To: Thomas Simpson, Assistant State Attorney, Financial Crimes Division (PH: 773-674-6639)c/o: Anita Alvarez, State's Attorney, Cook County, IL, 69 West Washington St., Suite 3200, Chicago, Illinois 60602Cc: Det. Scott J. Dinga, Financial Crimes Unitc/o Chicago, IL Police Department (11th District - Harrison), 3151 W. Harrison St., Chicago, IL 60612Cc: Additional cc's as indicated in cc line.Mr. Simpson:While I do not agree with your conclusion, you make your case well, and, you can be assured, your reply is not so brief in brevity as to be lacking. Also, while, yes, there are currently depositions on file (and may be more in the future, but I am not at liberty to disclose current litigation or "count my chickens before they hatch"), which, of course, would help your case, the case is solid even as it is.Mr. Daniggelis and I discussed this, and we both wondered how you could come to an opposite conclusion, given your integrity, your intelligence, your patience to look at all the small detailes, your excellent listening (and speaking) skills, and your knowledge of the case and the law governing it.We both independently concluded (and if we be wrong, please forgive & overlook, but this was our best "guess"), we both guessed that the only thing that could have swayed you might be the unfavourable ruling by Chancery Court, Judge Otto's ruling, specifically, wrongly giving title to Mr. Younes, who obtained it through fraudulent means - and KNEW of many of the frauds (the robo-signing, the photocopied signature, the lack of "consideration," e.g., payment, etc.). -- Daniggelis and I both felt that you were afraid you would not get a "fair day" in court given the known corruption your state's judiciary (and other branches of government) have encountered. (This is not meant as an insult: My state, Florida, I think, is even worse, and I'm only pointing out the obvious.) -- Speaking only for myself, I believe that the news media would help expose the "bad" court decisions which appear or seem to trouble you, should you change your mind and move to bring charges, and indict Younes (and others).Please do not be offended that I disagree with your stated legal conclusion, Mr. Simpson: Even the "nine smartest lawyers in America" (e.g., the US Supreme Court) often disagree, and if they, how much more "mere mortals," such you ourselves?After having studied the case and facts, I feel that any one of my several charges (in a fair court, that is) would stick, and, as such, I am now calling upon the Attorney General's Office - and local press - to give you the support to do your job, and follow the law. (See the cc line: I'm also resending the 2 attachments, "41830RM-JosephYounes-ADMITS-to-FRAUD-yet-profits-from-it.pdf" "29738-Aug03-2015-Motion-Amicus-Exhibits-GordonWayneWatts.pdf" -- for the benefit of the new recipients.) -- The robo-signing complaint by Younes to Lisa Madigan's office *is* relevant: it proves knowledge of a crime, which is key in showing his participation was "with knowledge" of fraud. If Daniggelis was not paid, how can this *not* be a financial crime/ fraud? (If that's not fraud, what is!?) Also, how can the many actions of Younes (including the complaint to AG Madigan's office and the transfer of title) *not* constitute acts in furtherance of the fraud? You, yourself, are honest - and, as such, admit that "I believe he was taken in a scheme and has lost a great deal because of it," and not without reason.Dear ATTORNEY GENERAL & local press, please take note that one of the attachments constitutes a new discovery on my part: Proof that Atty. Joseph Younes, one of the alleged criminals KNEW of some of the fraud, and the other one is a "file copy" of my Amicus brief which covers most (if not all) of the legal arguments -- some of which the victim's attorney either missed or did not cover well.I respectfully dissent on all points and would hold that numerous financial crimes and mortgage frauds have occurred -- and bring criminal charges on this head as outlined below.Gordon Wayne WattsIn a message dated 6/29/2016 3:39:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, thomas.simpson@cookcountyil.gov writes:Mr. Watts,
I am not sure that you understood the import of my last email. So, I will try again. Please excuse my brevity. Without additional evidence, there is not enough evidence to support a criminal charge to a successful prosecution of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I'm sure that there have been depositions on the civil case, which I have not seen. But, I imagine that there is no one claiming responsibility for a the forgery. How am I to determine who committed the act of forgery on the deed? I can not without additional evidence, of which a confession or statement of one party against another witnessing the act of forgery, bring a criminal charge. I do not expect you to obtain one, I merely was conveying that it would take a compelling piece of evidence to support the charge. All the arguments and things you point out are compelling circumstances, but in this situation the case requires more.
The Robo signing is of no importance as it relates to this forgery or any criminal acts. There is no act in furtherance after the transfer of the property in 2006, the statute of limitations are exhausted for everything save a forgery. Whether or nor not Daniggelis got paid is meaningless to a criminal prosecution, and his relief from the mortgage note is a form of consideration.
Please understand that I feel for Mr. Daniggelis as I believe he was taken in a scheme and has lost a great deal because of it, however, I can not institute a criminal case without sufficient evidence. It is a hard pill to swallow for me and I understand if you and Mr. Daniggelis refuse to accept it, but it is the case.
Sincerely,
Thomas P. SimpsonAssistant State's AttorneyCook County State's Attorney's OfficeSpecial Prosecution Bureau13 B 082650 S. CaliforniaChicago, IL 60608The information contained in this electronic message may be confidential and may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please delete the original message from your e-mail system. Thank you.
From: Gww1210@aol.com <Gww1210@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 9:28:34 PM
To: THOMAS SIMPSON (States Attorney); Gww1210@aol.com
Cc: 606FCU@ChicagoPolice.org; StatesAttorney; DAVID M WILLIAMS (States Attorney); gww1210@gmail.com
Subject: RE: Asst. State Atty Simpson (cc: Det. Dinga) Here's side-contract docs you s...To: Thomas Simpson, Assistant State Attorney, Financial Crimes Division (PH: 773-674-6639)c/o: Anita Alvarez, State's Attorney, Cook County, IL, 69 West Washington St., Suite 3200, Chicago, Illinois 60602Cc: Det. Scott J. Dinga, Financial Crimes Unitc/o Chicago, IL Police Department (11th District - Harrison), 3151 W. Harrison St., Chicago, IL 60612Cc: Additional cc's as indicated in cc line.Thank you for taking time to speak with myself, and my friend, Attorney Simpson. I have no doubt that your intents and motives are pure. (And, I will add, that since I'm human, you might be right, in your legal assessment, in terms of absolute truth, the objective standard of what really is true.)Your request to refrain from sending you additional legal documents is totally reasonable: Indeed, I've sent you what I believe to be overwhelming evidence of criminal acts, and legal arguments that should persuade even the most harsh critic of my legal analysis. (And, to your excellent credit, I believe you reviewed all of my documentation quite well. Thank you, also, for your kind words with regard to my own efforts, and also your genuine desire to get the bad guys in a professional/mature manner which doesn't hate or seek to mistreat them, but merely hold them *fully* accountable and *protect* the innocent victims: That 'balance' to try and "seek justice," yet without going too far, is a hallmark of integrity, honour, and maturity.That said, what you ask is impossible: Do you really think one of the bad guys would admit (in a signed or taped confession) to doing wrong? Nonetheless, even in spite of the "impossible" standard bar you've set, below, incredibly, it appears that I have *indeed* provided you with said "confession" you say you seek - can you believe it? You missed it, so please let me remind you of what you've reviewed previously:((#1)) For one thing, Younes **admitted** to Lisa Madigan's office, in his Feb. 06, 2013 complaint to the IL Attorney General, that there was robo-signing fraud. I won't send you anything new (as you've requested, below) - I already sent you and Detective Scott Dinga said document, remember? But, for the sake of simplicity, I'm resending it - again - in this email: "41830RM-JosephYounes-ADMITS-to-FRAUD-yet-profits-from-it.pdf," a small, 2.4 Megabyte doc with the Atty General's office stamp - yes, unofficial coming from me, but you can pay Lisa Madigan a visit to verify the authenticity of my document. Since Younes admitted to such fraud, his continued participation in it is *proof* of complicity, aiding and abetting, profiting from with knowledge and intent (Mens Rea, criminal intent), and all of that is beyond dispute! {{Beyond reasonable doubt: since he COMPLAINED to Lisa Madigan of robo-signing, this is de fact ADMISSION of knowledge of said fraud, and then his continued participation is actions speaking louder than words: He admits that HE is complicit by his participation - and benefiting from the theft of the title using robo-signing (and other fraudulent means!).}}Q1: How are his complaints to Lisa Madigan NOT admission of knowledge of robo-signing fraud?Q2: How are his continued participation **and** financial gains from said participation NOT admission of his own involvement in that which he knows to be fraud?{{If I'm wrong in my claims that he admitted to knowledge of - and participation in - robo-signing fraud, please tell me my mistake. I am human, after all.}}((#2)) Secondly, Daniggelis' first attorney (Atty. Benji Philips), in the 07/30/2008 filing, in No. 07-CH-29738, did (at point 45 on page 6) mention that the word 'July' was hand written over an obvious “white out,” alleging that the signature was forgery. If memory serves me correctly, Andjelko Galic (Daniggelis' current attorney) repeated this claim of forgery of the July 09, 2006 Warranty Deed. ***BUT** (and this is the key point), *my* brief ("2007-CH-29738-Aug03-2015-Motion-Amicus-Exhibits-GordonWayneWatts.pdf," which I've already sent you - and which is *documented* to be on record in all 3 trial court cases) lays out damning proof of forgery, using newer arguments of identical signatures. Again, this is nothing new: I already emailed you and Det. Dinga this filing (which the court has on record), so I'm not emailing you an "new" documents -- as you request, but for your convenience, see enclosed.My point?Even if the court did not "accept" my arguments, they *did* review them, and all parties were served, as the record shows: Unless you can show me how a mere mortal can sign his name twice in a row with an EXACTLY IDENTICAL signature, it IS BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT (there's your legal standard, counselor) damning proof of forgery, and Younes' continued participation in said action, with desire to gain financially (have title transferred based on a forged signature) is proof of admission: His actions speak louder than words: he benefited from a transaction he knew to be FORGERY (whether or not he did the forgery, his action was "in furtherance of" this crime, and he aided and abetted, and is just as guilty).Q3: How is he not guilty of aiding, abetting, and being a co-conspirator to commit a financial crime, and commit acts in furtherance of the PROVED AND PROVED forgery? Please tell me, if you know?See e.g., (720 ILCS 5/17-10.6)Sec. 17-10.6.Financial institution fraud.
(g) Conspiracy to commit a financial crime.(1) A person commits conspiracy to commit a financial
crime when, with the intent that any violation of this Section be committed, he or she agrees with another person to the commission of that offense.(2) No person may be convicted of conspiracy to
commit a financial crime unless an overt act or acts in furtherance of the agreement is alleged and proved to have been committed by that person or by a co-conspirator and the accused is a part of a common scheme or plan to engage in the unlawful activity.While, yes, it's hard to tell who did the forgery, Younes had knowledge that Daniggelis claimed forgery, and - with my filings, and that of Daniggelis' 2 attorneys, he had proof that it was, indeed forgery, yet he continued participating in said transaction. Criminal...((#3)) Thirdly, and lastly, since Daniggelis never got paid, and since it is well-settled case-law that no contract (including the so-called 'sale' of the house) is valid if it lacks consideration, i.e., payment, this, *alone*, would void the so-called closing, thus rendering an transfer of title criminal financial fraud - and this is true whether *or not* some "judge" rubber-stamps it: The Law is the law. Period.Q4: In light of case law, cited below, how is the transfer of title, and "sale, valid without consideration (e.g., documented payment)? Statement: If you can show me ANY *documented* financial records showing that Daniggelis got paid ANYTHING (and, by that, I mean, actual bank records, not just flim-flam statements or claims by the bad guys), then I'm throw down my toys, give up, and admit wrong. (Hey, maybe I'm wrong.)***CONCLUSION*** In order for the bad guys to give up, they would have to prove me wrong on ALL the points above (and a few more, remembering, especially, that, in your state of ILLINOIS, forgery, like murder, is an exception: There *is* no statutes of limitations.If I am wrong in *any* of my claims, please let me know from authoritative sources, and not mere guesses.Lastly, Daniggelis just told me that he estimated he must have spent an hour-and-a-half in your office, and that, while you seemed focused on ignoring the clear fraud, that he (as like myself) are grateful by your intentions, motives, and genuine efforts to meet him halfway and hear him out. **Thank you: you have my gratitude, Mr. Simpson.**PS: When trying to email Det. Dinga (whom I am told is out of the office for a few days on some matter of unknown nature), I got this email error message:In a message dated 6/28/2016 4:16:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, MAILER-DAEMON@smtp1.chicagopolice.org writes:The following message to <606FCU@chicagopolice.org> was undeliverable.
The reason for the problem:
5.1.0 - Unknown address error 552-'5.3.4 Message size exceeds fixed maximum message size'In plain English, I've found (by trial and error) that I can send him email attachments up to about five (5) Megabytes, but no more, so it took me "several bundles" to send him all approx. 20MB of attachments that your email server accepted in my last email. (Just so you know.)Also, Daniggelis reports to me that it is a huge trial and difficulty to travel to see you by bus, where it sucks up about half his day (paraphrasing from memory). While this is not germane to our legal discussion, I thought you might like to know the context: Mr. Daniggelis is probably right. In fact, speaking for myself, on the few occasions I've had to depend on the City/County bus system (the "Citrus Connection": Public transit in Polk County is provided by the Lakeland Area Mass Transit District: http://www.RideCitrus.com), I've found that it would sometimes take me several hours to wait for the right bus to pick me up, and then get a 'connection' from the bus station terminal to my eventual destination, and then, once finished, a few more hours to do the whole thing in reverse (if the buses haven't stopped running for the day, in which case my small bicycle was my only recourse).You are in a better position to get a "fair day in court" than am I, so I would marry your political position ((much stronger than mine: I'm viewed as an "outsider" to the court system)) with my strong legal arguments for a winning case. Oh, and the very fact that Paul L. Shelton, who made fame for his mortgage fraud - losing both loan originator/mortgage licenses and his law license, was the one who originated this loan, shows probable cause to pursue my legal arguments above, which, unless you can prove otherwise, clear the highest legal standard for criminal convictions: Beyond Reasonable Doubt.In other words, while you and I probably have cars or trucks, those of us who don't have huge hardships to do the most basic things you or I take for granted, so Richard Daniggelis' trip to you, today, was a major hardship, and probably took up most of his day. For that reason, I am glad that you and Detective Dinga have made a Herculean effort to meet us halfway in our trials and tribulations. **Your efforts and genuine concern do not go unnoticed or unappreciated.** -- But, and I don't mean any disrespect, I think you are wrong as a matter of law, and, while I appreciate the grim prospects you face should you go before some unjust judge who disregards the statutory or case law (remember: I've experienced bad judges, so I know where you're coming from here, my brother), nonetheless, I feel you have not done all that you could or should do, and for that reason, I exhort you to review my legal analyses, and to correct me, if indeed, I am wrong on any one point (knowing that the bad guys have to be right on ALL points to escape charges and conviction, which I find *highly* unlikely).Gordon W. Watts (full contact data below - and in the email attachments herein)In a message dated 6/28/2016 4:18:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, thomas.simpson@cookcountyil.gov writes:Mr. Watts,
I meet with Mr. Daniggelis and had an opportunity to speak with him. I informed him that without sufficient evidence, a criminal investigation will not continue.
I understand that was not what he was hoping to hear, but unfortunately that is the reality. Please accept this as well, I understand that you have invested a great deal of time, energy, and passion into his cause. I can not continue an investigation in which I can not realistically expect to bring a criminal charge. Even if I believe that Mr. Danigelis was swindled and those responsible will not be held responsible.
There was nothing more that you could have done, it unfortunately is a sad outcome all around. Please refrain from sending long documents, position papers, briefs, legal research regarding this matters unless it contains a confession by one of the offenders.
Sincerely,
Thomas P. SimpsonAssistant State's AttorneyCook County State's Attorney's OfficeSpecial Prosecution Bureau13 B 082650 S. CaliforniaChicago, IL 60608The information contained in this electronic message may be confidential and may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please delete the original message from your e-mail system. Thank you.
From: Gww1210@aol.com <Gww1210@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 3:15:05 AM
To: THOMAS SIMPSON (States Attorney); Gww1210@aol.com
Cc: 606FCU@ChicagoPolice.org; gww1210@gmail.com
Subject: Asst. State Atty Simpson (cc: Det. Dinga) Here's side-contract docs you sought..From the Desk of: Gordon Wayne Watts821 Alicia Road – Lakeland, FL 33801-2113H: (863) 688-9880 – C: (863) 409-2109 – W: (863) 686-3411 or: (863) 687-6141Email: Gww1210@aol.com / Gww1210@Gmail.com
Thomas Simpson, Assistant State Attorney, Financial Crimes Division (PH: 773-674-6639)
E-mail Address: Thomas.Simpson@CookCountyIL.gov ; PH: (773) 674-2728 ; (773) 674-6283
c/o: Anita Alvarez, State's Attorney, Cook County, IL, 69 West Washington St., Suite 3200, Chicago, Illinois 60602
Date: Tuesday, 28 June 2016 ; Subject: “Side Contracts” that Mr. Daniggelis said you wished to see
Dear Mr. Simpson: Thank you for agreeing to meet with my friend Rich Daniggelis, today at 1:00 pm. Anyhow, I got a phone call from Mr.. Daniggelis, informing me that you wanted a copy of the restriction contract(s) that prohibited the sale of his house. After a thorough review of the various public records I obtained, referring to the email attachments(s) in this email, here is what I found:
“DOC071615-0716201507ch29738,04ch10851,14m1701473.pdf” (21-page PDF document)
This was a public records request I got from the Cook County Clerk of Courts for following three cases:
** 2007-CH-29738, in Chancery (GMAC v. Daniggelis, which resulted in the title to Richard's house being transferred to Atty. Joseph Younes, without any legal basis, by a recent ruling by Judge Michael Otto)
** 2004-CH-10851, also in Chancery (Deutch Bank v. Daniggelis, an older foreclosure case)
** 2014-M1-701473 (Younes v. Daniggelis, the eviction case in “M1” e.g., 1st Municipal 'Civil' Division, which was based loosely on the ruling on GMAC v. Daniggelis)
Key docs include the following:
Forged July 09, 2006 Warranty Deed (note Whiteout of date and IDENTICAL signature, indicatory of a photocopy), as well as the 'real' May 09, 2006 Warranty Deed (which was bound and restricted by the side contract you requested) – These 2 docs (with “impossibly identical” e.g., photocopied signatures) are listed several times throughout this 21-page PDF
Page 4 of 21 of PDF: One of the side-contracts that prohibited a closing after May 19, 2006, thus rendering the “closing” that Daniggelis never attended (and for which he never got paid) NULL AND VOID ab initio. (Remember: Since I have shown in my Amicus Curie brief damning evidence that proves that the July 09, 2006 Warranty Deed's signature was a photocopy, e.g., a forgery, the only Warranty Deed that matters is the May 09, 2006 one, and the various side-contracts, which Daniggelis asked me to provide you today, all preclude, void, and annul any purported “sale” or “closing.” Additionally, Rich tells me that one of the depositions quotes a Stewart Title official, wherein she admitted that many irregularities occurred, thus voiding the so-called “closing,” but I'm not an expert on the details. Daniggelis' attorney, Andjelko Galic, might know about this. Moreover, in reference to “41830RM-JosephYounes-ADMITS-to-FRAUD-yet-profits-from-it.pdf,” we think that Younes was blackmailing several banks & servicers, threatening action with the Atty. General's Office regarding robo-signing, and that's how he got such a sweet deal, wherein they reduced the principal and gave him 2.0% for 60 month, as reflected in the very recent Loan Modification at the Recorder's Office. That may or may not be RICO (I say: 'may,' so, I can not be accused of slander or libel, here), but this much is certain: Younes admits to knowledge of “Linda Green” robo-signing fraud, and yet continues to participate in – and benefit from – this particular transaction, making him complicit in the crime!!)
Page 6 of 21 of PDF: Better copy of the above, but not stamped as to which case in which it was filed. (See below for that, though).
Page 8 of 21 of PDF: Yet another copy of same side-contract: Clerks went record happy on me, but hey, I'm not complaining: Better an extra copy than a missing copy.
Pages 11, 12, and 13 of PDF: Three (almost) identical copies of a different “side contract,” in the which the POA (Power of Attorney) limits the grant of authority SOLELY to “today's” closing, e.g., the May 19, closing, which never occurred, for whatever reason. (NOTE: Page 12 is the 'best' copy, as it has the least “clipping on the edges.” Since Erika Rhone signed it, and it was apparently accepted into court documents without objection – you can verify court records – this binds the so-called closing to that date only, which makes the so-called July closing invalid and void.)
Pages 19, 20, and 21 of the 21-page PDF: Daniggelis' sworn affidavit that his signature was forged (photocopied, in this case) on the July 09, 2006 Warranty Deed.
NOTE: ANY ONE of the above should have halted the sale in its tracks based on fraud.
“CookCounty-COURT-PublicRecords-reply.JPG” and “CookCounty-COURT-PublicRecords-reply.PNG”
These are 2 different image formats of a screenshot (screen capture) of an email that I got on 07-16-2015 from Assistant Chancery Clerk, Ms. Sharron Briggins-Levy, with a PDF attachment in that email of the ABOVE-named document, verifying that I got it from the court. (You can ask them if you don't believe me, but even better yet: See below, where I cite to the RECORD in thew trial court to “cite my sources.”)
“DeedJuly9,2006-fromTamiArena.pdf” – a high-quality copy of one of the Warranty Deeds that Tami Arena, Richard's niece, emailed me. (Note: I can't seem to find doc#: 0622826137 on http://CookRecorder.com under Tax-ID#: 14-33-324-044-0000, but this deed appears in all court records and in uncontested, and maybe I don't know how to view certain documents on the Recorder's website. HOWEVER, this also has a white-out, and the notary is Lisa Vitek, the wife of “twice-disbarred” lawyer, Paul Shelton, disbarred once of his Mortgage and Loan Originator licenses by the IDFPR and then disbarred of his law license by the IARDC.)
“richard-fromTamiArena.pdf” is a PDF file, also from Tami, of an excellent motion to stay, filed by Daniggelis' attorney, Andjelko Galic, but Galic never (so far as I can tell) asked for Summary Judgment, even tho he had (I think) an “open-and-shut case” for criminal felony fraud, forgery, and mortgage fraud on a senior citizen.
“shelton-fromTamiArena.pdf” A LIMITED POWER OF ATTORNEY, Tami emailed me, and time-stamped in the M1-Civil eviction case. This may be one of the key documents you're seeking, Mr. Simpson: Note the 3rd and last page of this 3-page PDF: It limits the sale ONLY up and until June 30, 2016, but recall, if you would, that the closing took place outside that time-window (for whatever reason—not important for our discussion), thus rendering the “sale” and “closing” (in air-quotes!) null and void ab initio (from the very beginning!).
A little more needs to be said about **this** particular POA (Power of Attorney).
First, notice what I filed (“2007-CH-29738-Aug03-2015-Motion-Amicus-Exhibits-GordonWayneWatts.pdf,” my Amicus Curiae brief in the underlying chancery case). Notice that “Limited Power Of Attorney” (but not notarised) Exhibit Watts-F, and compare it with “Limited Power Of Attorney” (which was later notarised) Exhibit Watts-G. Yes, these are my own filings, but the court-stamp on the latter shows it is valid, and the other one is labeled “Exhibit D” in someone else's case, easily located since you will search the actual court records.
Not only does the notarised one (with a court stamp in the 2014 M1 Civil eviction case) stop any “sale” after June 30, 2006, but the very fact you have a NON-NOTARISED version shows that the notiarised version was notarised after the fact. Maybe Richard Daniggelis signed this (actually, he did), but how could a “plain” copy get into the record, and then later get notarised? ANSWER: Some notary public probably ILLEGALLY notarised it OUTSIDE his presence, that is without actually seeing him. (The only way you could have access to both versions would be if the notary brought a portable computer scanner to the Starbucks where Daniggelis met Rhone, when he had signed it, and then have her scan it in, and then later have Shelton show up and notarise it, and then scan it again. That is unlikely, and not believable. It was not notarised initially because the notary ILLEGALLY notarised it without seeing Daniggelis sign it!!)
“04ch10851-07242015.pdf” – This is a 23-page Records Request in the 2004 Deutch Bank case (2004-CH-10851, in Chancery, Deutch Bank v. Daniggelis,), apparently dated07-24-2015, slightly over a year ago. Key docs include the following: Page 12 of 23 of the PDF shows that the late Habib S. Younes, deceased, the father of the Joseph Younes, entered an appearance for Daniggelis. While Joseph Younes, himself, never entered an appearance, the fact that his law firm did represent him creates control, power, and a special relationship, which renders Joseph Younes' claim of an “at arm's length” deal FALSE. (See e.g., my communication to the IARDC and Joseph Younes' various replies, about HALF of which are provably FALSE, as I document in my cross-reply to the IARDC.).
“07ch29738-07242015.pdf” – This is a 96-page document, which Chancery gave me under a (paid!) public records request, apparently on 07-24-2015.
Page 37-of-96 of this is “Exhibit C” of Daniggelis' July 30, 2008, 02:00 PM “answer” and “affirmative defenses” (see page9-of-96 for header). Key docs in this series include page 37-of-96 (Exhibit 'C', the May 09, 2006 Warranty Deed, real, but never used, as the sale occurred too late), Page 38-of-96 (on the the side agreements Rich said you are seeking, VOIDING all “sales” after May 19, 2006), and Page 39-of-96, a POWER OF ATTORNEY which is not notarised, thus showing it was later notaraised AFTER THE FACT and FALSELY!!
Page 40-of-96 of this PDF is another side agreement limiting the 'sale' SOLELY to 'today' (which was May 19, 2006). This (and other docs) is/are on file with the court, Atty. Simpson, so you need not take my word for it. But my email today may constitute probably cause to do whatever is necessary, and then later (when you have documented proof), you pass preponderance of evidence, you pass clear & convincing, and go straight to damning proof: Beyond all reasonable shadow of a whisper of a doubt – and win your case. (Hint: The clerks will release records to you more quickly than to me, and probably for less payment of fees/ records costs.)
Pages 41 and 42 of this 96-page doc are for the 2-page Warranty Deed of July 09, 2006, that is, the one with a photocopied (identical, e.g., forged) signature. Page 43 was Daniggelis' notice of fraud. EITHER of these alone (and certainly both together) should have stopped the sale. (Also, the very fact that NOT RECORD exists of Daniggelis EVERY getting paid should void the so-called 'sale' – ALL BY ITSELF: It is well-settled case-law that no contract is valid if it lacks consideration, i.e., payment: This, alone, would void the Warranty Deed: Stilk v. Myrick, 170 Eng. Rep. 1168, 1168 (1809) (L.R.C.P) (Ellenborough, L) (holding a renegotiated contract void due to lack of consideration), old but valid, case-law. (NOTE: While the various other fraud shows Mens Rea, criminal intent on the part of the bad guys, the fact that Daniggelis refused one offer of a paltry $1,500.oo “payment” shows that Daniggelis' intent was NOT to sell the house, but as I allege, to seek refinancing. No one, not even a crazy person, would just “give away” his house!! That the bad guys so allege is just absurd!! See, again, “2007-CH-29738-Aug03-2015-Motion-Amicus-Exhibits-GordonWayneWatts.pdf” for the nitty-gritty details of most of the fraud that I have alleged. I left out only a few things in my Amicus brief, such as Younes' admission of robo-signing fraud, something which I had not yet discovered. Also, I left out Shelton being disbarred – because it had not happened as yet!! But, the fact that the chief architect lost 2-3 professional licenses for mortgage fraud is a ket fact in showing it happened yet again, this time to Daniggelis.
Oddly-enough, Younes, himself, makes only anemic arguments for the “sale” of the house, and it is only GMAC (starting on page 67 of 96 of “07ch29738-07242015.pdf”) that addresses the side-agreements which you requested of Richard, but even assuming their argument holds water, they don't address lack of consideration (PAYMENT, hello!?) or the identical (photocopied) forgery felony fraud, which we now know. (Note: If the signatures were merely “similar,” we'd need a handwriting expert, no doubt, but as they're identical, this is easily obvious even to a blind person!)
“07ch29738-07242015-001.pdf” is another records request in the same case, and it is 90-pages long. Here are highlights: Pages 32 and 33 are entries for the infamous “Linda Green” robo-signing Lost Assignment Affidavit, as do pages 46 and 47. Besides that, however, nothing of note is here, unless you like to check out the various (good) legal arguments that Daniggelis' attorney (and the opposing attorneys) made.
“14m1701473-07242015.pdf,” also 90—pages long (what a coincidence) is a records request for the 2014 M1-Civil Division eviction case. It's pretty boring (as it is based on the underlying Chancery case's bad decision, snatching title away from Daniggelis), but pages 13 and 14 show the (fake) July 09, 2006 Warranty deed discussed above. (Besides the photocopied signature, please don't forget the White Out others have brought up!) Pages 63-65, however, do have a newer fraud affidavit and one of the key side agreements. Also, the legal arguments, made by Daniggelis' attorney, Galic, do (in my opinion) seem more interesting & compelling that those above.
Gordon Wayne Watts
LAKELAND, Florida (www.GordonWatts.com / www.GordonWayneWatts.com)
In a message dated 6/14/2016 2:03:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Gww1210@aol.com writes:SUBJECT: [in reply to] Asst. State Atty Simpson (cc: Ray Sanders & Detective Scott Dinga)In a message dated 6/14/2016 12:25:35 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, thomas.simpson@cookcountyil.gov writes:Mr. Watts,
I have received your emails and your voicemails. To the many questions that you have given me:
1) I think that you have successfully moderated your tone.
Thank you for your feedback; that is one less distraction.2) The Cook County State's Attorney's Office does has an investigative staff. Their primary duties are for trial support, after a case has been charged. They do not take over another agency's investigation. On the rare of occasions they do initiate investigations, and without going into extreme detail this situation does not qualify.
Someone at the Police Dept (I think it was Detective Dingo, but I'm not sure) said that, yes, they typically initiate an investigation, but they typically check with the State Attorney's Office first to make sure that you all think you have a prosecutable and solid case before they spend resources investigating.I was able to catch Det. Dingo in his office real early this morning, and he also mentioned that he was able to speak with you. -- I am cc'ing him in my reply. One of your offices (I think it was you, but again can't recall exactly) has told me that the statutes of limitations starts to run when the crime was committed OR when the last act "in furtherance" of the crime was committed. -- Since LOADS of "acts in furtherance" were committed, you all may have a windfall of opportunity - and "extra time" to get the bad guys.Nonetheless, the forgery is easy enough to prove (see my legal arguments and documentation to back it up). However, proving Younes "did it" is going to be very hoard. BUT with the fact that he now knows of this fraud, his continued participation in the "forgery fraud" makes him an accomplice, especially since he is benefiting from it!! (Go, get him!!... uhm... please.) He also admitted to knowledge of the "Linda Green robo-signing" fraud, since he actually filed a complaint with Lisa Madigan's Office (whch I obtrained from Lisa Madigan';s office under FOIA - see the attached "41830RM-JosephYounes-ADMITS-to-FRAUD-yet-profits-from-it.pdf" file in this email, here.) - Thus, he is "complicit" and is "aiding and abetting" -- in both forgery (which has **no** statutes of limitations) -- as WELL as a few other crimes (whch do have stats of limitations, but which were "reset" when "acts in furtherence" - See e.g., (720 ILCS 5/17-10.6)Sec. 17-10.6.Financial institution fraud.
(g) Conspiracy to commit a financial crime.(1) A person commits conspiracy to commit a financial
crime when, with the intent that any violation of this Section be committed, he or she agrees with another person to the commission of that offense.(2) No person may be convicted of conspiracy to
commit a financial crime unless an overt act or acts in furtherance of the agreement is alleged and proved to have been committed by that person or by a co-conspirator and the accused is a part of a common scheme or plan to engage in the unlawful activity.3) I have spoken to Det. Dinga and I am assured that CPD Financial Crimes will be able to offer assistance in continuing an investigation or starting a new one if that is possible.
I agree: Both of you - and your colleagues - seem like true patriots of honour and integrity.Again, we can not move forward without Mr. Daniggelis' cooperation. He has not been in contact to reschedule and I can not do anything without CPD and myself speaking to him.
OK, yes, you are right, Atty. Simpson. What I'm going to do here is include both Detective Scott J. Dinga (Chicago Police, Financial Crimes Unit) - and retired Attorney, Ray Sanders (a personal friend of Richard B. Daniggelis) in my reply to you. -- Mr Sanders has email, and can pass this message along to Rich. -- But, today, Rich is busy trying to file something - by himself, I think - I am not sure - to ask for an emergency injunction to prevent the inside of his house from being destroyed further, as it is now ongoing. -- Richard's number, again, is 312-774-4741. -- Ray hasn't given me his permission to pass along his phone number (and I think it is not needed, unless Rich's cell phone battery dies - which is a happens on occasion), but Rich does want to visit with you and Det. Dinga, and both of you want to visit with him. -- Thus, I will give you my best prayers and blessings to continue to be patient here. *** I have not gotten Mr. Sander's permission to pass along his email address, but given the time-sensitive nature of this matter (his house being gutted & destroyed, as we speak), I trust he would not mind.I understand your passion and your desire to see this through, which is very commendable. However, too much contact with you, while enjoyable and interesting as you are, is distracting and time consuming.
You are correct. - So, I am "on the same page" as you in your suggestion to get Richard in contact with both you and Detective Dinga, in the Financial Crimes Unit.Please allow time for Mr. Daniggelis to get his situation in order and make an appointment to speak with investigators and myself. There is a phrase, that I want you to bear in mind, "don't confuse activity with action." All the emails and phone calls are a great deal of activity are a great deal of activity, but they are both, respectfully meaningless, unless Mr. Daniggelis comes in a speaks to investigators which then can lead to some action. Then and only then, will I know if there is sufficient evidence to bring a criminal charge for which I can prosecute successfully and overcome the burden of beyond a reasonable doubt.
Please excuse the brevity of this email, but I have other cases that require my attention as well.
Unlike whomever has spoken to Rich in the past in verious offices (unknown details??), you and Det. Dinga are doing all you can. -- I can not ask anything more from you all, except patience and sincere prayers for a "time-window" to open up where all of your schedules line up.Mr. Sanders -- Detective Dinga's contact information, should Richard need it, is 312.746.9661, 606FCU@ChicagoPolice.org, Chicago Police Dept. Financial Crimes Division, 3151 W. Harrison St. Chicago, IL 60612, and Asst. State Atty Thomas Simpson, in the State Atty's Financial Crimes division is below: His email address is thomas.simpson@cookcountyil.govIf I can be of assistance, please ring my bell, and - human tho I am - I will do what I can .. But, as you've said, I've done my part, and the only think I can (and should) do now is give you all breathing room - and wish you well.Gordon W. Watts///Rest assured that, I will give Mr. Daniggelis my full attention when the time comes.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson.
Sincerely,
Thomas P. SimpsonAssistant State's AttorneyCook County State's Attorney's OfficeSpecial Prosecution Bureau13 B 082650 S. CaliforniaChicago, IL 60608The information contained in this electronic message may be confidential and may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please delete the original message from your e-mail system. Thank you.
From: Gww1210@aol.com <Gww1210@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 2:57:32 PM
To: CAPS.018District@chicagopolice.org; Gww1210@aol.com
Cc: DAVID M WILLIAMS (States Attorney); THOMAS SIMPSON (States Attorney); StatesAttorney; gww1210@gmail.com
Subject: Evidence of felony crimes: part *2* of 2: 18th Dist. CITY of CHICAGO, IL Police.City of Chicago, IL Police - 18th District - Near North
Viz: http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cpd.html
1160 N. Larrabee Ave., CAPS.018District@chicagopolice.orgChicago, IL 60610, 312.742.5870Subject: Evidence of felony crimes: part *2* of 2: 18th Dist. CITY of CHICAGO, IL PoliceDear 18th District:I tried to send you evidence of felony crimes, in this case forgery, which, like murder, is one of the exceptions - and thus has no statutes of limitations.The email bounced: I had too many attachments. Here instead is the same email in 2 parts.This email, here, is part *2* of 2 - and has the 2 larger attachments (total of six) of the evidence/documentation of felonies committed. I'm including the SAO as a cc recipient, since I understand that while they can not initiate investigations, they do act as a mediator, in the which they speak to you, politely asking you to investigate. Please do - the elderly victim, a friend of mine, is homeless as a result of this fraud. {{In my last email, I said 'whole' - but I meant: 'while' -- Sorry for any typos.}}Gordon W. Watts///In a message dated 6/13/2016 1:47:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, MAILER-DAEMON@smtp1.chicagopolice.org writes:The following message to <CAPS.018District@chicagopolice.org> was undeliverable.
The reason for the problem:
5.1.0 - Unknown address error 552-'5.3.4 Message size exceeds fixed maximum message size'In a message dated 6/13/2016 1:47:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Gww1210@aol.com writes:-----Original Message-----
From: Gww1210@aol.com
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 13:45:44 -0400
Subject: RE: Joseph Younes, in relation to Gordon Wayne Watts, case #: 2015-IN-03387
To: AKrawczyk@iardc.org, RGolden@iardc.org, RGreggio@iardc.org,
UWard@atg.state.il.us, ADougherty@atg.state.il.us,
Thomas.Simpson@CookCountyIL.gov, CAPS.018District@chicagopolice.org,
Gww1210@aol.com
CC: RoJoe69@yahoo.com, PLShelton@SBCGlobal.net, PKing@khl-law.com,
PKing@KingHolloway.com, AndjelkoGalic@Hotmail.com,
AGForeclosureDefense@Gmail.com, anselm45@gmail.com, gww1210@gmail.com
Atty. Albert S. Krawczyk, Esq., Senior Counsel
Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission130 E. Randolph Dr., STE 1500, Chicago, IL 60601-6209PH:312-565-2600 (Switchboard), PH: 312-540-5277(Mr. Krawczyk), PH: 312-540-5278 (Ms. Golden)Subject: RE: Joseph Younes, in relation to Gordon Wayne Watts, case #: 2015-IN-03387DATE: Monday, 13 June 2016, 01:33pm, CST (Monday, 03 June 2016, 12:33pm, EST )Dear Mr. Krawczyk: (cc to Lisa Madigan's office - 18th Ward police dept in Chicago, and State's Atty office)I just now completed a Public Records Request with the IL Attorney General's Office, to whom I am including a cc copy in my reply, today. (Because it involves Forgery, which has no statutes of limitations, a criminal issue, I'm including the 18th Ward Police Department substation, which should investigate this, and then once they investigate this Forgery, I'm trusting that Thomas Simpson, an intelligent and honest Assistant State's Attorney familiar with this case, will then prosecute this. If the 18th Ward does not do their job, I will make a formal request - with cc's to all - for Lisa Madigan's office to investigate them.) Forgery, like Murder, is one of the few exceptions which has no statutes of limitations.Here are the four (4) key attachments in my email today, many of which I got from FOIA requests:PublicRecords-SCREWUPS-documented.pdf (588.2 KB)FINAL-unOFFICIAL-Mortgage-fraud-multiple-investigations-1720-N-Sedgwick.pdf (3.8 MB)41830RM-JosephYounes-ADMITS-to-FRAUD-yet-profits-from-it.pdf (2.4 MB)Rich-s-POLICE-Report-filed-but-IGNOREDe.pdf (1.5 MB)Here is the purpose in my communication to you today:First, referencing "41830RM-JosephYounes-ADMITS-to-FRAUD-yet-profits-from-it.pdf (2.4 MB)," which I just got the other day, we see Atty. Joseph Younes admitting to "robo-signing" fraud (and complaining to Lisa Madigan's office about it), but as you and I both recall, Mr. Younes then continued to participate in this transaction, thus benefiting from it. (He is complicit, and aided & abetted, thus some have suggested RICO or conspiracy to commit fraud. Others have suggested that Younes blackmailed these 2 banks & 2 servicers to give him a "sweet deal," as reflected in the recent loans he got, the most recent entry at the Recorder's Office. I think he is "innocent until proven guilty" of the conspiracy, but irregardless of conspiracy or the lack thereof, after he admitted to Lisa Madigan in his complaint that there was "Linda Green robo-signing" fraud, his contunued participation is grounds for criminal prosecution - oh, and of course, IARDC discipline, unless there's something I'm missing.)Secondly, in your last letter to me, you repeatedly adjured me that Daniggelis, the elderly mortgage fraud victim has an attorney, and has pending appeals. Well, in case you didn't get the note, his attorney left the country to parts unknown in Europe (possibly a family emergency - I rightly do not know) and has abandoned both his appeals, and both appeals have *now* been dismissed by said appeals court - those appeals which you reference in your letter to me (e.g., IARDC-Sat30Apr2016-crossreply-of-GordonWayneWatts.pdf - 3.1 MB), in which I remind you that in my reply to your IARDC colleague, Atty. Rita Greggio, Esq. (viz: IARDC-reply-of-GordonWayneWatts.pdf - 4.5 MB), I caught Younes in no less then three (3) lies, not counting those discussed in other places. However, since the IL First Appellate Court dismissed both 1-14-2751 (GMAC v Daniggelis) *and* 1-15-0662 (Younes v Daniggelis) for want of prosecution (read: negligence) by Atty. Galic, the victim's attorney, I think your point here falls flat, and you now need, I believe, to recalculate the Calculus you initially used in your claims that Daniggelis was represented (which implied he didn't need help from the IARDC). (I've attached these too, meaning you now have 6, not 4, email attachments.) Furthermore, see PublicRecords-SCREWUPS-documented.pdf (588.2 KB), which shows my difficulty in getting public records early on, thus delaying my ability to show the court a few key things Galic overlooked. So, the courts system (and Galic) have both (independently) failed Daniggelis, the elderly victim, and your claims that he can "go to court" are incorrect. (But I am sure you meant nothing malicious by your oversight & mistake here.)Half-Time: Now, Mr. Galic is a friend - and a man of honour & integrity - much smarter than me (I'm just a country bumpkin, and, of course, not a lawyer - nor do I play one of TV), but he failed to prosecute Daniggelis' case. BUT, I make mention of this "half-time" comment to clear up one key point: No matter what failings Galic made, his case was (just barely) strong enough to show beyond ALL REASONABLE DOUBT (even higher than "clear & convincing") that this was naked fraud. That I added a few things in my Amicus Curiae and my Sworn & Notarised Affidavits only solidified the case for criminal fraud. GALIC did an excellent (but not superiour) job, and I have only praise for him. -- Nonetheless, the record in this case is quite clear: Multiple frauds occurred, and NO LEGAL BASIS existed to simply "snatch the house" away from Daniggelis & give it to Younes - and you know that - and I know that you know that - and if I'm wrong, please show me, & I'll admit wrong.Third, please see FINAL-unOFFICIAL-Mortgage-fraud-multiple-investigations-1720-N-Sedgwick.pdf (3.8 MB), which gives damning evidence of criminal fraud, and then recall that Younes admitted to knowledge of robo-signing fraud - but continued to participate in (and profit from) it. This is a rough draft affidavit which Daniggelis loosely dictated to me, since he can't type: NOTE: I did not act to represent him or give him legal advice here - only as an unpaid secretary, so that's what I typed it up for him. It documents many (but not all) felony crimes discussed herein.Fourthly & lastly, Please notice "Rich-s-POLICE-Report-filed-but-IGNOREDe.pdf" (1.5 MB), which shows Daniggelis reported this forgery, which can be investigated by you, as well as the 18th Ward police dept, but IGNORED. (Apparently where this was reported - I'm not sure if it was the 18th ward, but it was one of them). The Police Dept and the IARDC can investigate this as well. I trust that you are honest - I know that from the attention to detail you gave my complaint. Also, the 18th Ward and their FOIA officers were all polite when they spoke with me, but I am putting them on notice - with Bcc's in this email to ALL local news media - that unless they do their job, I will make a formal complaint to Lisa Madigan for negligence on their part - and ask my friend, Rich Daniggelis, the elderly victim - to do the same - since I know from unnamed sources that his attorney does not understand the need to ask for this - and has, I am told - outright refused to pursue these financial felony crimes. So, you might clean up the mess he left. I am highly displeased with my friend, Mr. Galic's negligence here, but he is my friend, and working pro bono (for free) for Rich, and has a heavy case-load, so I wil not bring a complaint to you against my friend, Atty. Andjelko Galic.You may call Rich Daniggelis at 312-774-4742 or Anjelko Galic at his publicly-listed work numbers. NOTE: Daniggelis, initially afraid to speak to the press for fear of offending his attorney, now has given the "Green Light" to all news media (in the Bcc line of this email) to call him. When Rich's house began being gutted & destroyed by construction, which began about a week ago, he had a change of heart. ***NEWS MEDIA, PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THIS LINE***In conclusion, I don't hate Mr. Younes: I don't want him to end up homeless, but he stole another man's house, and the record is CLEAR: Rich Daniggelis did not get paid a PENNY for this, rendering the sale contract illegal, & null & void ab initio (from the get go) - no contract is valid without consideration (payment), and Younes will be just fine if he stops his criminal activities, I trust: He seems intelligent & otherwise capable of moving on, but AS I SPEAK, the Chicago Building Dept has confirmed that Younes is destroying the inside of the Old Towne historic district house which he stole (1720 N. Sedgwick), and would almost destroy the outside, but for historic district rules. (By "destroying," I mean removing a complete refit and remodeling - I don't mean "making it ininhabbitable, but it is what it is: Illegal, Immoral, and plain nonsense.)Again, I've raised serious legal claims of illegal and felony criminal financial crimes - as more-fully documented on my own online docket:mirror:front page-news on http://GordonWatts.com and http://GordonWayneWatts.com (See e.g., the December 1st, 2015 news item: "(Tue. 01 Dec. 2015, from Staff Reports) Courts * Chicago Courts refuse to help elderly 'Mortgage Rescue Scam' victim; make him homeless: For those who remember, this is almost exactly like the famous 2009 CHICAGO 'Mortgage Rescue' Scam case in which Lessie Towns became temporarily famous, and had a personal visit from former Gov. Pat Quinn (D-Ill.) to address her problem...")If I'm wrong in my claims of crimes which are not justified (but only "rubber stamped" by some trial court judge - and ignored by appeals courts), then you show me where I'm wrong, and I'll admit wrong, and drop my complaint. Otherwise, I request you pursue these various complaints. If I can be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.With kind regards, I Am, Sincerely,Gordon W. Watts - full contact info, in signature below...In a message dated 5/3/2016 12:40:23 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Gww1210@aol.com writes:Atty. Albert S. Krawczyk, Esq., Senior Counsel
Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission130 E. Randolph Dr., STE 1500, Chicago, IL 60601-6209PH:312-565-2600 (Switchboard), PH: 312-540-5277(Mr. Krawczyk), PH: 312-540-5278 (Ms. Golden)Subject: "Re: Joseph Younes, in relation to Gordon Wayne Watts, case #: 2015-IN-03387"DATE: Monday, 02 May 2016, 11:40pm, CST (Tuesday, 03 May 2016, 12:40am, EST )Dear Mr. Krawczyk:I am in receipt of your postal mail dated Feb. 19, 2016 (a copy of which is in the attachments in this email, here). Thank you for the excellent attention to detail that you gave, some of which uncovered surprising admissions by Mr. Younes, at least three of which can easily be proved false. While your conclusion was legally-speaking incorrect, I think you made an excellent "good faith" effort.Additionally, as I stated in my reply (attached) to your legal findings, I would like to apologize, Big Time – Major League: As you know, you replied to me over 2 months ago, but many things came up, and I tender my deep apologies for my negligence: If anything happens to my friend, Mr. Daniggelis, as a result of my delay, his blood will be on my hands, and I will be 100% and fully at fault. –Therefore: I am including you this electronic copy of my reply (which my records show was signed for and received by an "L.MEDINA" this morning).After I proof-read your response and my reply, I noticed several typos that I had overlooked before sending, and so I would like to offer a brief "addendum" to my crossreply:1) First off, you reference "1725" N. Sedgewick St. (in Old Towne) as Mr. Daniggelis' home. Actually it is 1720, not 1725, and it's "Sedgwick," without the 2nd letter 'e' (a misspelling), not "Sedgewick,". However, I myself made numerous small typographical errors in my own reply (attached as a PDF in my email here), so I'm not going to be "finger pointing" in this regard. (I don't think my typos changed the meaning of anything, and so I trust they are "harmless error" mistakes, as the legal saying goes.)2) I referenced Mr. Younes' mailing address as "120 W Madison St Ste 1405, Chicago, IL 60602-4128," but it may be 166 W. Washington St. STE 600," and his number might be "312-802-1122," and not "312-372-1122," as I indicated in my reply, here. (You might check with him for official updated contact information.)3) You take issue with the fact that Mr. Andjelko Galic did not file a complaint with the IARDC, and there were two points that I seemed to have forgotten to mention in my reply. I do vividly recall Mr. Daniggelis saying something about wanting to contact the IARDC, as well as the other regulatory agencies, including but not limited to, the Atty. General's Office. In that regard, my complaint does probably represent the wished of Mr. Daniggelis, tho he might have to review my specific assertions to verify exactly what happened. Secondly, I do recall hearing that Mr. Galic has been under a very heavy workload, and this might partly explain why he did not file a complaint to the IARDC, as Mr. Daniggelis would have liked. I can not speak for Mr. Galic, but this is a possible explanation. You might speak with Daniggelis and Galic to get more exact details, as they are the principles, and I am merely a Good Samaritan, trying to be a "catalyst for change" -positive change, that is.4) When speaking with Robert J. More the other day, he informed me that he wishes to join my complaint, as he feels that he has some stake or interest in this matter. You might also contact him, and you might also expect a visit or phone call from him. I am copying him in my reply, here, and he may be contacted at anselm45@gmail.com and (708) 495-1027. He was a 'tenant' of Daniggelis, but, so far as I know, not a "paying" tenant. (Daniggelis lost loads of rent monies because no sane tenant would rent from him with a dark cloud hanging over the title & related pending litigation.)5) Also, you said that Mr. Shelton was disbarred for an 'unrelated' matter. NOT. First off, he lost his broker's license after the IBFPR found he did a reverse mortgage scam on Ms. Lessie Towns, just as I allege that he and Younes are presently doing against Daniggelis. Secondly, the loss of his law licence by your agency, the IARDC, was for similar and related misconduct - even if not exactly the same. Yo umay confirm that by either reviewing your own records, or if it's more convenient, here's a comparison chart between Towns and Daniggelis, showing the similarities:or:This link can be found at the top of my Open Source download docket of the related court cases:or:That, in turn, is still front-page news at The Register (e.g., www.GordonWatts.com / www.GordonWayneWatts.com), and is the Tue. 01 Dec. 2015, news item: "from Staff Reports) Courts * Chicago Courts refuse to help elderly 'Mortgage Rescue Scam' victim; make him homeless."It is NOT without moment, Mr. Krawczyk, that Mr. Shelton is a repeat offender, having done various types of mortgage scams, on at least two occasions, resulting in disciplinary action (and disbarment) by both the IDFPR and then later the IARDC. (Where there's smoke, there's fire.) But, respectfully, Younes is (in my opinion) even more guilty, since he is the one benefiting (or trying to benefit) from this conversion.6) After sitting and meditating, I discovered that I appear to have overlooked mentioning three (3) VERY BIG problems, so I wish to amend for my oversight here: ((#1)) First off, Daniggelis has previously told me that Shelton had alleged, in open court, that he (Daniggelis) signed something that he didn't. ((#2)) Secondly, Daniggelis has previously told me that Lisa Vitek, Shelton's wife, supported this alleged false testimony. ((#3)) Thirdly, Daniggelis also told me that Younes made a false statement (either in court or deposition - I rightly don't recall), in which Younes claimed that Daniggelis had an injured back & said that he'd chosen to skip show up for the closing (as I recall). Daniggelis said that he was never able to properly inform the court of these three (3) perjury-type statements, since (of course) Daniggelis does not know how to file court pleadings as do I. (And, I'm guessing that Galic was too busy to file said affidavits, but that is only a guess: I can not speak for Galic.)This point here is key: Coming from me, as you know, this is mere "hearsay," and the fact that my Affidavit in the 3 pending cases (Civil, Chancery, and Law Divisions) was witnessed & notarised by an actual notary public in Polk County, Florida, only makes MY various statements "official," meaning it is "verified" hearsay, but, at the end of the day, my claims that Daniggelis was VERY, VERY upset at being lied about no less than 3 times (you'd be mad if three lawyers/etc. lied about you, too, wouldn't you?) is still only hearsay.For that reason, I believe it appropriate to speak not only to Mr. More, but also to Mr. Daniggelis, and get it "official," straight from the horse's mouth. While Mr. Galic, who is representing Daniggelis pro bono, is justifid in being upset at "one more thing" to take his limited time, I trust that he'll cooperate with you in communicating with Daniggelis, should you need to get more details or an official statement.Finally, as I've stated in my reply to you, I could be wrong about my claims that no consideration (payment) was made -- or, for that matter, any of my claims of fact, or conclusions at law, I'll be glad to admit wrong -if and ONLY if I'm wrong. (Remember: I admitted to Hon. Michael F. Otto, the associate judge in Chancery overseeing one of Daniggelis' cases, that I was wrong about my claims to a right to a telephonic hearing, and I'll admit wrong to you, too, but not simply because you say so: Only if I am actually wrong, and it can be shown to me.)You raised a number of point in your February reply, Mr. Krawczyk, and some were correct, but others incorrect. I replied to each and every concern that you raised. Please find attached my reply, in PDF format -- and cross-posted online to said websites, linked above - as well as sent to you by hard-copy, and received & signed for, this morning, by the front-desk receptionist, and signed for by an "L.MEDINA."PS: I got an AOL notification that PMSA136@aol.com, which was for Paul Shelton, is no longer a valid email address, so I'm updating my email on this head, removing said email address, and resending.~~GWW//Very truly yours,Gordon Wayne Watts, editor-in-chief, The Register
www.GordonWayneWatts.com / www.GordonWatts.com
BS, The Florida State University, Biological & Chemical Sciences;
Class of 2000, double major with honours
AS, United Electronics Institute, Class of 1988, Valedictorian
821 Alicia Road, Lakeland, FL 33801-2113
Home:(863)688-9880 Work: (863)686-3411 Voice&FAX:(863)687-6141 Cell:(863)409-2109
See also: http://Gordon_Watts.Tripod.com/consumer.html
Gww1210@aol.com ; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com
Truth is the strongest, most stable force in the Universe
Truth doesn't change because you disbelieve it
TRUTH doesn't bend to the will of tyrantshttp://GordonWayneWatts.com / http://GordonWatts.com
Get Truth
"First, they [Nazis] came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me."(Martin Niemöller, given credit for a quotation in The Harper Religious and Inspirational Quotation Companion, ed. Margaret Pepper(New York: Harper &Row, 1989), 429 -as cited on page 44, note 17,of Religious Cleansing in the American Republic, by Keith A. Fornier,Copyright 1993, by Liberty, Life, and Family Publications.
Some versions have Mr. Niemöller saying: "Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant"; other versions have him saying that they came for Socialists, Industrialists, schools, the press,and/or the Church; however, it's certain he DID say SOMETHING like this. Actually, they may not have come for the Jews first, as it's more likely they came for the prisoners, mentally handicapped, &other so-called "inferiors" first -as historians tell us-so they could get "practiced up"; however, they did come for them -due to the silence of their neighbors -and due in part to their own silence. So: "Speak up now or forever hold your peace!"-GWW