Before the Trial of Ken Ditkowsky, he should call on the Miscreants to step forward…

and admit that on December 7, 2009, the Sykes probate (pirate) court lost all its jurisdiction.  This will include Guardian ad Lietem Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmeidel, Harvey Waller, Deborah Jo Soehlig and Amanda Byrens.

THEY ALL KNOW THAT THE COURT HAS BEEN ACTING WITHOUT JURISDICTION SINCE DECEMBER 7, 2012 when Carolyn Toerpe failed to serve any notice of the December 7, 2009 hearing upon the adult sisters and other daughter of Mary.

No dispute.  All on the record and all well established fact.  The declarations are published here.  There is no filing of the notice together with a timely Certificate of Service.
No matter what Judge Stuart says, the issue is clear and just–THE CASE MUST BE DISMISSED NON-SUITED and Mary allowed to return freely to her home and her other daughter who care for her lovingly for 10 years!

PS–Ken, if they are not in court at the start of the hearing, ask the Hearing Panel to get them on the phone.  Tell their receptionist just who is calling them to ask about jurisdiction in the case that is starting against you.

Now for my comments on Ken’s emails

If you are going to steal, what difference does it make if you have a court without jurisdiction?The miscreants should be called upon to step forward to Judge Stuart and do the right thing and admit the court lost jurisdiction on December 7th, 2009 before you put on evidence during your hearing that was the case and it gets in a transcript someplace.  they should be also called upon to admit that the ARDC complaint was only based upon your finding out their “crimes” and my posting it.

so far the Probate court (and I was thinking Pirate court when Mary’s other daughter made that typo!  –that was assuredly an LOL/Freudian slip– makes all the family coming forward to report abuse and theft “shush” up so it never gets on a transcript.  the court reporters only record the judge and miscreant attys then.

none if it then is on the record.  Not only do the miscreants use the Prob/pirate court to clean the transcript record, they then cleanse the court file, an a list of the 80% missing files in the Probate court is also a crucial issue in your trial and argument, so don’t miss that one.  Perhaps you should ask your tribunal to kindly step across the street and ask Judge Stuart to show them the file cart that has about 80% of the file missing.  No orders are left from 2009.  13 large heavy volumes of appellate record.  Professional cleansing.  And don’t let them blame the other daughter or the other Sykes family–we’re putting everything we have on the internet and they can just pop open a laptop and see that too!

—–Original Message—–
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Sep 2, 2012 9:10 AM

A Court speaks only through its written orders, thus, if there is no written order your sister acted ultra vires.
However, if there is no jurisdiction even the written orders are void.
Now tie in the Jerman case and apply the presumption that “lawyers and Judges are presumed to know the law” The GALs, Carolyn’s lawyer and the Judge all know that the order is void and when they act upon it they act illegally under color of statute.   The de facto officers of the Court act in violation of 42 USCA 1983.    Let us go one step further.   The venue section of the statute also uses the word ‘shall.’   That means the venue is mandatory and In re: Sykes 09 P _____ is even in the wrong County!
Ken Ditkowsky
From: the other daughter, summary
Missing assets:
1) the Beneficial annuity now worth about $1000,  maybe more
2) GE stock worth quite a lot– I was also a beneficiary.
3) Toerpe had mothers name removed off of the pension checks and
4)Toerpe emptied all if the accounts at the Pullman Bank (Pullman is now US Bank in Norwood Park) and so mother no longer has any accounts in her name.
5) Two if the three accounts I know of at Pullman bank had my name listed as joint owner was also removed. The three accounts had at least $20,000 at the time Toerpe kidnapped mother. Toerpe wrote mom only had six thousand (in an inventory?).
The crimes are too great to even care about any more because Attorney Schmiedel teaches how to determine financial exploitation to other attorneys: obviously he knows how to cover up and churn assets with a holy veil of the permission of the Prirate (sp) court.
From Me:  I laughed when I saw the misspelling of Probate court and she’s right, tho it might be a freudian slip, the miscreants are operating in nothing but a Pirate Court!
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 1, 2012, at 11:45 PM, wrote:

In re McCormack’s Estate, 50 NYS 2d 274 – 1944

How this document has been cited

Although a court-ordered withdrawal of funds from the Totten trust to be used for the depositor’s support amounts to a revocation to that extent, a committee or guardian cannot exercise the depositor’s right to revoke
– in Successor Trustees of Tentative Trusts: Trust Law Phantoms and one similar citation
Without a court order, the committee was without authority to terminate the trust by withdrawal of the entire fund on deposit with the bank
– in Gorfinkel v. FIRST NAT’L BANK IN YONKERS, 1963 and one similar citation
Should the depositor become incompetent, may his guardian reach the funds and if so, for what purpose?
– in Trusts
The above quoted statement, as well as the one by Bogert, apparently has its genesis in a few early New York cases.
– in Community Property-Management of Special Community of Incapacitated Spouse
—holding committee, upon appointment, has neither the power nor duty to close a Totten trust account under the guise of collecting the incompetent’s assets, may not change the registration by restoring it to the ward’s sole name, nor withdraw the funds and place them in a new account in the committee’s name as fiduciary
– in Successor Trustees of Tentative Trusts: Trust Law Phantoms
This case was treated as a tentative trust even though there was a trust agreement In the signature card of Hlbernla Savings and Loan Society which held the account.
– in Legal bulletin

2 thoughts on “Before the Trial of Ken Ditkowsky, he should call on the Miscreants to step forward…

  1. Before I say anything, let me say this: Hannah, the pooch in the photos above, is no longer with my mother — as she, Hannah, was mother’s ‘salvation’ (as my Mother would say). What we now is this: Hannah has a serious alergy to certain foods, and was NEVER to eat grains! I was ordered by Judge Connors to give up Hannah to Toerpe’s custody when on September 21, 2009 Mother — against her will – was ordered to return to the Toerpe home: it was also on the court order that she was to be returned to her home in 14 days (and in August 2010, Judge Connors reminds Stern, Schmiedel and Farenga that “** we got to get [Mary] back in hre home”. That said, I told Connors on the 21 Sept. tha I would not allow Toerpe to ‘care for a trained animal killing Pit” let alone precious Hannah, and Judge Connors threatened me with jail time unless I gave Hannah up. In March 2010 Hannah is brought to the Vet four or five times and racked up bills over #1000 (according to Toerpe’s inventory): Toerpe reported to the court that Hannah had to be put on steroids. What I know from talking to my mother is that Hannah put on “a lot of weight” and “had lost the use of her back legs”. I now understand that Hannah, because of lack of proper care, id dead: Toerpe KILLED HANNAH JUST AS SHE KILLED HER DOG TC! Suffice, people who abuse animals abuse people, too: even more clear and proven is that people who abuse animals also abuse seniors!

    THAT SAID, whereas I don’t find most of what is on this blog as more than the blogger’s opinions–and until this morning have stayed away from the blog as I’ve asked the JD to take my name and likeness off the blog and to NOT publish any of my emails to Ken, apparently she is still receiving my emails (and I’m not sending them to her). To conclude, it wasn’t a type-oh! JD. I meant pirate although it is misspelled as I was using my IPhone and ****. A dear friend has been calling CF, AS, PS, et al Pirates for some time now, and I found it fitting that the Probate Court is an “expert” at priating the freedoms and human rights, and equitable properties of the elderly and churning assets! Finally I want to make pme thing clear, AS, CF, PS and CT and Company (et al) can keep all the frickin money and to to their graves with it, as long as my mother is freed and her life salvaged! Once freed, I will spend my time helping her heal, and prayfully give her back much of what she has lost — her family, dear friends, community, activities, and well, ultimately, her life! That all of this was accomplished with smoke and mirrors– that this is what attorneys do (lie, cheat, distract, protect the criminals as long as they financially benefit)! In fact, it is probably the only profession where attorneys are paid to get off serial murders and rapists and they do so with honor.

    I asked that JD not publish any of my emails as I do not send emails to JD — but somehow, my words and phrases continue to make it into her blog. Even JD hasn’t learned anything….

    • Dear Gloria;

      1) there is NO SUCH THING as a dog or cat having an “allergy to grains.” Dogs are carnivores. They have no enzymes or any other digestive chemicals in their bodies to digest carbs/grains/fruits/veggies. Absolutely none. It’s not a food allergy, but more something that is “not species appropraite.” Hannah, being a smaller dog, cannot tolerate even a diet with a small amount of species inappropriate food because it will make her severely ill. Due to the financial pressures of mega Agra, grains are creeping into dog and cat food, which used to be all meat (even tho it was never the best parts of the animal, it still was all meat).
      Peta does a ton of junk, and so do other animal rights outlets, but none are strong enough to take on pet food manufacturers and get inappropriate materials out of those containers of pet food. Even PETA and other huge, huge organizations can’t do it, so what they do is go after puppy mills and create leash laws and no kill shelters (where they feed them crappy inapproparite pet food).

      This is all beside the point. Hannah was only lent to your mother, she is actually my dog and is chipped to me. The agreement was, when your mother passed, she would come back to me, whether Judge Connors knew it or not. I emailed CF, AS and PS several times to let them know this, but again, because they are miscreants, they lie, cheat and steal all the time, so IF Hannah is dead or has been hidden from you and me, I am not surprised.

      2) I don’t publish your emails any longer. They do come to me thru a variety of sources, but you said “don’t publish” so I don’t publish because you do own a copyright in them. BUT a copyright only protects against slavish copying. Copyrights do not protect against dissemination of the underlying facts, factual summaries, lists, forms–basically anything that does not rise to a work of creative authorship or design, and even then it only protects against slavish copying, with the standard being “substantially similar” which means if the alleged infringer changed more than punctuation and typos, and actually did some creating writing (tho minimal, it does not have to be much), there is no copyright infringement.

      Accordingly, short excerpts, summarizing an email, getting a list of facts–all is not copyright infringement.

      For these reasons 1) a phone book is not copyrightable; 2) lists of facts are not copyrightable; 3) mathematical formulas are not copyrightable; 4) the periodic table is not copyrightable (unless colored and with pretty fonts and all, I don’t know); a list of the trees on my front lawn is not copyrightable.

      3) You have repeatedly said neither Ken nor I are your attorney, and besides the fact that is no one’s business and you don’t have to say that, this means we have no special duty to you, and we are like the member of the public to you. If you come up with a great patentable idea, but do not have a confidentiality agreement with that individual, they can take it, do what they please, and under the new AIA patent system, even steal it and file a patent on it (this is exactly why we never had that irksome “first to file” before.)

      The rule is, if you don’t want someone to publicize your secrets, do not broadcast it to anyone that you do not have a confidential relationship with. in Illinois, without a contract, that is your attorney, your clergy and your CPA and that’s it. Anyone else has no obligation to receive information from you and refrain from passing it on. There is nothing illegal about it. And worse yet, under the new AIA, you can even steal an idea and file a patent on it.

      Once you send out an email, all you have in that is a copyright, but to perfect it, you must make registration. Someone that paraphrases it or writes about it in their own words and style has not infringed your writing because copyright only protects against copying–it does not protect the underlying words, facts, phrases, etc. You cannot copyright facts, lists, legal forms, legal pleadings (which are supposed to be only about facts or facts applied to the law), etc.

      Again, if you don’t like this blog, don’t read it. If it upsets you, don’t read it. If you don’t want any email summaries, paraphrasing, or whatever to end up here, don’t send that person any more emails. Once your words leave your pen, your computer, your mouth, someone may write about them. OMG, even an investigative reporter!

      You used to do that, correct? And perhaps even some of your interviewees didn’t want what someone else published, it got published, correct? Stories, inferences, paraphrasing, innuendo, heresay are all grist for the pub mill, day in and day out.

      Further, Ken has a serious ARDC proceeding coming up this week, and I wish if you could just see a few feet around you for this week and lighten up on the “all about me” stuff, okay?


      Please no more emails to me today or requests to posts either. Please put your stuff through Ken. That has worked well in the past. I will not publish your emails unless you say “okay to post” and I am a stickler on that and you know it. But the underlying facts are not copyrightable and have no expectation of privacy and further, you have already blabbed 90% of this stuff in court, but the court never listened. How can you expect privacy in something you email to Ken when you already said it in court and in your pleadings?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s