Statute of Uses and Conflict of Interest for Plenary Guardian Carolyn Toerpe

The following is an email that Atty Ken Ditkowsky agreed to post with some explanation of the facts to new readers:

Background (by JMD):

In 2005, Mary was taken by her daughter Carolyn to an attorney to change her Will and Power of Attorney which a Power of Attorney for Health Care and Property was granted to Carolyn. The other younger daughter, Gloria, did not know about this until after she and her mother returned from a vacation trip in 2010 and noticed that keys to their safe deposit box were missing, and the staff at the local bank informed them that Carolyn had the box drilled out, without permission, while both of them were gone. Now, since Gloria's name was on the safe deposit box, the bank should have required written permission from Gloria, but that was never done. Carolyn knew Gloria's name was on the safe deposit box. A trust document was created which purportedly transferred title from Mary Sykes to a Trust wherein Mary Sykes was the trustor, trustee AND beneficiary. There was an approximate $150,000 mortgage on Mary's home.

From Ken:

Let us go over the facts. The house owned by Mary had a mortgage on it that had a due on sale cause in the Chain of title. Carolyn to obtain a benefit for herself, induced her mother to sign a Deed in Trust that violated the due on sale clause. This document was intended to be deceptive in that in the early pages of the document that Mr. Stern provided, the Deed in Trust purports to divide the subject real estate equally, yet later on it attempts to portray the entire property being given to Carolyn.

Now add up the facts: 1) Mary with the aid of Court personnel prepared a petition for a protective order against Carolyn. 2) Carolyn obtained a power of attorney, but never filed the appropriate accountings even though she raided the Safety Deposit Box. 3) Carolyn took without authorization $4000.00 that she claimed that she was using to allegedly "create an IRA account" - this precipitated Mary going to the Courthouse.

4) The petition for an order of protection was sidetracked by the agreed order promulgated by the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the plenary guardian. (I believe that at that point in time Schmiedel had replaced Waller). The document that Stern provided does not have a document number or time stamp. When did Carolyn file the Deed in Trust?

It is my opinion that the Deed in Trust violates the Statute of Uses and therefore transfers the property right back to Mary. The net is that Carolyn has no authority to institute the forcible entry and detainer action against Gloria. The net also is that this document (furnished by Stern) is strong evidence of misconduct on the part of the plenary guardian.

Stern's furnishing the document and correcting Schmiedel's misstatment as to the disposition of the petition for an order of protection is a positive. I understand he arranged one of the rare Christmas contacts for Mary's siblings. His complains about your blog however are a negative. There has been so little reported that is positive concerning Stern, it is a pleasure to be able to say something nice. It is possible by highly improbable that he is going to surprise us by revealing to the Court the fact that Carolyn has not been candid with the Court as to the assets of the disabled person's estate and she has a real conflict of interest - i.e. does she foster her own interests or that of the estate. The expectation the either Farenga or Stern would do anything that was not in the best interests of Carolyn is 'slim and none.' As a lawyer, Stern is supposed to be familiar with the Statute of Uses.

I copied Stern on this e-mail because I do not want him to suggest at some later date that it never occurred to him that the Statute of Uses would apply and that ****.

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Additional note from JMD: At the time the $4,000 was removed from Mary's account without permission, Carolyn claimed it was for an "IRA" or retirement fund for Mary. This is despite the fact that in 2009 Mary was 90 and ineligible for any retirement fund with any tax or other benefits.
Further, at the very last hearing, Gloria brought up the fact with Judge Stuart that Carolyn should not be guardian because she was the Respondent to an Order for Protection and that was against Illinois state law. Judge Stuart responded, "wasn't that heard earlier in this case" to which Mr. Stern admitted, "no it wasn't." Judge Stuart then indicated she would not entertain and was interested or concerned about the fact that Carolyn Toerpe was, and still is, the respondent to a Motion for a Protective Order! Certainly the court personnel helping Mary would not have filed the Petition if they felt Mary was incompetent or suffered from dementia, they would have brought it to the attention of the court.

Daley Center Probate Court: Secret Tribunals? Where is the Inventory and Where is the Accounting? 2 years have passed!

As many of you know, the Probate Court file for Mary G. Sykes is pretty much a complete mess. Documents, Briefs, Pleading and Motions are not in date order, they are all over the place, and many, many important filings appear to be completely missing.
Last week I was looking for the "Inventory" and Accountings. An Inventory is required to be filed by any new Guardian no less than 60 days after opening up an estate. An accounting should be filed at the end of each year from date of appointment.
Carolyn Toerpe was appointed Pleanary Guardian in Dec. 2009. This means the first inventory was due by Jan. 2010 and the first accounting by Jan. 2011. I searched the file thoroughly, but found no Inventory and no Accountings. I found one court Order that referred to the Inventory and a "Current Accounting" but as I recall, it indicated both of these documents to be amazingly late (over a year, if memory serves me right--but I will check and update as I have more time to look at the file. Currently, the court does not allow the file to be transported to the file room and you have to look at it in court as one is able to.)
One of the most hotly contested issues in this guardianship IS the accounting and inventory, and now all those are missing and a second accounting is supposed to be due soon in this case.
I have no idea why Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga allow for such shenanigans to take place. They are supposed to be actively involved in ensuring a timely and accurate (to the best of their knowledge) accounting has been filed with the court, and if the relatives are making loud protestations that items are missing, they are supposed to take notes, conduct an investigation and report to the court their findings. Ken Ditkowsky was Mary's attorney for many years, if he is asserting items were missing, well he knew Mary and Charles Sykes (deceased) and their affairs the best, and his comments should be taken seriously.
My question, is why are these important documents apparently missing from the file? What happened to them? Why was the entry of one "Current Accounting" and the inventory "entered and continued" at a very late date? This should be all public record so the relatives will know that AS, CF and Judge Stuart are not running "secret tibunals" that do not conform to Illinois Probate Laws and Procedure.

Seizure of an Attorney's Laptop--is this the US of Russia or what?

Today I had a most unusual experience. I have never seen this before in 25 years of practice.

In court room 1804, Judge Stuart, while I was attending a hearing on the Sykes case, the bailiff walked up to me and took my laptop! She didn’t ask me to put it away. She just took it. I told her that the courts allow electronic note taking, but she took it anyway.

This is at a hearing where Adam Stern and Peter Schmeidel were going on and on about how I was disqualified from representing Gloria for notarizing one document and how I was running a blog about the Mary Sykes case (horrors)!

Some have speculated (this is only a rumor now) about how I might have been blogging about the case in the court room!

The court personnel (where were they during 6th grade US constitution exam) thought I couldn’t take notes because I was not a court reporter. Interesting, but no cigar. The reality is, I cannot take the place of a court reporter because they have specialized training and a license. But as a US citizen in an open court, I do have the constitutional right to take notes.

The big questions are tho: 1) why are Adam Stern and Peter Schmeidel and the court so overly concerned about my running a court room blog? 2) No one has asserted how anything posted on this blog is untrue (other than Cynthia Farenga, and adequate evidence was attached to a communication sent to her that completely dispels this notion) and 3) why is it no one in that count room seems to know that blogging, public dissemination of court room proceedings are a basic and important US constitutional right?

Open courts are inimical to a free and just society. It is of the most urgent importance that reporters, bloggers and anyone with a quest for truth and justice be allowed to enter into any US court room and take notes and publish them anywhere there is an audience interested in the proceedings and the free and open flow of information (or in this case, lack thereof).

We all have an interest in keeping our courtrooms open and free. By that we can ensure that justice is done there.

Sadly, today it was severely lacking. And even more sad was a courtroom filled with about a dozen people that didn’t seem to know or care about how important that right was.

I recall getting 100 on my 6th grade US and Illinois constitution exam. I guess it’s sad when you put the people that got all the low scores in charge of the courtroom!

PS–the files on my laptop go back to documents and emails prepared for clients back to 1990! I wonder how Judge Stuart is going to explain to clients why their information was placed into the hands of a court room bailiff who knows nothing of them or their business. She was a part of it. I will publish the transcript when I get it.

PPS–there are devices on the market that can scam a hard drive via an open port in minutes! Why did the judge allow a meagerly paid court room bailiff access to a lap top of an attorney that had years of confidential and highly sensitive client information which should have the eminence of attorney client privilege on it with very little apparent forethought and absolutely no safety precautions for the data contained therein?

All good questions.

Another day in probate. Another day with more questions than answers.

Result of Appeal of Sanction award against Kenneth Ditkowsky for attempting investigation of the Mary Sykes matter.

As you are aware, when I was engaged by the Friends and family of Mary Sykes to investigate the unusual circumstances that surrounded her being isolated (by Court order) and her assets being removed from her possession, I ran into a ‘fire storm.’ The promulgators were the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the plenary guardian. Well knowing that if my investigation of what appeared to be gross ‘elder abuse’ and unconscionable financial exploitation of Mary Sykes was unethical under the rules that govern the practice of law in Illinois then the place to bring a request for an inquiry was the Attorney Registration and Discipline Commission.

Mr. Stern, Ms Farenga, and Mr. Schmiedel however filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County a Motion to sanction me in what was in my opinion a blatant attempt to intimidate me and end my investigation. The fact that Illinois Statutes 735 ILCS 110/1 et seq. (Citizen Participation Act) prohibits the very conduct that was being perpetrated against me was of no concern to anyone, least of all the Circuit Court. Most seriously the Court and the Court appointed guardians were totally disinterested in the fact that there were protections afforded Mary Sykes that had been ignored. The Appellate Court had previously ruled that these basic protections were ‘jurisdictional.’

When the Circuit Court rejected my arguments that it lacked jurisdiction on several basis, the Court awarded almost $5000.00 in sanctions against me. I took an appeal and then did a more comprehensive investigation as to why there should an effort to prevent me from doing the due diligence that Supreme Court Rule 137 , and FRCP 11 mandated as necessary before an attorney can agree to becoming engaged in litigation. I soon found out! The tip of the iceberg was the fact that Mary Sykes owned a safety deposit box and therein were fungible ‘gold (Au) coins,’ fungible United States Dollars, ‘ jewelry, and other valuables. Today with the rise in the value of gold it is estimated that the ‘loot’ had a street value of more than a million dollars.

My appeal addressed two major legal concepts. 1) the sanction motion was brought under Supreme Court Rule 137 which was directed at false pleadings filed in pending court proceedings, and 2) jurisdiction. As I was at best a stranger to Mary’s estate litigation, until I filed an appearance for someone the Court lacked jurisdiction over me. I had not done so – all I did was start the inquiry process. In addition, it appeared to me that the Court was over-reaching in its claim of any jurisdiction. The case of In re: Sodini required that Mary be protected from a ‘railroad job!’ The statute required that 14 days notice to close relatives. Mr. Schmiedel is not shy in admitting that no notice was given to close relatives! Sodini points out that the failure to give this notice is not a casual requirement that can be ignored – it is jurisdictional. Thus, without the Sodini notice it is respectfully suggested the guardians are acting without Court authority. The judge sitting on the bench may be wearing a ‘robe’ but the judge might just as well be sitting his/her basement dispensing justice to the neighborhood children – the proceeding without jurisdiction has not binding force and effect.

Unfortunately, the Appellate Court was not interested in the more sophisticated jurisdictional deficiency. (It would have been a surprise if it had been). However, even though all that would have to be done would be for the plenary guardian (or the GALs) to request a proper hearing and give the close relatives 14 day notice the Court would have been clothe with jurisdiction and then *****. It is respectfully suggested that Stern, Farenga, and Schmiedel were interested in thwarting my investigation because it was reasonable to assume that a scintilla of due diligence would unearth this jurisdictional deficiency.

As the Courts appear to not be interested in addressing in the Sykes case the Sodini issues, the sanction award was vacated upon the more basic jurisdictional deficiency – I was and always have been a stranger to the Mary Sykes case. Thus, I am not subject to Court sanctions. That is not to say that the Supreme Court of Illinois will not investigate to determine if questioning the conduct of such august persons as Farenga, Stern, Troepe, and Schmiedel is unethical – Indeed, the ARDC is investigating me! All of the above persons have been reported to have made frantic pleas to the Attorney Registration and Discipline Commission to investigate me! It is interesting that no investigation is going on to ascertain why the plenary guardian denies Mary Sykes visitation with her (Mary's) siblings, her younger daughter, her friends, her neighbors. Indeed there is no investigation in the 'looting' of the safety deposit box, etc. The investigation is whether on not is it unethical to inquire as to the foregoing!

All that said, as the guardians have discovered even a cloutless attorney with a neighborhood office has ‘teeth!’ The sanction motion is ‘garden variety’ malicious prosecution. 735 ILCS 110/1 et seq. (Citizen Participation Act) provides a State of Illinois claim to sue to recover the lost remuneration, anxiety, etc that I suffered as the result of the sanction motion. 42 USCA 1983 provides a remedy to sue in the Federal Court based upon the fact that Mr. Stern and Mr. Schmiedel (and possibly Farenga) used their office to attempt to deny me my First Amendment Rights. (Right of Association).

All that said, I would trade these causes of action for Justice for Mary Sykes. All that is required is for Mr. Stern, and Ms. Farenga to do their jobs. Turning a blind eye to the financial exploitation, spoliation of evidence, isolation and abuse of Mary Sykes may be the MO that is the current vogue, but Mary Sykes and Gloria Sykes are innocents – the fact that Mary Sykes has a few coins (worth a million plus dollars) should not be the focus – the focus should be honesty, honor, integrity, and good will toward all men.

This is the Christmas Season. America needs a Christmas present – giving Mary Sykes back her life and whatever property that has not been dissipated would be ‘good start!’

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

A letter from Gloria Sykes regarding her mother

From Gloria J Sykes:

Dear All,

My mother is the most amazing woman in the world. We played miniature golf (in February, 2011) and she completed 16 holes before she got "dizzy". I learned the PG gave her a "late breakfast" -- so at 2:30, unbeknownst to me she was in need of some protein. Nothing around, i bought her a sorbet with fresh blueberries and we shared it. She went back and we completed three more holes and my sister was waiting, watching, about 50 feet away. My cousin Debbie, who had it not been for her, the visit would never had happened, took a couple of pictures of us (I guess AS didn't tell her about the court order) and **** What I remember most is how mom was in awe... being able to feel free, around people she loved, and people she didn't know, but people active and having fun. There was a family playing before us, and the father/husband, tried hard, but couldn't break 4 - 6 strokes before getting the ball in the hole. His wife wasn't that must better, but at one point we went before them to complete the course. And I watched him watch mother play. One whole she landed the ball in the hole in three shots, and the other hole, well it was considered a hole in one -- and mom won a free game at the course. The man walked over to my mother to congratulate her, "Will you teach me how to golf?" he asked her. Mom's eyes were wide opened, she felt important, good and told him she was 92 years old.

We talked about Julie Smith, mom's long time friend and mom asked, "Are the gals getting together soon...Do you think you could put together a visit with the gals at the garden club?" I asked Kathie to see what she could do. I told mom my friend asked me to come to Greece and she replied, "you have to fly to get there.... oooooh." Mom said she didn't like to fly and she recalled a simulator we had experienced.. which brought back good memories with Daddy, and Kristin when she was about 8 or so.

At one point a little boy walked by mom carrying a golf club, and mom laughed and smiled, "Look at that little guy..."

She reminded me of a wrongfully imprisoned person who upon release, is cautious, subdue, and wide-eyed: look how much I've missed. She definitely showed signs of isolation, and gaslighting. But she enjoyed herself and before i had to turn her over to Debby to connect with the PG, mom asked me which home she was going to. I said in a cherry voice, "you will be with Carolyn now" and mom said, "I'm so confused....where are you living now?" I told her in Norwood Park, Chicago, and she sighed. I smiled and said, "Everything will be okay." and she said, "As long as it's a good outcome." and then kissed me and said, "As long as we have our health, we can do anything." I wanted to just grab her and run, but I hugged her and kissed her and told her how much I love her and that I am always there for her." She told me that she loves me very much too, and I thought she was going to cry, so I kissed her again, and said goodbye and walked away. I didn't turn back. I didn't want to watch her or see the PG. I walked fast and thought it all to be so unbelievable. How could anybody do this to a beautiful and amazing woman like my Mother.

It took me 30 minutes longer to arrive today: my navigator look me the wrong way (go figure) and the PG wouldn't give me a few minutes more. It was like a lockdown at a prison...

I didn't say see you later, or I'll talk to you tomorrow, because I don't know if I'll see her ever again or talk to her again. Debbie will give a good report and like all the other good reports, the person witnessing our love and friendship, the kindness and love between mother and daughter, are told they can't supervise any more.

There is no dementia; Mom isn't seriously demented as Adam Stern, the GAL, told Judge Stuart; and I don't agitate her. She is agitated because when she sees me she wants to know when she can go home. She desperately wants to go home and quietly live out her days with me. What there is, however, is a woman who has given up and realizes she has no rights or control over her life-- and she's resolved that it is what it is.

So hug the person you love, and remember that in a wink of an eye, a nod, or a signature on a dotted line, that person can be taken away from you and you'll never see them again...

I am blessed that my cousin Debbie gave up her afternoon and played miniature golf with us.

I saw my Mother two more times: she played winning hands of canasta and we went for a long walk, and both times she didn't want to return to Toerpe's home. She asked Debbie if "Carolyn was going to sell [her] home from under [her]?" and asked Debbie to help stop Carolyn. That was in March 2011. Toerpe is not only selling Mother's home from under her, Toerpe stopped all communications between Mother and me after Debbie told GAL Adam Stern what mother asked. We think that in American this activity should not happen, but it does, so it's foolish of me to rant about how wrong it is, because it is. What I know is that Carolyn Toerpe, through her counsel Fischel and Kahn, (Peter Schmiedel, et al), and TWO GALs, Cynthia Feranga and Adam Stern, have lied to FOUR courts -- Probate, Forcible Eviction and Detainer, U. S. Bankruptcy, and the U.S. District Courts-- in order to get the Judges to rule to their benefit and it's all about money. The lives of HUMAN BEINGS are irrelevant. Cynthia Feranga, Adam Stern, Peter Schmiedel, are attorneys who should not practice law, but practice how to survive wearing orange jump suits in FEDERAL PRISONS for standing idly by when the following was occurring: obstruction of justice, abuse of process, spoilation of evidence, malicious prosecution, financial exploitation, and isolating my mother, allegedly drugging her, and neglecting her medically, socially and emotionally, causing a slow death -- and ultimately MURDER is the next step. Yes, as soon as they get rid of me they will assuredly MURDER my mother through over-or under-medication, suffocation, or feeding her high levels of sugar. That said, Probate Courts are Courts of Pre-meditative sanctioned murder and the Sykes case is a good sample of just how far attorneys like Peter Schmiedel, Cynthia Farenga, Harvey Jack Waller, and Adam Stern will go for money. Of course, by 'agreeing' to appoint my sister, Carolyn Torepe, the known and named respondent to a petition of a protective order, they agreed to do Toerpe's dirty work against our mother and me, in order to get paid. Yep, again... I sincerely believe Toerpe told them that if they got ride of me, they froze my accounts, pauperized me and hopefully the stress would kill me, too, they would get paid handsomely. That was back in in and around June 2009, after mother filed a verified petition for an order of protection to stop Toerpe from doing exactly what Judge Connors and now Judge Jane Louise Stuart has rubber stamped.

FYI after I complained about Judge Connors, she was spontaneously promoted to the Appellate Court where she now seeks to retain her seat on the bench.

Any help anybody can give us by republishing this open letter is a blessing. All my Mother wants for Christmas is to be able to return to her home. Help me stop Toerpe and Company from selling Mother's home, isolating her and returning Mother home for Christmas. Saving my Mother's life will save the lives of millions of seniors and disabled people, Happy Holidays.

Gloria Jean Sykes
Bon Ami Productions, Inc.

First Amendent Rights and the GAL's

The First Amendment is the first line of defense in protection of the disabled, the elderly and those who cannot help themselves. In reading the postings of the victims of Elder Abuse and Financial Exploitation and in particular the transcripts from the Sykes case it is very disturbing to observe the conscious effort exhibited by many of the clout heavy court appointed guardians to prevent communication and deny to the victims and their families their First Amendment Rights. In the Sykes case as an example, the Guardian ad litems made a conscious effort to attempt to prevent me from communicating with Mary Sykes' treating doctor. Even though Supreme Court Rule 137 applies only to Court filings, the guardians were able to obtain a sanction order against me for writing to the doctor! this attempt at intimidate is alien to the American culture and in particular the American Constitutional liberties.

The attempts at abrogating the First Amendment are replete. The transcripts of the Sykes case reveal that an attorney was wrongfully and inappropriately disqualified because she notarized a document - the guardians at litem claiming that she might be a material witness. Thus, the victims were deprived of the attorney of their choice by what essentially was a 'fraud on the Court. Of course, this frugality with the truth by the guardians, was exposed by the lapse of time; however, it to date has gone unpunished.

The younger daughter of Mary Sykes' rights of communication with her mother were thwarted by other and different misrepresentations by the guardians, and when she persisted the attempt to silence her took the form of tying up her assets. The record reveals that most of the attorneys appearing in the Sykes case were threatened with either a discipline complaint and/or the loss of their license. The transcripts in the Sykes case reveal a chilling disregard for the First Amendment rights of all who oppose the will of the 'august' court appointed guardians.

It occurs to me that the blatant and persistent attempts by the clout heavy court appointed guardians to infringe on the First Amendment Rights of the exploited and abused victims and those members of their families who protest is a serious problem that cannot be countenanced. The Department of Justice has a Civil Rights Division. It occurs to me that one of the remedies that the victims and their families have that they have not exploited is a complaint to the United States of America and the Attorney Generals of the State in which they reside' This complaint should focus strictly as as to the violations of their civil individual right. This complaint should be strictly focused upon the patent attempts by the guardians to thwart protest, and free speech. The complaints may not be successful, or may get 'deep sixed' but with the number of examples of this miscreant attack on our Constitutional Liberties by this group of politically elite predators it is only a question of time before Justice will prevail.

It may not be politically correct to complain to law enforcement concerning the 'clout heavy' political elite who exhibit their magic in denying us of our First Amendment Rights - but if we keep silent we are condoning and contributing to the National Socialist agenda.

The Christmas Season is the season to stand up and be counted in the fight against the erosion of our Civil Rights. The full and complete exercise of our Civil Rights is the greatest gift that we can give our loved ones and especially our children and grandchildren. Democracy is not a spectator sport!

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

An open letter to the GALsAn open Letter to the Guardian ad Litem, Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern: A guardian ad litem owes a duty of candor to his/

An open Letter to the Guardian ad Litem, Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern:

A guardian ad litem owes a duty of candor to his/her ward. An attorney owes a duty of honesty to the Court. I have observed the two guardian ad litem and the plenary guardian in these proceedings and in my opinion they have breached their collective responsibilities and have conspired to not only deprive Mary Sykes of her civil rights but to deny her access to a judicial remedy. Mr. Stern's statements recorded in the transcripts of proceedings that Mary did not want legal representation is reprehensible and contradicted by writings in her own hand and by statements that she made.

The Circuit Court has two responsibilities that it has been lead away from by the guardians ad litem. The first is to protect the orders of the Court. The Lumberman order is a final order and entitled to full faith and credit. Ergo, the ad hoc attempt to mislead the probate court is at the very least a contempt of the judicial process. The fact that the paterno syndrome has acted to protect the wrongful action does not change the fact that the action is indeed wrongful. The 2nd responsibility of the GAl is to be the 'eyes and ears' of the Court and protect the ward from a predatory plenary guardian. This second responsibility has been observed by what I would opine is a conspiracy to 'cover up' financial exploitation and elder abuse.

In the past I have noted examples of the 'cover up' and the dereliction of responsibility so I will not repeat them at this point in time. I do understand that you will be filing one or more lawsuits against the persons responsible for retaliation against you and for the violation of your civil rights. It therefore as the factual situation herein is so complicated and so replete with examples of official misconduct a trier of fact could be overwhelmed.

The question as to whether or not your sister is the trustee is yet to be determined. The appointment provision requires the treating physican to certify to Mary's incompetency. Mr. Schmiedel is not a certified medical person. Dr. Shaw never having examined your mother is not an appropriate individual to certify anything. Dr. Patel refused to certify. It also appears amongst the documents that you showed me is a document that amounts to a revocation of the trust. Attorney Dennison informed me by e-mail that there is no evidence that the trust was ever funded.

When Carolyn took your mother to the lawyer and together they attempted to make Carolyn the primary beneficary of your mother's estate to your detriment she (Carolyn) became the attorney in fact of your mother. As such she became a fiduciary. Pursuant to statute Carolyn when she undertook the responsibility undertook the responsiblity to comply with the statutory disclosure requirement. Carolyn has never provided the required accounting. The probate court ordered the accounting, but with the assistance of both guardian ad litem in distracting the Court no accounting was provided. One of the items that must be accounted for is the contents of the safety deposit box and mattress with cache of currency. The safety deposit box had an inventory in it. The duty of GAL is not to thwart the inquiry of the Court as to the assets of the Estate but to enhance the opportunithy of the Court to regulate the activites of the estate and the protection of the disabled person.

The issue that should be address is 'why first are there two guardian ad litem?' and second why are they so protective of the plenary guardian. The failure to report the admitted abuse of Mary Sykes (December 2010) pales by the fact that absolutely obnoxious 'conflict of interest' petition that Stern filed to claim that by Ms. Dennison's notarization of a document she had a conflict of interest. Why should Stern even be involved? The plenary guardian might have an objection - but not a guardian ad litem. Certainly not a guardian ad litem who watched the plenary guardian during his horrible recession and the unemployment of her (plenary guardian) husband do extensive remodeling of her home. This is the very same GAL who attempted to stop my investigation with a bogus Rule 137 sanction petition well knowing that Rule 137 applied to documents filed in the Court proceeding and nothing had been filed. The fact that Schmiedel keeps referring to the sanction order demonstrates his culpability.

Unfortunately, the foregoing is just frosting on the cake. Mary herself filed a petition for a protective order. The personnel at the courthouse who helped her with the procedures for the petition all attest to the fact of Mary's competence, yet, neither Adam Stern or Cynthia Farenga talked to any of them - Stern wrote you an e-mail admitting that the order finding Mary incompetent was the agreement of the plenary guardian, the two guardian ad litem and the rubber stamp of the Judge. It obviously was a device to avoid a hearing by an impartial judge of the abuse claim that Mary made against the successful applicant for plenary guardian. Thus, by the breach of fiduciary relationship by both GALs there was no hearing on the petition for a protective order and the further complaint that Mary made to the Illinois Department of Aging also against the successful applicant for protective order.

As Tim point out - with such a conspiracy how is Mary not denied access to judicial process and the protections of a citizen. The is obscene that the very person that Mary sought protection against is appointed her plenary guardian. The obscenity never ceases as illustrated by the frugality with the truth that was exhibited by people appointed to protect the interests of Mary Sykes. IF THE GUARDIANS DO NOT RESIGN AND FILE TRUE AND ACCURATE ACCOUNTINGS INSTANTER, in addition to filng the proper responses in the Federal court, ask the Legislative Committee chairman who in the Justice Department to discuss this matter. The current investigation is going too slow!

Mary's estate has a value at this point in time of over a million dollars. The contents can be traced to the B*** estate and your father's estate. - It is my opinion this is how your sister was able to remodel her home and this is the reason that she has almost unlimited funds to retailate and otherwise prosecute you. At your 341 meeting your expectancy as these funds should be reiterated to the representative of the IRS who was interested in your Bankruptcy filing.

_____________________________________________________________




Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Gloria needs visitation NOW

Gloria needs visitation. While she has a court order for visitation, she has been stymied by the Naperville Police Dept because while she shows up at the door with her court order, Carolyn says that she has a different court order, but does not produce it?

What sort of a police department is that which depends upon hearsay?

I have not heard of that. If Carolyn has a different court order she should produce it at the door.

Jive walks, court orders talk. Gloria is entitled to her visitation. It is the duty of the police to enforce and respect court orders. If Carolyn has no alternate court order, Gloria has the right to visit with her mother.

How long will the Probate court allow Mary G to live in isolation from her family?

Question: How often have you (Gloria Sykes, a nearly 60 year old woman) seen your mother since Carolyn Toerpe was appointed Guardian of your mother:

(1) the second to last time I spent time with my Mother. We went bowling. She even broke 100! People were coming up to her because she was so filled with energy and a good bowler, that they were applauding her (for her age).

(2) the last time I saw my mother was at my Aunt Jo’s home in March 2009. She played yet another winning hand of canasta. Here she was so happy to see Shaggy, and obviously, he’s also happy to see her.

(3) Mom and I the first time I saw her after 10 1/2 months of not being able to see or talk to her in 2010. This was the first visit based on a court order that I can visit my mother ‘approximately every two weeks”. Don’t know how a court can stop the association between a mother and daughter, let alone demand supervision, but Carolyn Toerpe NEVER complies with court orders.

I love my mother so much that I’ve risked everything to save my life in order to save her life and bring her home to the community where she thrived for 55 years and the people she loves and trusts.

From Gloria Sykes.

No one understands at all why Carolyn will not let Gloria visit her, or why the court allows a guardian to isolate a 92 year old disable person from her family. Her elderly sisters have not seen her. They cannot call her on the phone. Gloria cannot call her.

Neither Mary’s sisters nor Gloria could Mary for Thanksgiving 2011. And they did not see her in 2010.

If Gloria (daugher) or Yolanda (sister) wants to see or call Mary G, they must get a court order for each and every phone call or short one hour visit.

This is clearly not the intent of the Illinois Probate Code. No Guardian should EVER be allowed to isolate and refuse visitation and phone calls by family members.

The Probate court allows this to continue. The GAL’s turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the isolation. As long as they get paid for each and every court call, they allow the abuse to continue so they can continue to bill on the case!

Carolyn Toerpe continually vioates court orders, she violates the probate code. The Court and the GAL’s are well aware of this, BUT NO ONE SEEMS TO CARE or STOP THIS from happening.

Please sign the petition at:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/to-return-mary-g-sykes-home-and-to-remove-carolyn-toerpe-as-plenary-guardian/

The Curious Conduct of Mr. Lippman, an Illinois attorney and Chicago Volunteer Legal Services

Another burning question in this case is the curious conduct of Mr. Lippman, a senior attorney and volunteer at Chicago Volunteer Legal Services (CVLS).

Now no one wants to say anything bad about an attorney that regularly volunteers for the poor, and in this case the poor and elderly, but Mr. Lippman's behaviour became quite curious in the course of the proceedings involving the guardianship of Mary G. Sykes. And to be fair, no one really knows why all of this happened but it all appears to be a severe violation of Mary G's rights in this matter. And other than the fact Mr. Lippman did not show up in court--after being provided with a subpoena, the fault really lies with the court and not Mr. Lippman.

Sometime before that hearing date of December 7th, in fact many months before, Gloria took her mother to CVLS and asked for an attorney to help her fill out a Power of Attorney for Health Care and for Property. As with any good attorney, when a family member brings in an elderly senior, he wanted to talk with Mary G alone, determine that she was not under any undue duress or influence, and that she basically understood what the documents she was about to sign were there for. So he talked with Gloria for a short while, and then he privately discussed everything with Mary G and sent her happily on her way with the two required Illinois statutory forms, one for Property and One for health care. Mary filled them out with the assistance of another independent family member, and they were notarized by an independent party. The notary was available to testify in court, but the court did not want to hear that testimony, that the notary watched Mary G sign as indicated and there was no evidence of undue influence or duress. (Actually a notary only testifies that she knows the person signing the document was in fact the person before her--notaries do not ensure any other matters such as undue influence or even sound mind and memory, unless that is specifically stated so in the notary clause.)

But during the court hearing to appoint a guardianship, the court ignored all of these important facts, and even the most important document--the Power of Attorney and Health Care granted to Gloria which was the most recent and it should have been enforced UNLESS it was conclusively shown that Mary G was incompetent at the time of the signing--which would have been nearly impossible in a normal court because Mary G wrote specific wishes all over the document in her own handwriting!

The GAL's said Mary was just parroting instructions, which was absolutely ridiculous because the words and phrases were complex and the handwriting was excellent. Was the court merely following the theory that a thousand monkeys with a thousand typewriters typing a thousand years could write an award winning short story? Was that the reasoning for this.

The court SHOULD have required Mr. Lippman to testify and enforced the Subpoena that Gloria filed, the court SHOULD have listened to the testimony of the notary. And the court clearly should have questioned Mary about who she wanted to have her Power of Attorney and if she could identify her handwriting on the document.

Instead, the court railroaded Gloria and appointed Carolyn--a person who was the subject of a Protective Order where Mary G alleged Carolyn was wrongfully removing assets from her accounts!

Mary G deserved her own private attorney and not the GAL's who were ignoring her requests and her instructions.

She wanted to stay in her own home and have Gloria continue to care for her.

Those should have been the only goals of the Court and of the GAL's.

Now it gets very, very strange. Of course the court would want to see those documents. Perhaps the court wanted to talk with Mr. Lippman, JD, to determine that he followed proper and customary procedures (this would NOT require Mary G to divulge her attorney client privilege. Mr. Lippman would only discuss the procedure and NOT the substance of the conversations.

Instead, at the last minute, Mr. Lippman said he would not attend and that the director of CVLS told him not to unless there was a court order in place--ridiculous. Mr. Lippman has a duty--even as an ordinary citizen--to attend a court hearing out of a civil duty. In Illinois attorneys have the right to obtain a subpoena where ever there is due cause that the testimony may be helpful to the court or to their client. Mr. Lippman and CVLS ignored all of that!

Further, the hearing on December 7, 2010 when Carolyn was appointed was only to be on Gloria's care plan. Instead, the court railroaded Gloria and appointed Carolyn, even tho the matter should have been set for another day because there was no notice to anyone.

Allegations of Drugging

From Ken Ditkowsky, an Illinois Licensed attorney:

Please Note:

One of the facts that I did not stress in my letter to the Illinois Department of Aging that supplements the ignored complaint that Mary Sykes personally filed and the Petition for a Protective order that was never heard, and the various cries of help that she uttered is the fact of the alleged drugging of Mary Sykes.

It has been alleged by family members that on one or more of the rare occasions that they had contact with Mary that she had been drugged. The family members investigated the drugs and discovered that amongst the side affects that were published were effects that mirrored the diagnosis that was published by the guardian ad litem and the plenary guardian. They have however provided no medical information to back up their diagnosis. I do not consider a diagnosis by a doctor who did not physically examine Mary Sykes to be valid or informative. I also suggest that any physican who relies on a history advanced by the alleged abuser - who claimed to be a PhD - having put the letters phd after her signature - to be suspect.

Thus, when a wellness check is done - especially of a woman who has had multiple trips to the emergency room - and virtually none prior to being placed in the custody of a person who she (Mary Sykes) accused in a Petition for a Protective order - a drug test should be done to make certain that the check is not compromised by drugging.

Let me make this very clear. Elder abuse and Financial exploitation is a serious business. Serve and Protect mean exactly that! Jerry Sandusky targeted childen and exposed the Paterno Syndrome of ineffective CYA law enforcement that has been demonstrated as equally applicable to the Mary Sykes case and literally hundreds of other guardian abuse cases across the fruited plain. Now that the 'dirty secret' is out it is time for Law enforcement to redeem itself and earn back the respect of the public. The tea party, the occupiers, and others have demonstrated that the American public is 'fed up' with unresponsive ineffective expensive government replete with a credo of Ignoring substance in favor of 'good form' and meaningless words!

The drugging of the elderly is not a new thing - it is just so reprehensible that the fact slipped my mind. I apologize for not mentioning this unconscionable tact in my previous communication. Anyone who would deny a mother communication with her children and her siblings is a monster! Any public official who would attorn and aid and abet such a situation is a charter member of American branch of the National Socialist Party. Democracy is not a spectator sport, and if we are not diligent in its defense we will lose it.

Happy Thanksgiving -

Info for Bankruptcy Court from Mr. Ken Ditkowsky, JD, an Ill. licensed attorney

In Re: )

) CHAPTER 11

GLORIA JEAN SYKES )

) CASE No. 11 B 39381

DEBTOR IN POSSESSION )

)

MEMORANDUM OF GLORIA SYKES

Prefatory Statement

This Chapter 11 Bankruptcy was filed by me, pro se, on September 28, 2011. The purpose of the filing was to address bulging debts being incurred because the U.S. 1364 Federal Credit Union located in Merrillville , Indiana refused to allow me, the debtor, access to my money. In the course of these proceedings debtor engaged, upon the recommendation of Attorney Kenneth Ditkowsky, Attorney Jeffrey Esser.

This Court granted the vacation of the automatic stay as to the U. S. 1364 Federal Credit Union, and Carolyn Toerpe on _______________________. This Court suggested that the issue of my funds, listed on Schedule _____, was more property under the Circuit Court of Cook County jurisdiction (Probate Division) and it was more appropriate to litigate the issue herein. I respectfully disagree for the reason stated herein.

On _______________________________________ I attempted to file a Motion to Reconsider the Modification of the Automatic Stay. My efforts were thwarted as I was informed (please fill in the blanks below) “________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________.”

When I encountered difficulty in filing my documents in the clerk’s office I requested the office of Kenneth Ditkowsky to help me to file documents to address the modification of the stay. Mr. Larry Chambers, an employee of the office, after consulting with the clerk’s office, caused my documents to be filed. I have not engaged Mr. Ditkowsky to represent me in this proceeding.

Statement of Facts as to the Scheduled Funds

1. That on or about ____________________________, I suffered a loss at my home located at 6016 N. Avondale, Chicago , Illinois . I made a claim under my home owner’s insurance.

2. That on or about July 26, 2002 my insurance carrier filed a law suit entitled Lumberman’s Mutual Casualty Company v. Gloria Sykes. This law suit was docketed as case number 2002 CH 13769.

3. That after a series of mesne orders including but not limited to the decision of the appellate Court entitled Lumberman’s Mutual casualty Company vs. Gloria Sykes, docketed as number 1-07-0860, the Circuit Court of Cook County granted an award to me on October 17, 2008. That award generated the funds scheduled hereinand which are the subject matter of the Automatic Stay.

4. The Affidavit of the Attorneys who participated in the granting of the award is attached hereto and made a part hereof as exhibit 1. The opinion of the Appellate Court is attached as exhibit 2. The order awarding me the funds that are the subject matter of the schedule is attached hereto as exhibit 3. The printout of the docket of the Lumberman’s case subsequent to the entry of its final order is exhibit 4. These exhibits are incorporated by reference and made part hereof as if set forth in detail.

5. That the only avenue to address any defect or error of the award aforesaid dated October 17, 2008 (case 2002 CH 13769) is pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2 1401 or a timely appeal. No 1401 petition was filed and no appeal was filed.[1] Thus the award is final and the funds are clearly mine and mine alone.

6. That my review of the record and the Court’s statements indicates that no adjudication has occurred suggesting that anyone other than me has an interest in these funds.

7. That it is the established law of the United States that Illinois courts have no jurisdiction beyond their borders and certainly cannot attach assets beyond the state border.

8. That it is my understanding that the purpose of a Chapter 11 proceeding is to garner the debtor’s creditors in one jurisdiction and attempt to allow the debtor to marshal her assets and to work out a plan to liquidate her liabilities. Without the funds belonging to me, I cannot do this.

9. That the modification of the Automatic Stay as to my funds accredited on Schedule ___ obviates my ability to address my creditors.

10. An Americans with Disabilities Act claim has been filed in the United States District Court as docket number _______________________________________. The ADA law suit is incorporated by reference and made part hereof as if set forth in detail.

I respectfully urge this Court to reconsider and reinstate the automatic stay as to all creditors or persons having access to the funds scheduled.

Respectfully submitted,

________________________________

Gloria Jean Sykes

Verification

Gloria Jean Sykes pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/1-109 and penalties of perjury states that to the best of her knowledge and belief the facts stated herein are true and correct.

________________________________________

Gloria Jean Sykes

Why can't Mary G see her elderly relatives?

From Ken Ditkowsky, an Illinois licensed attorney:
On the eve of the Christmas Season, I would like to ask one main question.
l.) Why should any child or close relative be limited or barred from visiting with his/her sibling/parent etc? Or stated in a more specific manner – what possible rationalization exist for anyone to prevent Mary Sykes’ siblings (age 80 plus) and younger daughter (almost 60) from visiting with 92 + year old Mary Sykes on an unfettered basis? As noted in the Sykes case the effort put forth by the plenary guardian and the two guardian ad litem to isolate Mary Sykes from her family, friends, young daughter, and siblings is humongous. Hundreds of hours have been spent in preventing the younger daughter and younger sister from having contact with Mary Sykes! Hundreds of hours have been expended by Guardian ad litem Stern in an effort to prevent Mary Sykes from having legal representation!
The obscenity that the marshalled facts detailing the plenary guardian’s and the guardian’s ad litem actions in the Mary Sykes case presents is strong evidence of how far we as a society have progressed in our efforts to re live the National Socialist agenda. Just like the ‘brown shirts’ of the 30′s we are pious in our verbage, but, the Paterno Syndrome is alive and well! The ‘do not ask, do not tell mentality’ has led law enforcement and government to forget their function in society, i.e. serve and protect. It is easy to goose step along in benign neglect! However, the fact remains that what is happening is wrong and no matter what member of political elite might find herself/himself in the ‘dock’ should not be a consideration.
Mary Sykes is not protected by isolation, financial exploitation and elder abuse. She (Mary Sykes) is not protected by a society that can turn its back on her and allow a guardian who was named by Mary in an Petition for an order of Protection to be deprived of the love or her siblings and her younger daughter! Some activities are inherently wrong! They remain wrong even when approved by authority and/or the Courts. This isolation of Mary Sykes from her younger daughter and her siblings is inherently wrong. How does the Illinois State Police and the Naperville Police attorn to this situation. The National Socialists rounded up allegedly undesirable people in the 30′s, bundled them into rail cars and deprived them of oxygen and the world watched! As indicated by the number of guardianship abuse cases that have come forward we have temporarily substituted the allegedly disabled for the “undesirables” or Jews, blacks, disabled persons, homosexuals and Russians!
The very same ‘lame excuses’ and rationalizations presented with authority are now used to perpetuate the elder abuse (isolation) and financial exploitation and the lack of action on the part of authority. The Paterno syndrome is just as alive in Chicago, Illinois, Colorado, Indiana etc as it is at Penn State. Heavy clout obviates any meaningful investigation, prosecution, protection, or government function. Form is superior to substance and we hear:
1) a guardian ad litem tells the Court that Mary Sykes does not want legal representation – even though she has in her own hand written a plea for legal representation. Even though other family members have been passed notes by her and she has appealed to them to get an attorney and go home. How do the GAL’s and the court respond? To not bring up the subject because it will upset Mary G! Mary G knows her mind and she wants it to be respected. The Probate Code allows for the disabled person to make such decisions.
2) a lawyer telling a court that the isolation of Mary in a day care facility replete with sensory deprivation is ‘progress” (we know better – since when does a lawyers words substitute for common sense and reason?) Why is Mary being placed in senior day care, when Gloria can keep her at home and care for her?
3) police department response minimizing approximately 1/2 dozen emergency room trips by Mary and the December 2010 incident in which we was reported to have lost 10% of her body weight, and was neglected by the plenary guardian. (this is exactly what happened in the Paterno case – and exactly what the Tea Party, the Occupy group, and the majority of Americans are crying about, We are tired by same old excuses and blame game! – Coach Paterno did exactly what he was required to do, and Law enforcement minimized the serious child molestation. Indeed, had Paterno done more nothing more would have happened. Indeed, nothing more would have happened and did not happen because Coach Paterno was an icon and if an honest and full investigation had occurred the heads of many of the clout heavy would have been on the chopping block. Thus, Paterno is the victim that the media is felling sorry for! Hell with the victims!)
4) the failure of government to insist that the plenary guardian inventory the contents of a safety deposit box (and a mattress containing money). (The GALs, law enforcement and the Court that is supposed to supervise the disabled person’s estate watched extensive remodeling go one a the plenary guardians’ home while her husband was unemployed and the US was in a serious recession )
Once again – how does our society rationalize it attornment to the isolation of Mary Sykes (92) from her daughter and siblings! (80 +) The ‘box cars are on the track!’ You will not need your luggage – *****
Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

CALL FOR INVESTIGATION by Ken Ditkowsky/JoAnne Denison, Illinois Licensed Attorneys

1. A COMPLETE AND UNBIASED PHYSICIAN AND MENTAL EXAMINATION OF MARY SYKES TO BE CONDUCTED AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO CENTER FOR ADVANCED MEDICINE OR NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY. This examination must be conducted by real doctors, not doctors who are willing to sign certificates of incompetency without examining the patent - the record in this case reveals such a physician. It also reveals that the plenary guardian signed one of the certificates representing that she was a PhD. She is not!

2. A COMPLETE INQUIRY AS TO THE PETITION THAT WAS FILED BY MARY SYKES WITH THE AID OF COURT PERSONNEL SEEKING AN ORDER OF PROTECTION. It is amazing that this serious proceeding was totally ignored by the Circuit Court of Cook County and the two guardian ad litem who were assigned to this case. Incidentally why are there two guardian ad litem and what is their role - except to prevent Mary from having legal representation?

3. A COMPLETE INQUIRY AS TO THE ESTATE PLANNING DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PROMULGATED THAT ESSENTIALLY DISINHERITED MARY'S YOUNGER DAUGHTER. This should have been a red flag for the guardian ad litem. Since the plenary guardian was the named abuser in Mary's petition for a protective order this situation should have been investigated. Demands for the notes on such inquiry by the GALs have resulted in nothing being produced.

4. A COMPLETE INQUIRY INTO ALL FACTS SURROUNDING THE APPOINTMENT OF A PLENARY GUARDIAN FOR MARY SYKES THIS SHOULD BE COMPREHENSIVE AND SHOULD FOCUS UPON SUCH ISSUES AS WHY THE SODINI NOTICES WERE NOT HAD, THE AUGUST 31 2009 TRANSCRIPT, THE APPOINTMENT OF TWO GUARDIAN AD LITEM, THE DISQUALIFICATION OF JOANNE DENISON, THE ATTORNEY EXCLAMATION OF BEING RAILROADED, THE ACTIONS OF THE GAL IN PREVENTING MARY FROM HAVING LEGAL COUNSEL. The Sodini case makes these notices jurisdictional. Will there by a “cover up” of the admitted failure to serve the Sodini notices? If there is , what is law enforcement going to do about it.

5. A COMPLETE INQUIRY INTO THE REMOVAL OF MARY’S ASSETS FROM HER HOME AND FROM HER SAFETY DEPOSIT BOX - INCLUDING THE UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE ASSETS IN THE INVENTORY. This is the heart of the criminal conduct and the unifying thread of this case and the other guardianship abuse cases. This thread also extends to the nursing home financial exploitation cases. Millions in tax revenue is lost by not requiring the guardians to report the 'loot' received as ordinary income.

6. ALL FACTORS INVOLVED IN THE ISOLATION OF MARY SYKES FROM NOT ONLY HER YOUNGER DAUGHTER BUT HER SIBLINGS, FRIENDS, AND ACTIVITIES. There is no justifiable reason why Mary's 80/90 year old friends and relatives cannot freely and in an unfettered manner visit with her and communicate with her. It is important that law enforcement ascertain the motivation for the GALs acting in a concerted manner to perpetuate the isolation. Indeed, the demonization of Gloria Sykes by Adam Stern and Cynthia Faranga (GALs) is not only unjustified but evidence of gross impropriety. Ms. Sykes is a published author and journalist.

7. other and different aspects of the financial exploitation and elder abuse.

I suggest that everyone call/fax/email the court investigators (there are the federal ones or the FBI in the Dirksen building, 219 S. Dearborn Ave, and the are also state investigators in the Thompson center. You can also try to visit them with your petitions. Gloria, can you get their phone/fax/email and we can post that tomorrow? Everyone needs to email them with how Gloria lovingly cared for her mother for 10+ years while Carolyn idly stood by. Also, if you have information on assets, that would be great and can substantiate Gloria’s claims of gold coinage and cash in the mattress and what people inherited in the family and then died, that would be great. And finally, if you can substantiate how Mary has pled repeatedly to get an attorney and go home, that is very helpful too.

Open Letter to Naperville, Ill. Police Dept.

Dear Ken and Sgt. Krammerer,

I woke up and reread Sgt. Kramerrer’s email and still faced with the horrors perpetrated upon my mother and all people she loves and trusts. I am dumbfounded as to how a law enforcement agent can reasonable accuse me, or any person my mother loves and trusts, of making ‘unfounded’ reports, when in fact, Sgt. Krammerer has admitted that his only source of information is a named respondent to a petition of an order of protection, a ‘person of the lie’ who has not only repeatedly lied to the Naperville police, lied to the Court (three courts including a Federal Judge), not just about her profession (claims she’s a PhD and signed legal documents and filed them with the court stating the same); but also, Sgt. Krammerer NEVER spent one minute on this case performing a true and reasonable investigation into elder abuse, financial exploitation, et al! That is Sgt. Krammerer who, according to GAL Adam Stern, emailed Stern, told Stern he, Krammerer, would have me “arrested” for asking for ‘wellness checks’ for my Mother, and Stern claims that Sgt. Krammerer asked him to ask the court to write an order preventing me for further requests of wellness checks. That there have been over two dozen complaints against Caroyn Toerpe from family and dear freinds over the past two years, (that is an estimate of one a month) and yet, Sgt. Krammerer, believes that all people who Mother loves and trust are “bad” people and that Toerpe is a good person. That Sgt. Krammerer, had he done his homework would learn that Toerpe was estranged from the family for over 10 years, and that she only got involved in the family after I received a settlement from a homeowners lawsuit on my home, where the insurance company sued me! That had Sgt. Krammerer done his homework, as he claims he is a law enforcement agent, he would have interviewed Toerpe’s neighbors, and her husband’s family, and learned that Toerpe had no relationship with mother prior to 2009, and that my mother has probably asked neighbors and Toerpe’s family for help. That I have at least three 911 calls directly after my mother called me or picked up wthe telephone and begged me for help, and the Naperville Police the last call a coule of months ago, told me that Toerpe had an order preventing me from talking to my mother on the telephone. No, Sgt. Krammerer had not done his homework, not even close to a threshold of providing documents, reports, et al. that should then be turned over the Illinois States Attorney for prosecution.
That Sgt. Krammerer does not find it criminal that Toerpe has denied me the right or my mother the right to talk to me on the telephone, and that she has yet to comply with one court order, from producing a full statement of mother’s assets, to allowing unsupervised visits, let alone visits ‘approximately every two weeks”.

Sgt. Krammerer is quick to allege that I am the problem and cannot be ‘civil’ around my Mother, when in fact, I have over a dozen ‘visits’ with my mother since this started and at no time has the Police been called me and/or has Toerpe, Farenga, Stern provided the Naperville Police with a ‘record of conviction’ that would prevent me from unfettered visits with my Mother.. That Sgt. Krammerer, if not turning a blind eye to the ‘facts’ then he is part of the problem and enabling Toepre to abuse, neglect and exploit my Mother. That any decent person would have questioned Toerpe, the Toerpe family, neighbors, and all the people mother loves and trusts before jumping to his conclusions that my statements are ‘unfounded’. That one of the chapters in my book is complete with ‘facts’ surrounding the Naperville Police department and its lack of concern for Mary G. Sykes, and it’s bias approach to this case. That I will not be threatened or intimidated by Sgt. Krammerer or any law enforcement agent who believes that he or she can bully me into silence, or, also, as in this case, accept an email as the Holy Grail.

It is known that Robert Toerpe, Carolyn Toerpe’s husband’s son not only lives in Naperville but is in cahoots with the DuPage Sheriff’s department.

That this will be the third Thanksgiving, Christmas — holiday season I have been dennied access to my mother and Sgt. Krammerer beleives that this is okay and is perpetrated by a ‘healthy individual’. The court, Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga should do a psych evaluation on Carolyn Toerpe and would find a very sick, greedy, manipulative woman whose only agenda is to use my mother as a pawn and do me great harm. This is criminal. That to ignore this is just as evil as all the people who ignored the rape and molesation of children by the Catholic Church: Penn State, et al. That being an ostrich is easier than confronting these evils and society is harmed because of people like Sgt. Krammerer. That had the Chicago police simply not ignored complaints about John Wayne Gacy, 21 boys would have grown up to have families of their own and contributed to society. If you recall, Gacy charmed the Chicago Board of Education who allowed Gacy to have these boys participate in a homework program in Gacy’s house. And let’s not forget that yesterday they released reports of two more law enforement agents who are lawless and lived above the law stealing x amount of drug money…… That I beleive Sgt. Krammerer is a part of the problem rather than the solution, which is unfortunately the norm rather than the unusual.

That I am asking for a meeting with the Chief of Police in Naperville, a full investigation of Carolyn Toerpe, and so my mother can at least spend 10 minutes with me over the holidays, a wellness check of my mother with myself, and such a meeting must/shall be outside the home of Carolyn Toerpe, who is also named in a US District Court ADA complaint where the evidence of violations against a disabled person are not just mere allegations and are founded in the facts and evidnece that Carolyn Toerpe, Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga and the Probate Court have denied my mother access to the corut, access to servives, programs, and activities, et al., and to do so, have ‘isolated’ my mother from family, friends, her home and community wher she thrived. That apparently as a public servant, Sgt. Krammerer is also denying my mother access to the Court, police, and public services, support and her rights as an American Citizen.

Ifi the Naperville Police truly care about my mother, then on Tuesday afternoon or Wednesday, then I expect to meet with the Chief of Police of Naperville, and be escorted to the Toerpe home of and/or the adult day care cener or wherever my mother is held up, and a wellness check in my presense will take place. Let’s see who is filing ‘unfounded’ reports, Sgt. Krammerer. I will ask that the local newspaper also be present so we can have an accurate acounting of this 10 minute visit and make it public so there will be no ‘bias’ in reporting this visit and that I was not only ‘civil’ with my mother, but that Mother asked for an attorney. This, Sgt. Krammerer is the reason they are isolating Mother to keep their raged of horrors until such time they get rid of me. Unfortunately for them, I’m not going anywhere soon.

At all times I do not waive my rights to further filings of complaints with law enforcements agencies, adult services, the political elite, et al. As so often quoted from “A Few Good Men”, I beleive Sgt. Krammerer “can’t handle the truth’. To do so would mean the arrest of Carolyn Toerpe and the freedom and life saving rescue of my mother, Mary G. Sykes.

Oh, FYI it has been reported that Hannah, my mother’s companion pooch has not been seen for over 6 months. I have also documented not only elder abuse, medical neglect, isolations, and financial exploitation, but also animal abuse. That said, you can check out my credentials, Sgt. Krammerer. I don’t make ‘unfounded’ statements, reports, nor do I go pubic with speculations, innuendo, allegations, et al. But then, I have nothing to hide.

I can meet with you and the Chief or a representative from the Chief’s office any time on Monday, after 3 on Tuesday and any time on Wednesday. It’s Thanksgiving, a very religious holiday to my mother. At least give her the gift of having an opportunity to be heard, and an answer to her prayers that she can spend at least ten minute with me, away from the control and hostage of the named respondent to a petition for an order of protection that mother authored in the care and control of State employees at the Domestic Relations division in order to stop Carolyn Toerpe from doing exactly what Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga (also named Defendants in the ADA complaint) agreed and empowered Carolyn Toerpe to do.

That you Sgt. Krammerer want to ‘arrest’ me as Adam Stern reported to the Court for asking for wellness check, when the last two requests my MOTHER ASKED ME TO HELP HER makes me wonder whose side you are really on, and in light of your email, I do not believe it’s in the best interest of Mary G. Sykes. This is just my humble opinion, of course, and two years of intense, thorough investigation. How far will you go under the law to protect your Mother? Please contact me at the earliest time to set up this ‘wellness check’ and give Mary G. Sykes the gift of life, her family and friends that she trust and loves, and the opportunity to be heard!

Yes, I woke up this morning, feeling uneasy with the reality that the Naperville Police and it’s so called ‘senior services representatives have turned a blind eye to an obvious case of court sanctioned elder abuse and the abusers, now defendants to a US District Court ADA complaint made by Mary G. Sykes by ‘next-best-friends’ who only want to witness my Mother live out her life with the people she loves, in her home of choice, involved in the activities and community where she once thrived, and with all the freedoms and liberties guaranteed under the Constitutions of the United States and Illinois. Sgt. Krammerer you took an oath to serve and protect, so serve and protect.

(Permission to repost granted)

Healthy Regards,

Gloria Jean Sykes

Information from Mr. Ken Ditkowsky, a lawyer

Frustration - Update on the Mary Sykes Case

In the 1600's, Lord Mansfield pointed out that society had a duty to protect those people who could not protect themselves. He singled out for protection children and those who were infirm. In approximately 1927 or thereabouts, Mr. Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes wrote in the case of Buck vs. Bell that "three generations imbeciles is enough" Indeed, our society has apparently taken those words to 'heart!' Reading NASGA and Probate Sharks web pages it is clear that in an effort to not create a hostile work environment for the lawyers, Judges, and guardians appointed by the Court we have not only removed the ten commandments from the Courthouse but removed common sense and respect for the elderly.

In re: the Estate of Mary Sykes, pending in the Circuit Court of Cook County, is a magnet for miscreant conduct. In December 2010, Mary was taken to the hospital. Hospital personnel noticed that she had lost Ten Percent of her body weight. Had any inquiry been done as to this serious situation, the Elder Abuse mandatory reporters would have discovered that the plenary guardian admitted that Ms. Sykes had suffered from a swallowing disorder and was denied treatment until the extreme weight loss occurred.

As happens all together too often, there apparently was no report to the Illinois Department of Aging by the Hospital. The two guardians ad litem - who are now famous for their advocacy for the interests of the plenary guardian - also failed to report the clear neglect of Mary! In fact one of the guardians was quick to deny the admission made by the plenary guardian. Naturally, neither of the two GALs reported the admitted neglect to either the Court or the Illinois Department of Aging.

Reports by family members and friends to the Naperville Police Department, the Illinois Department of Aging, the Illinois State Police etc. resulted in absolutely no action! Even calling attention to the fact Mary had sought a 'protective order' against the plenary guardian before the plenary guardian was appointed Mary's guardian was met with a yawn!

It is unfair to say that nothing happened - something did! It is reported that Mary's youngest daughter and most active advocate was 'chained' to a chair in the Courtroom, forced to disclose where her money was, and the Court reached across the Indiana border to freeze her funds. This attempt to silence the younger daughter was unsuccessful, but has slowed down her ability to irritate the status quo and the guardians ad litem. Mary's isolation continues. Indeed, Mary's younger sibling (age 82) was denied unlimited visitation with her sister. The GAL disclosed that Mary's sibling is not fond of the abuser of her sister. [Apparently he thought that a condition precedent for one sister to visit unfettered with another was love for the abuser!] Thus, the younger sister was given restrictive (supervised) visitation after not seeing Mary for about 18 months!

It is now six months since Mary almost lost her life due to the alleged admitted neglect of the plenary guardian, yet Mary remains in the care of the plenary guardian without there ever being a hearing on Mary's sworn petition for a protective order. Mary is still isolated and both Guardian ad litem are diligently active to keep the status quo - i.e. Mary is being isolated and kept from her activities, her friends and her family. We all know how dangerous an 82 year old sibling can be!

Unfortunately, the GAO report and websites have disclosed the frustration that every victim and their family members must endure. How can this happen in America? The reality is that it has happened and we apparently are mollified by the lip service of the political elite and the meaningless words that they utter about concern for the elderly!

Yes, there are excellent and well meaning court appointed guardians and people working diligently to make life a little easier for the disabled and their family and friends, but by tradition we focus only on the miscreants whose avarice is so common. By necessity we focus on Mary Sykes and victims like her!

That said, the Sykes case is so obscene that it cries out for Justice; however, Justice, fairness, and appropriateness are absent as the Sykes family endures one outrage after another and each occurs unabated. Consider: What possible excuse can be rationalized to prevent a 92 year old person from freely visiting with her 82 year old sister! What possible danger can the 82 year old be to her 92 year old sister? Aunt Yo Bakken was indeed subjected to restricted visitation with 92 year old Mary Sykes! She had to go before a judge to obtain access to Mary Sykes. The restricted visitation granted to 82 year old Aunt Yo is a travesty and mocks the foundations of the justice system! It informs everyone that form trumps substance and *****.

Shame on you, and shame on me! We totally lost our sense of decency! We allowed this outrage to happen not only to Mary Sykes but to hundreds of other senior citizens while we mouth our concern for seniors, their health care and social security. We like the political elite could not care less! What good are few pennies of social security to seniors who are held hostage by a plenary guardian such as Mary Sykes has looking after her? What good is health care when it is denied until a senior loses 10 per cent of her body weight and suffers for days with a swallowing disorder! What good is our concern if we allow a senior to be isolated from her family, her friends and activities! Why do we have criminal code, and/or give any lip service to being compassionate concerning the elderly when we act in such a blatantly knowingly wrong manner?

Indeed the ten commandments, the Torah, the Bible or whatever we choose to call the words of the deity truly do not belong in our homes, our courts or our lives as when we let the Sykes style outrage continue month to month and year to year ***** Next time one of your elected representatives mouths off about how he is against cuts in Social Security or some other entitlement for the seniors - ask him/her why? Unless the political elite are concerned about senior civil rights, due process, and equal protection of the law all that health care, social security and the other entitlements are bribes that ultimately will unjustly enrich those who make their living exploiting the Mary Sykes' of this world. Worse yet - by supporting or buying into the lies of these hypocrites we are just as guilty as the miscreants. Democracy is not a spectator sport!

Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com