Does MSM Pervert the Truth? A Case Study
Recently, the Chicago Tribune threw its hat into the ring and published two articles on the widespread problem of guardianship abuse. Hospitals funnel patients into long-lasting guardianships, https://archive.is/20251123122805/https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/11/23/guardianship-chicago-hospitals/ The articles, while appearing on the surface to delve into this issue, now join other msm coverage in obfuscating the root of the problem and therefore its potential remedy.
Adult guardianships impact approximately 1.5 million people and generally target the elderly and disabled. Upon the stroke of a gavel, an elderly or disabled person loses the lion's share of his or her rights and all access to funds. In addition, the courts heavily favor professional guardians over family guardians, and the issue of the use of restraining orders placed against concerned and protective family members is well known. As are arrest warrants issued against family members who dare to try to remove the parent from the predation of the court appointed guardian.
We have previously seen coverage of this issue by the Los Angeles Times, the Wall Street Journal, the New Yorker and some other mainstream venues. The Epoch News and Propublica have also tackled this issue. However, none of the reporting makes any attempt to delve into the reality that fuels these cases--the reality being that each and every corrupt and questionable action by a guardian or attorney or referring hospital needs to be approved by a judge and that research into separate involved judges has produced evidence that the judges are being paid off, under the table, to throw these cases. And that law enforcement is doing the best it can to protect those receiving illicit funds from what has been termed "The Federal Bribery Club."
While on the surface the Chicago Tribune series, written by reporters Emily Hoerner, Christy Gutowski and Lisa Schenker appears to delve into corrupt practices that contaminate these cases, the reporters cut a wide swathe around the judges and their active involvement in these cases. In fact, the series fails to name any judge in any of these cases, committing only the name of the presiding probate judge, Daniel B. Malone, to print. Instead, the first article names a number of local hospitals that refer patients into guardianship while the second article discusses extensively the relationship between the guardianship company, Midwest Care and the Monahan Law Group. While the reporters are to be congratulated for their efforts in exposing the financial predation of these two collusive entities, the fact that the judge assigned to these matters exonerates and approves the predatory practices is not mentioned.
About two years ago, the Tribune was sent a slew of articles exposing Cook County judges for surreptitiously taking bribes. Judge Shauna Boliker, Judge Aimee Alonso, Judge Regina Mescall and Judge Edward Robles were mentioned in the articles and their bribe taking vehicles laid bare. A probate court litigator, whose name is being withheld from this report at his request, again sent the articles to the three reporters involved in the recent series. So the Tribune cannot claim ignorance of this matter.
The efforts to protect the complicit judges could be seen as an effort to protect the government itself for systematically attacking both the life savings and the very existence of a group of people. In fact, attempts have been made to launch guardianships in the absence of any need for "aid" of this nature, such as in the Cook County case involving the now deceased Albert Campasano. His widow, Sophia, is a mere sixty some years old, has a nursing degree and an MBA and no sign of mental incapacity and was threatened with guardianship by verbalizations made by attorney Matthew McQuiston and Judge Aimee Alonso. Similar threats of launching an inappropriate guardianship were recorded in the 2014 book, EXILE. The old Soviet Union was known to put dissidents into mental asylums and this practice appears to be utilized by the USA.
The predation evidenced in these court authorized guardianships was well summarized in this communication to the FBI by one Cook County probate court litigant and reproduced in part here--
“Racketeering, Extortion, Human Trafficking, Tax Evasion, and
Murder, involving sitting Democrat Judges, Guardian ad Litems,
and other lawyers in Chicago, Cook County, Illinois
including Judge Shauna Boliker,
Judge Aimee Alonzo (wife of federal judge Jorge Louis Alonzo),
court appointed guardian ad litem Melinda C Martin (law firm of
Reigheimer, Martin, and Cinquino), and Midwest Care Management
Systems. There are more players, and possibly 4 more care
management/guardian companies (Rehab Assist, RNR, and
Consultants on Disability, TD Care) which are satellite companies of Midwest
Care, and all have Melinda Martin and her firm on retainer (see
attached articles).
Here’s how the scam works -
People with considerable assets or some type of available funding
come before the judge for some reason, the judge appoints a
guardian ad litem (GAL) to research and inform the court what would
be best for the “ward”, and uncover assets. The GAL most times
never meets personally with the ward/individual, although it is
mandated by the Illinois Probate Act and as stipulated in the judges
order appointing the GAL. The GAL recommends a case manager
and new guardian which is most often Midwest Care Management
Systems or one of the satellite companies. After the Judge appoints
them, guardianship and/or power of attorney are revoked from family
members, and Midwest assumes guardianship/power of attorney.
The “ward” is then placed in a facility associated with Midwest Care.
Sometimes they have to involve the Cook County Public Guardians
office and Lisa Casanova (see attached).
An order of protection/no contact order is then issued to keep the
family of the individual from contacting their loved one. If it happens
to be the wife or husband, the judge arranges for an annulment or
divorce in absentia, all assets are then put in control of the new
guardian (Midwest Care) and a portion of those assets are doled out
to the lawyers and GAL involved under the guise of fees. Then the
Judge in the case takes out a mortgage or home equity loan,
sometimes from the same banks that are involved with the case, but all tied to the care companies, and a third party...pays
off the loan within a few months (see attached loan history for Judge
Boliker and Judge Alonzo). The loan history is such that the Judge’s
salary would not afford them to pay off the amounts of the multiple
reoccurring loans in the short time that they are paid off.
This is a source of income that is untaxed, and, over time, this
amounts to millions of dollars.
The lawyers take turns being the court appointed GAL in some cases,
and the attorney representing the case management companies in
others, as mentioned above (see attached court Compasano order/Melinda Martin representing Midwest Care), to the tune of many
thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees charged to the
estates of these individuals. This is a clear conflict of interest, breach
of fiduciary duty and multiple ethics violations.
Most often the elderly victims, after their assets are depleted, die
while under the control and “care” of Midwest Care Services, most
likely so they don’t have to spend money keeping them alive
anymore. Please see attached articles and information.
There are many different cases involving millions of dollars being
extorted or syphoned off tax free.
Please investigate this, many, many lives are being ruined and life
savings stolen.”
Retired Chicago attorney Ken Ditkowsky also weighed in on the Chicago Tribune coverage.
Ditkowsky, as a retired lawyer with 50 years in the court saddle, has expressed concerns repeatedly that the probate court judges are not following the law:
"The Chicago Tribune article has some major deficiencies that have to be addressed.
In particular, it fails to address the real issue of guardianship, i.e. public corruption. Let’s start from square 1, Guardianship is a necessity in certain limited circumstances addressed by 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3b, which in Illinois states:
(b) Guardianship shall be utilized only as is necessary to promote the well-being of the person with a disability, to protect him from neglect, exploitation, or abuse, and to encourage development of his maximum self-reliance and independence. Guardianship shall be ordered only to the extent necessitated by the individual's actual mental, physical and adaptive limitations. The order shall conform with Sections 11a-12 and 11a-14
The limitation on guardianship, while ignored by the article, is not only significant but necessary to protect the “person with a disability” from predation and forfeiture of his/her human rights such as occurred in the Campasano, Sallas, Sykes and a large majority of other guardianship cases.
In simple terms the guardian is bound to do only those acts that are:
1) Reasonable
2) Necessary and
3) Actually, benefit the ward.
This limitation is significant because the word by the adjudication does not forfeit his/her Constitutional rights but retains the protections. As noted by Campasano, Sallas, Sykes and hundreds of similar cases found in the parallel Wall Street Journal, New York Times, New Yorker, Huffington Post **** prior articles.
In fact, so significant is the legislative intent to protect the elderly victims of guardianship abuse (and other financial abuse) that Illinois passed remedial legislation to protect the elderly victims, i.e. 720 ILCS 5/17 – 56. This legislation makes it a felony (in my opinion)to do exactly what was done in the Campasano, Sallas cases. To further assure that the rights of the elderly ward is protected, the aforesaid statute provides for triple damages and attorney fees to be obtained in a civil lawsuit.
Obviously, the Tribune articles are silent as to how Campasano, Sallas, Sykes et al (and the cases portrayed on Netflix) can occur. How could a Judge (taking the Campasano case as an example) allow the guardian to ignore openly and notoriously the marriage between Sophie and Albert? (NB. This cost Campasano an estimated $1,000,000.00) In the Sallas case it appears that an office of the Byline Bank had Mrs. Sallas (the alleged person needing protection for who a guardian had been appointed) sign loan documents in violation of 755 ILCS 5/11a – 22 and not only did two judges ignore the clear words of the statute, but it set in motion Mr. and Mrs. Sallas to not only lost (by his estimate) about 8 million dollars but render Mr. Sallas homeless on the streets of Skokie, Illinois.
The statute states:
“(755 ILCS 5/11a-22) (from Ch. 110 1/2, par. 11a-22)
Sec. 11a-22. Trade and contracts with a person with a disability.
(a) Anyone who by trading with, bartering, gaming or any other device, wrongfully possesses himself of any property of a person known to be a person with a disability commits a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) Every note, bill, bond or other contract by any person for whom a plenary guardian has been appointed or who is adjudged to be unable to so contract is void as against that person and his estate, but a person making a contract with the person so adjudged is bound thereby.
(Source: P.A. 99-143, eff. 7-27-15.)
All of the foregoing is public knowledge and have been in one way of another published either in Court filings, e-mail exchanges, or on various blogs. It is my opinion that this situation is a manifestation of elder exploitation and corruption of the vilest nature. The cover-up is universal and reprehensible. Unfortunately, the booty is easily obtained, foolproof, and judicially protected."
This reporter reached out to reporters Gutowski and Hoerner.At the time of going to press, no response has been received.