her because juvenile attys came “from a list.”  I provided them with US Supreme court caselaw on that and got an apology.  Then, in probate I found my first transcript either “had disappeared”, then it “was lost”, then it was “stolen”.  I asked the court reporter for the police report and all I got was silence.  I talked to the supervisor and he told me that was impossible, because they were kept safely under lock and key so that could not happen.  So I asked him for this transcript.  A few days later I got an apology, but he would not be getting back to me for some time soon–and it was already 3 months after the hearing date!  I never did get that transcript.  After a call and fax to the state’s attorney and US attorney, suddenly the case went away.  Just showed up in court one day and the judge told me she had reconsidered and all was fine.  Imagine that.

So, maybe I’m suspicious.  Atty Ditkowsky has respectfully asked the ARDC for his transcript after his infamous hearing in which I was not only dismissed from the proceeding (I believe it was a set up by Atty Stern and for blogging) and KDD assures me that at numerous times he “wrapped himself in flag” (metaphorically speaking), and provided an eloquent speech on how first amendment rights were assured the public, and even lawyers, and especially lawyers asking for an investigation where families had reported open and obvious court corruption or a wide divergence from rules of law, statues and procedure.

He assures me that he was asked the incredulous question “are you repentant for repeatedly calling for an investigation from the authorities?”  He assures me he answered “certainly not.”

As an US citizen, I want to see that transcript.  I want to publish and frame that answer.

I was once asked if I was repentant about this blog and would I stop (by a reporter).  I replied “certainly not, and I will not stop the blog or be shut up until I stop hearing (verifiable) stories of corruption in the (Illinois) court system.”  This quote (although she got it backwards at first), has been published perhaps a 100 or more times around the internet.

Just recently I asked Attys Jessica Haspel and Sharon Opryszek at the ARDC for the transcript from KDD’s September 2012 hearing.

Silence.

But they did manage to get the transcript of the disqualification of my attorney and confidant and dear friend Atty Kenneth Ditkowsky to the Supreme Court of Illinois tout d’suite! I believe it was 2 or 3 weeks.

How is it that some transcripts appear right away whereas others (this one from Sept of 2012)  the ARDC won’t reply and  doesn’t even have a speck on the horizon 6 months later?

Isn’t the ARDC embarrassed by all of this?  I mean, a continuing theme on the blog is that you have to bring your own court reporter to a probate proceeding because you can’t trust the official court reporters on the 9th floor of the Daley Center who lose, alter, destroy, disappear, claim the transcript ended at X, when you know a few minutes later Y is chock full of all sorts of stuff the court shouldn’t have done– or whatever it is they do with transcripts.  (And if the ARDC doubts me on this, I have my own story and about half a dozen more regarding this.  Oh, I know I will post all the declarations and affidavits on my blog so they can prepare yet another complaint about this alleging, once again, that I lied, and they didn’t, and they can’t be bothered to read all the affidavits and declarations on this blog).  I get that.  It’s embarrassing and inexplicable.

So here’s another greasy mud ball at the ARDC.  If you guys can manage to get the transcript of Ken’s (bogus) disqualification in my ARDC case sent off to the ARDC promptly and within 2 or 3 weeks, then just where is Ken’s transcript 6 months later.

He asked you for it.  I asked you for it for my case.  I know Ken is an eloquent speaker on human rights, civil rights, property rights, preventing the loss of these via a corrupt court system (oops! said that again).

So, the transcripts the ARDC wants get out right away (and I have to tell you and I will publish it), I don’t think this one helps their case, I do believe they have sniffed a few too many meth lab fumes or whatever they do just before they ordered and sent that one to SCOI, but the ones Ken and I want are long, long delayed.

Well, were they lost, destroyed, stolen without a police report, did you ask the court reporter to stop recording as soon as Ken spoke or what?

You guys can do this.  Explain away.  I’ve heard them all from the 9th floor.  Many probate victims have reported even more colorful tales from the 9th floor.  I would LOVE to hear the excuse.  I bet Ken’s transcript was lost, stolen, the dog ate it, the cat peed on it, the court reporter got drunk and passed out, — I don’t know. What new excuse can they come up with?

The citizens of Illinois are waiting for this one.

And sorry about the blog.  It’s one of those annoying things about the First Amendment. People just tend to publish all the stuff you just don’t want to hear, and especially when you ordered a copier with CYA, office space with CYA, a rug with CYA, a new filing system with CYA, and still, the darned stuff leaks out when people, esp. lawyers start asking questions.

And you know you want to get a gag order.  You want to silence us.  You want us to put our tail between our legs and creep away.

John Wyman called me today and read to me a blog comment where a lawyer said “good for you, I would do that, but I want to keep my (good paying job).

Well, I got some news for that lawyer.  Go take out a loan and buy a back bone.  Go get some cajones or ova or whatever it is that will get you to the side of justice and honesty.

Again, for the attorneys at the ARDC, Atty Larkin, Atty Smart and Atty Ospryszek:  DO THE RIGHT THING AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINTS AGAINST MYSELF AND KEN.

For Attorneys Stern and Farenga, DO THE RIGHT THING AND NONSUIT/DISMISS the Sykes Probate!

For Atty Sharon Rudy and Kim Timmerwilke McKenzie, DO THE RIGHT THING AND DISMISS/NONSUIT the Wyman Case!

There is no ultimate glory, laud or honor prosecuting and persecuting honest and ethical attorneys such as KDD and myself.

Quit your jobs.  Come work for and with me as we clean up the courts in Probate and Illinois.  I may be broke, I might not have food, heat or whatever, but I do what is right.  I listen to the probate victims and I promise to help them without money up front and everything based upon faith and good intentions.

JoAnne