From: kenneth ditkowsky <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: JoAnne Denison <email@example.com>; “firstname.lastname@example.org” <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 6:02 AM
Subject: THE FINAL SOLUTION!
Dear Ms. Farenga and Ms. Denison,
I heard that there was mention of the partition suit in the proceeding of June 25, 2013 before Judge Stuart in the Sykes case.
It was reported to me that Chase Bank made a concession of some sort and Mr. Schmiedel said that they were abandoning the partition suit. If this is accurate, why was it not recorded in the order. Following through on my statement as what constitutes corruption, it was corruption to not record the dismissal of the partition lawsuit. Indeed, it is corruption to NOT turn over the proceeds of the Lumberman suit to Gloria Sykes. It was and is corruption to alter, amend or otherwise tamper with the final order in Lumberman case. Judge Connors in one of the first opinions that her name was associated with acknowledged that the only way to get to a final order was 735 ILCS 5/2 1401. It is corruption for the Sykes guardian ad litem to make a collateral attack on a vested final order. You are fully aware that Gloria was the policy holder and Mary was not on the policy as an assured. Such action on your part did not cover you with glory, nor did your attornment to ****”s use whatever clout that **** had with Chase to get them to refuse to accept payments and then file a foreclosure action. (We would never had know about ****’s action except the it was bragged about in open court and picked up in a transcript.
Indeed, it is corruption to not address all the issues that are discussed and/or ruled on in a written order or to put words in the Court’s mouth.
There is a more sinister way of looking at the order entered on June 25, 2013 and for the moment it occurs that law enforcement had better examine the order in that regard.
If we follow the pattern of the Bush case and some of the other cases detailed, when the miscreants have under their control all the assets of the senior citizen’s estate that they can garner, the senior has a way of conveniently obtaining his/her final reward. The final solution appears in these cases to be just too convenient! Being a bit paranoid, Mary’s move to a nursing home in total isolation and separation is reasonably calculated to induce severe depression. Gloria and Mary’s friends thwarted the scenario by appearing on the scene and jolting Mary back to her old feisty self.
The plan to bring about the final solution was thus interfered with; however – bingo – our friends are back in Court and the Procrustean order of June 25, 2013 was entered. This order stated in part that visitation was barred except to those who could qualify for the written permission of the plenary guardian!
Indeed, Ms. Farenga – this is an example of corruption!!!! 755 ILCS 5/11a – 3 points out that guardianship is not a death sentence – it is part of parens patrie and the guardians function is assist the disabled person to do what the disabled person cannot do on her own. Yes, Mary Sykes would not isolate, abuse, or give up her liberty or property on her own, but ‘elder cleansing’ is not (or at least until recently) been one of the goals of either elders or the society that they reside in. If you need a symbol of corruption the order of June 25, 2013 is an Olympic event.
If law enforcement and our political leaders are serious about ‘serving an protecting’ we need a ‘wellness check’ of Mary Sykes on a daily basis and an HONEST complete and comprehensive investigation of the Mary Sykes affair instanter. If of course Greylord 2 is in operation along with a ‘cover up’ and ‘elder cleansing’ we will allow more of the same. No matter how you, Ms. Farenga, slice it and package it, everyone of these elder cleansing cases is replete with corruption and infamy. If you have nothing to hide – join with us and call for law enforcement, the IARDC, the Judicial Inquiry Board, the Congress, and the media to do an HONEST complete and comprehensive investigation.
I can answer the question as to why wasn’t the parcel then quit-claimed to Gloria, and GAL Adam Stern (“AS”) told Gloria that “he had to look at it further.”
I agree, the official decision was the parcel was not worth it. It is in foreclosure, no one care about it, so why not quit claim it to Gloria. Someday the money will all be gone. Mary is being watched carefully for any signs or signals that she is being abused. The Naperville police are carefully watching her due to “highly unusual activities” in the 09 P 4585 case. When the money is gone and Mary is not dead, likely she will be returned to Gloria penniless and broke, just like all the other thousands of wards the states churn up and out every year–indigent elderly to live in the streets, beg food, eat at soup kitchens–all because the “probate team” wanted their estates for themselves.
Gloria should just get her house back, let her fix it up and when Carolyn is “done” with Mary’s money, Gloria will take care of her, just like before because the “wiring tax” never touches the indigent.
Go ahead, go through the probate files and see the cases of utter horror and shameless dipping into estates with people being thrown in to nursing homes, paid up homes and bank accounts depleted by the “cottage industry probate teams”, estates depleted, seniors left penniless and homeless or returned to relatives when they were “done with.”
Probate reform in Illinois must COME NOW. The Sykes case is a poster child for the entire system. Greed and evil abound in such as system, all to the detriment of those that cannot speak up for themselves.
You want to know what Mary said when I visited with her? She asked if her house was okay (sorry, no mom, they sold it), did they sell Gloria’s too (no, but they want to). Mary’s allegedly incompetent response, “well, it’s okay Gloria, you and I can just start all over and we’ll be fine don’t worry. we have each other.” She finally ask the question a few times, “where is the money from the house?” (Carolyn has it.) Will she let you (Gloria) and I buy a new home to live there together? (No, mom).
It was always the same response from Mary “it’s okay Gloria, you and I will start all over.” Why couldn’t you see me, Gloria (Carolyn would not let me, she’s mad at me). Well, we’re together now. But that should not happen (and she goes on and on with platitudes about forgive and forget, move on, let the miscreant be, etc.)
What an amazing woman–at 94 she knows more sage advice than I have heard from ANYONE in the “cottage industry” in all the 4 years of this probate case. Her words put the miscreants to utter shame.
Mary is right, Gloria should petition to get her home back and she and Mary (when Mary is broke and penniless) can live there together.
I wrote to Atty Peter Schmeidel asking to visit Mary. No response yet. I will email again.
It’s very hard not to see her around Gloria, like Gloria did for 10+ years, but I pray they will just spend her money and be done with her soon. Then we can all get her back.
Gloria will take care of her, just as she always has.