THE FULL RECORD ON APPEAL! RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwMFZtZzFhTDk0UTA&authuser=0
You will be able to follow the ARDC case against me right on this web page.
Link to Case directory:
For Ditkowsky and Denison vs. Jerome Larkin, et al. and our civil rights complaint:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwSlRTQjRvVFhZcVU&usp=sharing
For Copyright infringement suit (Denison v. IARDC) click here:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwd0JhYUZCZ0dlQTg&usp=sharing
This blog promises transparency and accountability, unlike the IARDC!
I promise to publish the complaint, motions, transcripts and whatever else is done or published.
Let’s see if public pressure can bear on the probate cases without jurisdiction that MUST be investigated, and the ARDC complaint MUST BE DISMISSED for relating tales and pleadings of corruption in the Illinois Court System.
If you disagree with the ARDC and believe that the Illinois State Courts and/or the Cook County Court does NOT enjoy a good or favorable reputation in the community, you can fax the director Jerome Larkin at 312-565-2320 or write him at:
Atty Jerome Larkin, ARDC Administrator, and
Attys Haspel and Opryczek, prosecuting attorneys
One Prudential Plaza
130 E Randolph Dr, #1500
Chicago, IL 60601
Please reference my complaint No. 2013 PR 00001
Also write the Supreme Court of Illinois
Chief Judge: Thomas L Kilbride
200 E Capitol Ave
(217) 782-7821
The ACLU:
ACLU of Illinois
Executive Director: Colleen K. Connell
180 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 2300
Chicago, IL 60601
Phone: (312) 201-9740 Fax: 312-201-9760 | Email: acluofillinois@aclu-il.org
Link to the complaint:
2013 PR 00001 Complaint against JMD for Blogging
Motion to Dismiss from Ken Ditkowsky
Requests for Admission to ARDC
Requests for Documents to ARDC
Motion to Disqualify Atty Ken Ditkowsky and Response thereto
Petition under Rule 383 for a Supervisory Order to Ill. Supreme Ct.
More to come!
Here is my entire Google Directory on the entire case:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B6FbJzwtHocweG5BcTdfZFoxR3M&usp=sharing
I challenge the IARDC to put up their entire directory!
I am probably going to take down the above now that we have the record from the ARDC
Here are there answers to KDD’s discovery requests:
Notes you can find at p91, 129, 140, 144, 209, 215, 220, 290, 292.
sykesblog-ardc-RFDs-pp500to999
sykesblog-ardc-RFDs-pp1000toend
the Record from the ARDC:
The Transcripts from Hearing days 1 to 4
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwaDBva1BYMVdQV00/edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwRUJGaFh6Qkx5bE0/edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwOGtpSFZqR1A0RE0/edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwUnU1Y1ZZc041SFU/edit?usp=sharing
MaryGSykes.com 
Pingback: Guardianship: 'A Crime Against Humanity' - Dr. Rich Swier
DONATE HERE! TO A VICTIM OR HORRIBLE CHILD ABUSE
DONATE HERE! TO A VICTIM OF HORRIBLE CHILD ABUSE
It’s not copyright infringement when disciplinary committees reference your blog. This falls under fair use. This is no different than Bond V. Blum, when a murderer attempted to suppress the legislative introduction of his confession manuscript on the basis of copyright law. How, pray tell, would the disciplinary committee’s use of your work cause damages or affect value?
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
I disagree. they did not have one or two or three copies, I saw dozens of them. Further,they displayed the entire blog, which they did not use 95 percent of it. In addition, it turns out the court reporter had not been licensed and Illinois law says that if the court reporter for the trial isn’t licensed, then the judgment is invalid and she can’t charge. The Illinois Supreme court nonetheless declared the judgment valid and the state paid an unlicensed court reporter over $10k. how do you explain all of tht.