From Kenneth Ditkowsky–thoughts on protecting grandma and grandpa

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jun 10, 2012 1:08 PM
To: GLD , ‘LUCIUS VERENUS’ , “Grant H. Goodman” , “ghgoodman@hotmail.com”
Subject: Re: National Forum On Judicial Accountability (NFOJA)

The predators who profit from their breaches of fiduciary relationship are protected by the fact that properly administrated, the guardianship laws are not only appropriate, but quite necessary.   The doctrine of parens patrie is solid and good law.   The Sterns, Farengas, Schmiedels and their co-conspirators could and do destroy our society and culture.    There is no easy fix to this problem  – there are however many ‘fixes’ that are worse than what we have currently.
Judicial and political corruption is a cancer.  It has to be addressed like any other cancer – quickly and effectively.   The treatment has to be focused and precise so that we do not kill the patient in the attempt to rid him/her of the disease.   The Good Lord helps those who help themselves – we have elections coming up – the political types who are unresponsive should be subjected to targeted campaigns to make them private citizens.   We should start with the Solons who are fighting to protect grandma’s social security check at the expense of grandma liberty, property, civil and human rights.    Where is the civil rights division of the Justice Department?    Where is our Governor, or Attorney General etc?     I do not think it is a priority to get Ms. Farenga, Mr. Stern, or Mr. Schmiedel grandma’s social security check!
Ken Ditkowsky
My comment: it appears to be much more serious than all of that.  While posturing to protect grandma, the miscreants go way beyond the social security check, but dig deeper into the pocket into the house, the savings, and safe deposit box, and/or encourage a guardian to do so with impunity and sans any meaningful investigation.  They rip grandma from a home of 50 plus years to accomplish these goals and isolate her.  When her written directives are to remain at home until she passes, and miscreants interfere with this, isolating her, that is about the most desperate, pathetic form of abuse there is.

 

From: GLD <gailwinds2hi@yahoo.com>
To: ‘kenneth ditkowsky’ <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>; ‘LUCIUS VERENUS’ <verenusl@gmail.com>; Grant H. Goodman <goodmanconsult@gmail.com>; ghgoodman@hotmail.com
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 12:41 PM
Subject: National Forum On Judicial Accountability (NFOJA)

 

I have been monitoring the group National Forum On Judicial Accountability (NFOJA) for some time now.  NFOJA appears to be a group of professionals as well as non-professionals bent on meaningful reform, transparency, and accountability of the judicial system that we all know is just as bent on retaining the power they use to line their pockets off the backs of the lifelong savings of their victims.
With regard to the blatant abuse of the Un-Constitutional State laws of guardianship, many have tried to encourage the fractured grassroots groups to solidify to present a stronger reckoning force.  However, the ideas regarding how to enact change vary so much, that a common mind seems impossible.
The members of the various groups benefit from a sympathetic ear, but no real help or solutions can be offered…because the powers that run the guardianship exploitation industry are so entrenched and powerful…destroying any and all that dare stand against them.
The fact is…we need help.  We need guidance.  We need people that have a plan and are working this plan steadfastly to enact change.  And I believe that NFOJA is a group of dedicated people that can provide this help and guidance.  Also our troubles with judicial exploitation of the guardianship laws are per State related issues as well as Federal issues of Constitutionality and NFOJA has organized itself by State and on the National level.  And NFOJA has partnered with other (sister) organization to enhance the effort.  
I encourage you to view the NFOJA Campaign 2012 where you will be presented with a 30 minute slide brief which introduces their plan of action.
Zena Denise Crenshaw is a very active advocate and I believe a founder of NFOJA.  You can find Zena and NFOJA on FB page and Google NFOJA and National Forum On Judicial Accountability to find the NFOJA homepage.
 
NFOJA Campaign 2012:

From Ken Ditkowsky–more thoughts on corruption in Probate court

From Ken Ditkowsky to myself:
Dear Joanne
Kickbacks are soooo common!   One of the e-mails that has the ARDC, Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga et al up in arms is the one in which I suggest that the miscreants have paid the ‘kickback’ to the ‘clout’ in the form of a campaign contribution and the ‘clout’ would not or at least in not expected to return the contribution.

[That would be a very good question.  Have they made campaign contributions to Connors/Stuart and if they did, is that illegal?  About 7 fed cir court cases say no (the law in the US is you can make a campaign contribution and the candidate can change a vote, refrain from taking action, take action, or take different action due to the contribution, and that is not “corruption”.  I think it’s at least an appearance of an impropriety for lawyers, but the court have held “no”.  That’s why the Blago conviction was soooo problematic. There has not been a decision like this before and that’s why he was always saying “follow the money’ meaning he took nothing personally.  Then they got that state law about campaign contributions, then the US Supremes said you can give all you want to a pol candidate and that is a first amendment right.]

[Did you ask for third party discovery against Stuart/Connor’s campaign fund for a list of donations and in particular regarding all miscreants or everyone involved in the corrupt mess?] 

Thus, the guardian ad litem and the plenary guardian cannot at this point in time do what is expected of them – i.e. report the unusual spending of the plenary guardian, the ex-parte and illegal drilling of the safety deposit box and the non-inventory of a a million dollars in assets.   I knew that this would draw their ire, as it is most probably the current status of the Sykes case.

Follow the scenario – if the miscreants (the eyes and ears of the court) were to put on record the allegations made the Court would have to hold an inquiry.   Gloria Sykes has provided information on the subject as has Aunt Yolanda Bakken.    If called to testify I would also have testimony to contribute based upon my conversations with Mary.   At the very least there would have to be a referral to the States Attorney’s office for an investigation.   The SA would find that Gloria was a signatory on the box (and probably a joint owner) thus the drilling without her knowledge was suspect.    The State Attorney General and the IRs would also do some questioning as taxes are due – at this point in time almost a million dollars with interest and penalties.
To starve off the interest and penalties an excuse based upon the ***** (I am not going to give them a hint at a defense) the million dollars would have to be inventoried.   With the double eagles being inventoried it would have to be physically available for audit.    As the referral fee has most probably been paid to the clout (the referral fee is usually 1/3) someone has to come up with $333,000.00.   That would raise suspicion and in this pecuniary climate some hardship.    Once again – if Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmiedel et al have nothing to hide, let them join with me in calling for the States Attorney of Cook County to do a complete, honest, and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes case.    A professional investigation would determine if we are whistling Dixie, or have legitimate complaints! 
Thus, the flood of ARDC complaints and the attempt to silence us.    To shut Gloria up the Illegal seizure of her money, the eviction and theft of her papers and property etc.    To intimidate me, Ms. Black in her pleadings says I am a liar, but fails to disclose a single fact that she claims to be untrue.    When I asked her in Requests to Admit as to specific facts she wrote that the administrator does not have sufficient information to either admit or deny.    I have also requested that Ms. Black and the ARDC join with me in requesting a States Attorney investigation.
It is indeed interesting that this Texas corruption case should come to light and it should involve a Judge passing out guardianships etc, as well as a garden variety Greylord events.    It should be noted that this appears to be a Federal Prosecution.  Where is the State government?    Where is the investigation by local law enforcement?    Why has the local ARDC not acted against the miscreants?   (This pattern was also true in Greylord!)    Next time you see one of political types tell you that he/she is ‘fighting’ for the rights of the elderly – vote against him/her!    If he/she cared a ‘tinker’s damn’ about grandma he/she would be be screaming for an investigation of the Sykes case, the Tyler case, the Wyman case, the Gore case, etc.    Indeed, that would indicate that he/she is concerned the every day a senior citizen has been or is being wrongfully deprived of his/her liberty, property, civil rights, and/or human rights.     Like the Mary Sykes case the weapon is to isolate the senior from her family, her friends, her activities, and her neighbors.  Anyone who objects is the subject of official harassment.

Yes, Tiny Tim, this is 2012 America!   1936 has once again raised its ugly head and the ‘brown shirts’ wearing their new ‘shark skin’ suits are once against goose stepping ****
Ken Ditkowsky

 

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: GLD <gailwinds2hi@yahoo.com>
To: ‘kenneth ditkowsky’ <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>; ‘probate sharks’ <verenusl@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2012 11:17 PM
Subject: EX JUDGE testifies in lawyers corruption trial OR How the wheels of predatory guardianship turn

Ex-judge testifies in lawyer’s corruption trial

Posted Thursday, Jun. 07, 2012Updated Thursday, Jun. 07, 20120 Comments PrintReprints
By CHRISTOPHER SHERMAN
A
By CHRISTOPHER SHERMAN
Associated Press
BROWNSVILLE, Texas — The former judge at the heart of a four-year federal investigation of judicial corruption told jurors on Thursday that he accepted kickbacks from several attorney friends, including the South Texas lawyer on trial.
Former state District Judge Abel Limas took the stand in Brownsville as a prosecution witness against Port Isabel lawyer Ray Marchan, the first of a dozen indicted in the case to go to trial.
Limas, the government’s featured witness, pleaded guilty last year to racketeering and is awaiting sentencing. Marchan faces seven counts, including racketeering and conspiracy.
The trial’s details may affirm the public’s worst fears about justice behind closed doors, where scales tipped in favor of money exchanges between lawyers and judges not evidence and procedure.
The intercepted conversations between Limas and Marchan played for the jury were profane, cynical chats between buddies about using the system to line their pockets. The amounts weren’t huge – about $11,000 from Marchan – but Limas testified that Marchan wasn’t the only one giving him money, and that, in total, he had taken more than $250,000 in bribes and kickbacks.
Limas 57, grew up in a rough Brownsville neighborhood and majored in criminal justice at the local university. He worked at the same police department as his dad for four years before going to law school, and said he had aspired to be a judge because it was prestigious and “only good people would get elected.”
In 2000, Limas was elected as a judge in Brownsville and served eight years on the bench. He said his judge’s salary brought in about $8,000 per month. Limas admitted that he liked to gamble, and estimated he made 30 trips to Las Vegas mostly to bet on boxing matches. He said he also had four kids in school and, by 2008, was more than $400,000 in debt.
Marchan, 55, was a respected civil litigator in Brownsville. He had attended Rice University and graduated from Stanford’s law school. In 2008, he was going through a divorce, and Limas said he had heard Marchan was headed for his third bankruptcy.
Limas had the authority to appoint guardians ad litem – lawyers to represent the interests of people – often children, in cases. In part because Marchan hosted campaign fundraisers for Limas, he appointed his friend to represent a child’s interest in a civil lawsuit in 2008.
“It’s a good amount most of the time when it’s a good case,” Limas told jurors. “It’s quick, easy money.” His closest attorney friends, like Marchan, kicked back some of that money, Limas said.
In addition to Marchan, Limas listed three others from memory who had kicked back money from such appointments. Only one, Joe Valle, has been charged in the investigation and sentenced.
The FBI opened its investigation of Limas in late 2007 and had wiretaps on Limas’ cell and home phones in 2008.
Prosecutors say the men decided to help each other make money. Marchan says he was just trying to help a friend.
Prosecutors also showed jurors photographs and copies of banking records they said corresponded with the alleged bribes and kickbacks.
Marchan’s lawyer, Noe Garza, emphasized Limas’ plea agreement with prosecutors that calls for him to cooperate in the case. He suggested Limas had to cooperate to keep his wife, an early target of the investigation, from being indicted. Limas said she was no longer a target.
Garza asked Limas to distinguish between lawyers who paid him kickbacks and bribes and those who loaned him money while he was a judge. On a large pad of paper beside the jury, Garza listed names for each.
Garza suggested Marchan was one of the friends providing loans.
He played a recorded call from June 2008. In it, Marchan asked Limas if he should make out the check as “a loan to your wife or a loan to somebody?”
Limas told jurors, “How to disguise it, that’s what he’s asking me.”

From Gloria–an important article on corruption in Probate

Dear Readers;


Gloria sent this along today and I just wanted to thank her.


Since corruption in Probate does not appear to be disappearing anytime soon, I will publish the entire article, it is of great importance and I do not want the link to break.


thanks


Joanne


PS–I have more great transcripts coming from the Sykes cases!


 

is the link–

 

Andrew Thomas rolls out Citizens for Clean Courts

‘If they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone’

Bookmark and Share


andrew thomas and patt gomes

Former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, pictured with Patti Gomes, one of several victims of Arizona’s probate court system, held his first of a series of press conferences advocating support for Proposition 115, a constitutional amendment to bring accountability to our courts.

Photo by Linda Bentley

PHOENIX – Former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, on behalf of Citizens for Clean Courts, held the first of a series of press conferences on May 31 at the state capitol to advocate support of Proposition 115.

House Concurrent Resolution 1001 passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support in the legislature to become Proposition 115 on the November ballot.

HCR 1001 proposes to amend various sections of Article VI of the Arizona Constitution relating to the judicial department.

While serving as county attorney, Thomas attempted to clean up corruption in the courts, only to find himself facing a force much larger than he imagined; one that eventually resulted in his being disbarred along with Deputy County Attorney Lisa Aubuchon and suspension of Deputy County Attorney Rachel Alexander’s license.

Just before the press conference began, Thomas said, “If they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone.”

Thomas began the press conference with the quote, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

The saying, while repeated by many, first arose as part of a quotation by John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, otherwise known as Lord Acton (1834–1902).

Acton, a historian and moralist, expressed this sentiment in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887, in which he wrote, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

Thomas introduced Patti Gomes, who said it was uncomfortable talking about her situation and initially thought hers was an isolated incident.

Gomes told the story of how her mother ended up in the probate court system and said, “The court failed my mother.”

She said, “If you have an estate, it is in jeopardy.”

Gomes stated the court ignored living trusts and living wills, while it denied her petition to become her mother’s conservator.

She said the court assigned a person to investigate who later turned guardian.

Gomes talked about “non-appearance hearings,” during which the court approved a multitude of payments, charging her mother’s estate.

When Gomes contested the court’s actions, she said the court used her mother’s money to defend its actions.

They charged her mother’s estate for numerous trips to the mall and the purchase of stuffed animals.

Gomes brought up the well-publicized cases of Maria Long, who has been left penniless by the probate court, and the case of a Disney heir, although declared competent, whom the court refused to release from its guardianship.

Stating she totally supports Proposition 115, Gomes emphasized how no one is safe with a living will and living trust under the current system.

She also encouraged victims to contact them via e-mail at citizens4clean courts@cox.net so they may become involved.

clair dipardo and andrew thomas
Clair DiPardo held up a picture of how her mother looked, healthy and vibrant, at the time the court took over her guardianship. She then held up a gruesome picture of a bedsore her mother suffered while under the court’s “protection.”

Photo by Linda Bentley

Thomas introduced Clair DiPardo, who said her mother was ripped from her home in Scottsdale, medicated and isolated, without a doctor ever declaring her incompetent.

While her mother is still alive, DiPardo said her mother has been victimized by the probate court, which placed her in a nursing home in Prescott where she knows no one and DiPardo is denied visitation.

She said the court went through over a half million dollars in a period of 12 months, mostly for duties such as opening her mother’s mail.

DiPardo held up a picture of her mother, looking healthy and vibrant, which is how she said her mother looked at the time the courts took over her care.

She then held up a gruesome photograph of a bedsore her mother suffered while under the court’s “protection.”

DiPardo said she was denied her rights as successor trustee, was chastised by the courts for talking to the media and endured “unimaginable experiences.”

She stated, “The standards of accountability should apply to all of our courts and judges. I’m here today to stop this from happening to you.”

Another concern DiPardo brought up was probate judges don’t know probate law and they look to the attorneys representing the state for guidance.

Thomas said this is a nationwide problem and while Proposition 115 will not fix all that is wrong with our judicial system, it is an important first step.

Proposition 115 will remove the state bar from the judicial recommendation process and will provide the governor eight nominees to choose from instead of three, along with the applications of the persons not being recommended.

Thomas said Proposition 115 will also require all the orders made by judges appearing on the ballot for retention to be posted online, so voters will have meaningful information with which to determine whether or not a judge is worthy of retaining.

DiPardo said the victims reached out to Thomas in this effort because he stood up to the system and he too paid the price.

However, Thomas said, “I don’t see myself as a victim. I see myself as a reformer. We got too close to the truth.”

He said, “The most powerful branch of the government is not accountable to the people.

This is the first step in taking our government back. We’ll be coming back next year with more reforms.”

Thomas said they would be actively campaigning to get Proposition 115 passed.

Ms. Lea Black at the ARDC and asking for verifications from her

Dear Readers;

Now as far as any Illinois licensed attorney knows, under the Illinois Rules of Civil Procedure, once one pleading in a suit is verified (swearing that the fact contained therein are true and accurate to the best of the verifier’s recollection, or where based upon information and belief, were believed to be true at the time the statements were made)–then all subsequent pleadings filed by either party must be verified.  But LB doesn’t seem to understand this.  Ken Ditkowsky has ask LB to verify a lot of the junk she has filed against him, and most importantly, her answers to his discovery requests, and she has not done that.

What’s up with that?  All attorneys require their clients to sign verification sheets with pleadings (except where completely based upon procedure and which contain no real statements or admissions by the parties), so why can’t the ARDC do that?

Isn’t this just another huge red herring laying on the floor of KD’s ardc proceeding indicating it is completely fishy?

Other indicators: 1) Gloria and Scot submit affidavits with KD”s motion to dismiss and these affidavits are conveniently, accidently-on-purpose lost by the ARDC and “unavailable” to use for that pleading; 2) LB isn’t signing verifications sheets of all the pleadings; 3) she contacts me to “take a statement” fully well knowing we had quite a discussion in Dec 2011 that I wanted him to represent me, and that while he wants to do the proceeding pro se because it is complex and involved, I would be helping him all the way.

4)   Also, don’t you think it is strange that I fax LB all sorts of stuff on the case, indicating corruption and cronyism — transcripts that make it clear the miscreant attys are talking to the court exparte “behind the scenes” and I get no response from her or her offices.  Not even a “thank you.”

5) she also has not explained why she thinks we are publishing things “with disregard for the truth” when I sent her a 10 page “table of torts” from the miscreants indicating all their mis-stepts, tortious behavior, blatant mistreatment of Gloria and her mother–a now 93 year old lady whose wishes and directives (live in her own home until she passes over, be with Gloria and her family) are being completely ignored while CT’s pack of lies, theft, forgeries, etc. are amazingly blatant and never seem to get addressed.

Has Ms. Black no heart that she has DONE NOTHING to get Mary home?

Mary should be living at home and Gloria should be caring for her, as Gloria has done for 10+ years.

Mary wants to come home.  The video tapes I and other have posted on the internet have made it clear she knows what she wants, she left written clear directives, and LB should be ensuring those directives are carried out.

JoAnne

Now from Ken Ditkowsky who is also working tirelessly, without pay, to ensure that justice is being done.

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jun 5, 2012 9:43 PM
To: GLORIA Jean SYKES , scott evans
Cc: Tim Lahrman NASGA , states attorney , Sherrif Dart
Subject: Re: strange communications from the Ms. Black

I realize that Ms. Black’s asking me for your address is a subterfuge.       I will have Diane copy your e-mail and mail it to her.     I think that your e-mail should be of record at the ARDC as all the games playing is about as ethically challenged as anything you can imagine.
This lady who recites ethical rules in my opinion has been less than candid and when she personally contact Ms. Denison being aware that Ms. Denison was represented by counsel she crossed the line.
Ken Ditkowsky
From: GLORIA Jean SYKES <gloami@msn.com>
To: kenditkowsky@yahoo.com; scott evans <scottcevans@hotmail.com>
Cc: Tim Lahrman NASGA <timlahrman@aol.com>; states attorney <statesattorney@cookcountyil.gov>; Sherrif Dart <sheriff.dart@cookcountyil.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2012 4:47 PM
Subject: RE: strange communications from the Ms. Black
Dear Ken,I have had the same mailing address since 1998: it is also on my faxes.  I am not hiding or asking Ms. Black to ‘find me”: I’m in plain sight (and unless an unknown person or persons  i.e. Peter Schmiedel) has snatched up my mail before I retrieve it from my mail box), I do receive my mail and have received my mail at 6016 N. Avondale, Chicago, IL 60631.  Suffice, I have provided my email to Ms. Black and the ARDC so many times, that it is foolish and even comical that she or any person at the ARDC is clueless as to how to contact me: she also has my telephone number.  What I believe as true is that she does not want to talk to me and as she “cannot handle the truth”.  (I love that scene from A Few Good Men.)  None of  us should be naive so to beleive that Ms. Black cannot contact me, Ken.  I can’t speak for Scott Evans, but I do know that he frequents the Daley Center and in fact, has been to the Chicago ARDC office many times:  I doubt if he’s playing hide and seek with Ms. Black, either.

As far as being wrongfully and forcefully ‘evicted’ from my Homestead, that too is being dealt with in the appropriate venue(s): I was neither a tenant and/or had a lease with my Mother.  (Of course, Schmiedel and company are now saying I was a squatter, but their ‘eviction notice’ stated that I had a ‘month-to-month oral agreement’ with my mother.  I’m wondering how Schmiedel and Company sleep at night!  Using a 93-year-old woman to churn assets and destroy lives is truly an act none like any German war-criminal who raped innocents of their homes, possessions and then slaughtered the old, disabled and children like they were contaminated, toxic and ill alley rats. But now I’m off subject.  Sadly, Ken, Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern, and Cynthia Farenga’s business-as-usual acts apparently are brushed under the rug like bugs, in order to protect people at the ARDC, who have jobs to protect the public*****.

Healthy Regards,

Gloria Jean Sykes 
Bon Ami Productions, Inc. 

773.910-3310(cell)
773.631-9262 (fax and office line)
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 14:23:10 -0700 From: kenditkowsky@yahoo.com Subject: strange communications from the Ms. Black To: gloami@msn.com; scottcevans@hotmail.com CC: timlahrman@aol.com; statesattorney@cookcountyil.gov

Gloria,
As you are aware I wrote Ms. Black pursuant to Rule 201(k) to complain that she had not complied with my document requests.     Following the ‘Brady Rule’ applicable to criminal cases I made demands for the investigative reports that should provide me with the information as to what, if anything, I lied concerning.    As I am confident that every word that I uttered was true and that everything that I did was not only appropriate by protected by the First Amendment and Article 1 of the Illinois constitution I made demand for among other documents the investigative reports.     Obviously, as this entire ARDC complaint is predicated upon shutting me up and discouraging me from the exercise of my First Amendment Rights I was not surprised that there had been no investigative reports.     Had there been any investigation the ARDC would have had to take this matter to law enforcement and ask them to conduct an investigation into the activities of the two guardian ad litem, the plenary guardian and the attorney for the plenary guardian.
The Answering letter that I received from Ms. Black this afternoon, inaccurately stated that she had provided me with a 214 affidavit.  (This is an affidavit that she had made a diligent inquiry and search and she had in fact provided me with all the documents that I requested).     There is no 214 affidavit.    A 214 affidavit would have destroyed the illusion of sending me 3000 plus pieces of paper most of which were portions of e-mails either written to me or written in part by me.   In most cases there were three or four copies of each document.    The production also furnished me with copies of the documents that I filed in the ARDC proceedings.
This production was sophmoric, but when a baseless complaint is filed with the intention of intimidating a person into forfeiting his First Amendment Rights I guess it is effective.     I am really resentful that I am afforded so little respect, but I guess I should be impressed that such ‘august persons’ as Stern, Farenga, and Schmiedel are interested in me.
Therefore I sent the following letter to Ms Black:
Dear Ms. Black,
I checked the documents that you sent me.     There is no 214 affidavit.     Please forward a copy to this office immediately as apparently it was not included in the documents forwarded to me.
I did not request any materials that were not related to this particular proceeding, nor do I want such information; however, I do want the materials that are that are listed on the Request to Produce documents.     If there are documents that you claim are privileged the documents ought to be described and submitted as part of a privilege log so that it can be determined if they are indeed privileged.   For your convenience enclosed are duplicate copies of the Rule 214 document requests.
I am ‘shocked’ that you listed both Gloria Sykes and Scott Evans on your witness list and you do not have their addresses.    If a scintilla of a legitimate investigation of whether or not the statements made in the complaint that you drafted are accurate or true had been made, you would have at the very least the addresses of both Sykes and Evans.     Someone would have talked to them in detail.
That said, Gloria Sykes was ‘by trick’ evicted from her homestead and I did not inquire as to where she moved.    I contact her by using her e-mail address which is sufficient for my purposes.     She is very co-operative and working diligently to right the grievous wrongs  that have befallen her and her mother when without the Sodini requirements (jurisdictional protections)  her mother was unlawfully taken from her home, her family, her friends and her neighbors and summarily separated from her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights.    Just for the record, the Sodini  protections are critical and if there has not been strict compliance therewith, it should be apparent that what we have is another Greylord scandal coupled with a Gulag!
 Scott Evans continues to reside where he has always resided.     As a Federal employee with high security clearance normally I would be reluctant to provide anyone with his address, especially as he has not authorized me to give out his address.    The address can not be much of a secret if it can be found on the ‘net.’
Pursuant to Rule 201 (k) I would appreciate the 214 affidavit and the balance of the material requested by a short date.
_____________________________________________________________
It has been a long time since anyone has attempted to ‘bully’ me and even longer since I’ve been exposed to so many legal professionals with so little respect for the State and Federal Constitutions and the oath that they took when they were admitted to the bar.    I guess we should not be surprised that the Ten Commandments had to be removed from the courthouse as it created a hostile work environment for the lawyers and judges.
We need a complete and comprehensive investigation of all the allegations made in the Sykes case.   –    I do not fear an investigation!      My file is open to law enforcement.    Let the other side open up its files!
Ken Ditkowsky

From Kathy Bakken, some very good questions–why can’t she see Mary? Because she took the wrong side!

No need to comment re: CF & KD, as JoAnne’s eloquent response more than covers it.  I would however like to add some thoughts & ramblings of my own this evening.

Having recently returned from a most enjoyable afternoon with 50+ relatives celebrating my cousin’s sons graduation, my heart is filled with love for my family. The compassion, concern, generosity of spirit and love for each other, warmed the cockles of my heart.  

In stark contrast I am faced with the isolation of my Aunt Mary (Mary Sykes) at the age of 93.  My crime as explained by her guardian is that I did not side with her (the guardian) during the proceedings.

How could I side with the person that my Aunt begged me to help her stop from taking over her life?

My punishment, is that I am not allowed to speak with or visit my Aunt.  Having not seen her since September of 2009, it saddens me deeply that one person has been able to cause so much pain and heartache, never considering her own mother’s wishes.  

The cruelty of keeping one’s own mother from the family she regularly had contact with is  unimaginable and makes one wonder as to why?

Oddly enough, both guardian ad litem seem to see nothing wrong with this behavior. I would have thought they would question or wonder as to why the guardian has isolated her own mother from her younger daughter (Gloria), her youngest sister (Yolanda), and many of her nieces and nephews.

How is it that the people who are supposed to look out for the wards best interests do not even question as to why the ward has been separated from the people she has loved the most?  While my Aunt objected in open court, neither GAL batted an eye.

Aunt Mary asked Judge Connor’s who was fooling who and for what.  

I couldn’t ask it better myself.

Compliments for Ken Ditkowsky, JD

Dear Readers;

As we are all aware, Ken Ditkowsky has been the subject matter of numerous ARDC complaints from the GAL’s in the Sykes case despite the fact that US Supreme Court cases have consistently made it clear that everyone should be given the highest priority to free speech under the US constitution. I have been the subject of one, and while it has not gone anywhere in nearly 6 months now, I realize that from the get go, if I did not start to scream loudly, I would be next.  The writing was on the wall, that’s for sure.

The ARDC routinely ignores these rights by allowing complaints to be filed and then stand against attorneys.  I have searched Fastcase high and low and have not found another single case where an atty was disciplined for helping out a client on a blog.  I have found a few cases where the ARDC has required or requested disclaimers for overly laudatory atty blogs.  But nothing like what has happened in the Sykes case and the Illinois ARDC.

Apparently quite a number of you agree with KD and myself and believe that everyone–and I believe attorneys especially–have the duty and obligation to speak out against corruption, kangaroo courts and nepotism and cronyism.

Chicago has been voted the most corrupt region by a two to one margin, hands down.  Unless the general populace here demands more accountability from our court system, and apparently the Illinois ARDC, the level of corruption will continue as it has in the past.

Read the comments below and I and Ken want to thank all of you for realizing that when the attorneys are threatened for uncovering corruption and croynyism, the system has sunk to its deepest low and the general population better start protesting because, well, democracy is not a spectator sport.

Thanks to everyone who has complimented Ken.   He is fighting a pretty lonely fight.  I have tried to get dozens of other attys involved in this, but Ken and myself stand alone and stand resolute.

JoAnne

PS–has anyone else noted any other attys on any probate blog that are just there trying to hlep out others for free?  Plmk and I will put up their names on a page commending them for their hard work in the fight against court corruption.

Now, for comment’s on Ken’s writings:

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jun 3, 2012 6:18 AM
To: nasga us
Subject: Re: NASGA Blog: “Attorney Ken Ditkowsky: The Constitution vs. Whores of Justice”

Thank everyone for their kind comments –  The next step is to transform the comments, good thoughts et al into action –   We are faced with an all out assault on the core of our democracy –  The First Amendment, the right to protest, and the right to speak out against even such august persons as Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga et al must be preserved and nutured.    In America we cannot tolerate for even a moment the concept of senior citizens being legally deprived of their liberty, property, civil and human rights under the guise of protecting them.    The recent events in the Sykes case and similar cases demonstrate the Gulag mentality that has polluted the Courts and more seriously the legal profession.
This is an election year – maybe some of our elected representatives have the basic intelligence to understand the seriousness of the problem – if we keep writing them and telling them.    Those members of the political elite who are profiting from the Gulag will be resistent and promulgate harassment and prosecution of those who speak out – but, we do have a cadre of elected representatives who believe in America — maybe!
Yes, like the rest of us I am naive!   But, hope springs eternal
Ken Ditkowsky
From: nasga us <nasga.org@gmail.com>
To: Kenneth Ditkowsky <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 2, 2012 9:57 PM
Subject: NASGA Blog: “Attorney Ken Ditkowsky: The Constitution vs. Whores of Justice”

Good Evening Mr. Ditkowsky,

Here are the comments posted today.  I expect more comments will show up Sunday.

NASGA Moderator 

Post a Comment On:National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse

1 – 6 of 6

AnonymousThelma said…
The problem lies also with the legislators. What percentage of them are lawyers? They can write stronger laws and force law enforcement to do their job. But why break up a good thing? Maybe they can get some of the action when they retire.
Saturday, June 02, 2012 3:43:00 AM
AnonymousBarbara said…
I always enjoy reading Mr. Ditkowsky’s comments! Thank you, NASGA.
Saturday, June 02, 2012 8:28:00 AM
AnonymousSue said…
This is what happens when a lawyer stands up for right vs wrong. I hope and pray this shining star attorney Ditkowsky prevails.
Saturday, June 02, 2012 11:35:00 AM
AnonymousDennis Andrew Ball said…
“The Only Thing EVIL Needs To Succeed IS That Good People Do NOTHING! – Edmund Burke (1789)

I implore each of US to take ACTION & demonstrate to the AUTHORITIES your resolve to see that JUSTICE IS SERVED on this EVIL~! That IS what this IS – EVIL! It now visits the United States through the
Children of World War 2, Boomer Nation! ALL OF US MUST BECOME POLITICALLY ACTIVE TO DEFEAT THIS SOCIAL
MENACE TO OUR SOCIETY & AFFIRM TO OUR CHILDREN THAT THIS EVIL WILL NOT IMPACT THEM WHEN THEY ARE OLD!

JOIN THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION TO RESTORE AND MAKE WHOLE OUR SOCIETY FOR THE NOW & FUTURE GENERATIONS!

BALL2012.net

Saturday, June 02, 2012 1:29:00 PM

AnonymousAnonymous said…

Thank you, KD, for your continued pursuit of justice on the 18th floor of the Daley Center. My loved was was victimized and made poor and destitute during her predatory guardianship proceedings on the 18th floor.What is occurring is collusive, criminal, exploitative, and sickening. All who see and do not speak out are guilty.

We need whistleblowers with ethics, and whitstleblowers who just plain do not want to go down when the Greylord proceedings begin.

www.probatesharks.com
www.probateabusemanual.blogspot.com

Saturday, June 02, 2012 2:31:00 PM

AnonymousDebbie said…

Ken Ditkowsky is a man after my own heart! Thank you for being one of the rare good guys and for speaking up for those who have been silenced.
Saturday, June 02, 2012 5:57:00 PM

Interference with an Attorney taking notes in Court from a Purse Pet

From Ken Ditkowsky:

Thanks for your thoughts Ken, and I agree completely.  This is a practice that just has to stop.  While the courts routinely ignore cell phones, tablets and other laptop usages, they have ONLY seized my laptop and that was after a purse pet named Adam Stern whined about my blogging.
The incident in which Attorney JoAnne Denison had her laptop seized by a Sheriff’s deputy apparently upon the complaint of Guardian ad Litem Adam Stern that she might be blogging is not only a chilling event, but demonstrative of the wrongful delegation of authority that is evident in Probate Proceedings involving disabled persons.    First:  Why should Adam Stern be concerned about the exercise of First Amendment Rights by a person sitting in the courtroom?    Second: Why should anyone be concerned that a person keeping to themselves doing nothing disruptive or distracting might be ‘blogging.’    Third: why should Adam Stern have the power to prevent an attorney who is observing a public court proceeding from taking notes?
The problem in a ‘nut shell’ is the fact that there are people who act in a disproportionate manner when they are given authority.     The Chicago Police Department and other law enforcement agencies has psychological tests to weed out these people as their potential miscreant behavior can and does create a clear and present danger to the public  that they are to serve and protect.       As I’ve noted many times there are guardians and guardians’ ad litem who are perfectly proper in their behavior and very diligent and appropriate in the management and treatment of their wards.    However, as the September 2011 GAO reported noted there is a cadre of individuals who have and are taking unfair advantage of the elderly and other disabled persons who they are charged to act as fiduciaries toward.    These singled out individuals are subjected to forfeiture of their liberty, property, civil and human rights by the actions or lack of actions of the aforesaid fiduciaries.
It is unfortunate that this small cadre of court appointed individuals usurps the jurisdiction of the Court and as illustrated by the incident involving Attorney Denison’s laptop are able to abrogate the First Amendment and Article One of the Illinois Constitution.    All too often there is a delegation of the judicial authority to the misbehaving court appointed individuals and they become and speak for the Court rather than the judge.     This apparently is what has happened in the Sykes case and similar cases.
Before the Court and the Judicial System is further embarrassed by another ‘greylord’ scandal it is very necessary that a full and complete investigation commence and any misconduct on the part of the court appointed individuals be appropriately addressed.    In Sykes there is approximately a million dollars in un-inventoried property.    In Tyler it is Nine million dollars.   I understand that many law firms are closing their doors – it does not cover the legal profession with glory when the Courts and the Attorney regulators foster what amounts to legalized theft of ‘grandma’s assets’  and the evasion of the lawful United States of America income taxes due.
The seizure of the laptop is a symptom of the ‘cover-up’ of the corruption and delegation of the Court’s jurisdiction that the failure of law enforcement to conduct a full, honest and comprehensive investigation is fostering.     Mr. Stern and Ms. Farenga’s complaint to the ARDC concerning the call for an investigation and the ARDC’s prosecution of me for making the call is not one of the high points in American jurisprudence.      I reiterate my call for an investigation in the loudest voice that I can muster and call upon those citizens who believe that grandma’s liberty, property, civil and human rights are sacred to join with me in the call.

Ken Ditkowsky
http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Seizure of laptops for blogging–fax to presiding (head) judge Timothy Evans

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To:
Judge Timothy Evans
Circuit Court Cook County

Fax: 312-603-5366
From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison,     Pat. Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com or http://www.DenisonLaw.com
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights

Important Notice
This facsimilie message contains attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, collect, and return the original message to the above address.  You will be reimbursed.  Your cooperation is immensely appreciated.
For transmission problems, please call 312-553-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – (   )
June 2, 2012

Re: Seizure of attorney laptops in Probate court

Dear Judge Evans;

It has come to my attention that there is a pressing crisis in your courtrooms and namely, that is the taking of laptops by court room personnel whenever it appears that someone is concerned about the proceeding in a courtroom.

This has happened to me twice.  And twice I told the bailiff that I was only taking notes and she told me that I might be “recording” and that is prohibited.

I went to the chief judge of Probate and she said that it does not matter that I was helping a client and was blogging, that it is security that determines the rules regarding laptops and security has determined there might be recording.

What?

Has no one been on ebay and seen that for $10 you can get a pen that records all day? Or a coke can or a number of innoculous devices that do this.  Everyone knows that security is brain cell challenged, but…..

However, the most pressing issue is the right to free and fair court rooms and in this manner, I believe the Chicago area is sorely lacking and no one trusts the courts or politicians any longer because were were recently voted the most corrupt region by a clear margin of 2 to  1!

Two to one!   One would think that an atty taking notes in a courtroom that is or maybe clearly biased would be applauded, but think again.

In this case the courtrooms are replete with attorneys and the public that text and email on cell phones all day long.  But it was only when Attorney Stern noted during a Dec. 21, 2012 hearing that I might be blogging that my laptop was actually confiscated by a court room bailiff and waived about as if it were a flag or something.

I had to actually tell the bailiff that when you waive around a laptop, it has a tiny pointing device that actually destroys sectors on a hard drive and to stop doing that or the laptop will be ruined.

Why are court room personnel confiscating laptops of attorneys when they clearly have no training to do so.  And further, it is an affront to myself and my clients because my laptops have all of my client communications going back to 1992.

Also, no one in the court considered the possibility that some of the documents on my laptop were subject to Protective Orders in Federal District courts and other federal tribunals.  Under those orders, once a 3rd party not subject to the Protective Order comes in possession of confidential documents inadvertent retention and disclosure is always of paramount concern, and yet I saw none of that in the court room that day.  Same for cell phones which can literally contain thousands of PDF documents.  If seizure of computerized note taking processing devices is to be the norm, who is securing the client and business data to protect US citizens and corporations.

And my profession is a patent attorney, so what about patent documents that have been deemed secret by the US government.  What of those?  No one seems to ask or be concerned.

Are they responsible if a crooked bailiff scams my hard drive in seconds?

I don’t understand where all this is coming from.

Court rooms are supposed to be public.  It is in everyone’s best interest we no longer have secret tribunals that let the courts do as they please.

Attorney documents and confidential client data and information should be inviolate.  The public should not have to fear providing their attorney with all the information she needs to protect her and promote the interests of her person and business.s

First amendment rights to free speech and the press reporting on the activities of a courtroom are supposed to be afforded the highest priority–a priority that even extends to fundamentalist Christian protestors at funerals of soldiers  that demand there is punishment coming from the heavens above for letting gays in the military.

But I can’t take laptop notes in a courtroom.  While others are busily texting and emailing away willy nilly.  Probably half the public and attys in a court room do this all day long.

Maybe no one likes blogs.  They report what we all don’t want to hear–the courts are twisted and corrupt.

But then again, if you want to easily clean up your courts so you gain impunity, you should be thanking attys like myself that show up to hearings, blog and publish so miscreants know they are being watched.

Please reverse this ruling and publish it in every courtroom.  Attys and the public that are taking notes need to do so.  The bailiffs can be trained in programs that record on every device from cell phones to pens to laptops and they should literally stop the court proceedings, popup the task manager and check those programs for recording.

If the program does not record, what is the problem?

Thanks

JoAnne Denison

PS–it seems to me there is great liability out there for liability for refusing to let attys take notes on cases where the court or the attorneys might be corrupt.  Do you want to start taking a list of these?  I already have two corrupt cases for you already.

Very Truly Yours,

DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

JoAnne Denison

JoAnne M. Denison

cc:

You’ll need some real maple syrup for this transcript and all the waffles it provides

The attached is one of the most interesting transcripts I have seen in a long time and it is so because you can see how Judge Stuart is basically side stepping all the major issues in the case.  She goes to great lengths and tremendous twisting of the facts, so get prepared:

First, the link to the transcript:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwOGlTS3p2azY0UFU

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwOGlTS3p2azY0UFU

(if link breaks)

1.  With respect to the Soldini notices, Judge Stuart says that it is her understanding that Judge Connors looked at the issue at the time of appointment of CT and decided she had jurisdiction, and that is why she would not review it on 7/8/11.  Very interesting.  Except the law is, you can bring up jurisdiction at any time and if it’s notice type subject matter jurisdiction, the case MUST be dismissed.  The court is supposed to look at subject matter jurisdiction at any time because it’s sooo important.  It’s due process.  Sodini.  So that means the judge is side stepping the following 1) an admission by Harvey Waller that he never served the 14 day notices; 2) that there was no time between the care plan hearing by Gloria on Nov 22, 2009 and the Hearing to appoint Carolyn on Dec 7, 2012 which would have been inadequate time to prepare the 14 day notices–it was not until 11/22 that the hearing date on the Petition to Appoint was set for Dec 7th (look at the docket, dofus); 3) protestations and affidavits by the 2 sisters they never received 14 day notices; and 3) from time to time the GAL’s will state that the appointment of a Guardian was not by hearing, but by agreement between the parties. (Waffle no. 1)  In this transcript Farenga says Mary was supposed to be in court on Dec 7, but she was not there. (Waffle No. 2)  She then waffles on Mary’s need for an atty (p. 23).  (Waffle no. 3) Pretty amazing.

2.  For some reason the court is ignoring the fact that during a partition or when the motion is made, a party can defeat the partition by showing an accounting to the court that the other owner is not entitled to any proceeds owing from the transaction.  In this case, the court said they would just split everything 50/50.  Gloria protested that she paid an $18,000 down payment, so she is entitled to that back.  Then there was argument over whether the $165,000 was just on Gloria’s half, or if it was also on Mary’s half, until someone noted that Mary also signed the mortgage note.  Gloria protested that she always paid the mortgage (so one would assume she would get the credit on this), but the court said it would not matter, the mortgage would run against both halves and did not mention any accounting or credit for what Gloria paid, including but not limited to:  mortgage, taxes, insurance, repairs, etc. over the years of ownership.  Gloria should get credit, but the court didn’t think this was the law. (My question is, who convinced the court of this law).

3.  Next, the Court goes into lengthy detail as to why a 2-1401 motion to set aside a judgment did not have to be filed.  The court said it was only attacking an apportionment agreement, which is only a private agreement between two parties and it has nothing to do with a judgement or order of another court.  Gloria responded that the Agreement was part of the Order dismissing the case and it was reviewed by the chancery court, that Mary was represented by her own counsel at the time, but it didn’t seem to matter to the judge.  she seems to treat the apportionment agreement as a private agreement not heard by the chancery court, nor entered as part of a court order.  The GAL’s and PS seem to have convinced her of this. (new stack of waffles, please–that what happens when the judge goes to law school by letting attys into the private area reserved for judges and discussing cases with the attys there.  Duh)

4)  Finally, Adam Stern starts to complaint about being contacted by the Naperville police dept (p62) and that the sergeant says he was inundated with 513 emails regarding Mary’s condition and he wants Gloria and “her followers” to be admonished to stop this. He says he investigated several months ago and found nothing wrong with Mary or her living conditions.   Now see what the court says.  The court does not know who caused all those emails. but Gloria needs to think about this because it will turn into a Chicken Little situation.

BUT not to beat poor little Chicken Little to death,on the very SAME page we have CF going on and on about “a decline” in Mary’s condition and next page'”in the forseeable future” there may be a need for “more skilled care than they can provide..money is an issue.  Money is needed to care for Mary.” Another stack of waffles.  If all Mary needs is custodial care, then relatives are expected to pay for her care or suck up and do it themselves and Medicare won’t.  The GAL’s and the court know this.  BUT, if her needs are serious and cannot be done by family, then Medicare will pay.  Medicare does not require Mary to divest herself of a survivorship interest in a family owned home–only the GAL’s and CT want this.  I know this.  Most attys dealing with the elderly know this.  The probate court knows this fer sure.  Nursing homes are dangerous places no elder should ever have to go to–unless there is no family to care for her.  Now steps in Gloria, she did it for years and she actually promised her mom she would keep her at home until she passed over.

I’m going to say this again, in case LB or the GAL’s don’t get it.  Gloria cared for her mother for years.  Gloria paid the bills.  Gloria kept things going.  Mary was in EXCELLENT health.  She walked every day, she took care of her dog Hannah (okay she did spoil her by giving her inappropriate treats such as chocolate, but hey, I do that too and most vets now say “spoiled pets welcome”).  She was still in the garden club and even doing gardening.  She swept the street.  She visited with the nice firemen at the fire dept. next door, she went to the bank couple times per week  (which is when she became enraged that Carolyn removed $4,000 from Mary’s account without her permission and so Mary went downtown to get a protective order against CT, instead what happened is Carolyn got appointed guardian and the rest is history.

Another amazing transcript of Gloria being ignored, mistreated and spent off in Probate court.

On July 11, 2011 the GAL’s complained about Gloria’s postings on the regular guardianship blogs–NAGSA, Probate Sharks, etc…… Little did they know what lay around the corner.

First they got the nagging doubts of lay persons.  Now they have some real sharks to deal with.  Lawyers that write blogs, read transcripts and the most heinous issue of all–WE ASK THE QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ASKED.

The court was wrong.  We should ALL BE CALLING FOR AN INVESTIGATION of this Probate Case and why is the court saying “don’t do wellness checks” when in fact it is stated in the court’s own transcripts that Mary is in decline.  She never declined at the home managed by Gloria.  She at gourmet vegan and Gloria always did prompt doctor’s care.

Keep on emailing.  Keep on helping Gloria.  Sign the petitions that are posted above, write your senators and representatives and tell them NO MORE denying our elderly their due process rights.

Gloria has the Power of Attorney for Health Care of her mother.  Not CT, so why did the court ignore this.

The court is wrong.  The US Constitution and the Illinois Constitution guarantees each and ever one of us the rights to free speech and to cry out when an elderly person is being abused and manipulated  to her detriment.

Don’t be cowed by this transcript.  It’s not right and it should not have ever happened.

JoAnne

PS–Gloria, with all this waffling by the GAL’s, I think your best bet is to bring some maple syrup to court and just set it out every time they start to knit together their stories for the nth time.  Uuugh.
PPS–When they lie, don’t shout out “he’s a liar”, just bring a rug–you know, maybe even one of those doll house rugs.  You can get one at Gigis dolls and Sherris Teddy bears.  Use a stack of post its, write down each lie, and stack them up on the little rug.  When the miscreants start lying, don’t interrupt, just ask when it’s your turn and go thru those little post its on the rug, one by one.

I’m sure the GAL’s are reading this, so when you come in with your little rug and pull out the post its, I bet they never tell the judge you have to bring a rug to hold all their little (and not so little) lies, well, because they lie like a R U G.

PPPS–not to beat the making of waffles to death (pun intended), but from this transcript, it is clear the judge is talking to the miscreant attys in the hallway, Scott and Gloria always see them coming from behind the judge’s private areas, and it is clear that the court is being spoonfed BS law by atty miscreants rather than having to actually read cases and make decisions based upon briefing schedules.  The law with respect to partitions should have been briefed.  The court was often confused by the facts.  The court should have set a briefing schedule on 1) the partition; 2) the accounting on the brown house; 3) subject matter jurisdiction, as brought up by Gloria, etc.

This was not done.  And when formal briefs are not required, justice suffers.


More videos–and ones that are likely to be taken down

first, the links:

Larry G. Chambers
Assistant Office Manager
847 600-3421

Dear Readers;

As you may be aware, a number of videos of Mary G Sykes that I put up on youtube showing her to be a thinking, competent person with clear and appropriate intentions (she wants both daughters to share in her estate, she wants both daughters to share in taking care of her, she wants to go home and live at home until she passes, etc.)–most were flagged and removed from youtube.com.

what?  g-rated videos taken down?  Impossible, you might say.

But here we have it, a 90 year old speaking her mind, and those must be removed?  Why? Who benefits from this?  Evil and greedy GAL’s that want to churn the bill and make money while Mary G has no rights and no due process?  An evil and greedy daughter CT who had her mom sign documents at an atty in 2005 and refused to give her mother copies of those documents and her assets were allegedly placed in a trust in a trust document that is clearly void abinition under the Statute of Uses?

Interesting.

So go ahead and look at the videos and when it is clear they get red flagged and taken down because they show competency post Dec 8, 2009 finding of incompetency, let me know.

There are many, many august persons who do not want these videos to be kept on youtube.

UPDATE on videos.  Last night I got a plug-in to scam the videos and they are now all up at the vimeo link.  To do this, you just need to get a free “video downloader” plug in added to your Firefox.

take care

joanne

More fun with transcripts–Feb 16 2012

the link:     https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwZFRoMGlMbjVjODg

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwZFRoMGlMbjVjODg

Dear Readers;

First of all, I have to apologize for having been off line for a few days.  As many of you know, I had a $350 Acer computer for years.  Because I work on a ton of cases that do a lot of good, but there is not much income from them (ahem, case in point for this blog), I decided to opt for a cheapie laptop last time around to see how that would stack up against my typical $2,000 Dell business laptops I got tired of paying for.  Well, the Acer did great.  It beat the Dells for reliability and repairs hands down. But last Friday it hit a glitch and would no longer charge the battery so I took it into Microcenter for repairs.  I had purchased a 2 year extended warranty, one year mfgr, then another two years of Microcenter warranty.  Imagine my surprised when Julia told me the good news, that the mother board was burned up and they could not replace it so would I accept a $450 gift card.  Hell YES.    Within an hour I was down at Microcenter oogling laptops with that gift card and settled on a near-ultrabook–a Toshiba Portege, i5, 700 Gb hard drive, CD/DVD drive 5400 rpms at a 14″ screen and 3 lbs, it’s laptop heaven for me!

Of course I got the warranty right away.  So long live Microcenter and thank goodness for my  computer angels.  Just to let you know, they pushed to scam my old hard drive–which did not crash–for $150.  I told the guy “nope, my kid will do that for me.”  He replied, “are you sure he’s qualified.”  I answered, “Well, he’s been building computers and repairing cell phones since about age 10, Microsoft certified since age 12, and running my network since age 14, and now he’s a math and computer science major at SIU, so yeah, I think this is QED for him.”

Now the dirty little secret of what the guy was saying is that all I needed was a housing for my 2.5″ laptop hard drive and those housings have USB cables that plug and play on any laptop, so in this case I did 95% of the data copying myself.  For some reason, microsoft puts everything in directories 10 deep, and I hate that, but I copied that, as well as where I put my data which is just in c:\data.  How easy is that?  So save yer $150 if your motherboard crashes and just scam your data yourself with a $8 housing (okay I opted for the fancy metal one–but the plastic ones at $5 look flimsy to me).  I put the whole thing together at the microcenter check out with .99 cent screwdriver set.

Okay, back to law.  I hope you all learned how to save $125 to $150 when you motherboard fails.  For a hard drive failure, be sure to image-backup!

I have a few good posts for the next few days so read on.

When I have nothing better to do with my meager bucks I get out of going to work or working for 10+ hours per day, I order some of Gloria’s transcripts, because well, she’s pretty much a hoot in court and stands up to the GAL’s and their beastly “witnesses”.

The transcript link I posted above is the most recent and best one.  In this one, not only does Gloria continue to make her case that the [legal fora] proceedings are nothing but a sham, but she gets the [entity] to go on and on about how the [legal fora] can go back in time as it desires (oh, puleeze, beam me up Scotty), and get some quack-corrupt [entity] (hmmm, why does the name [entity] come to mind?) to say that he knows 4 years ago that Mary Sykes was incompetent to make or understand or even dictate her desires to sign off on the apportionment agreement. (If he knows that then why isn’t he beating out some real psychic pros like Sylvia Browne, James Van Praagh, John Edmonds, etc.)

But the best part of this transcript is you can see how the court justifies this clearly inane conclusion.

And there’s the little matter of 2-1401 that says judgments must be attacked in 2 years.  The court clearly does not believe that the “apportionment agreement” is a judgment or court order.  This court thinks it was a private agreement made between two parties and was never court reviewed or court approved.  This court further believes that Probate is the only full faith and credit courtroom that has ever existed or will ever existed.  Thank goodness there are only sovereigns sitting in those courtrooms running their own little fiefdoms.

Does this clearly speak to the out of control meglomania of [legal fora]–that it answers to no other court or jurisdiction besides whatever pops into its own little head–like a low flying airplane?

Read the transcript and judge for yourself.  This one will also go on my “crazy transcript” page.  I’m actually thinking of holding a contest for the craziest of all theSykes  transcripts. Clearly the one where the court sanctions KD for $5,000 and is overturned has to be number one or near the top.

Just let me know

JoAnne

From Ken Ditkowsky–Reasons for a number of agencies to get involved and Investigate

In Sykes it did not matter whether she was competent or not – it was a foregone conclusion orchestrated by an agreement between between the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the plenary guardian.    (Gloria received an e mail from Adam Stern admitting this fact – I wonder if that e mail was a target of the ‘theft’ of her work product accomplished by the eviction).    However, in reviewing a bunch of the victim complaints it appears that the medical examination most notably ignores the following:
1) history
2) body chemistry – i.e. it is possible to drug the subject
3) illness (either physical or mental)
4) consultation with treating doctors    (Dr. Shaw is reported to have testified that he did not bother to even examine Mary)
The great genius talks to the subject for a few seconds, listens to the scenario of the possible abuser and/or exploiter and writes of a report.   In the report on record in the Sykes case the ‘medical practicioner’ wrote the Mary was delusional when she described activities that she actually engaged.    He learned that Mary was imagining from the candidate for plenary guardian who just happened to be the subject of a pending Petition for a Protective order and had informed her mother after finding $4000 in her mother’s account that she was investing the same in an IRA.
Professional Regulation (and the ARDC, the States Attorney, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, the State Police et al) should be investigating this situation of ‘rubber stamp’ medicine.    The current procedure in Illinois (and in many other states) for the appointment of a guardian is replete with examples of total avoidance of all protections for the senior citizen targeted so that there would be no hinderance by the family of   you, me, Gloria, Senator Kirk, President Obama, et al to their being declared disabled and having CT appointed their plenary guardian.    No one charged with protecting the seniors cares!   Ask Mr. Wyman, the two Mary’s, Gloria Sykes, Janet Phelan *****and the hundreds of family and friends of the senior victim.
If a professional complains he/she can expect that he is the subject of a professional investigation!    Even medical professionals are not immune.
What society needs if it wants to protect its senior citizens is a complete, honest, and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes case and similar cases by law enforcement – and enforcement of the law.
Ken Ditkowsky
I agree that the fact that Dr. Shaw wrote down Mary was delusional because she was doing the following:  1) writing checks and paying bills, 2) driving and had a driver’s license; 3) walking to her bank and doctor and then CT lying and saying she wasn’t and Dr. Shaw never investigating further is very troublesome.
Again, the entire case was railroaded, the file was peppered with packs of lies, and these lies were rubber stamped by AS, CF and the Probate Court in a “done deal.”
Scary.
Does anyone have the right to protest against the railroading of incompetency?  Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and history will tell you that when the government wants to cover up fraud, let the politically elite steal with impunity, the first thing you do is start throwing people into mental institutions where they have no right to counsel or a hearing and the panel is rigged.  It works very well in Banana Republic countries, the mideast and has worked well in the USSR.
Is this the new age of the US?  No one can call for an investigation?  Are we all incompetent for suggesting that the court and the authorities might steal?  Is this the reason why Chicago-Cook County is easily the most corrupt area in the US, hands down, a margin of 2 to 1 over the next most corrupt jurisdictions?
Attorney Black, please enlighten us on this one.  How is it that numerous attys take good note of strongly suspected corruption, but then groundless complaints are lodged against the honest attorneys–the ones not making a profit from the corruption, and those complaints are not automatically dismissed and the miscreants dance away with impunity?  You have been sent the record from the trial court.  No discovery, plenty of railroading, the ward can’t appear in court, blah, blah, and yet this continues as an ordinary snafu of the Probate Court.
More good questions than answers, I am afraid.

From Ken Ditkowsky–a reasonable request to the ARDC

Time to alert the ARDC to the fact that Stern, Farenga et al have not been candid – i.e. they have not disclosed the fact that Mary passed a written examination administered by the Illinois Secretary of State just days before Carolyn filed a petition to declare her incompetent.     This event should give pause to Dr. Shaw.    If he maintains that Mary was incompetent on **** how is he going to explain her passing a written examination.
Of course Gloria is correct –  This is the reason that we need a comprehensive, complete and honest investigation of the Sykes, the Tyler case and the similar cases.     My letter to the ARDC read:
To the Administrator of the Illinois ARDC
Pursuant to Rule which reads:
(b) Issuance of Subpoenas. The clerk of the court shall issue a subpoena ad testificandum or a subpoena duces tecum as provided below:
(1) upon request of the Administrator related to an investigation conducted pursuant to Rules 752, 753, 759, 767, 779, or 780 or related to a deposition or hearing before the Hearing Board; the Administrator may use a subpoena in an investigation conducted pursuant to Rule 753 until such time as a complaint is filed with the Hearing Board;
(2) upon request of the Inquiry or Hearing Board related to a proceeding pending before the Board;
(3) upon request of the respondent or the petitioner related to a deposition or hearing before the Hearing Board; or
(4) upon request of the Administrator related to the investigation or review of a Client Protection Claim.      Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 754
I need issued the following subpoena in accordance with the Rules:
1.       Document subpoena for the Illinois Secretary of State seeking copies of the Driver’s license record of Mary G. Sykes.     It appears that in January 2009 Mary Sykes took and passed both the written and the physical driver’s license test.
Of course if you have these records the Notice to Produce documents previously served on the ARDC would have required their production.     The document production contained many duplicates but I did see this material.    This material is critical as had Mr. Stern and Ms. Farenga as Guardian ad Litem (or the ARDC prior to filing a complaint stating that I was a liar) done the due diligence required of them they would have obtained (or known) about this situation.      As Mrs. Sykes not only was able to file a sworn Petition for an Order of Protection immediately prior to the filing of Petition for her incompetency, but,  we are informed that a few short weeks prior to the filing she passed a written examination administered by the Illinois Secretary of State.
Pursuant to our Himmel Responsibility we respectfully renew the complaints to the ARDC that have been made by me, by Ms. Gloria Sykes, and various other persons who are friends, family and neighbors of the Mary Sykes.    (Our complaints seek an investigation of the actions (and non-actions) of GAL Adam Stern, GAL Cynthia Farenga, etc.)
Thank you for your courtesy and co-operation.
_________________________________________________________
I do not understand how this written test was over-looked by Mr. Stern and Ms. Farenga.    The Petition for a Protective Order against CT should have been a red flag and as there are two GAL the degree of investigation should have been much more careful than if only one had been appointed.    The prior assault on your 80 plus year old aunt should have also raised a red flag – a 260 pound male who is over 6 feet tall has a tough time convincing a person with all his/her faculties that he was in ‘dire’ fear of Aunt Yo!   Does she weigh a 100 pounds.    It should be noted that even the Naperville Police did not buy the story told by Toerpe – they did not arrest Aunt Yo for her vicious assault on Toerpe knuckles using her frail body as a dangerous weapon that made him reasonably fear for his safety.    (Of course the Naperville Police did not arrest Toerpe either! – I guess that in Naperville they have experience with those tough old ladies who terrorize the middle age male residents.)
THERE IS NO REASON WHY LAW ENFORCEMENT IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FACTS SHOULD CONTINUE TO STONEWALL THE DOING A COMPREHENSIVE, COMPLETE AND HONEST INVESTIGATION.   REMEMBER I ASKED BOTH GALS TO JOIN WITH ME IN CALLING FOR THE DEPOSITION – IF THEY HAD NOTHING TO HIDE – AND NEITHER DID.    I THINK IT IS TIME TO FIND OUT WHAT IS BEING HIDDEN.
(YES YOU MAY POST IF YOU WISH TO DO SO)
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

And I would add a request to the ARDC that they investigate the numerous trips to the emergency room during December 2009 to spring 2010 where Mary lost weight and other unknown reasons.

The ARDC should also issue a subpoena to Carolyn and Fred Toerpe asking for a copy of one statement from any bank account they have held since July of 2009, and one check from any account they held in their names, or for their daughter Kristen or Carolyn’s mother Mary, and then the ARDC should ask for statement records at each of those banks beginning in July of 2009–this means they go directly to each bank rather than look for doctored statements from these two miscreants.  At that point I bet they disappear rather than turn over any records.  They will leave Mary behind, penniless and do a quick sale on the home.  Then Gloria will get her mom back.

Good point Ken, I will fax these requests to Ms. Black and let her know if she loses it, it is also posted at http://www.marygsykes.com so she has no excuse.

JoAnne

The Constitution vs. Pole Dancers of Justice*

 
 
What is most amazing is the fact that the Courts should be so benign in their defense of the victims of Elder Abuse/Financial Exploitation of the Elder and so pro-active in their defense of the criminals who are appointed by it and who misuse their offices as guardians to exploit and abuse senior citizens (or assist others in their endeavor of abusing and exploiting grandma).    What is also amazing is the fact that decent and normally caring people can sit on their hands and allow this tragic situation to continue.     Two faced and disingenuous members of the political elite who ‘rape’ grandma and then boast about the fact that they are distressed that she might have her social security reduced by a dollar are expected to be miscreants.       The Courts and Law Enforcement are expected to be vigorous in defense of liberty, justice, and the American way.     It may all sound trite – but ****.
 
The Illinois ARDC prosecution of yours truly for the exercise of my First Amendment Rights has opened my eyes and generated the realization that the slogan “democracy is not a spectator sport” is not only true but a dire warning.        The bulwark of America is her Bill of Rights and in particular the First and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution.    The Right protected by the Sixth Amendment to counsel is also important but I am not of record in any of the cases that I are mentioned in the ethics complaint filed by the ARDC against me.  The rights of citizens to employ a lawyer who is not married to the ‘status quo’ or the current politics is only a tangent.       So the fact that I stand accused of doing a FRCP 11 investigation and communicating with my clients and reporting serious misconduct on the part of some ‘august’ court appointed vultures is relevant only as it relates to whether or not the ARDC can engage in a prior restraint of my continued calls for an investigation and my advocating for the Right of a senior citizen not to be wrongfully deprived of his/her liberty property or human rights to further the avarice of some ‘whore of justice.’
 
As an American Citizen and a lawyer who takes the oath that I took in 1961 seriously, I will and intend to continue to call on Law Enforcement to Investigate the Mary Sykes case and all of those similar cases regardless of the personal consequences to me.     Indeed, I call for an honest and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes, Tyler, Wyman and similar cases.    I call for the investigation of Farenga, Stern, and Schmiedel and their conduct in relation to the Sykes case, their wrongful prosecution of a sanction motion against me knowing that the Court had no jurisdiction, their interference with the property rights of Gloria Sykes etc.       This is America.     Mary Sykes who just weeks before a petition was filed to determine her incompetent and eligible to be deprived of her liberty, her property, civil rights and human rights is reported to have passed a written examination administered by the Illinois Secretary of State in addition to filing a Petition for a Protective order against the very person who was appointed her plenary guardian.    Thanks to efforts of the two guardian ad litem appointed in the Sykes case this petition was never addressed or heard in the Circuit Court.
 
   If legal justification for my conduct is necessary, the rationale and justification is ‘set in stone.     The New Times vs. Sullivan case and the Pentagon Papers cases affirm that the effort to silence me and/or intimidate me whether by the actions of Mr. Stern, Ms. Farenga or Mr. Schmiedel or a government agency is wrong.      The ‘assault’ on the liberty, property and civil rights of Mary Sykes, Gloria Sykes, their family, their friends et al is not necessitated by National Security –  the avarice of the plenary guardian and her co-conspirators does not meet the criterion set forth by the United States Supreme Court in the Pentagon Papers case.       As a lawyer I have a greater duty to speak out against the corruption of the legal system and even if I had been or record the precedent of Nebraska Press v Stewart obviates all argument that justifies the attempt to silence me.    Indeed, my calls for an investigation and for Mr. Stern and Ms. Farenga to report to the Court the non-inventory of about a million dollars in assets, numerous trips by Mary Sykes to the emergency room of the local hospital, failure to provide proper notice etc. does not create a situation in which there would be a substantial probability of interference with a fair trial (Gentile v State Bar of Nebraska).       Indeed, the stated principle of the Illinois State Bar is recorded in Himmel.   Therein Attorneys were mandated to report improper conduct of other lawyers.     
 
I’ve cited a few cases not to impress but to demonstrate that I am not a pioneer.     The Gulag mentality that is robbing the senior citizens of the liberty, their property, civil rights and human rights reported on the blogs and on the inter-net (and virtually ignored in the press and by law enforcement) is foreign.    Our heroes are not the guardian ad litem who aid and abet a plenary guardian who isolates a senior citizen and separates her from her family, her activities, her friends and her property.      Today we live in the year 2012, however, we have allowed a small group of miscreants to create in seniors the fear, desperation, and hopelessness that millions of Europeans felt in 1936.    
 
            The Sykes case and all those cases in which senior citizens are either losing their liberty, property, civil rights, human rights need to be investigated and the miscreants given free room board and time to contemplate the error of their ways.      A Free society cannot tolerate or condone the events that have been reported in the Sykes case and similar cases!       Citizens have to speak out and avoid the 1936 scenario for grandma!      Grandma’s protectors cannot be silenced or intimidated.     We have law enforcement to protect us!     It is time for them to start doing exactly that.
 
 
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

 

*an no offense to Pole Dancers.  I know they honest, hard working women trying to support a family or get thru college.  Corrupt officials are pretty much the low of the low dirty, flea dogs.  Okay no offense to dirty flea dogs, I wish a good family for them.

From Ken Ditkowsky–an epidemic of worries concerning the elderly

ELDER ABUSE EMERGENCY
America faces a crisis.   Suddenly a large number of our older citizens have discovered that they are the ‘Jews’ of 2012 and the replacements for the Nazi and Communist criminals have targeted them.    The ARDC complaint filed against me was my wakeup call that the Constitutional protections of the Federal and State Constitutions were not applicable to protect protest.    The regulators of the Legal Profession determined that if you protest the actions (or the non-actions)  of the two guardian ad litem and or the plenary guardian in the Sykes case no matter how accurate your statements – they are all lies!     If you ask a question it is intimidation!
The unintended consequences of the ARDC complaint are to induce some elderly citizens to confide in me as to their personal plight and their fears that they too can become victims.    Yesterday, an elderly accountant whose wife has become severely encumbered expressed in confidence that he was afraid that an impaired child of his could be induced into a Tyler or Gore  situation.    This morning an elderly retired businessman was concerned that a daughter was planning to make him a Mary Sykes.    It appears yesterday his daughter was ***** (attorney client privilege).
Over the years other elderly people ( 70/80 years old) have talked to me over the years about similar problems, but, I was not aware of the extent of the problem and we used irrevocable trusts to obviate the problem which I dismissed as paranoia or maybe a mild dementia.       After all my children would never ‘steal’ from me – or my wife, thus your children would not either.       Unfortunately we are in a different world today.     Who would believe that the World Trade Center could be destroyed by a motley group of terrorists!!     Who would believe that the First Amendment rights of an attorney would not be defended to the death by legal organizations and the profession in general!!    Who would believe that the non-inventory of about a million dollars in assets would not stir and investigation!!!     The idea that Court appointed attorneys would write letters of complaint to the ARDC and they would be taken seriously concerning the call for an investigation is utterly surreal!
Our complaints as to current outrages directed to you and me all beg the question!      What happens to me or any friend or family of a victim is irrelevant.     How do we protect our senior citizens from exploitation and abuse?     In 1936 the world sat on its hands while millions of innocents were marched into gas chambers!    Our government had no problem refusing entry to a ship load of escapees!   We sent them back so that they could be killed in the gas chambers.    We openly placed some of our citizens of Oriental descent in ‘concentration camps’ in the Mohave Desert!    Today we march our senior citizens in ‘nursing homes,’ ‘sheltered care facilities’,  etc.      I call your attention to the affidavit of Mr. Scott Evans as to his observations concerning Mary Sykes environment.    Death is a little more painful and a little longer than the ‘gas chambers!’     Like our National socialist ancestors some our bolder and less principled Court appointed guardians separate the victims from their assets.    Mary Sykes had about a million dollars of assets not inventoried.    Ms. Tyler about nine millions missing.   The list goes on, and the silence is deafening.
I support the call for a comprehensive and honest investigation by law enforcement of every one of these alleged Elder Abuse/Financial Exploitation claims.    There is no reason why an alleged incompetent should be segregated and isolated from his/her family.   There is no reason why an alleged incompetent should be held in isolation and without stimulation.   There is no reason that the assets of an alleged incompetent have to disappear and lost.    There is no reason why guardians ad litem  should not immediately report nursing home accidents (such as an alleged incompetent falling on his her head),  emergency visits – especially those in which neglect is admitted,  allegations of pecuniary misconduct – non-inventory of precious jewelry, collectibles, gold coins etc.     There is no reason why probate courts should not investigate the alleged misconduct and determine that it has jurisdiction.
Unfortunately before a solution for this growing problem can be formulated law enforcement, the Courts, the Congress, the State Legislatures have to do a full investigation.     The serious allegations that have been made need to be fully and honestly investigated – investigation of the complainants is ridiculous but unfortunately the CYA and avarice mentality that has created the crisis.
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

And KD fails to mention that the other day I received a completely shocking report from Ms. Belanger–a Mass. licensed atty whose father is in a guardianship where a CPA and GAL asserted in court that unbelievably his $9 million estate will be depleted in 7 years!  She asks me if that is true.  I replied, it is as long as they figure a way to churn those fees into millions and give business to each of their buddies over the next 7 years–nursing homes, mega pharma treatments at wired in docs, rehab that goes on forever, psychiatric care that goes on forever.  You name it and this $9 million lawyer that gave his two daughters POA and set up a trust to protect his estate from probate, now has a GAL and a CPA as guardian churning those fees and preventing the daughters from seeing their own father!  They have been told it is “too upsetting”. Dad is on major psychotropic medicines because he wants to pick up the phone to call his daughters, he wants to get it in the car and drive to their homes and see his own grandchildren.  But Mass. Probate court prohibits it because–he has $9 million in a bank account at Mellon, NYC and the court appointed a lawyer and a CPA over his own daughters and ignored his well planned estate wishes.  All because Ms. Belanger was dealing with the bank one day and threatened to move the money and they swept in with dad’s former CPA and attorney and put them in charge!  Scary.  He is now a doped up prisoner in his own home.  He too, was “not interested” in attending the competency hearing–when in fact he was and the temp guardian already had it in place to have him drugged that day.

From Gloria–weekly fax to ARDC

Because it seems the ARDC has repeatedly ignored any complaints Gloria has filed and they also seem to conveniently and accidently-on-purpose lose anything she sends them (a familiar event in this department–just ask Ken Ditkowsky how the ARDC managed to lose his two attachments — important Affidavits from Gloria and Scott which confirms that all allegations asserted in his emails and ultimately on this blog and other blogs–are in fact true and accurate allegations.)

 

The papers filed clearly indicate the affidavits were enclosed.

 

But then somehow they were “Lost” by the ARDC.  All this does is make the ARDC look inept, corrupt or both.

 

What are our Illinois state tax dollars paying for then? 

 

From Gloria:

 

 

“*** It is procedure that spells much of the difference between rule by law and rule by whim or caprice. Steadfast adherence to strict procedural safeguards is our main assurance that there will be equal justice under law

– in Cunningham v. Public Service Co., 1992

 

In 1951 the Supreme Court in Joint Anti-Fascist Refugees Comm. v. McGrath, 341 US 123, took a close look at what happens when ‘due process’ is ignored and American Courts are lawless in their quest to ‘condemn’!.  “The right to be heard before being condemned to suffer grievous loss of any kind, even though it may not involve the stigma and hardships of criminal conviction, is a principle basic to our society.”  Apparently, attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga have no “respect for the elementary rights of men” and to these attorneys, “democracy” is a spectator sport of which, as attorney Peter Schmiedel expressed, when he perpetrates his lawlessness he “has a good day” and “accomplishes a lot”.  That said, in this complaint to the ARDC let me add the following violations against Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga, attorneys apparently protected by the ARDC and perhaps some political clout who are empowered to do great harm for their own financial gain:

 

1.  Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga, one or all were suppose to send me a copy of the 13 April 2012 court ordered that had been entered: I have yet to see that court order and yet, on May 11, 2012, proceedings were held and ex parte discussions with the Court caused actions to take place, including decision to hold more hearings knowing that the Court lacks jurisdiction as Sodini notices were not served on my mother, Mary G Sykes’ two sisters and/or me.

 

2.  Attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga have yet to served me with a 2-1401, and yet continue to collaterally attack a 2008 final order and Cynthia Farenga generated fradulent documents in order to coerce my financial adviser and financial institution into providing her confidential financial information.

 

3.  Attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern, and Cynthia Farenga never served me with appropriate legal documents to even commence a partition action against me and yet, they have had a commissioner appointed (whose report was to be filed on or about the 16 March 2012, and a report I have yet to see) and continue to push for the sale of property of my estate knowing that the Probate Court lacks jurisdiction in this matter, too.

 

4.  That the US Trustee called attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern and/or Cynthia Farenga and told them to return the property of my estate, and the three Attorneys, have refused to return all of the property of my estate.  (Judge Murrey entered an order that commencing at 8 am on the 19th May Toerpe and Company are to give me full access to my homestead 6014 N Avondale so I can “take as much time as I need to remove all of my personal property, including intellectual properties and confidential legal documents: that said, I have provided attorneys Peter Schmiedel and Amanda Byrnes with a list of personal property their client ‘removed’ from the property already and so far, I have no response to whether or not the property will be returned.)

 

5.  That there is a Court order entered giving me rights to visit with my mother  ‘approximately eery two weeks’ and thus far, I have yet to see or talk to my mother since March 2011: I am also being denied any telephone access to my mother.  This is also a violation of my mother’s rights and my  rights of association, which in a case that Cynthia Farenga perpetrated, James Srruck v. Public Guardian, the Appellate court made reference to and suggested that Mr. Struck has a right of association with his mother and therefore may sue his brother.

 

6.  That attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern repeatedly attempt to or have ‘influenced’ Judges in the State, Appellate, and Federal Courts by misrepresenting the facts and malicious lies, including writing a letter to the Fed. Bankruptcy Judge (Cynthia Farenga) and as recent as a couple of days ago, Adam Stern’s attorney attempting to provide the Bankruptcy Judge with a Rule 23 Appellate order he claims  is law that should cause the court to dismiss an adversary haring against Adam Stern!

 

7.  Attorney Peter Schmeidel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga lied to the court on Mary 11, 2012, reporting that they were not notified that I would not be in court: I will send the ARDC copies of proof of successful faxes to each attorney fax number(s).

 

“No better instrument has been devised for arriving at truth than to give a person in jeopardy of serious loss, notice of the case against him and opportunity to met it.”

 

Neither my mother nor I have had due process or equal protection of law because of the malicious contentions and efforts of attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga…

 

And now, Fischel and Kahn have taught attorney Amanda Brynes to copy their lawless behavior and so, further complaints will also include the young attorney Amanda Brynes.

 

Meanwhile I have not spoken to or have had quality time with my mother, who is suffering the most, and her life shorted by the isolation, drugging, medical and emotional neglect, and the undue influences.  As Adam Stern wrote to me in an email which the ARDC has a copy of, ‘they’ have told my mother I abandoned her.  He went on to say he could tell my mother that I “abused her” instead!  Adam Stern does not have absolute immunity for murdering my mother!

 

Let me remind you that there are now TWO petitions for protective orders naming Carolyn Toerpe the respondent: Carolyn Toerpe is the client of Fishel and Kahn — Peter Schmiedel, Deborah Jo Soehlig, and Amanda Brynes.  If you read the 11 + volumes of verified court documents including transcripts, you will note that attorney Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern also advocate for Carolyn Toerpe.  In fact, there are about 20 proceedings where the Ward, Mary G. Sykes is not even considered.  The court proceedings have been all about me, a 3rd party and only an “interested” party to the case. The need to intimidate, harass, and silence me apparently is the law of attorney Peter Schmiedel et al.

 

And attorney Cynthia Farenga actually had her husband Michael Crowley serve these fradulent papers on my financial adviser and institution(s).  I guess it truly is a ‘family affair’…

 

 

“The heart of the matter is that democracy implies respect for the elementary rights of men, however suspect or unworthy; a democratic government must therefore practice fairness; and fairness can rarely be obtained by secret, one-sided determination of facts decisive of rights.”

– in Lankford v. Idaho, 1991

 

 

 

 

Gloria Jean Sykes

Bon Ami Productions, Inc.

773.910-3310(cell)

773.631-9262 (fax and office line)

 

 

Gloria also informs me that while CF has told the court she served Gloria with the Partition Action (note that document is not in the file between Mar 2011 and the present), it turns out that “Michael Crowley” is CF’s husband and he served the alleged documents (which turns out is only a pizza flyer).  CF got angry about that and emailed Gloria about doing “background checks on her” and Gloria replied she only checked on the internet which had all of the following information: Where CF’s kids went to school which was a private school, the church they attended and the obit of CF’s father who was a well connected lawyer AND worked for the water dept.  (Somehow someone directed Gloria’s water to be turned on causing damage to her house and a $500 bill.)  Again, CF’s using Michael Crowley, her husband to serve papers when that is expressly prohibited by statute because neither the parties nor their attorneys may serve papers in any lawsuit, nor can they use their family members to serve papers.  Somehow the law is not standing in the way of the abilities of the miscreants to terrorize Gloria, strip her of home and property and leave her couch surfing and penniless.

When Probate Court is full of troubles and issues…..

Mother’s day stinks.

From Gloria, read on.

Dear All,


It’s not unusual for your client, Carolyn Toerpe to be so mean-spirited and controling: she’s been that way her entire adult life.  Just ask any people who ‘use’ to consider her a friend (from grammar, high, or college schooles: even from past work relationships).  That said, for attorneys to promulgate and perpetuate the isolation of Mary G. Sykes, one must wonder the agenda.  In this instant case, the questions been asked and answered: GREED AND MONEY>  What kind of monsters are you?  That question has been asked and answered, too, as noted in the Kangaroo Court presentation yesterday.  Suffice it is Mother’s Day and this is the third Mother’s Day the three of you and your client have prevented me from sharing with MY MOTHER.  What is most disturbing is that you actually believe that this isolation has not taken a serious toll on her health, her spirit, and untimely her LIFE.  All said, I have yet Mr. Schmiedel seen a copy of the 13 April 2012 Order you said in Court you would mail to me.  That said, I have proof of successful transmission of faxed letters to all three of you, not just of recent, but from a months or so ago where I also notified you all (and the Court and the ARDC) that I could not be in court on the 11th May because of a conflict of scheduling.  Whether or not you can accept this, and I’m certain you never will, I am an American Citizen, protected under the Illinois and United States Constitutions and I do actually have a life outside the harassment and torture you three apparently under the sanction of the Court, have and continue to perpetrate against me and all people who my Mother asked for help and all people who will continue to tell you, “No. Hell NO  you cannot deprive me of my Civil and Human Rights, or deprived my Mother of the same, just because you are attorneys.  You are monsters, plain and simple, dangerous people who live lawless because of your arrogance and criminal minds.  Therefore, I ask to see my mother and that the three of your and your client comply with court orders.  That said, your client(s) Carolyn and Fred Toerpe, are respondents to petitions for protective orders, with CArolyn having two pending. Suffice I understand you chose another date to continue your lawlessness in the Probate Division, and a date that all of you know or should know I am also busy.  I won’t say more, as I have yet to see the court order from yesterday 11 May.  

Please note the U.S. Postal Inspector is still very involved in the theft of my mail, and Mr. Schmiedel you claim to still be holding on to two letters addressed to me of which you and your attorney  brought to two courts to attempt to persuade the court(s) that and again, unless you can provide me with the envelop(s) showing that you received returned mail, clearly you and your clients have and continue to steal U.S. Mail.  That said, your client has already looted my Homestead, two of my safety deposit boxes, et al.  

Btu now I’m off subject because I wrote attorney Soehlig yesterday or the day before, a note asking to talk to your client and make certain my Mother can see and or at least talk to me on Mother’s Day.  I didn’t expect to hear back from either of you regarding this and I’m certain, just like the last two Mother’s Days past, my mother will be prevented from spending quality time with me on her celebrated day.  What is even more interesting is that your client won’t allow me to speak to my mother on the telephone and has once again clogged the voice mail and I can not even leave messages for my mother.  I will call your clients cell phone today again and again. It’s Mother’s DAy and I want to speak with my Mother.

I have copied the ARDC because I want to make certain that your buddy Ms. Lea Black is fully aware of the repeated violations of the Professional Codes of EThics.  How far will you go Mr. Schmiedel to steal all of my mother’s assets, my money and leave us both paupers and  homeless?  WEll, today you win.  My heart is broken as is my Mother’s.  I imagine your Hitler complexes are kicking in as you read this and your once again having a “good day” and thinking you’ve “accomplished a lot”, but I believe that what goes around comes around.  

Perhaps you’ll show up at my book signing.  Im certain the public would love to hear your side of the story and how you Cynthia Farenga will tell them that the Court Reporter erred: you never said x y, or z.  I say, thank God for Court reporters — as most of them can’t be bought.

I hope your Mother’s Day Cynthia Farenga is as **** as my Mother’s.  Yes, what goes around does come around.

Please send me copies of the two orders and while your at it, try and obtain jurisdiction and then we may be able to talk.  All I want … all my mother wants is to spend quality time with each other on Mother’s Day.  
Gloria Jean Sykes 
Bon Ami Productions, Inc. 

773.910-3310(cell)
773.631-9262 (fax and office line)
And I personally know that when Gloria was caring for her mother, she gave parties for her frequently (Gloria was a party/social animal) and her mother was always there as well and any family that wanted to be there. Gloria let her mother call family and friends all the time.  CT was never barred from the house or calls, it’s just she rarely bothered.
Mark my words and others, the next step will be drugging and a nursing home and then a quick death.  Carolyn benefits and while a wired in court looks at the floor.

Requests to Admit

Dear Readers;

I sat in a car yesterday to pick up my kids at college, which took about 6 hours, and have some fun them.  This Holiday Inn has high speed internet, so that is great (soon as I figured out how to diagnose and fix it!). This is what I drafted up during the car sit.  These were the questions I had about the case.

BUT Requests to Admit are a fun tool to use.  I saw that Gloria had some in the file and they were apparently filed but unanswered.  If that is the case, then they have been deemed admitted by operation of law, other than the fact I think that the court might have told Gloria she has no standing to file anything, which makes no sense since there is a provision in the Probate Act that any interested party can file a Petition to Remove the Guardian, and even just a note.  Well, as any attorney knows, the only way to really do a good job at that is to file pre-discovery before filing such a document.

But I don’t know, and I looked at the Probate Cases and I couldn’t find any Illinois cases that talk about how a daughter is not entitled to file something, or serve pre-filing discovery, or anything like that.  It just sounds like more AS and CF intimidation against Gloria.

Now that more than one year of pleading have been filed, the pattern of ignoring, snubbing and making Gloria out to be some sort of false pariah in the case when she really has done nothing bad at all–except take excellent care of her mother for 10+ years, I guess it’s just business as usual for those guardians, because once the house is sold, they get paid.  Carolyn thinks her Trust is valid and she gets all the money and needs no reporting to anyone.

So read on below.

JoAnne

Requests to Admit.        These are directed mostly to the GAL’s.  I know these are the questions I have on the case.  I think answering such interrogatories would be most important.

The term “GAL’s” refers to AS and CF collectively.

The term CRLTO refers to the Chicago Landlord Tenant Ordinance.

The term “Estate” refers to the “Estate of Mary G Sykes” or case 2009 P 04585.

The term “White House” refers to the home where Mary G Sykes lived, or 6014 N Avondale.

The term “Brown House” refers to the home where Gloria Sykes lived prior to it being destroyed by mold, or 6016 N Avondale.

The term “Gloria” or “GS” means Gloria Sykes

The term “MGS” or “Mary” means Mary G Sykes

“PS” is Peter Schmeidel; “HW” is Harvey Waller; “CT” is Carolyn Toerpe; “FT” is Fred Toerpe; “CF” is Cynthia Farenga; “AS” is Adam Stern

The term “wired” means any type of corruption or preferential treatment in court, including promises of money, position, continued employment in and out of the courtroom, etc.  This also includes promises from any judge (Daley center or not), political favor, or court room employee for money, continued employment or preferential treatment.

You are directed to admit or deny the following statements:

1.    That you have been told by GS that $4,000 was removed wrongfully from the Pullman bank account of MS in 2009 and you took no action.

2.    That you are aware that this action caused MGS to prepare a Petition for an Order of Protection against CT.

3.    That you have been told that the removal of $4,000 from the bank account of MGS was allegedly to start a retirement account for MGS.

4.    That you have been told that the removal of $4,000 from the bank account of MGS was purportedly to start a retirement account for MGS

5.    That you knew that MGS at age 90+ was ineligible for a retirement account pursuant to IRS rules, regulations and/or statutory law.

6.    That at the time, MGS was not in need of establishing a retirement account.

7.    That you did not serve any discovery upon Pullman Bank regarding the withdrawl of the $4,000.

8.    That you did not track the $4,000 from Pullman Bank to any other bank account and find out who moved it and when.

9.    That you are not interested in whether CT misappropriate $4,000 from the funds of MGS and therefore did not conduct any proper investigation.

10.    That GS paid two mortgages for approximately 10+ years.

11.    That GS paid the mortgage on 6014 for approximately 10+ years.

12.    That GS paid the mortgage on 6016 for approximately 10+ years.

13.    That the income of MGS was substantially $1900 per month in the year 2010.

14.    That the income of MGS from 2005 to 2010 was $1900 per month.

15.    That the income of MGS being only $1900 per month was insufficient to pay all the expenses of MGS.

16.    That MGS prefers to eat vegetarian.

17.    That MGS prefers to eat vegetarian and organic.

18.    That CT does not provide MGS with organic, vegetarian food which MGS prefers.

19.    That GS always fed MGS a vegetarian diet.

20.    That GS regularly bought MGS high quality vegetarian food.

21.    That GS regularly shopped for MGS at Whole Foods.

22.    That GS regularly purchased a meal plan from Ambutol in Chicago.

23.    That you are aware Ambutol prepares gourmet vegetarian meals.

24.    That GS provided MGS with gourmet vegetarian meals from Ambutol.

25.    That CT does not shop at Whole Foods for the food for MGS.

26.    That CT does not provide as many vegetarian, organic foods as she can for MGS.

27.    That no GAL has ever recommended setting up a retirement account for a 90+ year old person, that you have ever head of.

28.    That you have never obtained any bank records from Pullman bank regarding the $4,000 withdrawal.

29.    That you were aware that CT was the Respondent in a Petition for an OOP in 2009.

30.    That prior to appoint CT as Plenary Guardian you did not properly inform Judge Connors of this fact.

31.    That when CT was appointed Plenary Guardian in Dec. 2009, you did not inform Judge Connors that the jurisdictional 14 day notice of hearing was served upon the two sisters of MGS.

32.    That when CT was appointed Plenary Guardian in Dec. 2009, you did not inform Judge Connors that the jurisdictional 14 day notice of hearing was never served upon sister Josephine.

33.    That when CT was appointed Plenary Guardian in Dec. 2009, you did not inform Judge Connors that the jurisdictional 14 day notice of hearing was never served upon sister Yolanda.

34.    You have never informed the court it has been acting without jurisdiction.

35.    PS has never informed the court it has been acting without jurisdiction since Dec 2009.

36.    HW has never informed the court it has been acting without jurisdiction since Dec 2009.

37.    A competent attorney would have promptly brought this issue to the court’s attention promptly after having been discoveed.

38.    KD and Gloria have been repeatedly informing you that the Probate Court is acting without jurisdiction.

39.    HW has admitted that no 14 day notices were timely served on sisters Yolanda and Josephine prior to the hearing appointing CT.

40.    HW has admitted on the record that no 14 day jurisdictional notices were timely served on Gloria prior to the hearing appointing CT.

41.    That the doctor’s report presented with CT’s Petition for Guardianship in July 2009 was legally deficient in that it was not signed by a medical physician that actually conducted the examination.

42.    That Dr. Motckya who signed the CP211 form was in fact a PsychD.

43.    That Dr. Motckya who is a PsychD cannot sign a CP211 pursuant to the Probate Act for the purposes of presenting a Petition for guardianship.

44.    That counsel for GS repeatedly asked for discovery prior to appointing CT as PG in Dec 2009.

45.    That GS was repeatedly denied any requests for discovery prior to appointing CT as PG in Dec 2009.

46.    That you did not tell the court that GS was entitled to discovery in this case in Dec 2009.

47.    That you have never, in fact told the court GS should be allowed discovery.

48.    That AS knowingly filed a wrongful petition for sanctions against KD.

49.    When AS filed a petition for sanctions against KD, both GAL’s knew he never had appeared in the Probate Court.

50.    That the filing of ARDC complaints against KD and JMD for expressing opinions on a blog constituted a violation of the Illinois CPA. 735 ILCS § 110 et. Seq.

51.    As a GAL, the filing of that ARDC complaint against KD brings liablity to the estate.

52.    A GAL that brings liability to a ward’s estate should immediately report it to the court and be removed.

53.    The reason why AS was not sanctioned by the the Probate Court for filing a false Petition for Sanctions against KD is because the court is wired–or it sure looks like it.

54.    AS filed a Petition to Disqualify JMD as counsel for Gloria because as CF said JMD will assuredly “paper me [meaning the GAL’s to death].”

55.    JMD accordingly became the subject of a Motion to Disqualify (“MTDQ”) filed by AS and endorsed by CF because she is a competent attorney.

56.    CF and AS knew that the filing of a MTDQ JMD was wrongful and in derrogation of well established law.

57.    CF and AS misrepresented to the court they had sufficient grounds to file the MTDQ when in fact they did not.

58.    That in Dec 2009 GS had filed a number of pleadings, and AS asked the court to strike all the pleadings of GS because she was pro se.

59.    That those pleadings in Dec 2009 were in fact filed pro se and so there was no reason to strike those pleadings.

60.    That only sleezy, underhanded attys pull such stunts mentioned in the two prior RFA’s.

61.    That CF and AS meet the description in the last RFA.

62.    That I am not surprised either one would pull such a low down stunt.

63.    That you have been informed by numerous family and friends that Gloria took excellent care of her mother for 10+ years.

64.    You have been informed that Gloria returned from California after her father died to take care of her mother.

65.    You have been informed that Gloria provided Mary with designer clothes to wear.

66.    You have been informed that Gloria provided Mary with monthly trips to the salon for hair and nails.

67.    That the Probate Court trashed Gloria’s care plan on purpose.

68.    That Gloria’s care plan was more than adequate.

69.    That while Gloria didn’t know the name of Mary’s one hypertension medication, she knew what a CBC was and the judge didn’t.

70.    Most people know that a CBC is a Complete Blood Count or Blood Panel and it is an essential part of a regular physical.

71.    One of the reasons the court trashed Gloria’s care plan was because Gloria lived upstairs and Mary lived downstairs at 6014 N. Avondale (“White House”).

72.    CT has a two level home with a basement.

73.    The court did not have a problem with the fact that Mary’s bedroom was on the second level and the other living areas were o the first floor of CT’s home.

74.    Mary lost 10% of her body weight due to a sore throat that lasted a week before CT dropped Mary off with Gloria.

75.    Mary subsequently required several trips to the emergency room which were not reported to the court.

76.    Gloria recognized that something was very wrong with Mary and took her to the doctor the day Mary was dropped off.

77.    That CT represented to the court that family would care for Mary during the day when she was at work.

78.    That subsequent to the appointment of CT, her daughter Kristen moved out of the home.

79.    That subsequent to the appointment of CT, FT did not want to care for Mary during the day.

80.    That subsequent to the appointment of CT, FT did not in fact care for Mary during the day.

81.    That Dr. Rabin signed and submitted a report to the court indicating Mary was incompetent.

82.    That Dr. Amdur signed and submitted a report to the court indicating Mary was incompetent.

83.    That Mr. Motckya, PsychD signed and submitted a report to the court indicating Mary was icompetent.

84.    That you reviewed these reports and agreed with their accuracy.

Each of the following questions refer to the “Doctor’s Reports” of Amdur, Rabin and Mr. Motckya, PsychD and the “Competency Examination.”

85.    You either knew or should have known at the time Mary wore custom hearing aids.

86.    Mary’s hearing was not tested before the Competency Exams were completed.

87.    You knew or should have known at the time Mary suffered from time to time with hypoglycemia or low blood sugar.

88.    A CBC or Blood Panel was not conducted immediately before any Competency Examination.

89.    That in derogation of CT’s care plan, Mary has been put in “adult day care” for low functioning adults.

90.    That while Mary was in “adult day care” she could have been living

91.    That prior to this, Mary wrote checks, was involved in the neighborhood gardening club, walker around her neighborhood nearly every day, walked to and from her doctor’s office and was very involved with her community.

92.    That Mary is now isolated with limited phone calls and visits from family.

93.    That the guardian CT is careful to isolate Mary from family.

94.    That CT claims that Mary is upset by Gloria when in fact Mary is upset when Gloria is around because she wants to go home.

95.    That CT claims Mary is upset by Gloria when in fact Mary asks Gloria to get her an attorney so she can go home.

96.    CT saw Mary only a few times per year before summer of 2009.

97.    CT filed a Petition for Guardianship because Mary filed a Petition for a Protective Order for wrongfully withdrawing $4,000 from her Pullman bank account.

98.    That you have been told that Carolyn drilled out Mary’s safe deposit box at Pullman Bank.

99.    That Gloria was also listed as a joint owner of the safe deposit box.

100.    That you have been told that valuables amount to X were found missing from the safe deposit box.

101.    That you have not investigated the missing contents.

102.    That you have not informed the Probate Court that CT drilled out a safe deposit box owned by Gloria without her permission.

103.    That you have been told that CT had Gloria’s Chase safe deposit box drilled out and the content removed.

104.    That the contents of Gloria’s safe deposit box was approximately $5,000.

105.    That you have not obtained the records from Pullman (now US Bank) regarding the drilling of Mary and Gloria’s safe deposit box.

106.    That you have no obtained the records from Chase regarding the drilling out of Gloria’s safe deposit box.

107.    That CT believes she is the Successor Trustee (“ST”) in the Mary G. Sykes Trust dated 2005(“Mary’s Trust”), when in fact she is not.

108.    That Mary’s Trust names Mary as the initial Trustee and also the Trustor which violates the Statue of Uses and renders the entire Trust document invalid.

109.    That KD and Gloria have repeatedly informed the GAL’s that Mary’s Trust is invalid because it violates the Statue of Uses.

110.    That CT filed an eviction proceeding against Gloria based upon her position as ST under Mary’s Trust knowing that this trust was invalid for violating the Statue of Uses.

111.    Because CT was not in fact the ST of Mary’s Trust, the eviction was wrongful.

112.    CT’s wrongful eviction has created substantial liability upon the Estate of Mary Sykes.

113.    CT also turned off the gas for the White House where Gloria was living in 2010, which in fact violated the CRLTO.

114.    Because she violated the CRLTO, CT has brought upon the Estate a possible violation fine of $200 to $500 per day.

115.    Because CT violated the CRLTO for several months, CT has brought upon the Estate a possible violation totaling more than $5,000.

116.    Because  CT violated the CRLTO for several months, CT has brought upon the Estate a possible violation totaling more than $10,000

117.    AS and CF should have filed a Petition for the Removal of CT for shutting off the gas where Gloria was living based upon these violations of the CRLTO creating massive liability to the Estate.

118.    Because AS and CF failed to remove CT for wilfully violating the CRLTO, they should have been removed as GAL’s.

119.    In winter of 2010, PS called Chase, Gloria’s mortgage holder and told Chase the brown house was abandoned.

120.    PS convinced Chase to “secure the property.”

121.    Gloria arrived home one day to find herself locked out of the Brown House, her secuirty cameras were disabled and the security system disabled and tampered with.

122.    Gloria arrived home to also find that interior walls in her Brown House were trashed, rendering the property completely uninhabitable–well beyond any remaining mold remediation.

123.    Gloria arrived home one day to find all of the furnishings remaining in her brown home were put in the snow behind her home.

124.    When Gloria’s home was locked and trashed, the GAL’s were promptly informed and failed to investigate.

125.    The GAL’s have told the Probate Court the Estate has a valuable interest in the Brown House and it should be partitioned.

126.    The prior statement is in fact a lie because the GAL’s have been informed repeatedly that Gloria owned the Brown House and Gloria only put Mary G on title as a joint owner as a testamentary convenience.

127.    That all the family members except CT agree that the Brown House is Gloria’s and the White House is Mary’s.

128.    That Gloria paid the mortgages on both homes for approximately ten+ years.

129.    That you were told repeatedly Mary’s income for ten+ years was approximately $1900 per month which was insufficient for her to pay her $1000 per month mortgage, plus utilities, clothing and other expenses.

130.    The GAL’s failed to investigate the severe destruction of the Brown House because they, as well as PS, desired to ensure Gloria was rendered utterly homeless for the purpose of intimidation.

131.    The GAL’s failed to investigate the severe destruction of the Brown House because they, as well as PS, desired to ensure Gloria was rendered utterly homeless for the purpose of intimidation.

132.    The GAL’s failed to investigate the severe destruction of the Brown House because they, as well as PS, were operating in a wired courtroom.

133.    The GAL’s failed for file a Petition to Remove Carolyn for violating the RLTO because they were operating in a wired courtroom.

134.    On May 11, 2012, you informed the Probate Court that Mary’s $1 million in gold coins was “Gloria’s fiction.”

135.    At that time, you did not inform the Probate Court how sister Yolanda could confirm Mary’s ownership of the coins and how they were in the safe deposit box before CT drilled it out.

136.    At that time, you did not inform the Probate Court how sister Josephine could confirm Mary’s ownership of the coins and how they were in the safe deposit box before CT drilled it out.

137.    At that time, you forgot to inform the Probate Court how sister Yolanda could confirm Mary’s ownership of the coins and how they were in the safe deposit box before CT drilled it out.

138.    At that time, you forgot to inform the Probate Court how sister Josephine could confirm Mary’s ownership of the coins and how they were in the safe deposit box before CT drilled it out

139.    That you have not conducted a complete and independent asset search for CT’s accounts.

140.    That you have not conducted a complete and independent asset search for FT’s accounts.

141.    That Mary wrote in her own handwriting (“Mary’s Directions) in Sept. 2009 that she wanted an attorney and wanted to live at home until she died.

142.    That you told the Probate Court that Mary’s Directions were dictated to her by someone else and she did not know what she was writing and this was a false statement

143.    That videos were posted on youtube.com and Vimeo.com which firmly confirm Mary’s Directions (“Videos”).

144.    Those Videos show Mary writing once again she wanted to live in her own home until she died and to have Gloria and Carolyn care for her there.

145.    You are aware that Gloria holds the last valid and enforceable Power of Attorney for Health Care from Mary. (The “POA”)

146.    This original POA document was produced in court in December of 2009 and the court ignored it.

147.    You initially told the court that this original POA document was a fake.

148.    When it shown to you and the court and it was determined it was an original and valid, Judge Connors summarily invalidated the document, without findings or a hearing.

149.    Judge Connors quipped it had to have been produced sooner–yet Gloria had mentioned it to her in several prior court status hearings and Gloria’s requests to effecutate this document were ignored.

150.    That a person who can pass an Illinois written Rules of the Road test does not have dementia.

151.    That a person who can pass an Illinois written Rules of the Road test does not have severe dementia.

152.    That a person who passes an Illinois written Rules of the Road test in January should not be declared incompetent later in July of that same year based upon a diagnosis of dementia, which is a chronic, progressive disease.

153.    That filing a motion to Disqualify JMD for merely notarizing a document is improperl

154.    That the notary clause in the document only stated the person appearing before the notary was in fact known to the notary to be that person and nothing more.

155.    That the GAL’s misrepresented to the court that JMD would be used to testify to show Mary’s competence or incompetence in August 2008.

156.    That JMD was never called to testify regarding the competence level of Mary.

157.    That the issues regarding the Lumberman’s funds disbursing payment in August 2008 (“Lumberman’s Settlement) are full and final and may not be attacked in any court of law.

158.    That 735 ILCS § 1401 provides in its pertinent part that an attack on a judgment must be brought within 2 years of the date of entry of judgment and therefore the Lumberman’s Settlement may no longer be attacked.

159.    That Gloria’s funds were illegally frozen in 2009, and the wrongful freeze continued to the date of this pleading.

160.    That in August of 2012 the GAL’s should have asked the court to unfreeze all of Gloria’s funds because the time to attack the Lumberman’s Settlement had passed.

161.    That in Dec 2009, HW wrongfully caused all of Gloria’s funds at Chase to be wrongfully frozen, rendering her penniless for more than a week.

162.    That the freezing of all of Gloria’s accounts in Dec 2009 in excess of the Order entered by the court was wrongful, bringing substantial liability upon the Estate.

163.    That the freezing of all of Gloria’s accounts in Dec 2009 should have created cause for the GAL’s to remove CT as plenary guarding for the wrongful actions of her counsel.

164.    That a guardian is legally responsible for the wrongful actions of her counsel.

165.    That you enjoy terrorizing Gloria.

166.    That it was funny that you complained Gloria had no current address when it was your plan all along to render her homeless and penniless.

167.    That this put a crimp in your evil plans.

168.    That no one cares you never have a master plan of evil.

169.    That PS’s evil deed on the 6016 home (“Gloria’s Home”) is pretty much going the same way, that is, south.

170.    That the mortgage on the home of approx. $200,000 is likely more than the home is worth.

171.    That it is not worth partitioning this house.

172.    That you have not figured this out.

173.    That mini-me had better master plans of evil than CF and AS.

174.    That your filing of ARDC complaints against KD and JD are about the same as whining like a 3 year old girl that has wet her pants and it feels real yucky now.

175.    That you have exerted undue influence in the 2009 P 4585 Probate Case (“MGS Case”).

176.    That you are aware that the MGS Case was wired.

177.    That you are aware that the appointment of CT as Plenary Guardian was wired.

178.    That the Probate court is about as corrupt as the Circuit Court was in the days of Greylord.

179.    That you form an integral part of this corruption.

180.    That you just don’t care anymore because the money is just too damn good in this poor economy.

Easy peasy Discovery

Interrogatories:

See attached Table of Torts.

1. Identify any statement(s) which you believe are incorrect and provide a corrected statement in lieu thereof.
And finally, don’t forget to read the Disclaimer on this website!

Are we missing the forest for the trees? Question from Scott Evans

I thank Scott very much for going to court for both Mary and Gloria about a gazillion times and taking wonderful notes and thinking these very inciteful thoughts he is willing to share with us all.  Read on…..

From Scott:

Overview: All endeavors that are a work-in-progress tend to suffer from, “… the forest for the trees syndrome”.   Hardworking persons in any endeavor can get wrapped up in their own immediate perspective and miss things or take them for granted, things that a broader view would consider important.

Since Mary passed the Illinois written drivers test plus the driving test just a few months before being declared incompetent and thus being made a Ward of the Court, I can’t help but wonder what other similar anomalies go along with her case. For instance, what would be the typical events in the life of someone who actually had significant dementia? The driver’s license issue begs the question of what else is out there that the Friends and Family of Mary Sykes (FFMS) have gotten so used to that these other keys points have been ignored, lost in the forest.

Some examples: If the Sykes case was a legitimate Plenary Guardianship based on significant dementia ——-

REGULAR REPORTING ON HEALTH OF WARD: In other Probate cases I and Gloria have sat through, the Plenary Guardian (PG), the GAL, and family members regularly report on the health and wellbeing of the Ward of the Court. Usually, this is in some detail, occasionally in strict medical terms plus medical reports that are entered into the record.

For Mary Sykes, an abbreviated, very generalized and short discussion is used, which varies from “….she is doing wonderfully..”, to “….she has taken a turn for the worst….” — all without details, without prior reporting to other family members and without written medical statements put into the record.

FAMILY ACCESS TO THE COURT: In other cases, family members gather at the bench, tell their relevant stories on the condition of the Ward, often at length while the lawyers just give important but usually concise information.

For Mary Sykes, Mary is discussed minimally or not at all.

DUTIES OF GUARDIANS: I would bet that most Wards of the Court have friends and family that are encouraged by the Court to visit the Ward and foster independence and wellbeing. Those concepts are included in “Guidelines for Guardians” as put out by the Presiding Judge of Probate Court. Gloria and I have watched Judge Stuart go to noticeable and even poignant lengths on the proper treatment of the Ward and the Duties of the Plenary Guardian.

The exception is Mary Sykes. Has the Plenary Guardian ever met the Judge? Isn’t a report required every 12 months on the health, wellbeing and financial condition of the Ward?  Given all the hearings, would most Judges make a point of meeting the Plenary Guardian?

CONTINUING CONFIRMATION OF NEED OF 24/7 CARE. If the need for 24/7 care was what made the Plenary Guardianship necessary in the first place, shouldn’t that be reported on regularly and supported in detail?  [On May 11, I watched Judge Stuart give strict instructions to a new Plenary Guardian that follow-up reports on the condition of the Ward CANNOT say, “…same as before…or… no change….” The condition must be spelled out in each report.]

For Mary Sykes, what gets used are short, glib statements by three lawyers ( I use that term loosely) who  have a glaring and roughly 6 figure conflict of interest.

SOCIAL CONTACT: For persons suffering from dementia, contact with old friends and family members would be part of their ‘prescription’ for wellbeing.  [On May 11, 2012, Judge Stuart read to two new Plenary Guardians from the guidelines for guardians and emphasized that the duty of a guardian includes helping the Ward of the Court to achieve, “…maximum self-reliance and independence….within limits of safety….”

For Mary Sykes, isolation, minimal to zero self-reliance, total and enforced DEPENDENCE on the Guardian,  including forced isolation such as not being allowed to use the phone to make or even receive calls except for special occasions, about twice a year , is considered by her Plenary Guardian and her two GALS as what is ‘best’ for Mary’s wellbeing.  Of course as we all know, it is only best for the ease of looting Mary’s hard-earned financial assets, the entire purpose of the Guardianship in the first place.  The ‘lawyers’ who practice this type of ‘law’ refer to it as, “churning the estate”.   It is their business plan to transfer an elder’s money to their own pockets.

WISE USE OF FINANCIAL ASSETS: For most dementia suffers, careful husbanding of the financial assets is carefully prescribed by the Court. I have seen it discussed in detail while sitting through other probate cases.

For Mary Sykes, the lawyers (that keep Mary in the situation she clearly has stated she does not want be in) have openly complained that they haven’t been paid. Clearly, the sale of Mary’s house is to pay the people (I use that term loosely) that are responsible for Mary losing her Constitutional rights as opposed to being sold for Mary’s future care.

In fact it can be argued that if Mary actually did suffer from Plenary Guardianship levels of dementia, she would have been treated far better. And since the FFMS know Mary does not have significant dementia, it is overlooked because it is a false accusation. However, the result of knowing that truth has been to inadvertently allow the alleged criminals (sorry Ken, “miscreants” is just too much of a euphemism) to carry on to approach their self-centered financial goals. And since we take it for granted that this case is only about Carolyn and her lawyers protecting their own financial windfall and to counter Carolyn being cut out of half of Mary’s Will/trust, if not all of it, as of June through September 2009, the tendency has been to get caught up in the ‘crisis du jur’ and not concentrate on the basics, the merits of the case. There is no finger pointing here; this is just how these things work out sometimes in any endeavor.

Until an incident like the driver’s license issue acts as a reminder, the broader picture gets lost in the current events; …the forest for the trees. After all, Tim, initially a year and a half ago, suggested that going back to the beginning was a solution. An April or May, 2009 drivers test would certainly qualify as going back to basics.

As far as dealing with dementia of an elder family member goes, I have no background in that. My paternal grandparents died early, my maternal grandparents and great grandparents were in fine mental shape up to their passing.  So, please modify or add to the above examples of standard treatment and actions concerning a Ward of the Court versus the “special” actions surrounding Mary.

I suspect there are many relevant issues similar to the driver’s license issue that could be added to it. I assume that putting them into play at the same time is better than doing it piecemeal.

~Scott
 

My Fax to Atty Black at the IARDC today!

Dear Readers;

One of the things that bothers me in a most major respect is how Ken Ditkowsky can be accused of lying about the Sykes Probate Case when in fact Ms. Black at the ARDC has shown no knowledge of the facts of the case.  It makes it look like she was “told to” file a complaint against KD without any facts before her.

Now, as an “ordinary” licensed lawyer, I would get in big trouble for that.  No, let me correct that, HUGE HUGE trouble for that.  In federal court they have Rule 11 where you can be sanctioned if you do not first make a reasonable investigation of the facts or the BS your client has told you.  In state court, it is a different rule, but nonetheless, an important rule.  Believe it or not, lawyers cannot actually file claims and lawsuits just based upon pure client BS.

So what is Ms. Black up to and why is my question to her.  She admitted in her answers to KD’s Requests to Admit that she did not have sufficient facts really to determine if many of the statements made in her complaint against him were true or untrue.

So, the intrigue continues.  I have told her KD is telling the truth.  I know the family and I know Gloria.  The Probate Proceeding was non jurisdictional and railroaded.  What happened?

so please read on below and I will in fact publish all those transcripts on this blog and post a page with links.

 

take care

 

joanne

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To:
ARDC
Attn:Lea Black
Fax 312-565-2320    From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison, Pat.      Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com  or http://www.DenisonLaw.com
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Marianne Buckley, Associate, Of Counsel
Troy Sieburg, Associate, Of Counsel
Important Notice
This facsimilie message contains attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, collect, and return the original message to the above address.  You will be reimbursed.  Your cooperation is immensely appreciated.
For transmission problems, please call 312-335-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – ( 2 + 4 PDF files to come  )
May 10, 2012

Re:     JoAnne M. Denison ,  In relation to Cynthia Farenga’s Complaint AND
Kenneth Ditkowsky, the Sykes Probate matter
PLUS my request to open an investigation against Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmeidel, Adam Stern, Harvey Waller
TRANSMISSION OF TRANSCRIPTS

Dear Ms. Black;

Without waiving my representation by Mr. Ditkowsky, who is aware of this communication, attached is are portions of the Probate File transcripts which have been imaged–as promised  You will eventually get 16 files, and I have just ordered the rest to get to you.  You should already have the following documents via fax for the above files:
1.  Table of Torts for April 2012, which I will periodically update.
2.  Probate file (imaged portion) Dec 1 2011 to April 1 2012 which contains the improper behavior of Peter Schmeidel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga which has occurred in Probate Court.  It supplements the “table of torts” which serve as a basis of complaints against these individuals.
3.  Probate file (imaged portion) Mar 2011 to Nov 2011, faxed May 8, 2012.

If you lose or misplace any of the above, these can be easily located at http://www.MaryGSykes.com.  While I do not think 99% of ARDC complaints need to or ought to be made public, I am 100% sure that Probate Case No. 2009 P 4585 involving AS, CF, PS and HW is so filled with grave injustices against Mary G and Gloria, the entire matter MUST and OUGHT to be published.

Unless and until I have heard that this has been accomplished, I will work on getting the feds involved, or the court corruption attorney prosecutors located at 219 S. Dearborn in Chicago.  I had to do this once before in Probate and once I shipped over a packet of info, the craziness in court all of a sudden stopped.  I guess a phone call was made.  That was a great story I will save for another day.

I also wanted to let you know the other day I was in FED Court or Forcible Eviction and Detainer Court.  (True story). This is on the 14th floor.  I can tell you that I have been in this court for clients a number of times and seen dozens of cases dismissed for lack of proper jurisdictional notice over those 5 day notes.  Yesterday, regrettably I had to dismiss my client’s case.  I didn’t want to waste his time or money.  Unfortunately, my client had a prior lawyer and this lawyer was told that the eviction case involved a land contract or an agreement to purchase the property within a certain time period.  For some reason, the lawyer had my client serve a 5 day notice to the tenant as if the tenancy were on a month to month basis.  When we received the file and noted that both parties agreed in answers to discovery that this was in fact a land contract arrangement, I had to inform the client that the law was in land contract situations (there is a separate set of laws for these apart from the Chicago Landlord Tenant Ordinance), that a 30 day notice had to be served.  Yesterday I had to agree to a non suit.

Oh, I talked to the judge about it, told him the 5 day was served in good faith, etc., but he was firm that a jurisdictional notice requirement was strict and severe and required dismissal and he could not take any action on the subject matter of the case.  I understand.  It’s due process and it’s constitutional.  The Illinois Supreme Court has made that clear.  There are two cases on this.  Read the language I have outlined. (will fax later today) Due process and notice jurisdiction is strict and severe.

I don’t like “jurisdictional notice requirements” in Illinois laws either when I have to withdraw or have one of my cases dismissed and start all over again.  This means if you don’t strictly comply with the form, content, and method of notice, the court may not take jurisdiction over a matter.  All orders will be void ab initio.  All lawyers involved may incur serious liability, malpractice or otherwise.  You get in the middle of the case, do discovery and find out jurisdiction is lacking and an honest lawyer informs the court promptly and asks for a dismissal.  I had to do just that yesterday.  BUT, they are important due process and constitutional protections afforded citizens with human and civil rights.  And in the long run, what makes the US great is our extreme attention and compelling dedication to the protection of human and civil rights, meaning all due process protections are highly regarded.

For some reason, the FED judges on the 14th floor understand this concept, generally carefully reviewing each and every new case to make sure the 5 day notice was correct and was served strictly in compliance with the statue.  But, then just four floors above in the Probate division, the judges there for some reason ignore all of it–due process, proper 14 day service on close family members and do as they please.

Soldini was clear that 14 day notice requirement prior to hearing is jurisdictional.  It cannot be waived and the case should and MUST be dismissed at anytime this issue is brought to the attention of the judge.

What is happening here?  KD believes that such a serious violation where both 2 Probate judges and 2 GAL’s and 2 Illinois licensed attorneys are involved and everyone ignores jurisdictional notice requirement of 14 day prior notice to a hearing to Gloria and the sisters Yolanda and Josephine, especially when combined with 1) family members reporting and insisting Mary G wants an attorney; 2) Mary G asking Gloria to find KD who is her desired attorney and he is not allowed to intervene (Gloria did NOT know that name before that conversation–she got it from her mom); 3)the GAL’s say Mary waived her right to an attorney; 4) the GAL’s say Gloria “consented” to an agreement to appoint a guardian, etc. and the rest of the funny stuff in the case (see my Table of Torts), the entire case looks like the old days of Greylord.

Worst part about it is the case has gone on now for 2 years.  Two years and we have 6+ bar admitted Illinois lawyers spend time, resources and estate money, holding an 93 year old woman in a place she has not chosen–all because these 6 lawyers (2 judges, 2 GAL’s and 2+ lawyers for the estate), don’t get the onerous and most serious burden of jurisdictional notice.

And this is a serious continuing violation.  Every day this case goes on, the limitations period is NOT tolled for any of this tortious ultra vires behavior that began in July of 2009.  Day by day, each of the lawyers involved that continue marching forward incur more and more liability for themselves and the estate.  None of them can apparently pound their ego down (as I demonstrated yesterday that I can) and admit that the entire Sykes matter is without jurisdiction, nonsuit it, let Mary G go home, let Gloria go home, give Gloria back her Indiana frozen funds and start the case all over.

Look at the FED cases.  After 2 years of litigation, a long and winding decision about how the RLTO should be interpreted regarding numerous violations the parties protractedly argued about one short sentence at the end said it all–the 5 day notice was only served by slipping it under the door and therefore we MUST vacate the landord’s judgment AND dismiss because the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction ab initio.

Two years of protracted, heated litigation down the drain.  Two years.  And in the end, due process won.  The constitutional rights of Illinois and US citizens won.  These documents are not just scholastic torture for the 6th grade kiddies–they are important legal documents that should control the behavior of the courts instead of the other way round.

No notice means no jurisdiction. The only way around this is to get a signed waiver of the jurisdictional notice, and neither Gloria nor the sisters Yolanda nor Josephine have signed such a document or told the court that on a transcript record (you will be receiving each and every one of these–you find the consent).  Every one agrees on that.

KD is right to call for an investigation.  That was and is his constitutional right.

He has recently transmitted to me additional law on this issue and I will provide you with a memoranda, but from what I’ve seen so far, the constitutional right to protect free public speech bearing upon public issues is a “special” protected right of the highest demand for absolutely no protections.

So then, why is this happening in the Sykes case, and why is there anything wrong with Ken Ditkowsky calling repeatedly for an investigation.  He is old enough to recall the problems involved in obtaining justice during the Greylord years.  I was admitted the year Greylord was over and 90% of the Daley Center was cleared of its corrupt judges.  I had heard corruption was so bad, the attorneys were openly handing envelopes stuff with cash right over the bench and saying “Merry Christmas” to these judges.  And it was not once in a while, but for years, and the ARDC sat by and did nothing, even with a barrage of complaints from the public and other honest lawyers.

Since I have gotten to know KD he is one of the most honest, caring lawyers that I have met.  He has bent over backwards many times to help Mary and Gloria obtain justice.  Why pursue him?

Gloria says she was involved in the Gacy case and apparently the CPS knew young boys were disappearing from their classrooms and did nothing.  She was one of the first investigative reporters on the case right after Gacy was arrested.  The CPS did not promptly inform parents there was an apparent pattern.  They did not inform the authorities so perhaps a dozen or more boys died needlessly.

I know that no one likes to think our courtrooms are wired, or that the authorities ignore the elephant in the room, but it’s people like KD and myself and Gloria that are outraged at such conduct.  We are vociferous and will be vociferous, and if those loud protestations wind up in a blog on the internet because the courts are wired and none of 6+ lawyers involved in that case simply “don’t get it”, and the ARDC turns a blind eye and deaf ear, then so be it.  That’s what we will all do.  And we are NOT going away, even after numerous 1983 violations, CPA violations, etc. We will still be on the internet’s door protesting so the public knows what the govt is spending money on–deny human rights.

Look at the Probate file, see what Gloria is repeatedly filing to protest her becoming homeless and penniless due to the behavior of the above miscreants–and worst of all, denying her of her beloved companionship of her elderly mother.  She is right.

Thank you for your consideration and prompt cooperation in this matter.

Very Truly Yours,

DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

Joanne M. Denison

PS–I think it is just easier for you to get the PDF files by email, but you said I could not email you anything yet on this case so I am faxing it to be sure I have a return receipt.

PPS–if you are doing a lot of paper faxing, I have found efax.com where you just get PDF files in your email is much better for longer faxes and I get people to use that.  And I don’t have to worry about anything sitting unattended on the fax machine.

Cc: Ken Ditkowsky, via email

More (Scarier) thoughts for today on reading the one sided, Gloria bashing Probate Court Record

Dear Readers;

This post started out as an amendment to the prior one today, but ooooh, reading that file and seeing how awful it was towards Gloria, got me going……….and you don’t want to get me going.

Even scarier are emails from the GAL’s in the Probate file that Gloria sent to the court where GAL Adam Stern incredulously write Gloria and tells her that her home (the Brown home) is a drain on her mother’s estate and so is the white one (Mary G’s home she lived in since the 1950’s) and must be sold.  He then accuses her of being bipolar, mentally ill, etc.–an Illinois licensed attorney admits to that–without cause or justification in the record.  There is no such diagnosis in the record.  I will readily admit Gloria’s eccentric, but then, arent’ we all in some way or another?  And she doesn’t go around suing people and interfering with other people’s families to churn fees–like certain other GAL’s we know, now does she?

Who appointed this guy Goddess that he can interlope in this family and sell both houses so he and CF can get fees, transfer Mary G to Carolyn’s home so Carolyn can sell the homes and put the money in a trust Carolyn benefits from, when prior to this Gloria took care of her mother and the mortgages on both homes?  Maybe AS and CF don’t like the way Gloria spends her money, maybe they don’t like the way Gloria wants to keep her mom at home until Mom dies and pay on two mortgages, but frankly, it’s none of their fudge making business. (See emails in 2-15-11 Probate file (No. 2), p. 10 where AS tells Gloria what to do and where to go.  The guy is clearly an out of control meglomaniac–and he puts it in writing)*  AS tells Gloria that both homes must be sold because “they’re a drain on the estate” while at the same time there are videos on the internet showing Mary is clear thinking and wants to live in her home until she passes and have Gloria  care for her and her daughters are to split everything on her death. (See Vimeo links on home page).

Again, between Jan of 2009, Mary passed her written driver’s license test, her eyes and ears were examined, she knew how to take directions and look in the eye test.  She passes a test many teens can’t pass today.  Then she walks to her bank several times per week, discovers that the plenary guardian took out $4,000 without authorization, goes to a lawyer, gets a Protective Order Petition going–talk to the paralegals there, writes her own checks, walks to and from her favorite doctor, Dr. Patel, 4 blocks away when she wants, visits the Fire House next door and everyone knows and loves her there.

Aren’t CF and AS embarrassed by all this?  Aren’t the judges reading this blog and aren’t they embarrassed by all this?  Now over a year of Probate Court file pleadings have been published on a blog on the internet.  That’s embarrassing to anyone with half a brain.

I already have 16 court transcripts and they are scary too.  Railroaded into a Guardianship, not permitted to speak in court, isolated in a remote suburb she doesn’t want to live in.  Who is in control of this?  We live in an area with a State Constitution and a US Constitution granting every citizen due process, rights to appear in court, the right to independent counsel, etc.

I will publish and fax the 16 transcripts to Lea Black tomorrow at the ARDC.

She needs all the facts.  These are very, very scary facts.

JoAnne Denison

 

*PS–note while I called AS an “out of control” maniac, this is a blog.  It’s purpose is to primarily entertain.  I do NOT do this in my pleadings or communications to and from my clients.  Turns out Neil Steinberg is an atty and he is pretty inflammatory in his columns, but this is entertainment and nothing more.  AS is free to respond by posting a comment and calling me a %^&*( and I will reply and thank him).  Because some %^&*( **clearly has to kick him in the butt for what he’s doing to Gloria, Mary and this family. Disgusting.

Copy of Fax to Lea Black Re: TRANSMISSION OF Probate Court File–Mar 2011 to Dec 2011

First of all, the links to the documents where everyone can see the case on Google Docts (Gddss bless Google Docts!)

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwRnlBTGUyWjVwSE0

If link breaks:    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwRnlBTGUyWjVwSE0

File No. 2 (cut and paste)

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwVUNnMEs1M1RFSHc

File No. 3 (cut and paste)

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwMFBEYmJCVmJrSlk

File No. 4 (cut and paste)

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwYUpSekZ4TkZocjg

Dear Readers:

As you are aware, I have promised to publish the court records and transcripts (not all hearings were transcribed) and get these to the ARDC so that they can see how the Probate Court has consistently ignored Gloria’s pleas for justice and relief.  Other than Carolyn, the plenary guardian, the rest of the Sykes family is not in disagreement on the issues in this case. Mary G’s sisters, other close family and friends all believe Gloria was doing an admirable job taking care of her mom for 10+ years.  But the Probate Court does not like that. How can AS and CF then churn fees when the family is happy? How can Carolyn do a money grab for Mary G’s bank accounts and the cash and gold coins at the home? Gloria was supporting her mother and keeping her in her home, well fed, well dressed.  Mary G walked to the bank several times per week and even walked 4 blocks to see her favorite doctor, Dr. Patel,who was keeping her in excellent health at age 90.  She passed her driver’s exam in Jan of 2009– six months before she was declared “incompetent” by Dr. Motckya.  There are videos on the internet that show this “incompetent” woman knows what she wants? Now she is 93.

Isn’t this the least bit scary to any of you that an estranged relative can barge into your life, loot your million dollar nest egg, wire the court and gain control when six months before it is undisputed you walked to and from your doctor and bank, you wrote checks–you even passed a written driver’s exam?

See the fax below.  Amazingly not all of it went thru because someone kept “answering the phone”. Since Lea Black at the ARDC won’t let me email these files, I have to fax them.

There’s about 400 pages of court docts so far on the court’s imaging system.  There’s about a carton of docts in the file. Although, I think I generated about 3 reams myself when I was involved with the case, and I plan on getting those docts to LB too.

Let’s see what happens.  I have no idea how the ARDC can make an informed decision on this case if LB doesn’t have the Probate file, entire transcripts (I have about 16 and there are more coming).

JoAnne Marie

Now for the Fax to Lea Black an atty at the ARDC

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To:
ARDC
Attn:Lea Black
Fax 312-565-2320    From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison, Pat.      Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com  or http://www.DenisonLaw.com
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Marianne Buckley, Associate, Of Counsel
Troy Sieburg, Associate, Of Counsel
Important Notice
This facsimilie message contains attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, collect, and return the original message to the above address.  You will be reimbursed.  Your cooperation is immensely appreciated.
For transmission problems, please call 312-335-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – ( 2 + 4 PDF files to come  )
May 8, 2012

Re: JoAnne M. Denison ,  In relation to Cynthia Farenga’s Complaint AND
Kenneth Ditkowsky, the Sykes Probate matter
PLUS my request to open an investigation against Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmeidel, Adam Stern, Harvey Waller
TRANSMISSION OF PROBATE FILE MAR 2011 TO DEC 2011

Dear Ms. Black;

Without waiving my representation by Mr. Ditkowsky, who is aware of this communication, attached is are portions of the Probate File which have been imaged.  You should already have the following documents via fax for the above files:
1.  Table of Torts for April 2012, which I will periodically update.
2.  Probate file (imaged portion) Dec 1 2011 to April 1 2012 which contains the improper behavior of Peter Schmeidel, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga which has occurred in Probate Court.  It supplements the “table of torts” which serve as a basis of complaints against these individuals.
3.  Probate file (imaged portion) Mar 2011 to Nov 2011, faxed May 8, 2012.

If you lose or misplace any of the above, these can be easily located at http://www.MaryGSykes.com.  While I do not think 99% of ARDC complaints need to or ought to be made public, I am 100% sure that Probate Case No. 2009 P 4585 involving AS, CF, PS and HW is so filled with grave injustices against Mary G and Gloria, the entire matter MUST and OUGHT to be published.

Unless and until I have heard that this has been accomplished, I will work on getting the feds involved, or the court corruption attorney prosecutors located at 219 S. Dearborn in Chicago.  I had to do this once before in Probate and once I shipped over a packet of info, the craziness in court all of a sudden stopped.  I guess a phone call was made.  That was a great story I will save for another day.

Thank you for your consideration and prompt cooperation in this matter.

Very Truly Yours,

DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

Joanne M. Denison

PS–I think it is just easier for you to get the PDF files by email, but you said I could not email you anything yet on this case so I am faxing it to be sure I have a return receipt.

PPS–if you are doing a lot of paper faxing, I have found efax.com where you just get PDF files in your email is much better for longer faxes and I get people to use that.  And I don’t have to worry about anything sitting unattended on the fax machine.

Cc: Ken Ditkowsky, via email

Okay and here’s someting funny.  I faxed LB about 200 pages and they started picking up the phone at the ARDC to stop the fax!  LB told me she does not do emails regarding complaints, but in order to make a fully informed decision, she should have the entire probate file, all the transcripts, etc. — one would think!  I know as an atty if I got involved in all of this,  would want that and demand it before making a decision. But then they pick up the phone at the ARDC to stop your fax and they say “no emails.”

Do they really want all the truth?  I’ll check it out later today, see if LB calls about all the docts and let you all know.

Take care, and peace and blessing and justice to you all today

JoAnne Marie D.

Re: How can a person who in 2009 passes a test administrated by the Illinois Secretary of State have Dementia?

From Ken Ditkowsky–an Illinois LIcensed attorney
The United States Constitution – you know that radical document that periodically a few thousand Americas give up their lives for – is an absolute.   It guarantees that a citizen will not have his/her liberty, property, or civil rights taken from him/her without due process of law.   The standard of due process is no very high, but it is still in full force and effect.     Society recognizes that subterfuges such as the Soviet Gulags are readily available and therefore we have such requirements as the Sodini  notices  and other protections.    One of the other protections is the Guardian ad Litem.   He/she is a fiduciary and is to be the eyes and ears of the court – not an advocate for the plenary guardian or the corruption of the courts.    I am using the words in the disjunctive sense.    A GAL investigation is made to ascertain if the person is indeed incompetent as a matter of law.   Part of that investigation is for the GAL to ferret out the facts.   There is no affirmative duty on the part of the children to spoon feed the GAL or to even be helpful.    It is my opinion that in the case of Ms. Farenga and Mr. Stern they had an agenda and if Gloria gave them the information – which I believe she did – they only reported the information that suited that agenda.   (This has been born out by their refusal to join in the call for a full investigation and their attempts to prevent me from writing e-mails such as this one pursuant to my First Amendment Rights)
In Illinois the mechanisms are in place to protect senior citizens from the loss of property, liberty, and human rights that Mary Sykes and others similarly situated suffer and are suffering.     (Talk to Tyler family, or the Coopers – they will give you an earful – Stern has inserted himself in Tyler).     The most important protection that senior citizens have is the FIRST AMENDMENT.    Unfortunately it is under attack in the ARDC proceedings against me.     I understand that Nationwide I am not alone.     Without the protection of the First Amendment we are right back in Germany in the year 1936 or Soviet Russia shortly after the overthrow of the K government following WW 1.
The Blogs are the ‘resistance’ to the attempt to abrogate the First Amendment.     Let me make this clear, except as a citizen of the United STates of America I have no financial stake in whether or not Mary was competent, incompetent, or something in between at any point in time.    Similarly the persons who operate the ‘blogs’ and have put forth strong statements of protest as to the wrongful forfeiture of Mary Sykes’ liberty, property, and human rights all do so as citizens interested in the simple principles that are embodied in the Bill of Rights and Article One of the Illinois Constitution.
You asked the question:  ‘smoking gun’  or ‘smoke screen?’    Lets find out!     Call on Law enforcement to demand a full and complete investigation of all the issues of Sykes.     Then start on  Tyler, Cooper (Gore), Bush and all the others in which family and friends of an alleged disabled person are aggrieved.   America cannot afford in 2012 reliving the horror of Germany that  became evident in 1936.    Democracy is not a spectator sport!   Read the ARDC complaint that was filed against me!
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Information on where to Complain regarding the Sykes Case

From: GLD <gailwinds2hi@yahoo.com>
To: ‘kenneth ditkowsky’ <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com>; ‘probate sharks’ <verenusl@gmail.com>; ‘GLORIA Jean SYKES’ <gloami@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2012 9:50 PM
Subject: Illinois Guardianship and Advocacy Commission

Created in 1979, the Illinois Guardianship and Advocacy Commission protects the rights and promotes the welfare of persons with disabilities.  A board of eleven Commissioners, who serve without compensation, govern the agency. The Commission is an executive state agency created to safeguard the rights of persons with disabilities. By providing legal representation, investigating complaints of rights violations and providing state guardianship for Illinois’ population with disabilities, the Commission has given voice to those who have previously gone unheard.

Three program Divisions in nine regions throughout the State carry out the responsibilities of the Commission:

       Office of State Guardian (OSG) : Appointed by the courts as a guardian of last resort, the OSG provides case services and money management to more than 5,400 persons with disabilities.

       Legal Advocacy Service (LAS) : LAS represents persons with disabilities at commitment hearings and makes counsel available to enforce the rights of those with disabilities under the Illinois Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Code and other related laws.

       Human Rights Authority (HRA) : With the assistance of a team of volunteers, the HRA conducts investigations of alleged rights violations by providers against people with disabilities.  Additionally, this program area works closely with providers to help resolve rights issues

Highlights

http://gac.state.il.us/images/bd_tabtriangle_section.gif
The Human Rights Authority exists to conduct investigations of complaints of violations of the rights of persons with disabilities. Based on early models of a singular regional grassroots program, the Human Rights Authority serves as a statewide framework providing direction and standards for a largely volunteer effort.

From Gloria Sykes, her thoughts and feelings and one question about a Driver’s License exam for Mary G?

Dear Readers;

This is really what makes a blog special and what we all want to read, and that it the personal thoughts and feeling of those that are going through these terrible courtroom travesties of justice.

Just how do people handle all of this?  Gloria hasn’t seen, touched or talked to her mother for a year now–its’ the worst form of  emotional abuse to a senior.  Gloria and her mother were very close for the 10 + prior years Carolyn ripped Mary G out of her home and neighborhood since the 1950’s and has isolated her in the remote suburb of Naperville. Don’t get me wrong, but suburbs are most useful if you can drive.  And Carolyn is isolating Mary.

And that brings up another question (I gotta publish this one)–Gloria tells me that her mother had passed the driver’s exam in 2009!  Her test wasn’t perfect, but SHE PASSED!  That was in summer, so how is it at the same time some hack PsychD is saying she is incompetent!  Huh?  That’s what I want to know.  She can pass a driver’s test, road exam and written test, but some hack says she is incompetent?  Someone wants to invalidate Mary G’s legal documents from August 2008?  That’s outside the statute of limitations for “Relief from Judgment” or to defeat a properly entered judgment. Why do they think they can do that.  And Gloria tells me that in 2009 Mary was driving.  To the Grocer’s and around the neighborhood.  In fact, it turns out that because Mary G didn’t like to drive Gloria’s car (too big), she was borrowing a neighbor’s car!  Obviously the neighbor thought Mary G was competent enough to drive.

What are they basing this alleged incompetency judgment on, exactly?  Who in their right mind would do such a thing?

The videos, the pages of handwriting, now the driver’s license test–who does this?

More disgusting facts, more apologies to Gloria.

JoAnne

Now for words from Gloria:

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN,


I can’t help but believe that God is watching us from above every time we sit on the toilet.  I also believe God watches specialty events, occasionally guiding tennis balls to hit the edges of the white lines on the courts, basketballs off the backboards into the hoops, and baseballs over the walls for home-runs.  God knows when people are dishonest and revengeful just like Santa knows which children are naught and which ones are nice.  I think all people live “Under God” a deity peering down on us just like the manager at Walmart atop the customer service desk.  That said, I have a keep sense of right and wrong: a strong personal and professional integrity that was taught to me by my mother and father.  “Reach for the starts,” my parents told me, “and if you fall short, look how far you’ve gone!”. So you’ll have to excuse me when I say that the last few years have been a nightmare, a reality no man, woman or child should have to face in the real world.  And so, when I tell the facts of the ‘horror story’ it is not unusual for people of authority to say, “you’re nuts’ and “that can’t happen [in America]”.  One only needs to read the 12 or so verified court records that include transcripts, currently on file with the Cook County Clerk’s office/Probate Division and there’s no doubt in my mind that the repeated comment in response “you’re nuts” or “that can’t happen [in America] will be changed to “Oh my God!”

Indeed, Oh My God!  But as God has nothing to do with the actions of dishonest, vindictive, greedy people, this reality my mother and I and thousands of “American’s” face every day.  The media is filled with stories of people shows selfishness and personal agendas are now infamous.  They work at such places as ENRON, Arthur Anderson, WorldCom, even the Roman Catholic Church: they’ve betrayed the trust of stockholders, citizens, children and the faithful — making our Democracy, our Economy, and our religious institutions less trustworthy in  the process.

These particular stories have faded from the front page, but the story of Corporate Greed and selfishness will be in the news forever.  The problem we have is that our Judicial is so well insulated, protected, that the “media’ has been silent, until now!  Still, it’s drama is perennial and its social costs immense.  The poet Rumi said it with reckless candor 800 years ago, “If you are here unfaithfully with us your are causing terrible damage”.  

What my Mother and I, and thousands of other ‘victims’ of Court sanctioned abuses and financial exploitations of the elderly and disabled have experienced is not a failure of legal ethics on the part of our Judicial and the attorneys appointed by the Courts: it’s a failure of human holiness.  Doctors who are dismissive of patients, politicians who lie to voters, attorney’s who intentionally “LIE” to the Judges and themselves and rob the elderly and disabled of their Golden Years and lives, and clergy who rob children of their well-being and  childhoods!  These people, men and women like attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Cynthia Farenga, and Adam Stern, for the most part do not lack ethical knowledge or convictions: they give speeches and seminars on financial exploitation and ethical issues and more than likely believe their own words. But they have a well rehearsed habit of holding their own knowledge and beliefs at great remove from the LIVING of their lives. 

Over the past three years the THREE attorneys listed above, have not only destroyed my livelihood and stolen my homestead and assets, but they have intentionally taken from me my Mother who is also my best friend: they have willfully destroyed my Mother’s life and the lives of all people mother loves and trusts for their own financial gain.  I am not ‘nuts’ or as the THREE want you to believe every adult child or loved one who stands up to the Probate Courts and attorneys are collectively, ‘bi-polar and mentally ill’.  No, hell no!  I made a promise to my mother that I will save my Mother’s life and bring her home to the community where she thrived for over 50 years, to the unrestricted and unsupervised life she once had filled with the freedoms to speak to and visit with whomever she pleased, to spend her money how she wants, and to have access to and the right to retain an attorney of her choice and sue the the people who have done her harm!  What I’ve learned about myself is awesome, if I may say so myself.  I’ve learned about friendship and the meaning of friendship: I’ve learned about love and the powers behind true love; and I’ve learned that the selfish, hateful, divided lives of many the officers of the probate courts across America – and particularly in Cook County Chicago, is pathological, so it always gives rise to symptoms — and if we acknowledge the symptoms, we may be able to treat the cancer — the DIS-EASE!  When people error, they lie and then they coverup and hurt the innocents: the cover-up is always worse than the initial crime.   Only when we are able to see it, can we believe it and once we believe that what most find impossible is possible, we start to un-numb ourselves and find the courage to prevail. If we continue to let people like Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, and Peter Schmiedel (including other attorneys from Fischel & Kahn) continue to manipulate the system, our judicial, bend the rules and live above the laws,  there is no hope. But if we believe, as I do, that we’re people “Under God”, then we have the angles on our side.  Personally, I’d rather have God and the Angels on my side than any of the political elite running the show in the Sykes case.  Now I say, “Dear God, thank you for giving me the courage, health and strength to right these wrongs and save my life and in doing so, save my mother’s life” rather than “Oh my God”.  I’m still reaching for the stars!  What makes this journey, this challenge even more accomplishable is that I’m not alone: thousands of us stand hand in hand and will prevail, together because we know right from wrong, good from bad, and heck, we know God is watching us from above… even as we sit on the toilet!  

(As I wrote my Chapter 11 plan and disclosure statement, I find myself missing my mother more and more. It’s been over one year since I last touched her, heard her voice, felt her unconditional love, knew she was okay.  And so I wrote this note as a way for me to cope and move forward, as getting on with live is better than getting by with life… please cross post.)
Gloria Jean Sykes 
Bon Ami Productions, Inc. 

773.910-3310(cell)
773.631-9262 (fax and office line)

Fax to Lea Black at the Ill. ARDC

Dear Readers;

click here https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwV2xuUnNtVXhDWkE

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwV2xuUnNtVXhDWkE

On Friday, my assistant Julia was able to get to the imaging dept in Probate and obtain a copy of the Probate files from Dec 1, 2011 to yesterday or April 27, 2012.

Attached is what she found.  Amazingly over six (6) months what was found is a clear pattern to exclude, snub, snob and ignore any pleading that Gloria filed, while on the otherhand, anything offered either orally or by mere hint of suggestion by the tortfeasors (GAL’s Adam Stern-AS, Cynthia Farenga-CF, the plenary guardian’s attorney Peter Schmeidel and company – PS) was grated without findings, no hearing, no discussion, and often without any written Motion or Notice of Motion–a situation prohibited by Local Rule 2.1 which says all Motions must be in writing  and the movant must provide proper notice to adverse parties.

Isn’t this the classic case of corruption?  Blagogevich was convicted because he merely hinted at “selling” a senator’s seat, when in reality it was to feather his political campaign fund–something the US Supreme Court in January 2011 said was perfectly fine.

The judge in the Probate Court declared in August of 2011 she did not have to follow court rules or Illinois Statutes pertaining to Civil Procedure in Court–she was exempt. Then she grants this privilege to the court officer miscreants–and now it is clear for the world to see this is a continuing pattern, ala Dorothy Brown who has finally provided some meager form of computerization to the Circuit Courts.

Why aren’t the Circuit Courts of Cook County computerized when the federal courts have been computerized since 200? 1) a thousand incompetent and computer illiterate patronage workers would have to be fired in a single day (although Dorothy Brown COULD keep them on as historical imagers pushing papers thru scanners, that’s what I would do until they died or passed over to the eternal world of civil servant); and 2) politically connected judges and their puppet attorneys (the GAL’s) would be exposed for what they are:  money grubbing, family strife churning leeches that create nothing but pain and misery in a family while swiping free parking money out of a well funded estate.

Here is a sublime expression of what ignoring corruption and feathering the campaign bed leads to.

Have a good read.  More to come.

JoAnne

The interesting, creepy and twisted status of the Mary G Sykes dilemma–now entangled in Probate, BK and Federal District Court

From Ken Ditkowsky:

The worm has turned.   They miscalculated with the ARDC complaint.  First JoAnne reacted by allowing me to defend her.   That meant that both of us were going to be co-ordinated.   This also meant that the pressure that would normally be delivered was obviated and when Black contacted JoAnne directly – a clear ethical violation – she had to be on the defensive.   Her response to my fax of protestation was clear backpedaling and mumbling at its best.

A second series of miscalculations occurred when they did not carry through on my challenge to allow an independent investigation.    If they were innocent had nothing to hide, why not clear the air with an investigation.

A third series of miscalculations was the idea that Gloria would fold her tent when she ran into adversity in the Forcible Entry and Detainer court and in the Bankruptcy Court.    The ADA complaint they viewed as a bump in the road that they would bull doze out of the way, and the Chapter 11 was duck soup as most attorneys cannot put together a plan.   Instead, Gloria came in there screaming about CT taking her intellectual property, the Sodini notices, etc.    Worse yet, Gloria learned well how to mumble about the Statute of Uses!    Where the hell had you come up with that bit!   Indeed, the Statute of Uses (naked trust) voided Carolyn’s status!    Would a judge know what that was all about?   If they tried to push the sale of the house, the title company certainly would.   The miscreants cannot be certain about delivery of clean title–let alone delivery of any title at all.    It is better to wait until Mary dies and then get a probate court order directing the executor (Carolyn) to sell the house.   But Carolyn not being appointed Executrix is not assured either, with all the tampering of the Probate Estate, the outstanding issues of her defending two Protective Order, etc.

As to the partition lawsuit, Schmiedel over played his hand.   The Chase foreclosure could be tied up for years in the Courts.   He cannot get all the necessary parties together in the same court.   Stuart can poster, but she cannot move the foreclosure action.    Gloria’s house cannot be sold without clearing the title of the Chase loan, and that cannot be cleared without addressing Gloria’s claims against Chase.   They are not going away.

Further hanging over their heads is the fact that they really did not serve the Sodini notices and thus the Court has no jurisdiction.    Every time you file something you mention that fact and the judge is aware that she is walking on very dangerous ground.   In my opinion criminal statutes have been violated.

If you could get an article published on the Sykes case and tie a neat package all hell will break!  The Tyler case and the Sykes case cannot stand the light of day.   Nine million dollars is unaccounted for in the two cases.   The IRS could bring a Federal RICO case against several judges, several guardian ad litem, and several guardians.   The criminal enterprise would be the probate court.

No I cannot bring it – a civil RICO will not fly, but the Justice Department’s action would fly.   Justice could give Stuart immunity and scrape goat Farenga, Stern, Schmiedel, Solo, and Connors.   LB might be icing on the cake.   She certainly knows that the ARDC complaint against me is bogus!  At this point in time, she certainly has the message that I am not frightened by naked intimidation and did nothing wrong except insist on my First Amendment Rights to the detriment of such ‘august’ persons as Farenga, Stern and Schmiedel.

The objection that Gloria filed this evening reiterates the fact that there is no jurisdiction and continuing on is dangerous business.   Gloria Sykes is not going away!   Indeed, if the media stop being cowed and take up the cause of the angels a whole new religion is going to be established over the bodies of Stern, Farenga, Schmiedel and Solo.    (Solo, Stern and Farenga are perfect villains – they look the part!  – central casting could not have come up with better casting!)

Gloria – quite honestly I do not know why I cared, but I felt sorry for Farenga and Stern.   I remember Stern from my youth.   He was the little boy that everyone picked on.   Farenga is the female version of Stern.   When I say everyone picked on him, I mean even the faculty!   As a youth I little sympathy for the Sterns of this world and they were safe from me as long as they left me alone.   I guess I feel guilty that I did not stick up for the Zloob!   However, I gave them both the opportunity to ‘help Mary’ and win my favor, but they turned me down.    Too bad!

Ken Ditkowsky
http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Ken Ditkowsky, esq. continues to find parallels to other cases…

Parallels
What is most disturbing is the fact that in relation to the Elder Abuse/Financial Exploitation cases history keeps repeating itself.  
The facts that are related to me indicate that the Tyler case and the Sykes case have many of the same facts.    It also appears that there are similarities to the Gore case.       The nursing home cabal raises its ugly head in these cases and too many of the same actors are on the scene.   It may be coincidence but [2 entities]  are frequently mentioned whenever someone in one of these cases claims mischief is afoot!      [One entity] also has a way of getting a mention.     One of the ‘cabal’s’ enterprises similarly is heavily involved.
All of this might just be coincidence, but I do not believe in coincidence.    When I was talking to the Marys’ the MO was amazingly similar to that we discovered in Sykes and the protection provided the Court appointed attorneys was amazing.     Indeed, even though Ms. Tyler started out with an expensive condo (Lake Point Tower) and about $8,000,000 in assets family members who complained as to the fact that the assets were not inventoried were demonized.       In Sykes the value of the Estate was about a million dollars and the value of real estate and Gloria was demonized – but the inventory was more secret than our Nation’s secrets.     
Isolation of the senior was a prime weapon in the arsenal of the abuser/exploiter.      Drugs were administered in both Sykes and Tyler and a vital and active senior was reduced to ruin.      Family members complained to law enforcement, the judiciary, and even the [agency] with no success.     Fiduciary relationships (guardian/ward) were honored by naked words and no action whatsoever.   
The pattern is repeated over and over again without regard to location.     No one seems to care, except the miscreants and their co-conspirators.     Anyone who steps up and acts uppity such as yours truly and the Marys’ and Gloria etc.  has to deal with sanctions.    The Marys’ were charged with criminal contempt for protesting.   Yes, they were ordered not to file anything with prior permission and did, but I believe that Near vs. Minn   (Supreme Court) is still the law and prior restraints on the First Amendment Right are prohibited.     The lack of jurisdiction did not stop my being hit with a $5000 sanction.    When the Appellate Court reversed because of the lack of jurisdiction, the [agency] filed a complaint against me.    Not only does the complaint make unwarranted conclusions, but, the Administrator admits to not having sufficient information to admit or deny the facts upon which the conclusions were based.   As to Gloria Sykes every concept of fair play and Constitutional protect has been abrogated.   
I have renewed my plea to law enforcement to make an independent investigation and in this regard I have written to Senator Kirk, Attorney General Holder,  the States attorney, the Sheriff and others.    I noted that political elite wax eloquent as to protecting grandmother’s social security, but are very silent when it comes to protecting Grandmother’s property and liberty.     It is respectfully submitted that the few pennies that grandmother is paid in social security pales when grandma’s liberty, property, and civil rights are forfeit.    How do our political leaders sleep at night?     By their inaction and inertia they are a major part of the problem.
It may sound like a broken record, but I do not see Governor Quinn, or President Obama urging the tax authorities to aggressively and diligently audit the guardians who refuse to inventory millions of dollars of senior assets.     The taxes, interest, and penalties to be collected in the Sykes case easily at this point in time are in excess of a million dollars.    In the Tyler estate are in excess of eight million dollars.      If the guardians (including the GALs) suffered a benefit they should also pay the taxes.     Are these people immune from tax collection because they are sharing the ‘wealth?’      This scam is a more sophisticated form of ‘greylord!’      
I offered the Sykes [entities] the opportunity to join with me in asking for an independent investigation of the allegations made by the friends, neighbors, and family of Mary Sykes.    I said, if you have nothing to hide – join in the call.    The silence is deafening.       The admission of wrongdoing is easily determined by the failure of these fiduciaries to join in the call for transparency and an independent investigation of the charges made.        The admission of wrongdoing is easily determined by the fact that the ‘safe harbor’ letters and calls to an investigation have been greeted by [agency] complaints.   
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

From JoAnne Denison;

As an update, I have been alerted to another case, this one in Mass. where an attorney held a POA for her father and was moving money to pay his household expenses.  AT Mellon Bank NY, the banker was giving her a hard time about paperwork, when she casually mentioned that if excessive paperwork were going to be a problem she could just move the accounts elsewhere (value $9 million).  Her father was an attorney and had clearly granted her POA and daughter intended to allow dad to stay at home until he died.  She was taking excellent care of him and often stayed over and involved him completely in her lives and the lives of his grandchildren, whom he adored.

Next thing she knew, his CPA went to court, had him declared incompetent, attained guardianship–all in a deal to keep $9 million at Mellon Bank in NY!  Yikes.  The guardian refused to allow the two daughters to see dad freely and started immediately to isolate dad from friends and family and they started drugging him with seroquel and risperdol–two dangerous psychotropic drugs used only on the most violently ill mental patients.  As in the Sykes case, currently the GAL is adding other attorneys to the case to outlawyer the daughter and churn the feeding freenzy–all with court connected lawyers.

Guardian claims dad gets angry and violent–but it turns out that happens only when they force him to stay at a local crappy nursing home when he is “too sick” to care for at home OR when he wants to call or visit his two daughters.  The guardian obtained a court order that neither daughter can see or talk to dad!  That means no children contact and no grandchild contact.  Words defy me as to that one.  Is the isolation from all your children and grandchildren the height of cruelty and indignation for a senior–and a lawyer grandfather who carefully planned and drew up countless documents and trusts to avoid just that?

We plan on starting a blog for this one too, so if greedy miscreants are reading this, more and more of these cases will be published here and elsewhere on the internet AND BY ATTORNEYS.  Lawyers that ask questions. Lawyers that are disgusted by greedy, thieving, cruel behavior which should only be found in those types of prisoners beat to death by other inmates for thieving from grandma and grandpa.

If this is your modus operandi, rest assured that I am being contacted by other (honest) lawyers in other states about starting blogs to stop this highly under reported yet extremely lucrative thieving that is continually destroying families.

JoAnne Denison

From Ken Ditkowsky–a Response to the [agency]

Motion to Deem Request to admit admitted\
Now comes the Respondent Kenneth Ditkowsky and states as follows:
Prefatory statement
                Supreme Court Rule 216[1] is intended to separate the wheat from the shaft and require the petitioner to Admit facts that should not be contested;
Rule 216 provides that “[a] party may serve on any other party a written request for the admission by the latter of the truth of any *125 specified relevant fact set forth in the request.” 134 Ill.2d R. 216(a). The necessity and reasonableness of the medical services a plaintiff received to treat her injuries and the reasonable cost of those medical services are facts that are proper subjects for a Rule 216 request to admit. Szczeblewski v. Gossett, 342 Ill.App.3d 344, 348, 277 Ill.Dec. 1, 795 N.E.2d 368, 371 (2003). Rule 216 provides:
“Admission in the Absence of Denial. Each of the matters of fact and the genuineness of each document of which admission is requested is admitted unless, within 28 days after service thereof, the party to whom the request is directed serves upon the party requesting the admission * * * a sworn statement denying specifically the matters of which admission is requested or setting forth in detail the reasons why he cannot truthfully admit or deny those matters.” 134 Ill.2d R. 216(c).
24 The statute was not designed to shift the burden of proof on to a defendant but rather to save the time and expense of litigation by eliminating the necessity of proof regarding facts within the knowledge ***610 **151 of the party upon whom the request is made. Szczeblewski, 342 Ill.App.3d at 349, 277 Ill.Dec. 1, 795 N.E.2d at 371. To that end, Rule 216 provides that “a party has a good-faith obligation to make a reasonable effort to secure answers to requests to admit from persons or documents within the responding party’s reasonable control,” including from the party’s attorney and insurance company investigators or representatives. Szczeblewski, 342 Ill.App.3d at 349, 277 Ill.Dec. 1, 795 N.E.2d at 372. However, Rule 216 also provides that a responding party may, in lieu of answering all or part of the request, serve “written objections on the ground that some or all of the requested admissions are privileged or irrelevant or that the request is otherwise improper.” 134 Ill.2d R. 216(c); Brookbank v. Olson, 389 Ill.App.3d 683, 688, 329 Ill.Dec. 835, 907 N.E.2d 426, 430 (2009). If the proper framework of Rule 216 is not followed, an incontrovertible judicial admission results and the fact is withdrawn from contention. Brookbank, 389 Ill.App.3d at 687, 329 Ill.Dec. 835, 907 N.E.2d at 429–430.
Oelze v. Score Sports Venture, LLC, 401 Ill. App. 3d 110, 124-25, 927 N.E.2d 137, 150-51 appeal denied, 237 Ill. 2d 561, 938 N.E.2d 522 (2010)
Discussion
                The proceedings herein are not the usual litigation, but are proceedings in which a professional reputation is being defamed, and the Administrator has taken communications out of context and drawn conclusions that are not warranted.       The respondent is not a voluntary party or an attorney in any of the litigation from which these matters arise, however, as a citizen of the State of Illinois and the United States of America he has profound interest.    A senior citizen has been illegally deprived of her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights.     Persons who have protested what appear to be extra-judicial actions occurring in the Courts also have been deprived of the liberty, property, and civil rights including the rights guaranteed by the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution of 1970.
It is respectfully suggested that the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission is held to a higher standard as professionalism than the ‘run of the mill’ lawyer.   This fact is recognized by the fact that the Administrator must prove his claim by clear and convincing evidence.      Thus, responses such as:
Response:   The Administrator does not have sufficient information to admit or deny the purported fact contained in Request number 1 as the Administrator was not; present in court on August 31, 2009.  (Page 3 Administrator’s response to Respondent’s 3d Wave Request to Admit)
Response:   The Administrator objects to the term recruited.   Respondent is attempting to show that the Court and the Guardian ad litem engaged in “doctor shopping”    This is a disputed fact and in not the appropriate subject of a request to admit facts.   The Administrator admits the Dr. Amdur signed a CCP 211.  (page 3 and continued on page 2 of Administrator’s response to Respondent’s 3rd Wave Request to Admit)
“Response:  The administrator has insufficient evidence to admit or deny the purported facts contained in request number 6”     (page 2 Administrator’s response to Respondent’s 3rd Wave Request to Admit)
Is inappropriate and must be deemed admitted.       The Administrator’s responses to the Requests to Admit are replete with similar evidences of the Administrator no complying with the criterion established by the Supreme Court of Illinois to avoid forcing a litigant to prove facts that in all honesty and candor should be admitted.
                The Administrator after essentially disclosing that little, if any, investigation required by Rule 137 was done prior to filing the disciplinary complaint herein was been served with four sets of Request to Admit, each set having less than 30 Requests of parts thereof.     Each of the Request to Admit refers to an essential fact that should have been thoroughly investigated.     For instance, Matter of Sodini, 172 Ill. App. 3d 1055, 527 N.E.2d 530 (1988)   requires for the Probate Court to obtain jurisdiction that notices be served on the close relatives of Mary Sykes.       If as the respondent contends the Sodini notices were not served, this complaint must be dismissed.       Good faith requires that the Administrator either admit or deny the fact.     The criterion set out to protect people like Mary Sykes is very simple.    List in your petition the close relatives and serve them a notice 14 days before the competency hearing.      If the Sodini notices are not provided there is no jurisdiction to appoint plenary guardians, etc.[i] .
                Complaints that aver that a party has acted inappropriately become an Oxymoron when a second set of rules apply for the Administrator and the respondent.    Herein, as an example, the Attorney representing the Administrator listed in the Administrator’s schedule of witnesses a witness, JoAnne Denison.   The e-mail that was sent to Ms. Denison was requested to be admitted.      In paragraph 15 on page 6 of the 2nd Wave Responses the Administrator responded.
“Objection.  The Administrator moves to strike Request number 15/exhibit) as irrelevant to this proceeding as it relates to a separate confidential matter.    Without waiving the objection that Administrator does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the genuineness of the e-mail but denies the facts therein.”
Indeed!    The Administrator in alleged ‘good faith’ and ‘candor’  represents that he does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the genuiness of an e-mail sent from the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission offices by the very attorney who signed the responses to the Request to Admit.
                The respondent and others have alleged that their rights protected by the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment and the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution have been violated.    The respondent and others have alleged that their rights protected by Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution of 1970 have been violated.    The respondent and others have alleged that 735 ILCS 110 and 42 USCA 1983 are being ignored in this prosecution and in the matters involving Gloria Sykes and Mary Sykes.     When in a response to a Request to Admit a document can be filed that in reference to a an e-mail sent by the attorney representing the Administrator that said states:
“****Without waiving the objection that Administrator does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the genuineness of the e-mail but denies the facts therein”
There has been no candor in the responses, no good faith, and most seriously a double standard is being applied to the instant respondent’s rights by the Administrator.      The respondent therefore appeals to this hearing board to declare all the Requests to Admit admitted and enter judgment in favor of the respondent in these proceedings.
                The respondent has served four separate sets of interrogatories on the Administrator.     Rule 216,  like Rule 213 does not place any limitation on the number of sets of interrogatories and/or sets of Requests to Admit that can be served.     Each set is limited to 30 interrogatories including sub-parts.
Wherefore the respondent moves for the Requests to Admit that were not specifically denied to be deemed admitted.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kenneth Ditkowsky
Pro se,  Respondent
5940 W. Touhy Ave
Niles, Illinois 60714
847 600 3421

What’s the deal with the [agency] complaints taking sooooo long to be dismissed

Dear Readers;
One of the issues I have been struggling with is that the [agency] complaints against Ken and myself for simply running a blog about the Sykes case.  I just can’t figure that one out.
It’s clearly a blog, it’s clear neither Ken nor I represent Gloria or Mary, we’re just concerned.  I also have known Gloria, Carolyn, Fred, Mary G, Scott, Doris and other friends and family for years.  I don’t get that.  Ken was the family attorney, so why is Ken accused of lying about all of this?  If anyone should know about $1 million in gold coins and cash in the mattress, Ken would know.  I also checked directly with the friends and family and the gold coins and cash are well known.  No one is amused by the cash grab by the miscreants.  All the family–with the exception of the miscrants–agrees that Gloria was doing a great and loving job of taking care of her mother for 10+ years.
There’s little to dispute in this case–outside of the 18th floor, where the case suddenly enters the Twilight Zone with time, space and perception being dramatically warped into something bizarre, twisted and unreal.  And out of that twisted, warped court room media has flowed a story that is strangely not investigated at all by the [agency] prior to filing a public complaint against Ken Ditkowsky.
So here is his most interesting explanation below.
take care all,
JoAnne Denison
Now from Ken Ditkowsky:
My theory on why the [agency] complaints against us prosper is that fact that there is a great deal of money involved.   The value of the commodity goes down if there is a risk of disbarment.   Lets take an example.   A [entity] for being deaf and dumb and running cover for the [entity] is promised a fee of $100,000.00.   this 100,000 can be paid part in taxable currency (check and/or court award and part in under the table funds – or all in under the table funds) The under the table funds can be a discount on a vehicle, discount on real estate, some fungible, gold coins etc.
A referral fee of 1/3 is paid to the sponsor.   In Sykes [it may be] believe it is a political person who is receiving ‘nursing home dollars.’    In that case it would be a campaign contribution.   (Gloria unearth a bunch of campaign contributions to the person she suspects as being the ‘clout!’ – she has come to her conclusions from a different angle and would probably resist my analysis.)
If the political person receives campaign contributions he/she incurs no taxable income until she/he elects to pay the taxes on the funds.    As no one knows that our [entity] has received dollar one he is not going to tell anyone.   He has a windfall.    All that happens is the disabled person’s estate is reduced and no one is the wiser.
In the Sykes case about a million dollars is not inventoried.   Shut you up, me up, Gloria up and no one has to pay dollar one in Federal Income Taxes!    Let us go one step further.   Why do the [entities] fear an investigation.  A trained investigator is going to ask questions.   Questions lead to answers.   Answers lead to more questions and in the investigator is independent someone is going to have to account for about a million dollars of inventoried treasure trove.
The [entities] for the plenary guardian have filed numerous complaints with the [agency] concerning you and me.    Ask yourself why?   Ask yourself if the regulators are ‘pure!’    The GSA scandal of recent days should give a clue to the right answer!    Also ask yourself why my ‘safe harbour’ (settlement) e-mails were taken out of context and are the basis of the [entity] complaint against me filed by the [entity].   Why is unethical for me to offer the [entity] a release from the Civil Rights claim that I have against them in exchange for them just doing their jobs?   As you know I wrote the [entities] and suggested that if they had nothing to hide join and ask for an independent investigation!   We have a better chance of having the President appointing either one or us  Secretary of State
Of course the [entities], et al all might be pure, sweet and a virgin.   It might just be a coincidence that the [entity] complaints against us are given credence even in the face of massive evidence to the contrary and the complaints against the [entities] for the plenary guardian are just tossed!   As I said we have a right to differ and I will fight to the death to protect your right to disagree with me.
Do not fall down a rabbit hole!
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com