Okay, this is a blow by blow from yesterday. Because I am atty, and because I am running a website, I might have a few restrictions more than the average bear, thank you Yogi.
BUT, I have heard from the other daughter, Scott Evans and Atty Larry Hyman (who has asked I say on the blog he is a great atty and he is–definitely hire him), the trial is over and I get to blog about it and let you know what happened.
See below. You’re gonna love it.
Ken ditkowsky. The evidence will show no jurisdiction. (Came in late to opening argument already in progress and darn, I missed the $13 deal at Lakeshore Athletic club.)
the evidence will show that the guardianship petition was never heard, and the notices were never sent out or complied with. No jurisdiction means no judge or GAL is acting with true authority..
PS will argue that Ms. Sykes was in the courtroom, but HW did not serve her properly either.
Why did he not bother to serve her properly?
I have the right and the responsibility to bring this to the attention of law enforcement and when any citizen of the US has had their rights, their human rights, their civil rights, their right to life and liberty taken away without due process, then I have the right to complain to anyone and everyone.
the flag is my right to complain. I can complain as loud and bitterly as I am able.
How can this happen in the US?, why is this happening?
I have a right and a duty to bring this to the attention of the authorities.
I am still complaining about this. There are people sitting right here who are complaining about this in the courtroom (referring to the people from NASGA, Probate Sharks, etc.
Speech ends. I believe LB or Apoltol whines about the fact that Ken went into Jurisdiction and that will not be part of this proceeding.
The Administrator calls Peter Schmeidel
LB asks him for a brief description of his background.
I’m an atty. I attended John Marshall law school. (Note to Larry and KDD are in parenz–What I want to know is if PS and AS worked at the OPG, were they buddies there? Did they work together? Was one the supervisor of another?)
Employment history. Worked at people law office as an attorney
worked 11 years at public guardians office ultimately in charge for 7 years
I mostly practice guardianship and probate.
I am testifying pursuant to subpoena
I represent carolyn toerpe.
Mary was adjudicated and there has been ongoing contention litigation.
Mary has other living Sykes relatives.
I could swear at this point he referred to Gloria as Claudia.
He then explains what a guardian of person does vs. guardian of the estate. The guardian of the person makes day to day personal decisions such as where the ward goes and what she can do, etc. The guardian of the person takes them to doctor, etc.
Guardian of the estate is responsible for financial side. They are responsible for the assets and inventories and accounting.
Assets and inventories done
Carolyn T was and is Plenary Guardian
Fist retained. Early 2010. Feb 2010. Mary already had been adjudicated.
LB: when was the first time you met KDD?
PS: At end of April 2011. I received a letter from him. Before that, no contact.
LB: look at Exh. No. 3
Have you seen the letter before.
This is a letter I received address to Dr. Patel which was copied to me and 2 other people, including the two court appoint guardian at litems.
I received it end of April 2010.
Is it a fair and accurate copy? A: It is
LB then reads this letter into the record.
Did I read that correctly? A: yes
Other documents were enclosed with it.
What is this document?
A letter. This was an attachment. It is a true and accurate copy.
What is this document?
A. Entry of medical record. Med exam June 5 2009. I also received this. It is a true and acc copy.
A: It is a 2 page document, report of physician form. Filled out in guardian ship matters it is a ccp 211, it is an option of the doctor, of whether that person can make personal and finanacial decisions.
This was filed out by dr. barry rabin.
Was this attached to the letter and this is a true and accurate copy?
This is a form prepared by Mr. Ditkowsky seeking to enter an appearance.
Q. What is this attachment? Is it a true and accurate copy? A: Yes
there were no other attachments.
No objection to admit the letter.
With respect to 2637.
Q: Had this appearance form been filed?
A. It had not been filed.
Mary had already been adjudicated disabled, she was adjudicated in dec 2009,
Q. Could Mr. D. File this appearance form?
A. Mr. D. Would have had to go thru a procedure. There is a procedure.
She could not have the ability to contract, so they would have sought leave of court.
NO CASE LAW AND NO STATUTE ON THAT!
Q: Have you received any email correspondence from Mr. D?
A. I received numerous emails. From Mr. D. Sometimes daily. Sometimes 5 to 10 per day. In total probably over 100, perhaps over 200.
(The objection should be ***seeks facts not in evidence**–If LB wants these in evidence to talk about she should have them there to talk about instead of just speculating a number).
KDD makes general objection. Good, but overruled.
A. In general the emails complained about accusing us of being corrupt, not turning over assets, accusing us of intercepting mail, etc.
Witness then starts in on jurisdiction and lies and says that was addressed in appellate brief and appeal was denied. (Get him on that great big lie, it was dismissed on formatting! The Order Dismissing is on the blog).
Q. About halfway down the page, it is a forwarded message. Talks about disapation of the Mary Sykes estate.
A. I saw it Feb of 2012. It was on my computer.
My email is on there. Kd sent it to me. I had received many emails before.
KDD: no objection to this email.
What are you moving into evidence.
The entire exhibit 25.
1393. A. that’s the second page of the email. Looking at the last paragraph. You reported to me that judge stuart gave lip service to demands of gal’s and PS.
PS took a risky course of action. They then talk about the relationship between the bankruptcy proceeding and the forceable action. Gloria agreed to leave the house on a date certain.
KDD objects to the emails containing heresay. It is all overruled on heresay.
Once you file the bk, there is a litigation stay, including guardianship litigation, I had filed a partition action. (No you didn’t, that came later).
We were attacking an apportionment agreement. Mary syes entered into an apportionment agreement, which Gloria received all the money $750,000 (not correct– she received $500,000. $1.3 million was the settlement total, $500M went to attys, $200M to pltfs bridge loan funds and gloria was left with $500M.
We could not proceed with the partition action, we could not proceed with the apportionment agreement, due to the automatic stay in bankruptcy so we sought to lift it.
(Ask him if he served Gloria properly with a summons and complaint for either proceeding–the partition OR to invalidate the apportionment agreement. Gloria will testify she was not served. Or, she was served the famous Pizza flyer by CF’s husband who is not supposed to serve anyway. There is also no motion or grant of a special process server in the file. And, the file’s a disaster with 80% of it missing. )
Judge Stuart entered an order…..
Gloria had transferred funds that were supposed ly withheld from the settlement and those were in Indiana, and Gloria wouldn’t say….,
He is getting so convoluted.
The bankrupcy judge agreed to lift the bankruptcy stay. It said we had the right to pursue the partition action.
(He forgets conveniently that the federal court the partition is held up because chase has a court date in October 2012 to get live testimony on the fact that while Chase is foreclosing, Chase no longer ownes the mortgage–that is all screwed up. Deborah Soehlig at least admitted to Judge Hollis during a bk hearing that no one had any idea how to do this partition because it is so complicated, and that her firm didn’t know how to do it. At least she was being honest. The partition proceeding is a complete mess. The mortgagee must be a party to it, but Chase sold the mortgage, Chase is not the mortgagee any longer.)
CT must comply with all orders. CT received a modification of the stay to proceed with the eviction order?
Q. Was this modification order entered? Judge studart had violated the automatic stay? The letter was many months after the automatic stay had been lifted.
Q. Any basis to say that the modification order was wrong? A. Absolutely none.
In the middle of the page.
Q. Have you seen this email before
A. It may have come from Mr. Stern. I recognize it as coming from Kenneth Ditkowsky.
A. It’s not from him.
A. LB will seek to have the email admitted via mr. Stern later.
Q. Mr. Ditkowsky said you intercepted mail and that was a crime.
A. Maybe in jan 2011, there was a hearing and judge stuart asked me to send orders to Gloria. Gloria she did not want to be emailed documents from court. I sent an email to her. I was supposed to give Gloria the contact information re dr. shaw. I also sent her orders because that judge had not approved the first or second current account. First current account and the inventory were still unapproved.
On the envelope, there was a little yellow thing (sticker) from the post office. In court the next time, it came back. Then Gloria accused me of intercepting her mail, but in reality it just came back in the mail. I mailed it out and it came back is not intercepting Gloria’s mail.
Q. Is there any basis to accusing you of intercepting Gloria’s mail?
A. Absolutely none.
No further questions
KDD cross examines.
Q. Are you aware of 755 ilcs 11a et seq. In general. It is the statutory scheme for probate and it talks about the notice requirements.
A. Yes, I am very familiar.
I am very familiar with the venue provision.
Q. The venue provision requires that if mary were living with CT, then she would have to be served in Naperville.
Q. Isn’t it true that they did not follow any of rules in appointing carolyn toerpe.
Hearing Chair; Let me state this. We will not making this a trial of what is going on in another court.
We cannot give you anything that would give you an advantage in another court.
(At some point KDD nails PS on the fact that KDD is not a party and never has been a party to the Sykes probate court. He has no other case in which he can “gain an advantage.”)
(He said there were 100 emails of complaint).
I have no other case pending in which I am a party in any other court.
Back to questioning PS. If venue is correct in the place where you live?
Discussion ensures over “gaining an advantage in a court”.
Do I have any pecuniary interest in the Sykes cases? A. No.
Did I ever file any claim seeking anything in the Sykes cases? A. No.
But PS is trying the “I don’t like what you’re asking, so I’m going to ignore and say what I want to diversion tactic. Nice going, buddy. KDD’s on yr butt. And Ken, it’s okay to tell the witness the day will go much faster and he will be excused much earlier if he would just answer the question directly and you intend to get all your questions answered. It’s not hard).
Q. Who filed a Petition for Guardianship?
A. Petition was filed on behalf of CT
Q. Was there a petition to have Mary Sykes declared incompetent?
A. Says lots of stuff, does not answer the question, but finally he admits it.
Q. Was there a petition for Gloria Sykes to become guardian?
A. Not sure if it was ever heard.
Q. But there was a Petition for guardianship.
A. It did not name either the two sisters.
Q. Was gloria syskes ever served with a copy of the petition?
Q. do you have a copy of the document. Is there is a copy of the document.
Q. Is there a copy in the court file?
Q. (Is the time, date and place) on the Petition?
Q Is there a certificate of mailing in the court’s file?
Q. Did you find a certificate of mailing?
He doesn’t recall any of this
Q. Did you send out a notice to gloria?
A. I had nothing……
Q. Have you read the Sodini case?
A. Is it your position that Sodini allows a person to be allowed to be found incompetent without notice to her two sisters?
Hearing chair sustained the objection to asking about Sodini and notice.
(Go back and ask if the complaints you received by email were about the fact there was no jurisdiction. Then it would relate to direct examination, otherwise call him in your case and ask again. What a dweeb).
Q. When the motion came for hearing, was she represented?
Q. When mary sykes was adjudicated, was this done pursuant to procedure of the probate act?
A. When mary sykes was served, she may have been residing with Carolyn.
(Ask if a copy of the summons is in the file or the affidavit of the server? It is not. Judge Connors did not review these documents prior to holding the hearing, as most judges normally do. She would have seen that Mary’s Avondale house was listed, but Mary had resided in Naperville for many long months and by then Carolyn declared Mary would never go home)
A. It is my memory she was residing with Carolyn at the time. (Good, her Chicago address is on the summons)
A. There was a summons issued for mary sykes.
I believe that there was a summons that was served in naperville.
The sheriff was directed to serve many sykes on Avondale? A. I don’t know where the sherriff was directed to serve her. And that was gloria’s residence. Gloria’s residence– from time too time.
Was there an order. There was an ordered entered in law division that was approved. We call it the lumberman case.
It was about gloria and mary sykes.
This is the one at 6016 n avondale.
Did you research this lawsuit before you filed it? (Referring to partition action)
Lumberman’s sued only gloria syskes. Mary was added as a counterplaintiff.
The initial lawsuit against gloria sykes.
Then her mother was added.
The lawsuit was a suit for declaratory judgment (of no insurance). It was suit based upon an insurance policy.
Gloria had taken out a policy on 6016 n. Avondale where she lived. Mary sykes was not on the policy.
(Make sure you make it known that Mary did not live there–she lived at 6014. Mary’s house was 6014 and Gloria’s house was 6016 and the adding of Mary to the property at 6016 was as a testamentary convenience.
Final order entered in Oct of 2008, this probate proceeding was in Jun 2009. Was there ever a petition file was 5/2-1401? Was there any request for post judgment relief?
After 30 days is a judgment entitled to full faith and credit? A. Generally.
All sorts of objections as to giving a legal opinion. (When Ken asks a question about a legal opinion, it is blocked, when LB asks a question, Ken objects and it is always over ruled, indicating clear bias from the tribunal. Even the Probate court is more careful (Judge Stuart) to avoid this type of bias.)
Q. Glorias proceeds were frozen. What was the legal basis for that.
A. Before I was in the case, there was a motion filed with JMC and the assets were frozen until further order of court. This $272,000 was only a portion of what Gloria received.
Q. Was any appeal filed. A. No appeal filed.
Q. Were any post trial motions filed? A. No post trial motions.
The court just took and entered this order.
Q. Isnt’ it true that the only way to attack judge mulhern’s order is by appeal, or 1-1401 that alleges due diligence and a meritorious defense. Otherwise it is entitled to full faith and credit, correct?
A. In most circumstances.
During the time of any disability, then the time to bring it, the order is stayed (tolled?). And there was also a contract.
A contract with a disabled is always voidable. (I’m not sure about that. It seems to me once a Guardian is appointed, then the person is represented and the tolling of limitations stops. The only exception is, if the ward becomes able bodied again, then she will also have the right to sue at that time. I suspect this witness is again being frugal with the legal truth).
That is what we are attempting to void.
There was fraud perpetrated and Gloria got her mother to sign a document and Mary did not have that capacity.
This was based upon the testimony of dr. shaw.
Q. Was the opinion Dr. Shaw made before or after this contract was done?
A. Dr. Shaw examined her.
(Mr. Frugal with the Truth isn’t saying Dr. Shaw finally examined her in fall of 2011! Not 2008.)
(All of Dr. Patel’s records and information are heresay–Dr. Patel did one mini mental in 2007) ask him to explain what a mini mental is. Then ask him about Mary’s hearing and if it were tested and if he knew Gloria was told Mary had to go to learn how to hear again and how mini mentals are contraindicated for those with hearing or vision problems! It’s all on Wikipedia).
Exhibit 3. Dr. Patel says she makes sense. This was June 2009.
The order was entered October 2008.
KD points out MS makes sense when conversing on any topic PS adds she had been diagnosed with dementia.
KD nows tears apart the letter and it doesn’t say he represents Mary Sykes. A. Based upon this letter I joined to get sanctions.
KD: At the time you joined in sanctions, you knew that I had not filed an appearance.
KD: You knew I was never in front of Judge Connors (JMC). A. You were asking for leave to do that.
Q. You also knew that before the petition, I had never even been in that courtroom.
A. I am there most days of the week, I don’t recall seeing you.
Q. Yet you joined in a rule 137 motion and it was overturned due to lack of jurisdiction.
PS doesn’t recall it was overturned due to lack of jurisdiction (yeah, right) another big lie, he is looking down, won’t look up.
KD: You claim 200 emails. Q. Did you file any lawsuit over the 200 emails? Did you file any complaint with the police? Any email asking not to send you emails? A. All answers to these are negative or don’t recall.
Q. you’re aware that because mary sykes relative were never served, there is no jurisdiction.
A. Witness denies this and is looking down at his hands.
No redirect. PS storms out of the courtroom looking down. He always does this when he is caught.
The Administrator calls Adam Stern;
Now, this is where it gets boring. AS will have to answer basically the same stuipd questions that PS did.–OMG I predicted that and I was WRONG!
AS is sworn in. Let’s see how much Ken can go after him in a half hour. I am an atty. Attended Valp school of law 1994. Briefly worked for legal service of NW Indiana and in Mar of 1995 I was employed by Cook County OPG, until may 2002, then I went into private practice, 5 years and then sole practitioner. I practice primarily guardianship and probate law.
I was appointed special guardian ad litem in 2009. I had been appointed gal probably about 800 or 900 cases.
Q. How many of those involved estates of elderly persons. A. Over ten years, my guess would be about 200, 250 cases.
Q. What are duties.
A. In August of 2009 JMC or Judge Maureen Connors appointed me special guardian litem out of an issue that arose regarding mary’s placement and could I assist. Cf was the other gal and she was out of town or unavailable.
Q. Did you continue in your role as special guardian. What are other roles. At this point there are two GAL’s and we share duties. (No, both are in court or are supposed to be there, and they churn the bill all the time. Often CF does not show up and says she has a dental appt for her kid. The kid must have no teeth by now.)
The gal makes recommendations to the court regarding what is in the best interests of the ward and is the eyes and ears, according to case law.
Carolyn Toepe filed for guardian. Exhibit 1
Q. Is this the petition for gal that carolyn toerpe filed? Yes,
A. admitted into evidence.
Q. What happened after carolyn filed this petition. A. There was a court date and I was appointed special gal.
Q. eventually a cross petition was filed by gloria syskes. A. I believe it was with the OPG (on it). They eventually amended this to gloria and kathy bakken.
Q. What is the general process.
A. Initially you file a petition,
the alleged dp needs to be notified, a summons has to be served,
then the court appoints a gal and then informs the dp of their rights, etc., the notice gets sent out and then the judge hears the information and makes a decision.
A an Illinois doctor examines the disable person. With respect to the notice, the notice should be in writing.
A. Is life testimony required? A. No.
Q. How common is it for live testimony? A. Probably ten to fifteen percent of the cases.
Q. Was there a contested hearing regarding the issue.
A. Gloria filed a cross petition, in her petition he alleged that mary was disabled, but in court she vacillated. Mary sykes did not contest the petition for disability.
A. Was there live testimony. A. No live testimony from a doctor.
The Ct had a doctor fill out the CCP 211. And there was also a neurological report, that also supported the need for adjudication.
Gloria also asked for adjudication. (Dr. Amdur–but Gloria did not pick him, although AS says all the time she did.)
Objections on heresay, LB explains she is not going to use this for the truth of the matter asserted. Just using it to explain the procedure.
A. Mary sykes was found incompetent. There was no live testimony.
Q. Was dr. amdur’s report used to adjuciate mary sykes disabled? A. Yes
Exhibit 2. Is this the doctor’s report of dr. amdur.
Is this an accurate copy of this report.
Objection heresay, foundation, they just said they’re not submitting it for the truth. I don’t see it as a verbal act. LB counters it was used to declare Mary incompetent and it is a court document. It is admitted over objection.
Q. How did mary syskes get to be appointed. A. It was on cross petition of mary sykes. Read back the answer
yes, it was on the request of mary syskes.
Q. When did the court enter the order? A. dec 10th 2009 by JMC.
Q. Was there an issue with her appointment? When did the hearing take place?
A. In nov of 2009 hearings were held regarding care plan of both petitioners. After those hearings, judge appointed Carolyn over Gloria (Wrong. Gloria’s hearing was Nov. 18th, and Carolyn’s was on Dec 7th, she didn’t have her oath or bond and it was late so they entered and continued the appointment to dec. 10th. Duh.)
Q. Was there an appeal. A. The appeal was dismissed, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The document is on the blog. A 341 non compliance dismissal.
Q. Did you know of KD prior to all of this? A. No, never met him or heard of him.
First page of exhibit.
Letter from KD. Q. When you received this letter 2632. What was attached to it. Can you look at other pages?
Q. Was the appearance form been filed April 2010 letter? A. Not sure, but I think no.
Q. Did you contact mr. Ditkowsky? A. I called to talk about the letter and the attachments hired by family and friends and he went on that he had a right to represent mary sykes guaranteed by the constitution of the the US of america.
He told me he represented her previously.
I contact PS who was the atty for the guardian, I drafted a motion for the court, I think asked for sanctions.
I visited mary sykes over the weekend.
I was curious if she knew who Kenneth Ditkowsky was. Foundation overruled. I met with mary sykes, and asked her if she knew him. Objection. Chair: Lay some foundation.
Q. When did you meet with mary syskes? A. May 25 2010
Q. Was anyone else present? A. Initially the daughter and the son in law, but I met with mary sykes alone.
Q. What was the purpose?
A. To ask Mary about KDD
Q. What was the result?
A. She did not recall who he was.
Q. Was there a hearing (on the petition for sanctions).
Q. What is this document.
A. Transcript of the proceeding on jan 2010. I have reviewed the transcript. Is this an accurate copy of this transcript.
KDD. Objection (to line of questioning) This is already in evidence. Transcript is in evidence.
Q. On the 6th page 1510 starting at line 10, counsel what is this additional appearance, and I want to prepare and represent her. I sent it to everyone to let them to let them know I am going to be representing her.
Q. Did Mr. Ditkowsky tell the judge he represents mary sykes. (Objection, stupid question, the court knows who has filed an appearance and who did not, come on now)
Q. What about the sanctions? A. Mr. KD was allowed to file a response to a motion on sanctions. And to send a copy of the order to 2 individuals. Mr. KD did not file a response. He did not file a response, he filed a Motion to Vacate order appointing guardian, numerous pleadings (FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE), and other documents not responsive to the motion for sanctions. (He filed pleadings indicating the court had no jurisdiction under Sodini and rule 137, and the latter is what the Appellate court determined. JMC had no jurisdiction over an atty that had not filed anything in her court.)
Q. Was there another hearing? A. that was in June 2010.
Look at Exhibit 5. Transcript June 2011. A. This was date of next hearing.
LB. Move exhibit 5 into evidence. No objection.
Q. Exhibit 6, is this the order entering sanctions against KD? A. yes, on june 23rd.
Move exhibit 6 into evidence. No objections.
Exhibit 7. What is this document? This is the court order from Judge Flemming. This is the amount of sanctions. This is an accurate copy of that order.
Move to enter into evidence. No objections.
Q Was the sanctions order entered later overturned? A. Yes, it was.
Q. Is this the appellate court order vacating sanctions against Mr. Ditkowsky? A. Yes. It is an accurate copy.
Move to admit exhibit into evidence. No objections.
Q. Since being special GAL, any email communications from KDD? Yes
Q. When did you first get these?
A. That weekend I started getting emails. The number varies. Some days I receive numerous emails, some days none. I have saved 200 eamils. (Ask him if he saves them and prints them out?)
Q. Do those emails make accusations about you and the GALS and the judges in the case? A. Yes.
Exhibit 7. Q. What is this? A. This is an email dated Oct 7,2011.
Q. How did you get the email. A. I get numerous emails. I send them to others and they come to me.
Q. Do you recognize the email address. Whose email address. A. KDD
Q. Had you received emails prior to this? A. Yes
Q. Is this an accurate copy? Yes.
Move into evidence?
Objections? KDD: It says email from gloria. I don’t see Mr. Stern’s address on this.
Q. Have you received emails from KD where his name does not appear? (Come on now, even a 2nd grader knows this is impossible! The email is altered. The peanut gallery is snickering).
Q. Did you recieve this email.
A. Objection. Foundation. That it came from Mr. Ditkowsky. There are conflicting lines as to who sent the email from gloria to AS.
I think that a proper foundation exhibit 11 has not been laid and cannot be laid with respect to this piece of paper.
On top it says from Ken, on the bottom it says from Gloria.
It seems to have been altered.
(As him to pop open his laptop and show it to you).
Object to the reading of this. If there is a particular question.
(LB: wants to start reading this again. She is waste of time. No question pending and just the reading of a document.)
LB: I don’t know the point I stopped. … she starts reading…
Deprive a citizen of his or her civil rights, invites corruption…
Not accounting for a bag of gold coins. When stern visited the pg home, stern had a duty to report unusual activity to the court. The doctor shopping. The federal court is not an appellate court is not an appeal court for the probate court. …
This is polluting the probate court…. I am not playing dead or going away…
At the very least they are accessories to criminal conduct….
Finally a question.
Q. Is there any basis to KD said there was “doctor shopping”, any basis to lack of “jurisdiction” any basis to mr. Ditkowsky’s actions in not accounting (objection, that’s not what he said). AS answers all in the negative–no basis to any of this.
KDD. Objection, LB is asking him opinion as an expert. She has not put him up as an expert. Is there any basis that for more for a legal conclusion.
She is trying to call him as an expert and she cannot do that. It’s imporper.
Q to AS: Is there is ant basis you did something improper in Probate court.
A. I do not think so.
Q. Is there any basis to KDD’s statement that wire fraud, mail fraud and rico going on. A. No.
Q. Have you tried to intimidate KD or any other atty? A. No.
Q. Are you aware of CF intimidating any other atty.
A. I am not aware of cf (LIAR) of cf intimidating any other atty in the sykes case (LIAR–CF said she wanted me removed because didn’t want to get “papered to death” meaning I would represent Gloria vigorously and she didn’t want to have to deal with that. Then she started maneuvering to make the my disQ procedure longer and longer out. And then she got Gloria in a tizzy. Gloria’s still in a tizzy over that one).
Q. On Dec 27 burglary..
KDD: Object on foundation. Best evidence.
Exhibit 12 is admitted over objection.
Dec 21, 2010. There appears to be a letter that Mr. Ditkowsky was to send to the ARDC.
To ARDC. There must be a great deal of money involved in Sykes, the harassment of Gloria continues on a daily basis. The actions against Gloria are……
An email detailing more mischief. The illegal injunctions entered in circuit court. These communications resulting in rehabilitation to her home tied up and stopped, and payments not accepted by the mortgage co….
The frustration the public has with us. 9th day of 21 day stay. The voidable order freezes ms. Sykes accounts, and now with the burglary.
I have no idea what the ARDC can do to keep this from happening.
1960’s starts talking $25, and starts with a Greylord story. This was called “selling the judge” Dec 28th fiasco, would have not occurred if the judge were made aware of some of the fact. The stuff which was the subject of the burglary. If I were paranoid, I believe that…..
Involves a great deal of money.
Q. Does the Sykes case involve a great deal of money?
A. AS, laughing, no. The estate has no money. The only great deal of money is the money gloria took from her mother. (Oh, a dodge),
Q. Any basis to say she (Gloria) was ambushed in court. A. None.
Q. Are you aware of judges receiving bribes in the syskes case? A. No, no,,
LB reads: Feb 11, 2012, mother isolated again.
Q. How did you first come to see it (this email)? A. It was sent to me by Mr. Ditkowsky.
Q. Is this a true and accurate copy. A. Yes
Ask that this be moved into evidence.
LB: About 5 sentences down, after reading and doing my own investigation….
Posterboard elder financial and abuse case……
(Get him to admit that Gloria was taken care of by her mother for 10+ years)
The very person. Any elder abuse? To you knowledge? Have you participated in any financial exploitation? AS answers no to each of these.
Has CF or CT engaged in any of these? No, no, no.
(You should get him to admit that there was no hearing date set on the petition and no one got notice of the hearing… The hearing date was not set in 30 days as required by law….. Judge relies on reports on GAL (BUT is this clear and convincing evidence, doctor’s reports are hearsay, so where is the clear and convincing evidence) And what of the fact there was a conflict bet Gloria and Carolyn and perhaps CT kept Mary from court. )
Q. Is this an accurate copy of the email? A. Yes.
Objection. From KDD: I don’t know if this is an original email from me. Best evidence would require him to produce the best copy. Data copy stored in a computer. Any printout that this reflects the data accurate accurately.
I don’t know if this true and correct or not.
There is an original beyond the printout.
LB: cites Rule 1004(3) original in possession
Farenga should testify as to where the fax/email came from. What about the underwriting and the fax encryptions. What about that asks Mr. Chair?
There are obvious marks, circles etc. on the document.
Mr. Stern you notice e circled. Was that on the document. I received the email with the stuff on it. I did not receive the cynthia farenga stuff on it.
Was the bottom fax line removed?
Admitted except the fax description and the handwriting.
LB starts to read again:
Time is short and getting shorter, gold is over 1500 per oz, that means there is almost a million in conins, a class 1 felony. A gal is the eyes and ears of the court.
Q. Did mary sykes own gold coins?
A. First in aug of 2009. Sometime after mr. Kd letter, he started raising this issue. I wasn’t informed of the gold coins before this. KD was the first person to raise the issue of the gold coins.
Q. Did mr. Ditkowsky ever give you any proof of the gold coins? A. I did ask family members about it. And I asked other people about it.
Q. Did you steal any gold coins belonging to mary syskes?
A. I have not seen them. I have not assisted anyone else.
Exhibit 17. Email dated may 11th.
Q. Have you seen this email. A. I have seen the email, not the cf printout, I have seen the email.
Q. How did you come to see the email? A. It was sent from KD . May 11.
Q. Except for the writing, is this an accurate copy, A. yes.
Same objection. The note on the bottom. Forwarded message to KDD.
It’s clearly an altered document.
Chair wants to admit it. He says the testimony as to foundation is sufficient.
LB reads on: First paragraph, even at this late juncture….why does the case require 2 GAL’s….. there is a large cache of gold coins that is uninventoried and can be split.
Is there any basis blah blah. (Why wasn’t this investigated) Good admission, AS has not be paid, and he has not been paid any fees.
(Have you asked the FBI or any other investigator to look into the cash and gold coins)
new witness, police officer tom. It is after lunch and I missed a bit going to the bathroom and getting a drink but I didn’t want to leave KD alone. Everyone else left and went to get drinks and food during a half hour break. I don’t understand how the ARDC gets away with this. In Circuit court the court reporters have a union and they don’t go for more than 3 hours, with a one hour lunch break. If the court wants 4 hours, they have to get another court reporter for the afternoon.
Starting at about 5 min after testimony beings.
Q. What contacts did you have with the Sykes family in Naperville?
A. I looked into all our prior contacts. We had 13 prior contacts. We had all well being checks. Assess her independently.
One court appointed guardians came with us as well.
13 calls prior to that.
Q. Any indication there was any basis for abuse of mary sykes? A. No.
Q. When did you first meet Mary Sykes?
Early 2010. Myself and rita manning. We went to the adult day care. We observed her and then we spoke with mary for about 30 minutes.
Q. Were you able to ask her living arrangement? Did you see any signs of abuse? A. I did not see any signs of abuse.
A. We were all introduced to here, she again asked who we all were a few minutes later and she had to ask adam stern who he was even tho she had met him several times before. (what about her hearing aids)
A. Her physical health appeared to be fine. She could not appear to recall things we told her minutes earlier.
A. She said that her husband would pick her up soon, but then she remembered and she said he was dead.
A. We then prepared police report. After meeting with mary syskes, we discussed this with KD via email.
Q. What about the emails from KDD? How often would you get emails from him?
A. They come in cycles, we would get a bunch for awhile, then nothing, and then we get a bunch more emails. Aprrox, not sure exactly. I have about 1000. Some are from other people, some are from him. I don’t know the exact number.
Q. What is the general subject matter.
A. There is some conspiracy. But we really have no interest to sykes because her home isn’t in naperville and she has no real property here. we really don’t have an interest.
(Not in our jurisdiction).
We weren’t interested.
Q. Email jan 17, 2009. How to pay off your congressman.
How did you come to see this email initially.
When did you receive this email.
Jan 17, 2012. Do you recognize that email? A. Yes
Q. had you receive emails on prior occassions?
A. He might have another email address.
I recognize the email as from KDD
Move exhibit 24 into evidence.
LB then reads an email:
I suspect the plenary guardian has dipped into mary’s money and will not spend dime one. Someone will have to account and that will be the million in cash gold coins and jewelry.
Is the email similar to other emails? A. Yes.
LB reads more. “Two gals were appointed and they decided that Mary was incompetent and Mary rubber stamped her decision. Then her incompetency was rubber stamped.”
Email talks about financial exploitation. Everyone profits, the judge, the gals’ the attys.
They are going over the emails.
( I don’t understand the relevance of the police officer in napervilee got emails? What’s the deal there?)
Objection. Mr. Cammeron’s email address is not the one. His email does not appear on the printout.
LB will try to lay more foundation.
Q. Is this your email address from Tom Camerron?
I forwarded what was sent to me to Adam Stern (I don’t’ get this, what is Adam supposed to say)?
That was on my email.
I asked that there should be something going on in the court proceedings.
TC testified that the email is true and accurate to the best of his recollection.
(Why is there Prudential security in there? I don’t get that?
There always seems to be one of them here. Do they get paid more for that? There’s always 2 of them)
Q. Do you have the police report. KDD. Objection We did not get a copy of this police report and we did not know that was to be used in evidence. (Larry should have objected to facts not in evidence).
LB: this was produced in April and is bates stamped pages 1929 to 1936
She struggles to show KDD a copy. The hearing Chair does not get a copy. She’s supposed to have a copy of the report for everyone and he’s not supposed to be testifying to facts not in evidence.
LB is looking at the report
Q. commander this is your report you used before you came into this room, correct? A. Yes.
Q. It included not only talking to ms. Sykes but also ken ditkowsky? A. Yes
Q. After all your investigations, you did not charge anything, and you informed kd that you were not going to charge anyone. A. Yes
Q. Based upon your own investigation nothing was going to happen. A. Yes.
Q. Throughout the course of the 13 different visits, each time you found ms. Sykes to be in good condition. After an officer makes a visit, they have to make a report.
And in these reports, did you find any abuse? A. No.
Larry Hyman cross examines.
Q. You have never met KDD before today in court, correct?
A. I either spoke to him on the phone or via email.
Q. Did you send any email to spam folder. A. No, you never know when an email might become important.
Q. Did you find that what Mr. Ditkowsky was doing, did this violate any laws? A. It did not . If found it annoying , but not harassing.
Q. You know that there is a criminal statute that if people make harassing phone calls or emails, that is a violation of the law. Are you familiar with that law? A. Very familiar.
Q. There are plenty of people in naperville that are annoying, they make annoying or harassing (communications, then) you would make a decision or you would go to the states atty. Was that done? A. Yes. Q. But out of that, no charges were filed, correct?
Q. these emails didn’t affect your day to day operations in your dept. A. No.
Q. Other than clogging up your inbox. A. Correct. Q. It doesn’t prevent you from investigating allegations of abuse? A. No.
Q. You found them annoying, you found them informational. You were aware, there was an ongoing dispute. A. I was from the emails.
Q. You never had to arrest gloria, right? Nope.
Q. At any time that you had gone thru the emails, did you ever ask mr. Stern, whom you learned was the gal, did you ask him to ask the court stop this lawyer to stop sending me this stuff?
A. I believe gloria was the one that was cautioned not to send me anything further.
Q. Are you aware of any trips of ms. Mary sykes was taken to an emergency room?
A. We searched the fire dept. records and found one. (That doesn’t mean she was taken by car, duh).
I only show one in the fire dept’s records. There was only one.
Q. That corroborated that assertion of mr. Ditkowsky, correct? A. Yes
Discussion ensues over calling Mr. Stern.
We did not want to keep ad am stern here very long. We discharged mr. Stern until later. He’s a 10 minute cab away, then we can call AS and then.
Judge stuart will be here at 3:30 and cynthia farenga.
Then mr. Harmon addresses the court.
I have my own I have to be back to my office by 4:45. My partner is involved in some case. Then tomorrow I have to be at a relative’s funeral at 1 pm.
From Mr. Chair: Condolences for the family member. I was asked for leave to file an appearance. I will not change the proceedings. The parties need one day total. We sent the second day to be safe. Mr. Hyman you just filed your appearance this morning (what does THAT have to do with anything, the guy just died last night and they have 24 hr rules, you know. Larry Hyman might not get into Jewish heaven, ya know what I mean. They’ll put him with the Roman Catholics or worse, the Protestants).
Hearing Chair: We will not reset any times. We go the full day today and then the full day tomorrow. No excuses. (Interesting, courts change time for attys all the time and then just take another matter in between. I don’t get this. Those people come to work every day. This has been going on for about a year. As many judges have told litigants when an atty has to do something, everyone just has to adjust and deal with it).
We intend to go to 5 today. And then 9:30 to 5 pm. You can file an appearance earlier today at the last minute and I am not changing the schedule..
Take a break until a quarter to two.
Oooh. Bad Wifi. Nothing available. Only 2 bars. Why am I not surprised?
Prudential security is here two guys. They get extra pay for coming to the proceeding. If I had my building guy come to a proceeding in my offices , it would be a short Mexican that can also fix a faucet and a toilet.
Recess, waiting for adam stern. LB and LH working out some stipulations on evidence. (Finally, that is what they should have done yesterday to not hold anything up). Make people pop open laptops then to be sure that emails are from KD and no one else and where did they go, etc.
If anyone’s coming tomorrow, there’s $13 parking at the Lakeshore Athletic club over on I think it’s Water Street, just around the corner. I don’t know of any cheap parking around here.
LB to chair, just gimma a minute or two, we are tring to expedite questions.
We are working out the authenticity of emails. This is regarding Exhibit 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 27, 28, 29, 34, 35, 36, 38 –all without objection.
One of the points made by the miscreants is that they have no 2 yr statue of limitations on 1401. But if the court lost jurisdiction on her in Dec 7, 2009, then the statute is not tolled.
LB goes to exhibit 18. Specifically 1333 on that exhibit. At the bottom, original message from KDD. LB reads: As you are aware the NASGA and the friends and family that there is something wrong when a Protective order entered against CT, yet she was appointed (paraphrasing), it suggest impropriety. Serious neglect, admitted by the GAL.
Q to AS: Did you engage in impropriety. Did you defend any neglect. (Nah, he just did nothing).
Q. Is the isolation to prevent inquiry into her gold, cash, jewelry, etc. A. No.
A. She has been made available to anyone any time I have been asked.
Q. Any basis to prevent inquiry into her competency? Any basis is to isolate? A. No.
Q. Are there any gold coins, jewelry or money that has not been inventoried? A. No.
LB reads on: Yesterday afternoon I received a telephone call. I was notified that the court was to appt me as gal district court judge. I was notified that the court would appoint me as GAL in this case. I would like the court….
Q. Are you aware that KDD was to appoint him as guardian ad litem? A. A motion was filed, GS, SE and SF filed a motion requesting that KDD be appointed as gal, it was dismissed as moot because the underlying complaint was dismissed (he leaves out the fact it was without prejudice and Gloria is working on filing it again.
LB reads on: I would appreciate that you provide the following:
reports to authorities. In dec 2010 mary was taken to edwards hospital having lost 10% of her body weight, this was report mr. Stern and Farenga. Q. Did the PG wait until mary was seriously ill before taking her to the hospital. A. There was a conversation with a cousin who related to several others. We found there was no factual basis to it.
Q: Did the pG make you aware of MS illness. Did you report it to the court? A. There was nothing to report. At 92 she is going to get sick and have illnesses. Harmon objects that this is purely speculative.
No. 3. Mr. Ditkowsky. Concerns regarding non inventory. It has been alleged that the gold coins were kept in the box. In the box were cash, gold coins, etc. It is assumed that the PG removed the contents. Any basis to the valuables alleged to have been stolen? A. No.
Q. Did the PG empty the safe deposit box without a court order? No she did not do it pursuant to a court order. (The answer is yes, she did it without a court order, she had it drilled out and she removed the contents, even tho Gloria’s name was on the box).
(Ask him if Gloria’s name was on that )
LB asks about Mary not getting legal representation.
A. I am not aware of anyone keeping mary from having legal representation.
Exhibit 20. It is clear that the sodini notices were never given. The probate court is without jurisdiction to seize those assets.
Then Ken’s siloquoy about how lawyers should be honest and candid rather than sneaky and sleazy.
They should have rectified the problem in an expeditious manner.
The fact the Soldini is ignored is one of the most serious issues in the Sykes case.
There was a great amount of communications sent in the guardianship abuse cases by mail and wire.
Then he talks about separating a victim from his or her property.
Fiduciaries should be interested in his or her property.
The US atty might wish to bring a RICO case. A month to finish the trial, but the IRS filed a lien and my client and I received nothing. But federal prosecutors can whisper *** to scare others straight.
Q. Are the notices be required to be given prior to a hearing. A. Yes, but written notice NO. ( Are you kidding. Look at the statute, it has to be written. You list the names and addresses and then you serve by mail or in person. It does not say list phone numbers and voice mail addresses). A. But it’s not my part to send it out. It is the petitioner’s responsibility.
Q. How did you take Mr. Ditkowsky’s statement of scaring other miscreants straight.
A. I assume miscreant is referring to me. He always refers to me when he uses the term “miscreant” (no, he does not, you are one of several).
Q. How did you take the story about federal prosecutors?
A. As a threat. (But how can you threaten someone with valid legal action?)
Q. Please look at 21.
(Why would he take this as a threat when AS alleges he did nothing wrong? Who is threatened?)
LB reads on:
The expose will follow. The intimidation and harassment is memorialized in stone. The court had no jurisdiction to rubber stamp ….. the isolation from friends and family are part of any conspiracy to shorten mary syske’s life (what about excluding gloria, kathy and yolanda).
A. I don’t report everything to the court. I might report severe ilnesses where people have long term illnesses. Q. What types of illness. A. Long term psychiatric hospitalizations I might report. Or neglect by the guardians.
Q. Have you been part of any attempt to isolate or shorten her life? A. No.
Q. Are you aware of any attempt to deprive her of stimulation? A. No. (What about low functioning adult day care?)
A. Ihave not harassed mary nor has anyone else. I have not harassed anyone.
Lb is sniffing, why is she sniffing. Second sentence.
LB reads on. They have prevented you from employing an attorney. Extreme lengths they have gone thru. Is that true? A. No. Gloria sykes has had numerous lawyers.
A. I attempted to determine if she wanted a lawyer. She did not. She is a very confused woman with a high degree of dementia. (What about the videos?)
1252. Second to last paragraph. Says with the videos on the internet they cannot be altered or oppressed.
(Ask him about videos. She does not seem to be highly confused and demented).
Talks about the Jerman standard.
Have you seen the videos. When did you see those videos. I saw them in late 2011. How did you come to see the videos. Had they been ( produced them in court–the judge said–I can’t look at that in court. )
what did you do after seeing the videos. Then I contacted cf. Did you have the internet. No and I did not attempt to have them removed. (But PS did, and he admitted it on a transcript. He got some removed from youtube. I put them up on Vimeo where you can’t get them down. Let’s see if LB shows them to the tribunal. She will if she’s honest.
email starts KDD to AS start with last paragraph. I have copied PS without the sodini notices, there is no jurisdiction, and when it is examined, it will be examined by the clear light of hindsight.
The federal courts are not tolerant. That said, if you do not unwind this problem, Ms. Sykes will seek a court order to hold you in contempt and damages. Monday is a court holiday.
Q. Were you involved in an illegal partition in the Sykes case.
How did you take mr. Ditkowsky’s statement that Ms. Sykes would seek a court order.
A. Two parts to that. I know the actions in probate court did not conflict with the orders in bk court. I know it was all proper. I was frustrated. This is a continuing pattern. There is another action in BK court, it never ends, I am called upon to defend or refute. Any tribunal anyone can try to find or defend. It takes away from my family and my work (wait a minute, isn’t this your work , probate and mary and gloria)
oh, now we are to safe harbor.
LB reads, as a courtesy to mr. Stern and mr. Schmeidel…. This investigation they cannot quash and they have no clout. An intentional violation of the automatic stay.
Q. Do you have clout? A. Laughs, I don’t think I have any clout. Judge Hollis lifted the stay so that the guardian can continue the action in probate court to Partition (but wait a minute, the mortgagee has to be part of the action and you notified Chase, but Chase no longer holds the note on 6016, you didn’t mention that, now did you Mr. Stern.)
Exhibit 34. In the middle of the day, an email from kdd, subject illinois supreme ct writs.
The continued isolation from her family and friends,…. promulgate elder abuse. The isolation is to create isolation, desperation, and loss of will to death. This means they intentionally can accelerate the date of death. …. How do you justify the decision to isolate Mary to accelerate her death?
Q. Any basis to saying mary has been isolated?
A. Many people think that there is no guardianship and they can see or call the ward whenever, but they have to make a reasonable request. There is no isolation plan in place. Everyone has to work with the court and the guardian’s wishes. Some people are willing to work within those parameters and other are not.
Q. Were there actions reasonably calculated to create depression and loss of the will to live? A. No.
Q. Were you trying to commit homocide. A. Absolutely not. Offended by that statement.
Q. Any basis for the isolation? A. I have tried to set up visitation and work something out. It has worked to everyone’s satisfaction (3 years, are you kiddin? Kathy was told she can’t see mary because she took the wrong side. Josephine is terrified if she does just a bit wrong, she will be cut off too) Stern is lying.
LB email; Now they talk about the 2 gal’s. the gals’ are joined at the hip and keep friends and family away.
AS says he talked to mary and she says she does not want representation.
LB continues reading the email: AS called me up and threatened me. My wife overheard the phone conversation and she was shocked at his threats and how he wanted me to stay away from the case. Stern was then joined by phone calls from Schmeidel and Farenga, threatened me and tried to keep me from looking into this case.
He suggests the estate and the loot is the basis for all this. Talk to the Coopers, they suffered a similar experience.
Q. Is there any basis to this? A. Mary did not want a lawyer was a truthful statement.
Q. Is there any basis that you called up KDD and threatened him. No basis to that statement.
Q. Have you seen any greylord type of activities (what about coming from the judge’s area all the time and then the transcripts show coaching between the court, PS and the gal’s., JMC helping Carolyn with her health care plan and trashing Gloria’s, other than that, nope).
Dr. Patel is on the phone. KD state his objection for the record. They are setting up for phone testimony. So how does the panel determine if the witness is lying. Can the witness see any documents? It’s crazy! No exhibits, just a call in? Yeah right, More of the same Probate same old same old, deviation from the proscribed Rules of Court, Civil Procedure…
Phone testimony has to be either agreed to in advance, or its simply cannot be used.
witness–Dr. Patel, over the phone! This should be interesting. Now we have the court reporter sitting in the witness seat, they have a phone headset from the 1970’s and what’s that? A safety pin holding up the court reporter’s mic. Now that’s something I have never seen. What a court room! What a mess. KDD objects to the witness on the phone routine. LB’s kidding.
Court reporter is present in Dr. Patel’s offices. Dr. Patel is sworn by her.
Oh and of course we have some ancient phone system that they’re going to use. 1970 for sure. No matter.
Okay we have the witness. Jeff Torosian, the Chair, introduces himself.
There is a court reporter with him as well. So he has to get on speaker phone.
Madam court report rose pisano, what company and phone pullman usa court reporting, 312-346-1626.
Can you swear the witness.
dr. patel is sworn.
Lb, state name and spell it for the record. Please give us a brief description of your background. My name is Dr. Patel and I graduated form college in Bombay India in 1973. Did residency in england from 1972 to 1977, then came to US and started a family practice. Have been at resurrection med center since 1980. He does family medicine. 7447 w talcott ave, suite 216 chicago, 60631. I am board certified in family medicine. I am testifying pursuant to subpoena.
Q. Do you know Mary sykes. A. She was my patient for several years. She was a patient in 2004. She was my patient in 2009.
Q. Did you receive correspondence from kenneth ditkowsky. He is looking for the correspondence. Let’s see if he can find it.
Exhibit 3 was faxed to your office, did you receive it. Dr. Patel, what exhibits are you flipping through?
A. I did receive Exhibit 3.
Q. Did you have the opportunity to look thru this. Is exh, 3 also in mary sykes’ chart?
Q. Did you have time to look at all this?
He obviously does not recall. (Fax machines can screw up),
LB: exhibit 3, the first page should have some numbers on it. 2632. It’s a letter from KDD to dr. patel. Letter form kenneth ditkowsky. The date says April 30, 2010. Is that the date of the letter and that letter is addressed to you.
2633. Do you see that document?
Dr. Patel wants to ask office manager about all the faxes he gets. LB tells him he can’t do that during his testimony. (See? That’s why this is never done. He wants to ask his office manager about records, he can’t find anything in his own files without assistance, and most of all, he just doesn’t care and probably has BS himself from the IDPR and in no way wants to help the ARDC, maybe even if they do pay him his $500 per hour for testifying, which I bet they didn’t).
bev asked why isnt he here and it’s probably because they won’t pay his $500 per hour to be here (Larry, ask him how much he charges to testify), The court reporter is directed to take away all papers except for the Administrator’s exhibits. Exhibit 3 is several pages. He isn’t sure what he is look at. First he is directed to find the KDD letter in Mary’s records. Then he is directed to look at the package from LB. He is obviously confused and can’t do it. If he were in court, LB could lay the docts side by side. No dice with this phone call thing she wants to pull.
If he was board certified in the 1970’s that means he is between 70 and 80 right now! It will be sometime next spring before he finds the 11th floor of the Prudential towers. It’s a difficult place to find and get to, unless you’re in a cab nearby.
Did you receive a fax earlier this week. He can’t find it. He needs his office manager to help him out, yadayada. The hearing chair says he will have to call him to come in downtown to testify.
Dr. Patel is asked to have the court reporter show him the documents. Turns out she left. Okay, this is realllly funny.
The Chair stops all this and directs LB to get him down to court to testify. Like that will happen. As Ken says, it will be Spring before Dr. Patel finds the courthouse.
AS is called back in to testify.
Mr. Stern is still under oath. (As if that helps his statements. He still looks down, avoids eye contact with the panel, etc. Smooth Move, ex lax!)
Exhibit 36, moving right along. It’s 3 pm. In the middle of the page Feb 24, cites some case and LB reads on:
It is now clear that the Sykes has to presented as part of the UN efforts to preserve human rights. There are numerous human rights violations (with sykes and the elderly in the US). AS rule making is an intolerable derrogation to mary’s human rights.
All but $4,000 of mary’s money has been dissipated. I have a real fear for mary’s life. They do not need mary any longer. Mr. Bush’s mother was murdered. Abortive attempts to continue an investigation of the Sykes case, farenga, stern and others got the court to enter orders without first obtaining jurisdiction.
To speed up death is to engage in murder. If there was any good faith, then mary could freely talk to her mother. Requiring a gestapo agent to be present to talk to mary is absurd.
Q. Are you aware of any violation of mary’s human rights. Were the sisters denied visitation. A. No and no.
Q. Have you made any arbitrary rules in the syskes case? Has mary’s estate been dissipated? A. No….
No, no, no.
Q. Have you received pecuniary benefit? A. absolutely not. Were you trying to intimidate mr. Ditkowsky? No.
Q. Are you aware of anyone speeding up mary’s death? A. No.
Q. Any basis to a gestapo being present to give up state secrets (but he is laughing, and it makes a point)
emai from KDD entitled reflections/promise. LB reads
That email states, everyone has always wondered, if I were in NSG during 1936, what would I have done. What I do as a cat or jew or arian having the right hair color, size and texture, and I would have behave diligently. I have now had the opportunity to observe my mettle.
From the look of her face, I must have met her expectations.
I refused to succumb to their…..
I was sanctioned $5,000 for exercising my first amendment rights.
The court lacked jurisdiction.
I am working on a civil rights lawsuit against stern, schmeidel and farenga.
42 usca 1983. The complaints by stern and schmeidel have born fruit and I need to exercise my first amendment rights. The safe idea is to accept a punishment and close my eyes that a senior citizen has had her rights taken away. The other path is to stand up to the ARDC and exercise my first amendment rights.
Mary sykes had a treasure trove, not inventoried.
PG is a fiduciary, a fiduciary taking funds creates a tax liability.
I am glad that I am glad that I am standing up, and I encourage many others to also do it.
How could this happen in America?
I am asking law enforcement to investigate diligently and honestly.
Q. Any proof of substantial treasure trove?
A. No proof.
Q. Have you protected anyone who has stolen funds? A. I have not protected theft of the funds.
Blog posting. From Ken Ditkowsky. Why sykes is such an import case…
From Denisonlaw.com? Denisonlaw.com? What are they reading? What the heck is going on. Everyone in the peanut gallery is snickering because they know the email didn’t come from there, it came from http://www.marygsykes.com. All the posts come from there. My firm website is denisonlaw.com.
Now a fight over the blog..
This will be admitted into evidence. You have not tied it up that Mr. Ditkowsky.
A blog printout. Are you kidding.?
At least I didn’t get booted out. Yeah!
LB says I am not a witness. Yeah!
But she can’t keep the blog out.
Discussion ensures over the blog. Ken finally pipes up and says he doesn’t know if it’s from that blog. Hearing chair says he’s gonna admit it. LB pipes up and says I’m on the witness list (but I don’t have a subpoena)
the more I think about all this, the more I think it was a set up from AS to get me to have to stop blogging.
Well it worked. LB didn’t know she was being set up but AS does it all the time.
He figures out a way to stop my blogging. Another SLAPP from the miscreants. They are getting more subtle. They think I won’t think or notice it. But you can bet I’m faxing LB tonight and pointing out their lies, lies, lies.
He gets the Probate court to do it, he gets the judge to motion the deputy to do it. He knows how to shut someone up.
Such a little *******