January 19, 1998 Mr. Kevin lllia Court Services Administrator COOK COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT 2600 Richard J. Daley Center Chicago, Illinois 60602 Dear Mr. lllia:After taking 3 months to reflect on my letter, your letter dated January 7, 1998 is consistent with your conduct during our meeting -- it appears that you're paid to watch over court corruption, call it bad rulings, deny it exists, and pass the buck to agencies which are also known to ignore court corruption.
The focus of your letter, as it was in our meeting, is not on Judge Siracusa's improper conduct or the strange goings on in Probate Court, but on a letter accusing Siracusa of being a crook. Now, you say that Judge Siracusa received letters, plural. Is that a typo or has he gotten more letters? You are incorrect when you say that I didn't answer you at the meeting or in my last letter. At the meeting, I said based on the letter you showed me, you knew that Larry Kienlen and I were not the only ones who thought Judge Siracusa was dishonest.
No one told me that they wrote the letter. I told you that other people have said Judge Siracusa is corrupt, but I never claimed to have talked to every person who might think so. You're disinterested in knowing who made those allegations or investigating them. Your only concern is that Judge Siracusa is upset about the letter[s]. To avoid accusations that he's dishonest, I suggested you tell Judge Siracusa to conduct himself properly. Have you done so?
When we met, you said that everyone who complains to you about judicial corruption is dissatisfied with your response to them. Could everyone who complains about judicial corruption be wrong? For every litigant that complains to you, the A.R.D.C. and the J.I.B., there are thousands who don't know who to complain to, or who have no idea how corrupt the legal system is because they don't understand the law or go to court for their hearings. Those who complain learn that corruption exists because it's covered up by agencies and people, like you, who are paid with tax money, supposedly, to prevent corruption.
I told you that like others, I came to you because I, mistakenly, believed that you were hired to do more than just watch the corruption. A December 23, 1995 Tribune article states that you are the "watchdog over corruption" and that your position is "essential to maintain a 'sense' of integrity... ." Interestingly, the article doesn't say that you're supposed to prevent, investigate or stop corruption. The illusion of integrity doesn't satisfy litigants who expect real integrity,
You asked if the conduct of the judges and lawyers in my case was right. The dictionary defines "right" as correct or proper. From the record of my case, who would think the conduct of my judges and lawyers was "right"? Maybe typical, but certainly not right.
I filed a Petition for Change of Judge for Cause against my first judge, Judge Perivolidis, Judge Cusack heard my petition, stated that it was obvious that Judge Perivolidis was prejudiced against me and removed him from my case.
My second judge, Judge Siracusa, recused himself after I alleged he signed an improper court order -- it wasn't the first improper order he signed. Judge Siracusa recused himself as damage control. He knew that if I filed a Petition for Change of Judge for Cause, I'd prove additional improprieties by him directed against me.
Neistein, Richman, Hauslinger, Young & Rosen is the law firm that integrated fraud and litigation into my father's WilI, the subject of my case. The firm's bad reputation goes back a long time and includes judge bribing. During the Greylord investigations, Irwin Richman and former State Senator Bernard Neistein (the Chicago Crime Commission called Neistein "the Crime Syndicate's man in the Senate") were found to have bribed Judge Reginald Holzer.
I won't go into the conduct of every lawyer I fired, just the first and last -- their conduct was typical of the lawyers in between. The first, Michael J. Hamblet, was fired because he blew a statute, That's legal malpractice and violates the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.
The last lawyer I fired, Larry Kienlen of Chuhak & Tecson prepared the last improper court order. Kienlen told me that Siracusa's furnace was paid for by an attorney who appears before him. Chuhak & Tecson returned all of my retainer and told me to ignore their bills because I could prove that they committed a variety of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty on me. Chuhak & Tecson is regularly awarded probate work and are in a position to know which judges take bribes. After a media investigation called "Dead Giveaway", Thomas Chuhak, the name partner of Chuhak & Tecson (and Larry Kienlen's father in-law), was removed from his appointment as Public Administrator because he was giving away dead people's estates.
In your letter, you claim not to "cast aspersions on anyone's character". I assume you're referring to me saying that you acted like I made up the story about Larry Kienlen saying Siracusa takes bribes, I don't think you really believe I made up the story -- that's just part of your covering up for the lawyers and judges. Even you agreed, you couldn't think of a reason for me making up the story. If I'd filed for a change of judge for prejudice against Siracusa, I could prove a series of orders inconsistent with Siracusa's rulings and other improprieties. I didn't need to allege that Kienlen told me that Siracusa is on the take.
You claim you can't substantiate any evidence of wrongdoing in the courts. When we met, I brought a report of a court proceeding and a copy of the corresponding improper order, but you refused to look at them (and, I have others), You have so clearly demonstrated that you are supposed to cover up corruption, that I wouldn't waste my time offering to show it to you again.
I told you that another litigant said that he had the identical experience, as I had, with Judge Perivolidis and Judge Siracusa, He said they move you from one crooked judge to another. He said that he reported them to the State's Attorney (the State's Attorney told him not to talk about it -- right, keep it quiet). Jack O'Malley didn't bother doing anything, but then the State's Attorney has never bothered with corrupt public officials. In instances where investigations have been done, it's been by the Justice Department.
The State's Attorney, who is supposed to represent the People of the State, is now in the process of defending Aurelia Pucinski for "losing" court case records. Conflict of Interest?
Everyone regards the Judicial Inquiry Board as a joke. Last year, over 400 charges were filed against judges. The J.I.B. issued 4 complaints; two of those were related incidents. 400 charges against judges without merit?
It's obvious how the court system stays so corrupt. As a former F.B.I. agent, who claims he worked on Greylord, it's ludicrous of you to pretend there isn't rampant court corruption. If the Justice Department did ongoing Greylord type investigations, maybe we'd have an honest court system. Even the Justice Department was very selective about who they prosecuted during Greylord. It was obvious to everyone else, so who could believe that Chief Judge Harry Comerford didn't know the judges he assigned were corrupt? Yet, Comerford wasn't targeted during Greylord.
The Seventh Circuit Court called Cook County Circuit Court a criminal enterprise. It's the laughing stock of the country - its claim to fame is that it's political and corrupt. Even Jerold Solovy, who gets appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court to head "blue ribbon commissions" to investigate how to prevent court corruption, admits that judicial corruption couldn't exists if the lawyers weren't dishonest.
Mr. lllia, if you aren't going to write anything credible, why bother writing at all?
Sincerely, Renee Kalish cc: Jim Davis Internet Donald P. O'Connell bcc:
Copyright© 1998 by Citizens for Legal Responsibility®. All Rights Reserved. email: clr@clr.org Chief Judge Donald O'Connell page Corrupt, Incompetent, and Unethical Judges page Judges as Criminals page Return to Home Page
January 22, 1998