Gloria writes to Lea Black regarding her subpoena for a Deposition

You go, Gloria!

Subject: RE: ARDC Lea Black — Subpoena deposition for Gloria Jean Sykes–please cross post!

Dear Ms. Black,


I received your call, and thank your for composing yourself, as I ask.  Yes as I told you before I hung up, I was hanging up as you were yelling at me in a very patronizing, bullying tone.  Suffice, I wrote a complaint to the Administrator in Springfield and asked for assistance: I will not be available to take this subpoena on the 5th as I had previous arrangements to enjoy the 4th of July out of the lawlessness of Chicago.  If you would like you can subpoena the name(s) of the family or friends who I am traveling with and will be spending the holiday week with.  You can also get a subpoena for my pooches medical records as he has been sick and it was touch and go as to whether or not I would be able to travel as I do not go anywhere without him.  Also, I asked the Administrator to tell you that you should subpoena all of the files on Shaggy that your buddies, Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga and Peter Schmiedel stole from my Homestead, alone with all of my confidential legal files, work product/intellectual properties, et al.  All said, I do believe I am protected under the Constitutions of the State of Illinois and the United States, as well as protections offered under the Illinois Supreme Court — unless of course you can provide me with a record of conviction that I have done anything criminal in my life that would cause actions against me by your agency and the Illinois Supreme Court.  

I am seriously disappointed that you have taken the stance you have and have treated me like a ‘criminal’ rather than a volunteer witness.  I stand by my affidavit and quite honestly don’t understand how it is that you can ignore the obvious that my mother, 93 is being held hostage by a named abuser, isolated and medically and emotionally neglected, without Sodini requirements by a group of attorneys who are hiding behind their appointments for financial gain.  I have sent the ARDC all of the transcripts and each one clearly shows criminal activity.  But then, I guess the ARDC must protect the political elite/clout behind all of this.

Today, Ms. Black, June 30, 2009 is the 3rd anniversary of when Toerpe kidnapped my mother under the nose of Judge Kirby of the domestic relations court.  GAL Stern was order to get all police records against Toerpe and he did not do so because each one proved not only my mother’s competency, but the truth as to who is the financial exploiter and abuser — CAROLYN TOERPE.  

I was suppose to leave this weekend, but I just spoke to my companion healing pooch’s Vet and I have to reschedule for departure on Monday.  Again, if you want to subpoena my family and/or friends please give me evidence that I have any criminal judgement against me… and that I have done anything wrong. Remember, you gave attorney Kenneth Ditkowsky four dates over three weeks ago and didn’t serve me until the 29 June 2012.  Did you really expect me to wait around for one date that you picked and then you pick a date on a Holiday weekend/week???  

I do not waive my rights as an American Citizen or as a human being living in America, the land of the Free… or so I thought.  Happy 4th of July.

Dates I am available are:

10, 11, 12 July 2012

18, 19, July 2012

I am certain that under the circumstances, you will consider and make proper arrangements for my companion healing pooch, Shaggy to be present.  I will not be placed in a situation of adversity and hostility, such as the ARDC or any person of the ARDC, or any person such as CArolyn Toerpe, Fred Toerpe, Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmiedel, Deborah Jo Soehlig, Joel Brodsky, et al, who have repeatedly threatened my live, livelihood, and freedoms– so much so, that even a challenged child could recognize the lawlessness, the Hitler-like T-4 Plan, prevalent in in and regarding the Estate of Mary G. Sykes.  

I am only participating in this witch-hunt in order to protect my mother and save her life.  Nothing more and nothing less.  You want the truth, I’m willing to provide you with the truth — evidence which you have in your possession already!

Yes God Bless America and all of us that we are protected from the Probate thieves and the hypocrisy of the Illinois ARDC and that our loved ones, the elderly and disabled, are protected, too.  You Ms. Black are in a position to save my Mother’s life and in doing so, save the lives of thousands of Illinois victims.  The bird is in your hand.

Gloria Jean Sykes 
Bon Ami Productions, Inc. 

773.910-3310(cell)
773.631-9262 (fax and office line)

From Ken Ditkowsky–the breadth of the First Amendment!

From Ken Ditkowsky:

Yesterday I re-read the ARDC complaint that was filed concerning my protests and communications in regard to Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga and the miscreants who acted under color of statute to deprive Mary Sykes of her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights.   The action taken is not even subtle.   It is a heavy handed attempt to shut me up.  My protest and exercise of my First Amendment Rights are particularly unpleasant to Mr. Stern, Ms. Farenga and those aiding and abetting their conduct.   I mentioned the fact that the breach of a fiduciary relationship is a ‘taxable event!’   When Stern, Farenga et al concealed the isolation and abuse of Mary Sykes by not filing reports to the Court of such conduct and instead defamated and castigated Gloria Sykes and those who protested they breached their fiduciary relationships to Mary Sykes.    When the plenary guardian drilled the safety deposit box and removed from it a large number of double eagle gold coins and other valuables and did not inventory the same it was not only a breach of fiduciary relationship but ‘theft!’    If the Federal and STate Income taxes have not been paid – that is tax evasion and possibly tax fraud.

As this has been now disclosed and made public we have called for an honest, comprehensive and complete investigation.   There is no just reason for Mary Sykes (aged 93) to be denied her civil rights and there is no reason why those persons who benefited by the non-inventory of the very valuable double eagle gold coins (worth about $3000 each) should not pay the Federal and State of Illinois taxes on the collectibles.

My continued mention of the fact that usually non-inventoried valuables in the possession of a guardian are not reported as income by the fiduciary has generated personal attacks on me from not only the two guardian ad litem, the plenary guardian and her attorneys, but now the ARDC.   Indeed, the fact that I undertook an investigation is the sole complaint against me.   I am also defending an attorney who is being investigated upon similar charges.  My defense to the Gulag is the First Amendment.    The following quote is particularly appropriate:

Like freedom of speech and a free press, the right of peaceable assembly was considered by the Framers of our Constitution to lie at the foundation of a government *523 based upon the consent of an informed citizenry-a government dedicated to the establishment of justice and the preservation of liberty. U.S.Const., Amend. I. And it is now beyond dispute that freedom of association for the purpose of advancing ideas and airing grievances is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from invasion by the States. De Jonge v. State of Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364, 57 S.Ct. 255, 259, 81 L.Ed. 278; N.A.A.C.P. v. State of Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 460, 78 S.Ct. 1163, 1170, 2 L.Ed.2d 1488.
3 Freedoms such as these are protected not only against heavy-handed frontal attack, but also from being stifled by more subtle governmental interference. Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233, 56 S.Ct. 444, 80 L.Ed. 660; Murdock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 63 S.Ct. 870, 87 L.Ed. 1292; American Communications Ass’n, C.I.O. v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 402, 70 S.Ct. 674, 685, 94 L.Ed. 925;

Bates v. City of Little Rock, 361 U.S. 516, 522-23, 80 S. Ct. 412, 416, 4 L. Ed. 2d 480 (1960)

Last week there was a protest outside a courtroom near Riverside California instituted by a group of persons protesting similar elder abuse and financial exploitation of senior citizens.   I understand that the Media blackout and political censorship of this ‘dirty little secret’ continues just as in a past decade the Gulag florished in Soviet Russia.   I hope that in the year 2012 the 4th of July celebration is all form and no substance.

Ken Ditkowsky
http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/
In response to Gloria’s reply yesterday:

Gloria –

I was just having the very same thought.    Rudy Bush wrote me and I remembered the situation with his mother and how her death was handled.

The League of Women Votes had a slogan – “democracy is not a spectator sport!”   Indeed, it is not and while we were complacent our democracy was hijacked!   Instead of protections for ‘grandma’ we have a gulag!    The Supreme Court decision of Buck vs. Bell was the legal precedent for the Holocaust.    Today we are more subtle however, like the National Socialists and the Communists we surround our miscreat behavior with Judicial CYA.    The distinction between the Sykes case and most of the others is the fact that because no one bothered to follow strictly the statute and provide the appropriate Sodini protections – i.e. naming in the petition the close relatives and giving them 14 days notice prior to the hearing to appoint a guardian the Probate Court lacked jurisdiction and the expropriation of approximately a million dollars of your mother’s (and your) assets lacks ‘judicial cover!’    In my opinion it is pure theft and if law enforcement believes in equal protection we will see some people in jail.   If our Federal Government is serious about enforcing taxes on an equal and equitable basis the unreported ‘income’ will be collected from the guardians (plus every penalty and interest due and payable).

We have only ourselves to blame!   We have the ballot but *****.    We have a right of assembly and free speech (except for me in the opinion of the ARDC).   Democracy is not a spectator sport!

From JoAnne:

What do the courts have to say about the First Amendment:

102 S.Ct. 929
Supreme Court of the United States
In re R. M. J., Appellant.
No. 80-1431. | Argued Nov. 9, 1981. | Decided Jan. 25, 1982.
Disbarment proceedings were instituted against attorney. The Missouri Supreme Court, 609 S.W.2d 411, issued a private reprimand. Appeal was taken. The Supreme Court, Justice Powell, held that the provisions of the Missouri Supreme Court rule regulating lawyer advertising which prohibit deviating from a precise listing of areas of practice included in the advisory committee addendum to the rule, which prohibit a lawyer from identifying the jurisdictions in which he is licensed to practice and which prohibit the mailing of cards announcing the opening of an office to persons other than “lawyers, clients, former clients, personal friends and relatives” violate the First Amendment where there was no showing that the advertising was misleading or that the mailings and handbills would be more difficult to supervise.
Judgment reversed.

Most notable quotes from this case:

Truthful advertising related to lawful activities is entitled to protections of First Amendment. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
Although potential for deception and confusion is particularly strong in context of advertising professional services, restrictions upon such advertising may be no broader than reasonably necessary to prevent deception. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
Under commercial speech doctrine, states may not place absolute prohibition on certain types of potentially misleading information if information may be presented in way that is not deceptive. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
Even when communication is not misleading, state retains some authority to regulate; but state must assert substantial interest and interference with speech must be in proportion to interest served. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
In regulating communication which is not misleading, restrictions must be narrowly drawn and state lawfully may regulate only to extent regulation furthers state’s substantial interest. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14
Restriction prohibiting attorney from mailing cards announcing opening of his office to persons other than “lawyers, clients, former clients, personal friends and relatives” violated First Amendment without indication that inability to supervise mailings and handbills was reason state restricted potential audience of announcement cards, nor was it clear that absolute prohibition was the only solution. V.A.M.R. 4, Code of Prof.Resp., DR2-102(A)(2); U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1,
Although states may regulate commercial speech, First and Fourteenth Amendments require that they do so with care and in manner no more extensive than reasonably necessary for their substantial interests. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1,

Nothing more fun than playing the game of what’s in the Sykes Probate File today…

Dear Readers;

The following is the probate file for 09 P 4585 between May1 and May 13, 2009:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwZG02MkVITlpVcms

cut and paste this if link does not work:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwZG02MkVITlpVcms

In any case, there is an accounting filed by CT for 2011 and there is also an Amended Petition for Partition.  I have not seen Gloria’s response to this, but there is no briefing schedule, so she has a few more days to prepare this.

With respect to the accounting, it looks fine except it is not explained why Hannah is so sickly and has $1000 in vet bills.  She is a young, healthy dog.  Her sister, Peanut, whom I have, is in perfect health and I think cost me about $70 in vet bills for just a check up last year.  Did anyone see this and wonder why Carolyn can’t take care of a simple 10 lb Pekingese, how can she take care of elderly Mary G?

Interesting.

Further, the mortgage payment doubled and that was not explained.  What’s up with that?

She also needs to revamp and refile her Motion to Dismiss or Non Suit for lack of jurisdiction.  I saw one in the file at one time. I will be finding that and redoing it for her next court appearance.  I have prepared declarations for Aunt Yolanda and Aunt Josephine and published them here and sent them off, but have heard nothing back.  All those declarations are necessary for 1) the Probate Court, 2) Gloria’s cases, most notable now the partition that will strip her of her brown house; 3) Ken’s ARDC complaint, 4) My ARDC complaint and a whole host of other reasons.

I’m hoping to get this all done soon so that justice may prevail and we can all go home soon!  Yeah!

JoAnne

Fax to Atty Black at the ARDC

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To:
ARDC
Attn: Ms. Lea Black, esq.
Fax 312-565-2320    From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison, Pat.      Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com  or http://www.DenisonLaw.com
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Marianne Buckley, Associate, Of Counsel
Troy Sieburg, Associate, Of Counsel
Important Notice
This facsimilie message contains attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, collect, and return the original message to the above address.  You will be reimbursed.  Your cooperation is immensely appreciated.
For transmission problems, please call 312-335-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – ( see efax header  )
June 26, 2012

Re: JoAnne M. Denison ,  In relation to Cynthia Farenga’s Complaint AND
Kenneth Ditkowsky, the Sykes Probate matter 09 P 4585
PLUS my request to open an investigation against Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmeidel, Adam Stern, Harvey Waller
Request for subpoenas!

Dear Ms. Black;

Without waiving my representation by Mr. Ditkowsky, who is aware of this communication, attached are two declarations for signature by the adult sisters of Mary G Sykes, namely, Ms. Josephine DiPietro and Ms. Yolanda Baaken.

Their addresses are as follows:

Ms. Josephine DePietro
222 Park Avenue
Bloomingdale, Illinois 60108

Yolanda M. Bakken
1600 N. 39th Avenue
Stone Park, IL

I would appreciate your transmitting these to these ladies to inquire if the declarations are in fact true, and they were never formally noticed by the Petitioner in the above Probate matter as to the Dec 7, 2009 Petition for Guaradianship of Mary G Sykes which was filed by Carolyn Toerpe.  This would make the entire matter–the freezing of Gloria’s $272,000, her subsequent eviction, the partition action filed against her home, her continued harrassment by the miscreants–void ab initio.

Thank you for your continued attention and investigation of the above matter.

This important communication was also posted on my blog at http://www.marygsykes.com, and http://www.marygsykes.blogspot.com, so if you lose it, it will be available there.  Also, if you do not want to retype it, today’s post provides a convenient link so you can just download a Word file to change as you please or just print out..

Very Truly Yours,

DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

JoAnne Denison

Joanne M. Denison

Cc: Ken Ditkowsky, via email, MaryGSykes blogs.

PS–this is also being sent to you as part of my (our) continuing duty to report serious and flagrant violations of the rules of ethics and relevant state and federal laws to the ARDC.

PPS–I am told by a little bird that Josephine thinks “being allowed” to visit her sister once every two months and a phone call once or twice per month is okay because neither Yolanda or her daughter Kathy Bakken–family members once very, very close to Mary G Sykes–were told they “took the wrong side” in the dispute and therefore they are not allowed to see Mary.  I find such conduct of an officer of the court deplorable, but ****.  So you might make Josephine aware it is part of her civic duty to step forward and tell the truth–the court has no jurisdiction and Mary is able to go free and go back and live in her own home if she wants.  And, no a Guardian ad Litem is not supposed to “take sides”, but report fairly and honestly.  Mary G’s sisters used to phone each other all the time.  Gloria held parties for her all the time.  Now CT keeps her in near total isolation with just handful of visits/phone calls.  I am told at a favorite niece’s wedding, the sister’s family table was only about 5 relatives when that side of the family used to have dozens of extended family members visiting Mary (see the Christmas tape links on Vimeo – the links are on the home page of http://www.marygsykes.com.

Direct Links to the Sodini Notice Draft Declarations for the Sisters:

see below.

please cut and paste link if it does not work in your browser.

Yolanda

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwSzNuZUpDR1ExMHc

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwSzNuZUpDR1ExMHc

Second declaration–Josephine:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwM2ZTVHNQOFZDOFU

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwM2ZTVHNQOFZDOFU

Now, if Ken wants to ‘CALL FOR AN INVESTIGATION” and ask the GAL’s to inform the court regarding these declarations, it’s a whole new ballgame.

A Guardian ad Litem, doing her job properly, would immediately, upon seeing Gloria’s documents in the file, or having been served with them, brought them to the court’s attention and start an investigation.

But see my “Table of Torts”.  TEN PAGES of questionable behavior, corruption, misfeasance, malfeasance, perpetration of misdemeansors and felonies have occurred in this case and law enforcement and even the ARDC have swept it under the rug.   Okay, maybe Atty Lea Black does not do this law and she needs help in this area, but the table of torts that I sent her should have raised some huge, huge red flags, even to the casual observer.

I’m not the one that should be scouring the files and preparing these declarations–she should be, or her staff.

The probate court is upside down right now (see attached picture), and I just wonder if the ARDC isn’t just standing on its head so the view looks good and proper to them.

Is this our Probate Court on the the 18th Floor? Should there be signage when you get off the elevator at floor 18 “Welcome to Wonderwerks?”

Ms. Black, YOU have the ability to change all of this.  I know you can do it and let justice prevail.

Another Reason for the Miscreants to start Gulping and back off

Dear Readers;

Now that I have had some time to go back and read transcripts and look over the my computer files (yes, I do have practically all the court orders and documents in my records, so this is a QED, AND I do plan on making those computer files consisting of filed and unfiled pleadings, court orders, court transcripts, etc. complete so Gloria can pursue her claims against the miscreants).

As a result of that and the upcoming July 6, 2012 Hearing on Motion to Partition, I have drafted the below affidavits and will fax them to Lea Black at the ARDC.

Now it is my understand (from a little bird), that Josephine “might be reluctant to sign” because apparently she “took the wrong side” and is allowed to see her sister every couple of months and call her a couple times per month.  What?  Gloria gave Mary parties all the time and included her in EVERYTHING.  Her mom called her sisters all the time.

The most disturbing part of this comment is that it is clearly obstruction of justice and a further breach by the GAL’s of their duty to report to a court fairly and impartially on matters concerning the disabled person.

I, myself, cringe at hearing such comments being made out of the mouth of an Officer of the Court.  Disgusting.

When this situation occurs, I will let Ms. Black know and to put in her cover letter to the sisters that it is their important civic duty to come forward and present court testimony (an affidavit is used as an important precursor to court testimony, it allows the parties, their attys and the court to determine if the witness has something worthwhile to say or not), and inform the court fully of the truth before it.  It is similar to jury duty, an important and cherished civic right, but perhaps signing that affidavit might be even more important.

Ms. Black should further know these witnesses have been tampered with by the GAL’s.

JoAnne

From Ken Ditkowsky today:

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jun 25, 2012 7:56 AM

Subject: Re: Request for Information on Incidents of The Use of Chemical Restraints on the Elderly and/or Disabled– from latifa . ring@comcast.net–she is looking for persons experienced with the drugging of elders to put them in nursing homes, keep them from family.  Generally these drugs are prescribed by physicians upon a complaint the elder is unruly and agitated.  Often this agitation occurs when they are put in a nursing home, personal effects and homes are sold–all to generate fees from lawyers, CPA’s and others that put them there.  The worst thing about it is that often these psychotropic drugs (Seroquel, Risperodol, etc.) are hard on the internal organs–heart, liver, kidneys, etc., and over time cause them to fail resulting in the death of the elder. An elder that would be perfectly fine in her own home, without money grubbing miscreants.

From Ken Ditkowsky

Just about every one of the Elder Abuse cases has an element of chemical restraint.    I forwarded your note to people who can report to you the information that you request.
The new Health Care Privacy laws are specifically designed to prevent this information from being readily attainable.   In Court 1 of the ARDC complaint against me (in relation to the Sykes case) Ms. Black is attempting to back door the First Amendment by suggesting that I cannot question a doctor about reports he wrote, and cannot address the fact that he as the treating doctor refused to sign the certificate of incompetency, yet a doctor called in one moment had no trouble signing.   The cache of doctors (except for Dr. Patel – the treater) have an amazing record of finding people incompetent so as to need the full time services of a plenary guardian.
As I said previously – using the criterion of the Circuit Court of Cook County in the Sykes case President Obama – if you stripped him of his clout – could wake up tomorrow morning and find Carolyn Troepe as his plenary guardian.   (No, I am not suggesting that the president is need of a plenary guardian – all I am saying is that when the goal is to create a need for plenary guardian the facts and the law do not get in the way – Yes, most of the Court appointed lawyers are good and decent people  – however, what has happened in Sykes and some similar cases is so reprehensible as to stand out in its stark perfidy).
Ms. Harris to whom this e-mail is directed can provide you with the information as to Robert Jaycox.   When I visited Mr. Jaycox he was so heavily sedated that he looked and sounded as if he were a sleepy drunk.  Of course – for privacy concerns the nursing home did not put up the safety bars – Mr. Jaycox has had at least one incident in which he fell out of bed and hit his head.   Gloria Sykes can tell you what the plenary guardian did to her mother.
All that said – you are investigating a ‘nerve!’   If you take away the chemical restraints as to indigent patients the nursing homes might have to provide services and these elderly (and disabled) could not be warehoused.   Indeed, you might take the profit out the warehousing –
Ken Ditkowsky
Now, here’s the affidavits:
Josephine’s
In Re Estate of                                 No: 2009 P 4585
Mary G. Sykes,
An alleged disabled person.
Declaration by Josephine DiPietro
The undersigned doth deposes and sayeth
1.     I am the adult sister of Mary G. Sykes.
2.     That I have been informed that on November 18, 2009, a hearing date of December 7, 2011 at 11 am in courtroom 1804 was set on Carolyn Toerpe’s Petition for Guardianship.  On that date the hearing was held, and Carolyn Teorpe was appointed Plenary Guardian of Mary G Sykes.
3.     I have also been told of the following requirement under Illinois law:
(f) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given by the petitioner by mail or in person to those persons, including the proposed guardian, whose names and addresses appear in the petition and who do not waive notice, not less than 14 days before the hearing.  755 ILCS § 5/11a. (Emphasis added).
4.     No one ever served me with any written notice of hearing 14 days prior to that hearing, either by mail or in person.
5.     I was not present at the hearing.  (State whether you would have been there had you been informed 14 days in advance.)    ______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
I hereby declare that the above statements are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and recollection at the time they were made.  Where based upon information and belief, they were believed to be true at the time the statements were made.  If I am called to testify, I will give testimony that is the same as stated within this document. I understand that false statements may subject me to penalties for perjury under the relevant Illinois laws and regulations.
Further declarant saith not.___________________________________
Josephine DePietro
Dated this ____ day of June, 2012

For Yolanda Bakken
In Re Estate of                                 No: 2009 P 4585
Mary G. Sykes,
An alleged disabled person.
Declaration by Yolanda Bakken
The undersigned doth deposes and sayeth
1.     I am the adult sister of Mary G. Sykes.
2.     That I have been informed that on November 18, 2009, a hearing date of December 7, 2011 at 11 am in courtroom 1804 was set on Carolyn Toerpe’s Petition for Guardianship.  On that date the hearing was held, and Carolyn Teorpe was appointed Plenary Guardian of Mary G Sykes.
3.     I have also been told of the following requirement under Illinois law:
(f) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given by the petitioner by mail or in person to those persons, including the proposed guardian, whose names and addresses appear in the petition and who do not waive notice, not less than 14 days before the hearing.  755 ILCS § 5/11a. (Emphasis added).
4.     No one ever served me with any written notice of hearing 14 days prior to that hearing, either by mail or in person.
5.     I was present at the hearing only because Gloria Sykes, younger daughter of Mary G Sykes, notified me informally in the following manner there was to be a hearing:
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
(State whether it was via an email to someone else, a phone call, etc. or you were unaware that the Petition was being heard on December 7, 2010 at 10 am in court room 1804 of the Richard J Daley Center, 55 W. Washington St, Room 1804, Chicago, IL 60602.
I hereby declare that the above statements are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and recollection at the time they were made.  Where based upon information and belief, they were believed to be true at the time the statements were made.  If I am called to testify, I will give testimony that is theInitials_______
Yoland Bakken Declaration
Page 2 of 2same as stated within this document. I understand that false statements may subject me to penalties for perjury under the relevant Illinois laws and regulations.

Further declarant saith not.

___________________________________
Yolanda Bakken

Dated this ____ day of June, 2012

These declarations should be signed ASAP and sent IMMEDIATELY to both myself for publication on the blog AND please fax them to Ms. Lea Black at the ARDC, fax no. 312-565-2320
I will put these inline in this post and also put them up as a shared file in word that can be edited because these should be used by every atty practicing in probate that is having a problem with a ward that may not be disabled and some family members want to fight it.

Fax to Hon Timothy Evans, Presiding Judge, Cook County

Dear Readers;

Okay, you know I just couldn’t resist a responsive fax to Judge Evans, so here it is:

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To: Hon Presiding
Judge Timothy Evans
Circuit Court Cook County

Fax: 312-603-5366
From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison,     Pat. Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com or http://www.DenisonLaw.com
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Troy Sieburg, associate, of counsel
Marianne Buckley, associate of counsel
Important Notice
This facsimilie message contains attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, collect, and return the original message to the above address.  You will be reimbursed.  Your cooperation is immensely appreciated.
For transmission problems, please call 312-553-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – ( 1  )
June 23, 2012

Re: Seizure of attorney laptops in Probate court

Dear Judge Evans;

I am in receipt of your cursory letter sent my snail mail to my offices.

However, snail mail is very costly to the taxpayers and emails and efax are much more efficient and I strongly encourage you to use those.  I promise you I will respond promptly to all communications, generally in a day or two, so do not worry about non receipt of mail.

Further, the USPS readily admits from studies that are decades old and extremely consistent, that only 95% of snail mail reaches its destination in 5 days!  I think email easily beats that statistic hands down.

As you may or may not know, this issue is part of a much larger issue going on in the Probate Court right now and we have a very active blog on all aspects of a case which is extremely contentious and appears to be the center of substantial corruption and wiring.

Discussions among the attys that are helping out the client pro bono are lively and active.

The seizure of the laptop has become part of those discussions, and one of the attys on the blog is extremely active and eloquently outspoken, so I thought perhaps you might enjoy his comments.  Below is the post for today, of which you are a subject.

Ken Ditkowsky says that Judge Timothy Evans sent me a bug letter
Posted on June 23, 2012

Dear Readers;

As you well know, last December 2011 my laptop was seized when Adam Stern whined to Judge Connors that I was blogging (soon the transcripts will appear on the first page of this blog, I am working on that), So finally, finally I got a response from Cook County presiding judge Timothy Evans after 3 faxes and waiting about 2 weeks. (I guess he has no law clerks or staff).

in any case, see below:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwQVh3bm5fbWU3VkE (cut and paste link)

Obviously, the letter says nothing in response to consititutional rights, the ability to best serve your client, etc. but Ken Ditkowsky had an even better anecdote regarding a “bug letter.”

KD’s anecdote:
“Many years ago before the age of computers on every desk, the Illinois Central Railroad ran trains to Southern Illinois. The trains had windows that opened, and sometimes passengers were harassed by insects. On one such trip a traveler was so upset that he wrote to the Chairman of the IC to complain.
In the 40?s and 50?s Banks and large institutions had automatic typewriters – these were typewriters that we very much like player pianos. A secretary would type a master, and then another secretary would fill in the details such as name, address, etc.
Anyhow, our traveler received a letter very similar to what you received, and in the unsophisticated era the personal signature totally mollified him – until he turned the letter over and saw in pencil the words: “send bug letter.”
It is a shame that everyone is watching what appears to be a crime being committed, i.e. a 93 year old lady, kidnapped and robbed and the thieves acting in concert with the judicial system. The Illinois legislature enacted the Sodini protections and made the protections jurisdictional to prevent exactly what has happened in the Sykes case. Now for four years this Gulag has continued in full sight of law enforcement, the highest ranking judicial officials, and the world. Mary Sykes has been totally deprived of her liberty, her property, civil rights and even human rights in full sight. Approximately a million dollars in assets have been illegally sequestered by the thieves who have the temerity to brag in open court of the perfidy! (see Sykes transcripts)
The distinction between Chicago street crime and guardian crime is that the ‘thugs’ are not ‘minority individuals’ not Italian mafia etc. They are ‘clout’ heavy political types who have for many years ‘played’ the system to make their bread at the public expense. By targeting Grandma who they could characterize as senile they are apparently safe as their co-conspirators cover their tracks with CYA letters, intimidation, and deceit! These criminals are just as vicious as the gang member who grabs grandma’s purse and throws her onto the elevated tracks! The only distinction is the the judicial system protects them. Shame, Shame, Shame.
The attached letter from Judge Evans is a symptom of the corruption that gave rise to Watergate, Greylord, Sykes, etc. It is difficult to speak to deaf ears glued onto public officials whose sole aim in life is CYA. Rest assured, at some point in time the right combination of circumstances will occur. How many years did Sandusky prey on male children? How many responsible people watched? What did the public authorities do? How many lives did the SOB ruin?
Why are the public officials who ignored the problem not in the ‘dock?’ Every one of them Aided and abetted the criminal activities while they occurred – each should be independently prosecuted and sent to jail as an Accessory during the fact. Each public official who ignored a complaint letter or other communication had an affirmative duty (parens Patrie) and in ignoring his/her duty assisted in the crime. These elder abuse cases are identical. Today – all the is required of the public officials (who have nothing to hide – those who do should take the fifth) is to demand a complete honest and comprehensive investigation of all the facts of the Sykes case.”
Sigh, now I have to send him a fax saying that his letter was non responsive, I will make the security guy aware of the letter, but the reality is lawyers protect our rights and not security people.  I have yet to see a cop or security officer say, you have important constitutional rights and I want to protect those.  Nope, their mantra is “an arrest a day keeps the sarge away.”
I don’t think the Hon. Timothy Evans  knows that I am serious enough to sue him over this because it is a very important right to be able to take notes in court when needed and to do the best possible job for your client.
So more faxes. I will let you know if I get a real response from him or if I have to go to a federal court district judge to do it.
thanks all.
JoAnne

There were other comments I receive about your letter, but KD”s was clearly the best, hands down.

Kindly let me know if and when you decide to write a responsive letter that protects the rights of attys and their clients in the courtroom, and PULEEZE do not push off YOUR responsibility to “security” who know nothing of these rights, don’t know, don’t care, aren’t being paid to worry about anyone’s rights, and always seem surprised when a lawyer brings up the fact that due process and constitutional rights were supposed to be part of a class and exam passed in 6th grade!

I already had a discuss with the courtroom employees over constitutional rights, and they admitted security personnel knew “nothing about” that (due process and constitutional rights” and they said that was not their job to know these things or evaluate these things.
I agree.

So why are you passing something to a department that knows nothing of these things, readily admits it, and they say they take their direction from the court after the lawyers argue their respective points?

All good questions, but where are the good answers.

Very Truly Yours,

DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

JoAnne Denison

JoAnne M. Denison

cc: http://www.marygsykes.com  And http://www.marygsykes.blogspot.com

cc: