Dear Readers;
I have to tell you I cannot figure out any of this at all. Now LB is
accusing Gloria of saying July 5, 2012 was a date previously provided
to her, and that’s why LB is having fits because Gloria wants to change
it?
What’s up with that?
Even assuming arguendo that Gloria told LB that July 5, 2012 was good
for her deposition, when LB sent out the notice of deposition and
Gloria responded it was not a good date, LB should have accommodated
her. After all, it’s not a hearing, it’s just a deposition and those
are easily changed. No one should care 5, 6 or 7 days in advance.
Heck, I’ve even had deponents that had to go to the hospital with a
close family member at the last minute, and I’ve changed and
accommodated the deponent.
Attorneys pretty much have to go to work every day. I don’t
understand what difference a few days or even weeks matter. A true
funny story. I had a case where on or about February 1st, a Jewish
deponent said holidays were coming up and he couldn’t do a deposition
until 3rd week in April. Not kidding. And he wasn’t even a Rabbi or
anything connected with a house of worship, he just wanted to skip 10
weeks! We actually had to extend discovery to accommodate that one!
So I don’t get LB. And the thing with the dog is even dumber. Why
should she care if Shaggy is trained, untrained, certified, uncertified
or even decertified? She knows that Carolyn took all of Gloria’s during
the wrongful eviction action she filed and effectuated. And Gloria
wrote LB right away with a number of alternative dates.
What a crazy, out of control case. The parties are supposed to work
together on dates. LB should be nice about the dog thing. (Everyone in
my building seems to have a dog, and those dogs go to work, and well, I
actually like that. We’ve had a chocolate lab, a standard poodle, a
German shephard and a few other types of dogs that have come to work
with doggie mom or dad and I see no problems).
I personally would NEVER ask anyone with a “service animal”–dog, cat,
pocket pooch, bird, whatever, to produce documents and certifications.
How rude. If someone needs a service animal that means they have an
unfortunate condition and everyone should accommodate with the fewest
questions. Gloria is no exception.
Perhaps LB is worried Shaggy will make everyone laugh and smile and
not worry about the ARDC’s dumb, trumped up case against an innocent,
hard working attorney. Well, that would be a benefit.
Read on for Gloria’s interesting response to all of this…
And again, LB is making a huge mistake to make a civil war out of
deposition dates. Most judges would never tolerate such behavior and
they would force LB to take a date of Gloria’s choosing if it were
brought to the court’s attention. Nastiness, lack of understanding and
accommodation against a member of the public is seldom tolerated in
court. An ARDC proceeding should be no exception. Someone needs to
stop acting shady and start acting like a lady.
take care
joanne
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jul 9, 2012 3:14 PM
To: probate sharks , NASGA , matt senator kirk
Cc: JoAnne M Denison , Lawrence Hyman
Subject: Fw: Ms. Lea Black – deposition of Gloria Jean SykesTh
Sent: Jul 9, 2012 3:14 PM
To: probate sharks , NASGA , matt senator kirk
Cc: JoAnne M Denison , Lawrence Hyman
Subject: Fw: Ms. Lea Black – deposition of Gloria Jean SykesTh
The letter attached to Ms. Sykes’ e-mail is about as unprofessional
a communication as can be imagined. If you maintain a book of
examples of do and do nots the Letter attached to Ms. Sykes e-mail is
one of the Do nots.
The Sykes case and similar cases are clearly not helping the
reputation of the legal profession! When the victims and the family
members of victims are treated to the discourtesy of the attached letter
it is clear that civility is no longer one of the criterion of 2nd
oldest profession. In these Elder Abuse cases the attached letter is
the rule and not the exception It appears that Greylord is not dead
and the defensiveness that is exhibited by those defending the current
status quo is so pernicious that any reasonable person has to ask – what
are they hiding? Only an honest investigation by law enforcement
will disclose that fact.
Ken Ditkowsky
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: GLORIA Jean SYKES <gloami@msn.com>
To: aRDC chicago <13125652320@myfax.com>
Sent: Monday, July 9, 2012 2:22 PM
Subject: RE: Ms. Lea Black – deposition of Gloria Jean Sykes
From: GLORIA Jean SYKES <gloami@msn.com>
To: aRDC chicago <13125652320@myfax.com>
Sent: Monday, July 9, 2012 2:22 PM
Subject: RE: Ms. Lea Black – deposition of Gloria Jean Sykes
Ms. Black,
The
science behind LIES is quite extensive and today, our body language,
facial expressions and ‘tones’ of our voices, all are tracks leading to
the truth: also the words and phrases we chose when we are writing
letters, also give an unveiled look into the author’s mind: lies have
consequences, Ms. Black. Therefore, I reject your letter (undated) with
the envelop dated June 2, 2009 as it is loaded with LIES, and
misquotes, which is a common practice in communications (written and
verbal) by you, your colleagues at the ARDC as well as your buddies,
attorneys Cynthia Farenga, Adam Stern, Peter Schmiedel, Joel Brodsky,
Deborah Jo Soehlig, and Harvey Jack Waller: using your paralegal Amy
Brown as a witness to what I said or didn’t say is an embarrassment to
not only to the few decent attorneys world wide, but also treason
against the United States and Illinois Constitutions (not to forget,
extreme violations of the Professional Codes of Ethics)! Ms. Black, I
have made plans and fulfilled 100% of them for the 4th of July since
1994! It is atrocious that you or any person questions that I (or any
person) makes ‘plans’ for the Fourth of July holiday!
But let’s
start with the mail delivery. The letter you or somebody at the ARDC
wrote that was in the envelop I just received on the 7th July, 2012, was
not dated: however, the envelope is dated and I will copy and provide
to the U.S. Postal Inspector for his on going investigation into the
thievery of my mail (which attorney Peter Schmiedel has actually brought
mail addressed to me to the State Probate Division and the Federal
Bankruptcy Court). Do the math.
Next only
under great intimidation and threats by you to have the Illinois
Supreme Court find me in contempt of court did I argue that “if you are
threatening me with contempt by the Illinois Supreme Court to change my
holiday plans, I will, but you will have to make reasonable
accommodations for my companion healing pooch, et al. You, Ms. Black
then told me you would reschedule but only if I faxed you over a copy of
my travel plans. I told you that my travel plans are none of your
business. You then started to yell at me, quite patronizing and
unprofessional, and I clearly told you to ‘calm’ yourself and explained
that I was going to ‘hang up’ which I did. Your maliciousness in
scheduling refusing to pick another date (which I’ve provided you at
least four dates) for this deposition is quite telling: as I have said
before, Ms. Black, you can’t handle the truth so in order to not have
the truth on record by deposition (although you have a copy of my
affidavit which I stand by), Ms. Black you believe you can continue the
LIE in order to prosecute attorney Kenneth Ditkowsky. I told you and I
told Kenneth Ditkowsky, since he is the person you continue to give
notice and make arrangements, I would only participate in a deposition
if reasonable accommodations were made for Shaggy, my companion healing
pooch.
I also
requested of Mr. Larkin that he or you demand that your buddies Deborah
Jo Soehlig, Peter Schmiedel or any attorney at Fischel and Kahn who
represent Carolyn Toerpe, have the named respondent to a petition for a
protective order (actually TWO petitions for protective orders) return
all of my personal, professional medical and legal files and I will
present to the Administrator any credentials you would like for my dog
Shaggy: I’ll even give you copies of CDs with national TV coverage of me
and my pooch. Hell, Ms. Black! Shaggy even escorted me into the Halls
of Congress (in DC), and Congressman Poe thanked Shaggy and gave him
upfront notice before he gave his 2011 speech on the “prevention of
Elder Abuse”! Furthermore, Shaggy’s been inside churches, department
stores, on tennis courts and inside tennis clubs, and will be my guest
at a Cubs game! He can fly and get a seat next to me in any airline,
can travel on the train, and there are many restaurants in DC, LA and NY
which Shaggy not only joins me for lunch or dinner, but he is given a
doggy menu — and no, it’s inside. Suffice, Ms. Black not all
disabilities are eyes and ears and you are in violations of the ADA
Title II — but then you are blinded to any truths and have been and
continue to play deaf to the facts.
To
close, Ms. Black, I reject the most recent letter I received from you
because it is filled with LIES and misrepresentations of the TRUTH.
The Reader once wrote an article about my mother and titled it, “You
Can’t Fool Mary G. Sykes’. Well, you can’t fool me, or even an
educationally challenged child. In conspiracy with your buddies,
attorneys Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga, and Peter Schmiedel you created a
situation where you (and your buddies) knew I was unavailable and when
I called you on it, you intimidated me through threats: you yelled and
demonized me and then, when I still wouldn’t turn over my “travel plans”
you reported to attorney Kenneth Ditkowsky that you would have me
barred from testifying in September as Mr. Ditkowsky’s witness.
(Coincidently, you have served Scott Evans and not only given him
proper 14 day notice of service, but also, you have changed the dates of
his deposition at least twice and are working with him so each one of
you are available!). Witness tampering is a crime, Ms. Black: so is
veiled threats and words and phrases of intimidation written in letters
littered with LIES that benefit you and your buddies Cynthia Farenga,
Adam Stern, Peter Schmiedel and Deborah Jo Soehlig! I will not be
bullied. My affidavit is on file and I will testify in order to save
the life of my mother!
You cannot be trusted, Ms. Black.
Rightfully Submitted,
Gloria Jean Sykes
PS.
My
Mother, Mary G. Sykes asked me to find attorney Kenneth Ditkowsky and
hire him to protect her from Carolyn Toerpe. That, Ms. Black is my
mother’s right. You should be protecting her, not your attorney friends
for their financial gain… or maybe, it’s your financial gain too. I
don’t know but what I do know is when a person accuses another person of
the crimes they’re committing, he or she tend to feel and look very
empowered — relieved and saved from punishment. You and your friends
are cancers, Ms. Black, but even late stage cancers can be cured, I
know… therefore, I gave you dates that I was available a week or
so ago and your response was to threatened Kenneth Ditkowsky that you
will have me banned from testifying. Suffice, I am not holding those
dates for you and therefore, if you decide to do the right thing,
contact me so we can go over our calendars together and come up with a
mutual date for the deposition. In the meantime, I have a deadline on
the first draft of “The W****s of Justice v. Mary G. Sykes at 90″ — of
which there is a whole chapter on the ARDC. I will incorporate the
attached letter with all of the emails and letters written so far. It
is mind-blowing that the Illinois Supreme Court has become a bully, too,
just because of attorneys such as yourself, Ms. Black.)
Bon Ami Productions, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment