That is the conclusion I’ve come up with.     This is bigger than Greylord, bigger that Watergate, and worse than either one and a dozen scandals that you can pick at random.

Why is the media so frightened of it.   Even the Judge appears to be afraid of it.    This Gulag makes the soviet judicial system look much better than ours.   

Ken, since you were concerned that no one knows what a “gulag” is, I’ll explain it here.  The Gulag was a system of work prisons throughout Russia which were masterminded by Stalin circa 1932 to 1970’s when the bestseller the Gulag Archipelago was published and Russia was officially embarrassed to stopping this human tragedy.  You had people declared incompetent or subversive and you sent them to these places where they froze, were starved, infected with various plagues, and then on the brink of death, some lucky ones were sent home.  Most were forgotten and buried in mass graves.  Millions of Russians were sent there over time, but records are sketchy.

Subject: Re: WestlawNext – § 358. Generally

Why is Mary Sykes not entitled to the protections of the statute?    Are there two sets of laws – one for those individuals who are targeted for deprivation of this civil and human rights by the politically elite and those who have no money?

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

Subject: RE: WestlawNext – § 358. Generally

Dear All,

Again very interesting.  I will order the transcripts on Monday and have to leave a deposit and so I must make arrangements to go downtown, et al.  That said, I have been barred from bringing in any evidence, witnesses, and *** even though the court transcripts of previous testimony I was allowed to bring in medical reports of Dr. Patel omitted by Peter Schmiedel and company.

I will be writing up my overview of today, but what is clear is,

(1) Dr. Shaw admitted he could not speak for Dr. Patel, Dr. Moctkya, or Dr. Rabin and the court agreed: however, he was allowed to give his medical opinion as to what he believed they meant when they wrote x, y and z.

(2)  Dr. Shaw admitted that some prescription drugs cause memory loss, disorientation, et al, and also admitted that none of the doctors he reviewed their reports listed the medications Mary G. Sykes was on the time she was evaluated by them:

(3) Dr. Shaw admitted that a diagnosis of dementia does not mean incompetency,

(4) Dr. Shaw claims that mild dementia and serious dementia are the same,

(5) and today Peter Schmiedel got Dr. Shaw to admit that all mother has is memory loss…

(6)  The Judge said that the US Supreme court decision based on an Illinois case that retroactive incompetency diagnoses are not allowed should not be considered, et al, 

(7)  The Judge said that Sodini does not apply to the Sykes case,

(8) The Judge claimed that there is no Illinois statue that states that a respondent to a petition for a protective order cannot be a guardian,

(9)  The Judge said that Toerpe can waive my mother’s rights to medical confidentially

and, but not limited to,

(10)  Dr. Shaw admitted that he may not have received all of the medical reports on mother but that his evaluation was determined on medical reports supplied by Carolyn Toerpe,

oops and,

(11) That he did evaluate mother recently, in April or May 2012 (which I’ve never seen his report)  but that he did not know if mother was on any medications, prescribed or otherwise…

The Judge said that I could not impeach him through my cross…

The Judge said that I could not give argument after Peter Schmiedel gave argument as to why the Court should sustain his objection(s)

And finally, Peter Schmiedel said that because he has a certificate of mailing that he knows I was served notice, et al.  

Peter Schmiedel then had in the order that I am to be called as a witness on the 16 August because I was on his service list.  The Judge then asked to show his service list which he did not have.  I have never been subpoenaed for service. I told the judge that I did supply them with a service list and Stuart told me that that was for ‘something else” and that the date my ‘witnesses were to testify” they were put in the hallway and I was handcuffed to a chair and… Schmiedel got that stricken..

Finally, I have court transcripts where the Judge says in 2011 that there is no proof my mother is incompetent only that she cannot make certain decision.  

JoAnne was targeted up front as to why she was in court and Judge Stuart said she doesn’t remember JoAnne ever being in court.  Accordingly, the deputy sheriff claims that the sheriff can determine whether or not a public can bring in their laptop.  Judge Stuart said that JoAnne could take notes on a yellow legal pad.  

At a certain point the deputy sheriff was going to take JoAnne’s computer, and the Judge waived her off.  JoAnne stayed in the courtroom with the computer on her lap  looking at the Judge.

I would like to know as Peter Schmiedel’s witness what I am testifying to … again as his witness….and what rights I have?  

Thanks

Gloria Jean Sykes 

Expert witnesses

Do not forget the fact that your mother passes a written driving test administered by the State of Illinois

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

From Tim Lahrman

Subject: Re: WestlawNext – § 358. Generally

Date: Jul 6, 2012 7:43 PM

this is the present day practice of economic eugenics  …..   a shit law, very dangerous law —-  easily exploited law

that seemingly supports economic involuntary sterilization — and privateering with impunity.

I almost think I would prefer to face a bunch of Somali pirates than a court appointed guardian  ——  both are stealing you blind and if you shoot and kill the Somali pirate you are an American hero entitled to own and use your gun to defend yourself ——  but if you shoot the guardian the headline reads

“Crazed gunman with history of mental illness ……..”