I hope everyone is doing fine. Our court watchers are out there in full force.
Two major (fun) topics to read today. 1) Peter Schmeidel’s complaint against myself and Ken Ditkowsky which he apparently filed in April, 2012 which was a renewal of something he wrote to the ARDC in Feb. of 2012 which they held was DISMISSED. Yeah for the First Amendment and actually reading it, and believing in it. A link to the actual documents are attached and I think it particularly funny where he attached a copy of my blog; and
2) The Probate is still trying to erect a completely dead horse and attack a 2.5 year old judgment? Don’t they know that horse is dead. In December of 2009 Harvey Waller and son wrongfully froze all of Gloria’s accounts causing her much grief and consternation. Then what happened is they corrected that and Gloria moved the money to Indiana, I believe in someone elses’ name. Then they continued to freeze money in Indiana as if Cook County Probate court never heard of State’s rights and don’t believe it’s jurisdiction only extends to state borders. Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern stood idly by, turned a blind eye, and I believe supported this move which was clearly ultra vires! Yikes.
Now it has been 2.5+ years since the underlying judgment (the Lumberman’s money to repair Gloria’s house), was wrongfully seized and frozen. The whole case makes absolutely no sense because the house is lying to waste, it is not getting repaired to sell, the court and GAL’s stopped that for some strange reason. Now they want to partition the house–it’s all insane. (Could it be money, money, greed, greed? you betcha!) But worst of all, the two year deadline has come and passed, and the Probate Court says it does not have to follow the rules of Illinois Civil Procedure, as if a King or Queen were sitting in the court room. Last I heard, the US did NOT adopt a monarchy in 1780 and appoint royalty in the courtrooms on the 18th floor of the Daley Center! I heard George Washington was elected and refused to adopt a monarchy on this soil and that happened more than 200 years ago.
Am I missing something or do we now have King Rahm Emmanuel, or perhaps the Board President Toni Preckwinkel has declared herself Queen and confirmed royalty status upon the Circuit Court judges? Was there a ceremony? Did I miss that edition of the SunTimes.
Anyone want to explain this to me?
Here’s the link to the documents you won’t want to miss reading, esp. since Prince nearly appointed Peter Schmeidel declared his ARDC complaint to be “confidential” (he might want to read those rules a bit more carefully, the recipient holds the privilege and not the respondent, duh! And I’m a generous chick that will willingly share stupid ARDC complaints for entertainment purposes on this blog) He wants his complaints to be enforced AND secret, as if that will happen with a mouthy chick running a blog. If I want to run a blog that is hypercritical of the ethically challenged antics of Peter Schmeidel, Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern, I have the legal right to do this and question every bit of their greedy self serving actions in Courtroom1804. I’ll be darned if I give up that right. They are indeed the three stooges of the courtroom.
Ohh, don’t get me going
Check this doct out:
And now for the rest of the posts for the day. Thanks so much to the contributors who are willing to bravely share their thoughts to make this world a better place for grandma and grandpa and who refuse to sell out to the status quo!
Dear Gloria (from Ken Ditkowsky)
Even though Stern was quiet it is still three on one.
In the not too distant past ganging up on someone was considered ‘bad form.’ The Motion in Limine that I sent you once submitted should is reasonably calculated to force Stuart to sit up strictly to protect herself (as you will be sending a copy to the Judicial inquiry board) and make inquiry on the three stooges to respond. If she asks for advice from whomever is advising her he/she will tell her to quickly address the Sodini issue and if there is no compliance to immediately order the notices sent out and set a hearing.
By the motion in limine concerning Dr. Shaw you have countered the anticipated new step. That will not be lost upon her. By outlining all the jurisdictional aspects that are violated you have blocked Schmiedel’s next anticipated gambit. There is just too much wrong with he proceedings that will be on record for the Court to quickly hold a bunch of hearings and then proceed with business as usual.
It is clear that you are smarter than either Stern or Farenga. You frustrate Schmiedel as he cannot understand why it is so difficult to deal with Carolyn and her destructive moods and no matter what he does he cannot push you over the edge.
If you want a laugh – think what he had to deal with when he and Carolyn left the courtroom. There is going to be real shortage of fishing worms this year in the Naperville area. I imagine that when your sister reads the Motion in Limine Schmiedel is going to need asbestos panties! Count 2 will give him full credit for being so stupid as to be defeated in Court by a mere ‘girl!’
From: GLORIA to KEN D.
Stern said absolutely nothing yesterday as CF did 80% of the objections and Adam asked one question at the end about mothers attorney Larry from the center of concern. It opened the door to ask Kevin if he knew whether or not mother spoke with Larry about the appropriation agreement. They objected to the question but k was allowed to answer: he said no. I asked him if he ever advised mother too seek outside counsel regarding signing any agreement and he said he may have but really did not recall.
That at all times KS never reported to the court or anybody that mother was incompetent and didn’t understand or was not under legal advisement is interesting. I was not allowed to ask Kevin if he found my mother competent at the time he met with her when he did nit recall the conversation. Another words mothers counsel could not speak on behalf of mothers mental capacity but if mother was incompetent then they the attorneys should be libel for the financial exploitation.****
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 05:01:09 -0700
From: kenditkowsky, To: Gloria, Joanne and Tim
From the reports of yesterday’s hearing Gloria knocked the cover off the ball.
That gave me the opportunity to send Schmiedel an e-mail that should help both he and Cynthia on their diet. I did not copy either Farenga or Stern – just an oversight that should make the effect more *** when they see it.
What Gloria told me yesterday was that Stern, Farenga, Stuart and Schmiedel are in denial. They know that there is no jurisdiction but they are continuing their harassment in the hope of ‘cracking her.’ In fact they are completely at sea because they have not been successful. What is even more disturbing to the ‘bad guys’ is that they have not gotten Gloria to the point where she antagonizes all her friends and is alone in the wilderness. For this reason we are now the friends, family and neighbors of Gloria and Mary.
The bad guys know that they have no jurisdiction and the proceedings have great moment in their lives as they have placed their economic livelihood in our hands. Their insurance does not cover intentional torts, and the Greylord conduct can result in 7 figure non dischargable verdicts. The flurry of ARDC complaints being filed by these clout heavy criminals against JoAnne and me continues. As late as April 7 Schmiedel filed another ARDC complaint – this one was that I had a blog! So what – I have a right to have a blog – I don’t but these miscreants are not concerned with the truth, or the facts.
Mr. Schmiedel and Mr. Stern threatened me. I do not like green eggs and ham. therefore I will continue to engage in my little acts of friendship and brotherhood.
The next focus point is helping Farenga to reach her goal of being 300 lbs. In my opinion it would held Diane’s therapy is to feel anorexic
I read in your ‘latest’ complaint about me to the ARDC. This one appears to be that I have a ‘blog!’ That is news to me! Let me enlighten you – I am a citizen of the United States of America and I have a good faith belief that Chicago, Illinois still is part of the USA. If you have any information to the contrary I would appreciate your immediate communication of such information.
Attached to your ARDC complaint was your response to complaints by ordinary citizens concerning your lawyering. They were indeed interesting. I know that I’ve mentioned this before when we had our first conversation – like it or not we live in the United States of America in the year 2012. At least for the forseeable future Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution and the First Amendment are still in full force and effect and neither you, Cyntha Feragna, or Adam Stern et al have any authority or right to interfere with my right or my client’s rights of free speech, assembly or our right to complain to the government.
NOw as to the Blog. In your complaint letter to the ARDC you complain about my having one. I understand that Ms. Feranga and Mr. Stern have made similar complaints. If I do indeed have such an entity (Apparently I also have a website.) my American citizenship gives me the such a right. Indeed, I also have the right to say any damn thing in it that I desire without your permission. Indeed, I do not need Adam Stern or Cynthia Feranga’s permission either. Why you think that the Illinois Attorney Registration and Discipline Commission can censor the words and phrases that I utter is also very interesting? As a public entity any action taken to limit a citizen’s First Amendment or Article 1 rights is strictly ultra vires and more importantly barred by Federal and State law. In fact you can also create a Blog and say anything you want. The only limitation is that the statements should be truthful or defamation could occur. A complaint to law enforcement that criminal conduct is suspected is not a defamation, unethical, improper or fattening. In 2012 United States of America even being critical of such luminaries as Schmiedel, Farenga, and/or Stern is not a defamation, unethical or in anyway improper.
Let me make it very clear to you. As I informed you in our first conversation I do not take kindly to threats or intimidation. I am very resentful of your attempt to intimidate me with the spurious sanction motion that you, Farenga and Stern brought pursuant to Rule 137 in a court without jurisdiction. The fact that the Appellate Court vacated the sanction because there was no jurisdiction will be addressed in due time. My clients and I will seek substantial punitive damages for the outrage.
The friends of Mary Sykes and Gloria Sykes are similarly aggrieved by what appears to us to be extra- judicial activity directed against both Mary and Gloria Sykes. Let me remind once again. Your statements on the record have been recorded and the record of the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois will not be spoliated. They admit (in my opinion) that the Jurisdictional Sodini notices were never served! In my opinion that at no time prior to any hearing on the issue of Mary Sykes’ competency has the Sodini notices been served on close relatives of Mary Sykes. As this is jurisdictional and for the purpose of protecting a senior from being railroaded into losing her civil rights, privileges and immunities protected by the Federal and State constitutions it is my opinion that if Mary Sykes and her family are entitled to Equal Protection under the Law and the probate proceedings in regard to Sykes have been proceeding without jurisdiction. That should have some very serious consequences.
Finally the Friends of Gloria Sykes are aggrieved that Gloria Sykes’ Lumberman judgment should be collaterally attacked and that in spite of the full faith and credit criterion you, Stern and Farenga are proceeding before Judge Stuart in an Appeal to overturn the judgment entered by a Circuit Court Judge in the Lumberman’s case. What is really interesting is the fact that Judge Connors was part of a concurring opinion that pointed out that after a judgment becomes final, the only attack that is available is pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2 1401. In essence in my opinion Judge Stuart is sitting and hearing testimony concerning the Lumberman case as an Appellate Judge without designation. In my opinion she does not have jurisdiction and the freezing of Ms. Sykes assets was and is illegal.
Justice Sotomeyer in the Jerman case made it very clear that Lawyers and Judges are presumed to know the law, and this is a very strong presumption. It is my opinion that these jurisdictional issues that seem not to matter in the Sykes case. – however, Mr. Schmiedel in the year 2012 in the United States of America we judge lawyer’s conduct by the ‘clear light of hindsight!’ Lawyer to Lawyer these jurisdictional deficiencies should be remediated instanter so as to mitigate damages. Additional complaints to the ARDC complaining about my exercise of my right to Free Speech is just going to ultimately enrich my heirs! The acting under color of statute to deprive a citizen of his/her civil rights in my opinion is a tort that is not dischargeable in Bankruptcy.
You, Farenga, and Stern complained to the ARDC that I offered a ‘safe harbor’ to you in consideration of Justice being afforded Mary and Gloria Sykes. This ‘safe harbor’ was refused and is not being offered again.
I still desired to ‘free Mary Sykes’ and in the interests of being a good citizen and recognizing that I might be wrong (though I truly believe that I am correct) I then suggested that we all agree that the States Attorney be requested to do an independent investigation so as to sort out the averments and the alleged miscreant activities. That was also refused by your and it appears to me a concerted effort was undertaken to ‘shut me up!’ This effort is an admission that something is rotten in Denmark!
As you can observe intimidation has not worked on me or the friends family and neighbors of Mary Sykes and Gloria Sykes. We are continuing to call upon law enforcement to investigation and make certain that Mary Sykes, Gloria Sykes, JoAnne Denison, yours truly and every other person involved as a friend, relative or neighbor of Mary Sykes and/or Gloria Sykes be afforded their civil rights, human rights and equal protection of the law. We do not attorn or agree with you that we are second and third class citizens because we lack ‘clout!’ That said, Mr. Schmiedel I disagree with you, and will resist you at ever juncture, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to disagree with me.
As to my alleged Blog – The only problem that exists is the fact that everyone but me can access it and apparently knows all about it. I would appreciate it if you would assist me in finding it and accessing it. To my knowledge the only Blog that I have or maintain is in your imagination!
you may post this memorandum on your blog – or anyone else who desires to post it can do the same. What has happened in the Sykes case and similar cases is a travesty and a terrorist attack on the Civil Liberties of the senior citizens of the United STates of America. This new form of “Jim Crow” is a cancer that is killing the soul of America.
APPEAL TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
JIM CROW IS ALIVE AND WELL
At all times relevant Mary Sykes was a well-adjusted female, aged 90 years old. In approximately 2005, Mary’s older daughter took her a lawyer. When they emerged a series of documents surfaced that were deceptive and misleading; however, the intended effect was clear. The older daughter was to have full and complete control over the mother’s substantial estate.
Unfortunately for the older daughter Mary discovered what had happened to her when she examined her bank account and discovered that $4000 had been removed from her account by the older daughter. Mary confronted the daughter and was told “mom, I invested your funds in an IRA” Even Mary knew that at her age she was not eligible to invest in an IRA and after an altercation Mary sought an order of Protection in the Circuit Court. The Court personnel helped her prepare the verified petition.
The daughter responded with a Petition to have a guardian appointed for Mary Sykes. Even though Mary’s treating physician refused to sign the ‘doctor’s report’ the Judge advised the older daughter to find another doctor. An ethically challenged doctor who would attest to both President Obama and President Bush being in need of a plenary guardian – such as the older daughter- was quickly found and he executed the documents.
The Court appointed two guardian ad litem. These ‘clout’ rich miscreants immediately joined with the older daughter in her quest and they submitted an agreed order to the willing judge who promptly appointed the older daughter as the plenary guardian with authority to separate Mary Sykes from her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights. The entire story is set forth in the probate file of Mary Sykes housed in the Circuit Court of Cook County 69 W. Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois.
This saga is repeated every single day in Probate and orphan’s courts across the United States of Illinois. Alleged abusers and other miscreants are given absolute control over seniors with little or no concern for civil rights, human rights, statutory protections or common decency. In the Sykes case all the protections afforded by Law have been ignored. A simple precaution such as naming and serving all the close relatives prior to an incompetency hearing for Mary Sykes was ignored and two years later continues to be ignored.
Just for the record the incompetency hearing provides for standard of proof referred to as ‘clear and convincing.’ The agreement of three interested people to the detriment of the alleged incompetent is disingenuous. Other protections most of which are jurisdictional have been equally observed by avoidance or just distorting the truth.
One of the easiest ways for a dictator or a criminal to destroy dissent is to have opponent ‘put away’ as crazy, incompetent, etc. Today, as reported on the Blogs and the Report of the United States Government Accounting office is the rampage of Elder Abuse and Financial Exploitation of the Elderly. Sheriff Dart (Cook County) sponsored a conference that addressed this serious problem. The most vicious of these criminal conspiracies is promulgated by the appointment by the Courts of avarice motivated clout heavy individuals who are not burdened by the Judio- Christian Ethic that permeates American Law. By Court orders, as occurred in the Sykes case, a plenary guardian is appointed (whether the individual needs such assistance of not) and this plenary guardian exercises complete control over the person and property of the victim.
With the aid of a ‘rubber stamp’ Judge, who approves whatever whim and desire of the guardian put before him (the judge) the senior’s liberty and human rights are forfeited. As long as the money holds out the senior is kept from obtaining his/her final resting place; however, as is indicated in Scott Evan’s affidavit the interim between the guardian’s appointment and final reward may be a living hell!
Lincoln freed the slaves! You and I by our procrastination have made our senior citizens the new victims of an even more vicious Jim Crow than existed in the 1860’s. The new Klu Klux Klan headquarters in our probate courts. A written order signed by judge substitutes for burning a cross or a worn bed sheet.
I urge Law Enforcement and particularly the Sheriff of Cook County and the States Attorney of Cook County to independently and fully investigate the Sykes case My office will co-operate fully as will friends, neighbors, and family of Mary Sykes.
There are hundreds of people similarly situated who are literally dying for Law Enforcement to investigate the incarceration and looting of their mothers, fathers, brothers et al estates by Court appointed miscreants. The ‘rape’ of the seniors in the United States is a National disgrace. The ‘cover up’ is outrageous and a testament to the breakdown of the American culture. The terrorist threat is from us! We by our failure to root out the criminals who take advantage of the Justice System to destroy the lifetimes of saving and hard work of our mothers, father’s et al are disingenuous. Every day that the guardians appointed in the Sykes case continue their nefarious actions is a sad day for every single citizen and another lesson to our children and grandchildren that if you have ‘clout’ it does not matter what the law says.
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else. This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it. And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes. Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.
PS – This blog is primarily for entertainment purposes only and please don’t file any pleadings or documents in court without checking with the sources for errors. My rate to review is $300 per hour. Sorry, but portions of this blog have to be entertaining so we can get the word out. There is most certainly a great deal of (stinging) truth in it, esp. for the GAL’s, the probate court and a society that ignores (thereby condoning) the sleazy world of probate, and in particular the 18th floor of the Daley Center in Chicago, but everyone needs to understand, these are not pleadings, there is no Motion, Response and Reply set by any court, together with extended legal argument recorded by a court reporter and subject to a Motion to Reconsider if errors or new evidence is found. So don’t take it that way. Like a good reporter, do your own due diligence and check with the sources first. Honestly, I have to explain blogs to attorneys? Have they no life? Do they not know how to email me or use the “comments” section at all?