Dear Readers
While I am writing up now my thoughts and notes, main questions came
in from the peanut gallery regarding proceedings in Probate Court that I
believe get to the bottom of what is going on.
What I thought was most noteworthy, was 1) the judge admitted Sodini
was not going to be used in her court (now, I believe I heard that, but
it was fairly shocking news, so I might have misheard; 2) Gloria asked
about how a psychiatrist, namely one Dr. Shaw, who never saw her mother
in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, etc. is now predicting in Oct. of 2008 simply
did not have the capabilities to make or understand a written
contract. He primarily did this assessment of something called a “mini
mental” which Dr. Patel conducted maybe once or twice per year and was
part of her medical records. Now I would call that being a psychic,
because well, Mary wears hearing aids that are not particularly
effective, but…. Doc Shaw knows better (quack quack). 3) the court also
explained to Gloria who pounded Dr. Shaw with proper procedures
published by the Alzheimer’s Assn and the Mayo Clinic how numerous
competent tests must be conducted and analyzed, together with a
contemporaneous finding of a neurological testing for cognitive
abilities before a finding of dementia or Alzheimer’s can be made.
Oops, sorry, skipped that step.
The judge explained how the Probate Court declares people incompetent
by the thousands each year and the only standard it uses is whether the
person “can make (logical) decisions and be able to communicate those
decisions effectively to others.”
That’s it. No science, no Sodini, no due process. Get a quack and loot an estate–legally.
Thanks for explaining that your honor.
But there are more comments that are worth publishing below.
So have a delicious read on. I left the best comment for last.
JoAnne
From Ken Ditkowsky
Sent: Fri, Jul 6, 2012 8:32 pm
Subject: Re: WestlawNext – § 358. Generally
Subject: Re: WestlawNext – § 358. Generally
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 Ditkowsky
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
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
Expert witnesses
Do not forget the fact that your mother passes a written driving test administered by the State of Illinois
Ken Ditkowsky
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 ……..”
No comments:
Post a Comment