From Ken Ditkowsky:
Thanks for your thoughts Ken, and I agree completely. This is a
practice that just has to stop. While the courts routinely ignore cell
phones, tablets and other laptop usages, they have ONLY seized my laptop
and that was after a purse pet named Adam Stern whined about my
blogging.
The incident in which Attorney JoAnne Denison had her laptop seized by a Sheriff’s deputy apparently upon the complaint of Guardian ad Litem Adam Stern that she might be blogging is not only a chilling event, but demonstrative of the wrongful delegation of authority that is evident in Probate Proceedings involving disabled persons. First: Why should Adam Stern be concerned about the exercise of First Amendment Rights by a person sitting in the courtroom? Second: Why should anyone be concerned that a person keeping to themselves doing nothing disruptive or distracting might be ‘blogging.’ Third: why should Adam Stern have the power to prevent an attorney who is observing a public court proceeding from taking notes?
The problem in a ‘nut shell’ is the fact that there are people who act in a disproportionate manner when they are given authority. The Chicago Police Department and other law enforcement agencies has psychological tests to weed out these people as their potential miscreant behavior can and does create a clear and present danger to the public that they are to serve and protect. As I’ve noted many times there are guardians and guardians’ ad litem who are perfectly proper in their behavior and very diligent and appropriate in the management and treatment of their wards. However, as the September 2011 GAO reported noted there is a cadre of individuals who have and are taking unfair advantage of the elderly and other disabled persons who they are charged to act as fiduciaries toward. These singled out individuals are subjected to forfeiture of their liberty, property, civil and human rights by the actions or lack of actions of the aforesaid fiduciaries.
It is unfortunate that this small cadre of court appointed individuals usurps the jurisdiction of the Court and as illustrated by the incident involving Attorney Denison’s laptop are able to abrogate the First Amendment and Article One of the Illinois Constitution. All too often there is a delegation of the judicial authority to the misbehaving court appointed individuals and they become and speak for the Court rather than the judge. This apparently is what has happened in the Sykes case and similar cases.
Before the Court and the Judicial System is further embarrassed by another ‘greylord’ scandal it is very necessary that a full and complete investigation commence and any misconduct on the part of the court appointed individuals be appropriately addressed. In Sykes there is approximately a million dollars in un-inventoried property. In Tyler it is Nine million dollars. I understand that many law firms are closing their doors – it does not cover the legal profession with glory when the Courts and the Attorney regulators foster what amounts to legalized theft of ‘grandma’s assets’ and the evasion of the lawful United States of America income taxes due.
The seizure of the laptop is a symptom of the ‘cover-up’ of the corruption and delegation of the Court’s jurisdiction that the failure of law enforcement to conduct a full, honest and comprehensive investigation is fostering. Mr. Stern and Ms. Farenga’s complaint to the ARDC concerning the call for an investigation and the ARDC’s prosecution of me for making the call is not one of the high points in American jurisprudence. I reiterate my call for an investigation in the loudest voice that I can muster and call upon those citizens who believe that grandma’s liberty, property, civil and human rights are sacred to join with me in the call.
The incident in which Attorney JoAnne Denison had her laptop seized by a Sheriff’s deputy apparently upon the complaint of Guardian ad Litem Adam Stern that she might be blogging is not only a chilling event, but demonstrative of the wrongful delegation of authority that is evident in Probate Proceedings involving disabled persons. First: Why should Adam Stern be concerned about the exercise of First Amendment Rights by a person sitting in the courtroom? Second: Why should anyone be concerned that a person keeping to themselves doing nothing disruptive or distracting might be ‘blogging.’ Third: why should Adam Stern have the power to prevent an attorney who is observing a public court proceeding from taking notes?
The problem in a ‘nut shell’ is the fact that there are people who act in a disproportionate manner when they are given authority. The Chicago Police Department and other law enforcement agencies has psychological tests to weed out these people as their potential miscreant behavior can and does create a clear and present danger to the public that they are to serve and protect. As I’ve noted many times there are guardians and guardians’ ad litem who are perfectly proper in their behavior and very diligent and appropriate in the management and treatment of their wards. However, as the September 2011 GAO reported noted there is a cadre of individuals who have and are taking unfair advantage of the elderly and other disabled persons who they are charged to act as fiduciaries toward. These singled out individuals are subjected to forfeiture of their liberty, property, civil and human rights by the actions or lack of actions of the aforesaid fiduciaries.
It is unfortunate that this small cadre of court appointed individuals usurps the jurisdiction of the Court and as illustrated by the incident involving Attorney Denison’s laptop are able to abrogate the First Amendment and Article One of the Illinois Constitution. All too often there is a delegation of the judicial authority to the misbehaving court appointed individuals and they become and speak for the Court rather than the judge. This apparently is what has happened in the Sykes case and similar cases.
Before the Court and the Judicial System is further embarrassed by another ‘greylord’ scandal it is very necessary that a full and complete investigation commence and any misconduct on the part of the court appointed individuals be appropriately addressed. In Sykes there is approximately a million dollars in un-inventoried property. In Tyler it is Nine million dollars. I understand that many law firms are closing their doors – it does not cover the legal profession with glory when the Courts and the Attorney regulators foster what amounts to legalized theft of ‘grandma’s assets’ and the evasion of the lawful United States of America income taxes due.
The seizure of the laptop is a symptom of the ‘cover-up’ of the corruption and delegation of the Court’s jurisdiction that the failure of law enforcement to conduct a full, honest and comprehensive investigation is fostering. Mr. Stern and Ms. Farenga’s complaint to the ARDC concerning the call for an investigation and the ARDC’s prosecution of me for making the call is not one of the high points in American jurisprudence. I reiterate my call for an investigation in the loudest voice that I can muster and call upon those citizens who believe that grandma’s liberty, property, civil and human rights are sacred to join with me in the call.
Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com
No comments:
Post a Comment