Tonight on Wrongfully Disciplined Lawyer Series–Atty Gene Wrona

From: Andy Ostrowski <> [Edit Address Book]

To: ‘kenneth ditkowsky’ <>, ‘Bill Scheidler’ <>, ‘Jeffrey Norkin’ <>, ‘HAR Justice’ <>

Cc: ‘Katherine Hine’ <>, ………..

Subject: RE: Justice Served with Andy Ostrowski – disciplined lawyer series – lawyers for judicial reform

Date: Mar 2, 2016 3:49 PM

Attachments: image001.jpg

Tune in this evening to hear more from Gene Wrona, who was on the show last year to talk about his disciplinary issue after he came across issues concerning altered court transcripts here in Pennsylvania.


Tonight Gene will tell the story of how he, like last night’s guest, Richard Fine, became incarcerated during his efforts to help a woman who got caught up in the criminal process in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, the home of my practice.  Please see Gene’s site at at 6 p.m. eastern time.

From: Andy Ostrowski []
Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 7:27 AM
To: ‘Andy Ostrowski’; ‘kenneth ditkowsky’; ‘Bill Scheidler’; ‘Jeffrey Norkin’; ‘HAR Justice’
Cc: ‘Katherine Hine’;……………………………
Subject: RE: Justice Served with Andy Ostrowski – disciplined lawyer series – lawyers for judicial reform

Very useful quote in our efforts:

 “No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,”

Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

Remaining questions from today’s interview with Ken Ditkowsky

The time that both Ken and I have had on the wrongfully “Disciplined Lawyer” series was simply too short to answer all the questions the viewers had, so below answers more of the questions received.

To: Andy Ostrowski <>,….
Subject: Re: Justice Served with Andy Ostrowski – disciplined lawyer series – lawyers for judicial reform
Date: Feb 18, 2016 9:57 PM
Attachments: unknown-2 KB
The most important point is true for not only me, but you too is that the charges made by the lawyer disciplinary commission are beyond the scope of their jurisdiction.    In particular all statements made by any citizen that relate to political or content related speech is protected by the First Amendment.     I cite Rosemond vs. Markham , and Alvarez as authority.

Rosemond is directly on point, and Alvarez pointed out that the statements made are protected even if untrue.    My statements are backed up by affidavits and the Court files.   As  I never was of record in any of the elder cleansing cases under discussion I enjoy all the rights of citizenship.   However even lawyers of record cannot be censored under both the Illinois and the Federal Constitution.

The foregoing not withstanding, assume that I was upset and called the Judge a ******.   He could hold me in contempt.   The statement might be considered an act and therefore  would be an exception to the First Amendment protection for the purpose of contempt.    The truth of my charge that the judge might be a defense, but, depending on my demeanor it might      Similarly if I overtly lied to the judge I might be held in contempt.    However,the Lawyer Disciplinary Board has no jurisdiction to act as a disciplinarian or censor of my speech.   They regulate conduct – not speech and their regulation is narrow or there  would be a deprivation of citizen rights of not only me but my client.

A Florida lawyer had a judge get all bent out of shape when the judge reduced a jury verdict. He did not hold the lawyer in contempt and therefore admitted that the lawyer’s behavior was acceptable.    The Florida Bar in an ultra vires action punished the lawyer and therefore violated the rights of not only the lawyer but his client.   The action of the Florida Bar was not only wrongful, but if a crime had been committed by the other side subjected itself to 18 USCA 371 liability.

In light of the Sykes case file in my case and in Joanne’s case our collective action was mandated by Rule 8.3 and 18 USCA 4.    

NB – Alvarez extends the Right of Free Speech to even untrue statements.    lawyer disciplinary proceedings require the commission to prove the misconduct by clear and convincing evidence.   Writing e-mails and letters requesting an HONEST INVESTIGATION is not misconduct – it certainly is not akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater.* 

Ken Ditkowsky

*That is, unless, as Ken pointed out, the theater is filled with crooked politicians, lawyers and judges, only then is this blog akin to crying out “fire” in that theater.

Questions from the listeners to Andy Ostroski’s blog:

Ken, I thought your interview was great this evening, and have received good feedback on it.  I did, however, in addressing the lawyer discipline issues, specifically, get the following questions submitted, which I think are pertinent, and think that everyone addressing their situation should address.  I am passing them along, and would appreciate your response, if you are so inclined:
What were the fact charges against Ken?   The stated charges by the ARDC was that I was defaming judges with untrue statements.   When I sent out an interrogatory asking specifically what statements they claimed were not true, they refused to answer the specifics.    One of the major problems they had was the file in the Sykes was refuted any claim that I was not telling the truth – thus it was not allowed to be subpoenaed   We also filed affidavits – the affidavit was ignored.
What were the code provisions?   I believe it was 8.2 and 8.4.   Rule 8.3 which addressed the issue and made my conduct mandatory was of course ignored. 
Did he get an appeal?    The Administrative proceedings were rigged the Supreme Court of Illinois and SCOTUS would not hear appeals.
What did the Disciplinary Complaint Say?   It can be read on the IARDC website
Did he have an attorney? I did have an attorney; however, on day one it was apparent that the fix was in.     
How can he prove that he was suspended because of his statements?   There is a letter from GAL  Cynthia Farenga to the the IARDC attorney who ultimately represented the administrator demanding such action – and the fact that the evidence concentrated on the fact that I made repeated demands for an Honest investigation.     Most pregnant was the question asked of me if I was repentant for making my demand directly to the Attorney General of the United States.