After another court hearing on July 6, 2000, when again Judge Manning failed to take back her judicial perjuries, I attended in court and interviewed Hanley again in the presence of Dan Ivy.
"Skolnick: So, do you think putting Bob on my TV Show will do some good?
Hanley: No. The time to put him on would have been two years ago at the time of the summary judgment. It's too late now.
Skolnick: So Coca-Cola understands all about this case, through your sister.
Hanley: Yes.
Whereupon, Hanley left."
The foregoing transcripts are contained in my signed Declaration attached to Kolody's Motion for the Judge to wipe out all her rulings of substance because of the Fraud Upon the Court by the Judge and Coca-Cola's spy in Kolody's camp for ten years. [Motion filed 8/9/2000, in No. 97 C 190.]
As I later discovered, Daniel V. Hanley's sister, Mary Hanley, is Associate Media Director [(312) 552-6368] of the huge, worldwide advertising firm, DDB. [Visit their website:http://www.ddb.com and click on their world directory of personnel for Chicago and Mary Hanley.]
As I put in my Declaration in Court: "The long-term custom, practice, and usage, in certain parts of the U.S. to purportedly purchase federal judgeships, has been a subject of investigations and commentaries by Skolnick and his closest associates, from 1966 to the present date. Skolnick has such a commentary on his website, http://www.skolnicksreport.com…Knowledgeable sources have informed Skolnick that the upwards of one million dollars to purportedly purchase the judgeship for Blanche M. Manning came from William F. Cellini via U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun. Law enforcement personnel contend to Skolnick that Cellini, heavily active in gambling casinos, is reporrtedly a key player in the crime cartel."
More details from my court
Declaration:
"Skolnick jointly with some of his associates in court reform, have been investigating the circumstances of a case pending before Judge Manning: USA vs. Joseph Jerome Miedzianowski, et al., defendants, No. 98 CR 923, U.S. District Court,Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. The circumstances show: (a) Judge Manning, many times without notice conducted closed door and secret proceedings in the case; (b) ordered the censoring, by redacting of court and other transcripts; (c) Chicago Tribune Company petitioned, to intervene in the case as of right, for among other purposes, for access to sealed judicial records and transcripts of proceedings; (d) Chicago Tribune apparently never publicly disclosed their objections to the secret proceedings in the case. Some references to this situjation are contained in the case in No.98 CR 923, among other items, docket items No. 174, 175, 176 , 180, 182, 186, 192."
3/