And exactly how much is there to cover up? How effectively can it be done?

Yes, folks, there is now a massive pile of elephant poop in a pile on the living room floor, but atty SO from the ARDC apparently has been given mile wide blinders for it and a pair of nose clips.  Read on.

 

From: JoAnne M Denison <jdenison@surfree.com>
To: kenneth ditkowsky <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: okay to publish?

It is very upsetting to me that the SO was more interested in ignoring the massive amounts of lies in the Sykes case, figuring out ways to phrase yes and no questions to cover up anything done in that case, rather than use discovery as the tool it was mean to be–arrive at truth and justice in a particular case or controversy.

Although I have been involved in multi million dollar patent and trademark cases, with highly contentious and conniving opposing counsel, there is at least SOME semblance of both sides behaving like ladies and gentlemen as attorneys and at least to some degree, even if it’s only about 50%, using a deposition for what it is meant to be–to uncover truth and justice.  There actually is some sort of show to that effect–even from the worst of opposing counsel.

This deposition was clearly meant to ignore and cover up the truth and continue the railroad against first Gloria and Mary and then you and now I.

They are so blatant such as they don’t even give any platitudes about lying by AS, CF or any of the other actors in this horrid drama.

Nothing.  Nada.  Not, we are most concerned about those lies, not we are very concerned about lack of jurisdiction, summons and complaint and notice to sisters.  Just another question trying to cover all that up.  No sympathy for Gloria, no concern for her assets or her family.  It was so bad, you will see that SO was actually trying to cover up the infamous Aug 16, 2012 order that was double stamped and scratched out.  SO said “that happens all the time.”  NO, it does NOT.  Here’s the real procedure.  One party drafts the order, the other party okays the order, it is presented to the court.  If one party objects to the decision, they can include in the order “agreed as to form only” or “objections made by part X to inclusion of X”.  But all parties see the order and agree to it.  In FED court, PARTIES MUST INITIAL ORDERS–esp. those granting possession or a money judgment.  The judge does NOT change the order.  If s/he does, the parties are called to the bench and the judge explains the changes and THEN s/he signs the order.

Judges say when memorandum opinions will issue. These are done without input of the parties because they are intended for publication (but may not be cited).

Judges are careful with orders, they do not scratch them out and sign them.

Connors made a huge deal about changing orders–even with a phone call agreement after the fact and told AS CF and myself to avoid doing it at all costs. (We had to change the next status date–no biggie, but Judge Connors made it clear orders are not to be changed, even for a status date and she never likes it).

And SO has been soooo blinded by at least a show of honesty, truth and ethics she had absolutely no problem telling poor prior witness JC a pack of lies before HER testimony (SO called it “preparing the witness” to that tribunal) she has no idea what she did was the absolute low of the low.

SO seemed to make it clear she “didn’t like to be blogged about”, talked about, or mentioned.  But as Justice Louis Brandeis said “sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

Maybe she doesn’t like my blog and what it posts, but perhaps when she sees her reflection in the mirror there, she might think about combing her hair and washing all the dirt off her face.

The other judges have done it by asking about summons and complaint and 14 day notice now and asking about Citations to Discover and Recover assets, and perhaps, painfully enough, SO to look at the mirror called the marygsykes.com blog to see the truth.  Starting with, respectfully ask to redo my deposition and ask about all the corruption I have uncovered and who can verify this and what can be done about it.

I once saw a judge, horrors of horrors, enter a guardianship, then turn around ask who was in the house (so they could prepare it for sale the ward was placed in a nursing home), and the attorney answered two elderly siblings or cousins in wheel chairs, and the judge responded, well get them out of there and do you want me to sign an order of possession now?  Of course, that’s what the attorney walked out of there with.  No notice, no eviction, nada.  BUT THESE ELDERLY RELATIVES who lived with the ward–in wheel chairs–probably for years, had the right to notice, an eviction suit, an appearance, etc.

This IS THE STUFF this blog is intended to correct.  I was horrified by that action.  But I am not part of that case, I can’t step up and say , “hey your honor, aren’t these elderly, infirm people entitled to due procees?  at least an investigation and assistance?”  No, all I get to do is blog about it and say I was horrified, these elderly people–precious and oh so vulnerable–who are disabled, are entitled to notice, a hearing, a determination of rights and they should go thru the FED courts where there is more legal assistance for the indigent and infirm.  But I digress.

Everyday I pray to be filled with truth and love and compassion and understanding and it works.  Did you know praying for truth keeps you from disease?  You might not at first like the truth, what is actually going on, but then at least you can face it and make appropriate changes.

joanne
—–Original Message—–
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jul 25, 2013 11:04 AM
To: JoAnne Denison
Subject: Fw: During my deposition…no one cared about past lies!

JoAnne,
The legal profession got its reputation on merit.    From lawyer one to the present day there have always been lawyers and judicial officials who lack ethics.     The legal profession just has more who are readily identifiable.    Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmiedel are well aware of the fact that no jurisdiction was ever obtained over Mary Sykes.   They are well aware that Gloria Sykes property is her property and the claims that are made against Ms. Sykes are bogus.     The IARDC is well aware that lawyers are citizens and enjoy First Amendment Rights.     SO is well aware that she has no right to impede your (or my) communication with others.    Yes, Stern’s testimony was ‘frugal with the truth’ and any unbiased soul would have be upset by it; however, the problem with an untruth is that you have to remember it!    The problem with an untruth is that it will be discovered.
You have pointed out that Stern created fiction concerning his investigation of the more than a million dollars in gold coins that were not inventoried.    You pointed out the record in the Sykes case as contradicting him, and we both have noted that the people he contacted were people reasonably calculated to yield no credible information.    Except for the IARDC there is no one who is fooled by his testimony and is not laughing at the fact that in his investigation he never claimed to have spoken to Mary, Gloria, the reported sellers, or anyone who would have knowledge.    This is the reason that in our call for an investigation we used the word “HONEST!”      What purpose does it serve to interview President Obama as to the contents of Mary and Gloria’s safety deposit box!     He has no knowledge as he never met either and certainly never visited their safety deposition box.    The President’s lack of knowledge to the IARDC and its panel is clear and convincing evidence that there was no million dollars in coins.
The travesty that is going on in these ‘elder cleansing cases’ and the ‘cover up’ goes on daily.      Hopefully the Justice Department and other law enforcement agencies will bring the miscreants to justice.    The State of Illinois and the United States of America have millions of dollars in tax money to collect – this should be an incentive!    This miscreants in aiding and abetting the criminal conduct have incurred liability for themselves which at some point in time ‘law enforcement’ will address.    [I want you to note that I have not defined or specified anyone as a miscreant – the people who are engaged in criminal and/or quasi criminal conduct know who they are and if they wish to identify themselves I am certainly happy to have them do so.]
I work up this morning believing that the ‘red, white and blue’ still flew over Illinois.     THUS I AGAIN CALL FOR AN HONEST, COMPLETE, INTELLIGENT & COMPREHENSIVE INVESTIGATION OF THE SYKES CASE AND ALL THE ELDER CLEANSING CASES.
Ken Ditkowsky

 

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: JoAnne M Denison <jdenison@surfree.com>
To: Atty Ken Ditkowsky <ken@ditkowskylawoffice.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 8:42 AM
Subject: During my deposition…no one cared about past lies!

I told SO that AS presented perjured testimony at numerous times during your trial. (You will recall he said under oath, the coins were investigated, he sent out subpoenas to the bank, then we get the ROA and there are no such subpoenas, no return of service, no affidavit of service.  The ROA shows Mary wasn’t served and neither were the sisters and he said there was “nothing wrong with the case”, etc.–lies upon lies) She didn’t seem to care at all. In fact, she never said OMGS that should never have happened and I will try my best to correct that situation.

Where are her ethics?

And this attorney took MY deposition?  I had to take a dozens showers and a hot bath to get that grunge off of me.

When you see my transcript you will see that SO was more interested in obtaining misleading answers from Yes or No answers than she was at getting to the truth of the matter and that is that the Sykes case is corrupt and wired in.  We don’t know where.  We don’t know who–there has been no investigation yet, but we know it’s there  It looks like a dead duck, smells like one, but we’re just not sure where it came from or who killed that duck without an investigation.

joanne

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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