From Ken Ditkowsky--Statements not properly denied are admitted!

From Ken Ditkowsky–a Response to the ARDC

Posted on April 24, 2012

Motion to Deem Request to admit admitted\

Now comes the Respondent Kenneth Ditkowsky and states as follows:

Prefatory statement

                Supreme Court Rule 216[1] is intended to separate the wheat from the shaft and require the petitioner to Admit facts that should not be contested;

Rule 216 provides that “[a] party may serve on any other party a written request for the admission by the latter of the truth of any *125 specified relevant fact set forth in the request.” 134 Ill.2d R. 216(a). The necessity and reasonableness of the medical services a plaintiff received to treat her injuries and the reasonable cost of those medical services are facts that are proper subjects for a Rule 216 request to admit. Szczeblewski v. Gossett, 342 Ill.App.3d 344, 348, 277 Ill.Dec. 1, 795 N.E.2d 368, 371 (2003). Rule 216 provides:

“Admission in the Absence of Denial. Each of the matters of fact and the genuineness of each document of which admission is requested is admitted unless, within 28 days after service thereof, the party to whom the request is directed serves upon the party requesting the admission * * * a sworn statement denying specifically the matters of which admission is requested or setting forth in detail the reasons why he cannot truthfully admit or deny those matters.” 134 Ill.2d R. 216(c).

24 The statute was not designed to shift the burden of proof on to a defendant but rather to save the time and expense of litigation by eliminating the necessity of proof regarding facts within the knowledge ***610 **151 of the party upon whom the request is made. Szczeblewski, 342 Ill.App.3d at 349, 277 Ill.Dec. 1, 795 N.E.2d at 371. To that end, Rule 216 provides that “a party has a good-faith obligation to make a reasonable effort to secure answers to requests to admit from persons or documents within the responding party’s reasonable control,” including from the party’s attorney and insurance company investigators or representatives. Szczeblewski, 342 Ill.App.3d at 349, 277 Ill.Dec. 1, 795 N.E.2d at 372. However, Rule 216 also provides that a responding party may, in lieu of answering all or part of the request, serve “written objections on the ground that some or all of the requested admissions are privileged or irrelevant or that the request is otherwise improper.” 134 Ill.2d R. 216(c); Brookbank v. Olson, 389 Ill.App.3d 683, 688, 329 Ill.Dec. 835, 907 N.E.2d 426, 430 (2009). If the proper framework of Rule 216 is not followed, an incontrovertible judicial admission results and the fact is withdrawn from contention. Brookbank, 389 Ill.App.3d at 687, 329 Ill.Dec. 835, 907 N.E.2d at 429–430.

Oelze v. Score Sports Venture, LLC, 401 Ill. App. 3d 110, 124-25, 927 N.E.2d 137, 150-51 appeal denied, 237 Ill. 2d 561, 938 N.E.2d 522 (2010)

Discussion

                The proceedings herein are not the usual litigation, but are proceedings in which a professional reputation is being defamed, and the Administrator has taken communications out of context and drawn conclusions that are not warranted.       The respondent is not a voluntary party or an attorney in any of the litigation from which these matters arise, however, as a citizen of the State of Illinois and the United States of America he has profound interest.    A senior citizen has been illegally deprived of her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights.     Persons who have protested what appear to be extra-judicial actions occurring in the Courts also have been deprived of the liberty, property, and civil rights including the rights guaranteed by the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution of 1970.
It is respectfully suggested that the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission is held to a higher standard as professionalism than the ‘run of the mill’ lawyer.   This fact is recognized by the fact that the Administrator must prove his claim by clear and convincing evidence.      Thus, responses such as:

Response:   The Administrator does not have sufficient information to admit or deny the purported fact contained in Request number 1 as the Administrator was not; present in court on August 31, 2009.  (Page 3 Administrator’s response to Respondent’s 3d Wave Request to Admit)

Response:   The Administrator objects to the term recruited.   Respondent is attempting to show that the Court and the Guardian ad litem engaged in “doctor shopping”    This is a disputed fact and in not the appropriate subject of a request to admit facts.   The Administrator admits the Dr. Amdur signed a CCP 211.  (page 3 and continued on page 2 of Administrator’s response to Respondent’s 3^rd Wave Request to Admit)

“Response:  The administrator has insufficient evidence to admit or deny the purported facts contained in request number 6”     (page 2 Administrator’s response to Respondent’s 3^rd Wave Request to Admit)

Is inappropriate and must be deemed admitted.       The Administrator’s responses to the Requests to Admit are replete with similar evidences of the Administrator no complying with the criterion established by the Supreme Court of Illinois to avoid forcing a litigant to prove facts that in all honesty and candor should be admitted.

                The Administrator after essentially disclosing that little, if any, investigation required by Rule 137 was done prior to filing the disciplinary complaint herein was been served with four sets of Request to Admit, each set having less than 30 Requests of parts thereof.     Each of the Request to Admit refers to an essential fact that should have been thoroughly investigated.     For instance, Matter of Sodini, 172 Ill. App. 3d 1055, 527 N.E.2d 530 (1988)   requires for the Probate Court to obtain jurisdiction that notices be served on the close relatives of Mary Sykes.       If as the respondent contends the Sodini notices were not served, this complaint must be dismissed.       Good faith requires that the Administrator either admit or deny the fact.     The criterion set out to protect people like Mary Sykes is very simple.    List in your petition the close relatives and serve them a notice 14 days before the competency hearing.      If the Sodini notices are not provided there is no jurisdiction to appoint plenary guardians, etc.[i] .

                Complaints that aver that a party has acted inappropriately become an Oxymoron when a second set of rules apply for the Administrator and the respondent.    Herein, as an example, the Attorney representing the Administrator listed in the Administrator’s schedule of witnesses a witness, JoAnne Denison.   The e-mail that was sent to Ms. Denison was requested to be admitted.      In paragraph 15 on page 6 of the 2^nd Wave Responses the Administrator responded.

“Objection.  The Administrator moves to strike Request number 15/exhibit) as irrelevant to this proceeding as it relates to a separate confidential matter.    Without waiving the objection that Administrator does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the genuineness of the e-mail but denies the facts therein.”

Indeed!    The Administrator in alleged ‘good faith’ and ‘candor’  represents that he does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the genuiness of an e-mail sent from the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission offices by the very attorney who signed the responses to the Request to Admit.

                The respondent and others have alleged that their rights protected by the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment and the 14^th Amendment to the United States Constitution have been violated.    The respondent and others have alleged that their rights protected by Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution of 1970 have been violated.    The respondent and others have alleged that 735 ILCS 110 and 42 USCA 1983 are being ignored in this prosecution and in the matters involving Gloria Sykes and Mary Sykes.     When in a response to a Request to Admit a document can be filed that in reference to a an e-mail sent by the attorney representing the Administrator that said states:

“****Without waiving the objection that Administrator does not have sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the genuineness of the e-mail but denies the facts therein”

There has been no candor in the responses, no good faith, and most seriously a double standard is being applied to the instant respondent’s rights by the Administrator.      The respondent therefore appeals to this hearing board to declare all the Requests to Admit admitted and enter judgment in favor of the respondent in these proceedings.

                The respondent has served four separate sets of interrogatories on the Administrator.     Rule 216,  like Rule 213 does not place any limitation on the number of sets of interrogatories and/or sets of Requests to Admit that can be served.     Each set is limited to 30 interrogatories including sub-parts.

Wherefore the respondent moves for the Requests to Admit that were not specifically denied to be deemed admitted.

Respectfully Submitted,

Kenneth Ditkowsky

Pro se,  Respondent

5940 W. Touhy Ave

Niles, Illinois 60714

847 600 3421

What's the deal with the ARDC complaints taking sooooo long to be dismissed

Dear Readers;

One of the issues I have been wondering about is the ARDC complaints against Ken and myself for simply running a blog about the Sykes case.  I just can't figure that one out.

It's clearly a blog, it's clear neither Ken nor I represent Gloria or Mary, we're just concerned.  I also have known Gloria, Carolyn, Fred, Mary G, Scott, Doris and other friends and family for years.  I don't get that.  Ken was the family attorney, so why is Ken accused of lying about all of this?  If anyone should know about $1 million in gold coins and cash in the mattress, Ken would know.  I also checked directly with the friends and family and the gold coins and cash are well known.  No one is amused by the cash grab by the miscreants.  All the family--with the exception of the miscrants--agrees that Gloria was doing a great and loving job of taking care of her mother for 10+ years.  

There's little to dispute in this case--outside of the 18th floor, where the case suddenly enters the Twilight Zone with time, space and perception being dramatically warped into something bizarre, twisted and unreal.  And out of that twisted, warped court room media has flowed a story that is strangely not investigated at all by the ARDC prior to filing a public complaint against Ken Ditkowsky.

So here is his most interesting explanation below.

take care all,

JoAnne Denison

Now from Ken Ditkowsky:

My theory on why the ARDC complaints against us prosper is that fact that there is a great deal of money involved.   The value of the commodity goes down if there is a risk of disbarment.   Lets take an example.   A GAL for being deaf and dumb and running cover for the plenary guardian is promised a fee of $100,000.00.   this 100,000 can be paid part in taxable currency (check and/or court award and part in under the table funds - or all in under the table funds) The under the table funds can be a discount on a vehicle, discount on real estate, some fungible, gold coins etc.    

A referral fee of 1/3 is paid to the sponsor.   In Sykes we believe it is a political person who is receiving 'nursing home dollars.'    In that case it would be a campaign contribution.   (Gloria unearth a bunch of campaign contributions to the person she suspects as being the 'clout!' - she has come to her conclusions from a different angle and would probably resist my analysis.)    

If the political person receives campaign contributions he/she incurs no taxable income until she/he elects to pay the taxes on the funds.    As no one knows that our GAL has received dollar one he is not going to tell anyone.   He has a windfall.    All that happens is the disabled person's estate is reduced and no one is the wiser.   

In the Sykes case about a million dollars is not inventoried.   Shut you up, me up, Gloria up and no one has to pay dollar one in Federal Income Taxes!    Let us go one step further.   Why do the GALs et al fear an investigation.  A trained investigator is going to ask questions.   Questions lead to answers.   Answers lead to more questions and in the investigator is independent someone is going to have to account for about a million dollars of inventoried treasure trove.    

The GALs and the attorney for the plenary guardian have filed numerous complaints with the ARDC concerning you and me.    Ask yourself why?   Ask yourself if the regulators are 'pure!'    The GSA scandal of recent days should give a clue to the right answer!    Also ask yourself why my 'safe harbour' (settlement) e-mails were taken out of context and are the basis of the ARDC complaint against me filed by the ARDc.   Why is unethical for me to offer the GALs a release from the Civil Rights claim that I have against them in exchange for them just doing their jobs?   As you know I wrote the GALs et al and suggested that if they had nothing to hide join and ask for an independent investigation!   We have a better chance of having the President appointing either one or us  Secretary of STate 

Of course the GALs, et al all might be pure, sweet and a virgin.   It might just be a coincidence that the ARDC complaints against us are given credence even in the face of massive evidence to the contrary and the complaints against the GALs and attorney for the plenary guardian are just tossed!   As I said we have a right to differ and I will fight to the death to protect your right to disagree with me.

Do not fall down a rabbit hole!

 

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Ken Ditkowsky’s Answer to the Complaint filed against him by the ARDC via Cynthia Farenga

Posted on April 19, 2012

Link below to KD’s Answer, Motion to Dismiss and Affirmative Defenses to the bogus ARDC complaint filed against him for merely calling for an investigation and emailing those that can investigate or help in that and posting to this blog! Imagine posting to a blog to get an investigation started is an ARDC complaint!

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwR1lBd3NjMVVLdVU

Dear Readers;

As you are probably aware, Ken Ditkowsky and I are so far the only Illinois lawyers to protect Mary G and publicly fight the grave injustices done to Mary G Sykes, a woman ripped out of her home by a relative she rarely visited, and now lives isolated in a remote suburb of Naperville.  The daughter Gloria who cared for her mother admirably for the past 10 years–an arrangement well known in the family–has been evicted from her home, she was ordered (without a hearing or any due process or service) to stop working on her home to make it habitable after mold damage, then the court froze her $200,000 in Indiana so she is now homeless and penniless.

Why?  So the other sister can sell both homes, put the money in a trust that she benefits from!

Watch the video links shown below, sign the petitions, let the world know that you will not stand for an Illinois grandma and American citizen to be abused like this.  In the videos she knows what she wants.  She wants to live at home until she passes, she wants Gloria to care for her and she wants her property divided equally between her daughters.  She is NOT incompetent to that extent.

Kend Ditkowsky and I have been caught up in all of this because we have been working tirelessly on this blog and to inform others of this situation–and those attorneys who will churn fees at hundreds of dollars per hour–want us silenced.  They apparently have a lot of clout in Probate and even with the ARDC.

Two complaints remain against myself and Ken Ditkowsky–mainly for publishing the truth about the situation on this blog and in emails, and also to call for an investigation of elder abuse.  Apparently, when it’s the court and clout connected attorneys doing the abuse, it’s no longer abuse.  And when you stand to be awarded with tens of thousands in attorneys fees, you get to loot what you want from the elderly.

Please read the attached Answer to the ARDC’s complaint and help us out.

thank you.

JoAnne Denison

From Ken Ditkowsky

Dear Gloria and JoAnne;

Sorry that you did not receive this answer, motion to dismiss, and affirmative defense that I filed in relation to the spurious complaint filed against me by the ARDC.    As you are aware I have very sensitive to any attempt by anyone that is reasonably calculated to shut me up.   What is most disturbing is the fact that in reference to the Request to admit that I served on the ARDC that required them to either admit or deny the basic facts that they claimed were in the e-mails and which were untrue, the ARDC admitted that the administrator had no information to either admit or deny the fact.   Indeed, if they have no information they cannot reasonably suggest that anything that I said.

It gets worse.   The first pleading that I filed was a motion to dismiss pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2 619.   This motion had three affidavits attached in support.   The first affidavit was Gloria’s affidavit.   The second was Scott’s affidavit.   The third was the ADA verified complaint filed in the United States District Court.   All of these affidavits confirmed the fact that every word that I wrote in the various e-mails referred to ARDC complaint filed against me was in fact true and accurate.    To my utter surprise the attorney for the ARDC worte in her response to the Motion that there were no affidavit attached in support of the Motion.    (This is the very same attorney who without my permission called my client JoAnne.  Then when I objected to such an obvious breach, instead of just saying I’m sorry it was mistake she tried to **** her way out of it)

The ARDC has published their spurious complaint against me on their website, therefore, I assume that they will also publish this answer, and thus make available to law enforcement and others the information contained therein including but not limited to discriminatory enforcement of the ethical rules in such a manner as to thwart lawyerly complaints of corruption.

As I state in my answer, Illinois has a wonderful set of laws; however, they mean nothing as no one cares to enforce them.    Thus, Mary Sykes has lost her liberty, her property, and her human rights, and Gloria Sykes who has stood strong and tall in attempting to protect her mother has been subjected to the loss of her property, her liberty, and intimidation and harassment.    It should be noted that every single lawyer who Gloria has sought help from has been ‘talked to’ by Farenga, Stern, and/or Schmiedel and they have either been turned, or frightened off except you JoAnne and yours truly.   The ARDC has received complaints against both of us, and is prosecuting me as I by complaining about the elder abuse/financial exploitation and the theft of Mary’s property am tending to bring the profession into disrepute.    Of course the people who are participating are ‘model and ethical lawyers!’

There is a humorous aspect to the ARDC complaint.    Even though I am a stranger to the Sykes litigation and have not filed an appearance for anyone and there is no way that I could profit one way or another, the complaint echos the Alice in Wonderland averment that I complain about the theft of Mary’s property and Gloria’s property to secure an advantage in the pending litigation.   Indeed, except for the possibility of falling down the rabbit hole there is no possibility for this to occur.

Please publish the Answer etc.

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

And I would like to note (JMD) that if you follow the money trail, it leads directly to the Plenary Guardian, the GALS’s Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga, and the Guardian’s attorney’s Harvey Waller and Peter Schmeidel/Dorothy Soehlig!

I have not received a dime from Gloria in years.  I am doing this blog for free.  Ken has tirelessly written emails, letters an d posts from this blog–all without pay!

It would appear that Mary G has been fleeced–of her home, about a million in gold coins numerous other relative can verify, as well as other property the family can and would verify if given a chance.

thanks for what you can do for Mary G, 93 years old and professionally abused.

JoAnne

Petitions

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

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/359/248/993/petition-to-protest-the-publication-and-filing-of-a-complaint-against-atty-kenneth-karl-ditkowsky/

Title:

Watch Mary G Sykes–a victim of elder abuse, probate abuse and financial abuse who was declared “incompetent” speak her mind clearly!  Amazing footage of what the Illinois court considers “incompetence”!

Amazingly enough, she is supposed to be incompetent and her GAL’s Adam Stern GAL and Cynthia Farenga GAL have conveniently arranged a guardianship where her desires are NOT being carried out. She wants to live at home and have her daughter Gloria care for her in Mary’s home until she dies. Carolyn Toerpe had her execute a will where once Mary’s home is sold the proceeds are put in Trust and Carolyn Toerpe takes it all upon Mary’s death. Now Carolyn Toerpe has had Mary declared incompetent and is seeking to have both Mary’s home and Gloria’s home sold and the proceeds put in Carolyn’s trust. All of this has been done under the authority of the Probate Court of Cook County and GAL’s Cynthia Farenga Attorney and Adam Stern, Attorney. This proves that evil never sleeps.
Sign my petitions at:

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

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/359/248/993/petition-to-protest-the-publication-and-filing-of-a-complaint-against-atty-kenneth-karl-ditkowsky/

READ her complete story at www.MaryGSykes.com
Thank you for any bit of help you can give her!

Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else. This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.
PS – This blog is primarily for entertainment purposes only and please don’t file any pleadings or documents in court without checking with the sources for errors. My rate to review is $300 per hour.  Sorry, but portions of this blog have to be entertaining so we can get the word out.  There is most certainly a great deal of (stinging) truth in it, esp. for the GAL’s, the probate court and a society that ignores (thereby condoning) the sleazy world of probate, and in particular the 18th floor of the Daley Center in Chicago, but everyone needs to understand, these are not pleadings, there is no Motion, Response and Reply set by any court, together with extended legal argument recorded by a court reporter and subject to a Motion to Reconsider if errors or new evidence is found.  So don’t take it that way.  Like a good reporter, do your own due diligence and check with the sources first.  Honestly, I have to explain blogs to attorneys?  Have they no life? Do they not know how to email me or use the “comments” section at all?

Gloria’s ARDC Complaint against Atty Deborah Jo Soehlig

Posted on April 18, 2012

Dear Readers:

While we have not to date published an entire blog article regarding Atty Deborah Jo Soehlig, today is her day.  I would excuse her if she were just a young associate that is easily deceived and blinded by partners with decades more experience in twisting and manipulating facts, but according to the ARDC, she has been around since 1987.

1987 and she still does not do her own investigation of the facts?  That is indeed a very, very dangerous situation.

Well, Ms. Soehlig, I hope today is your day.  To read this blog.  To understand that what you are doing at your firm is NOT worth it.  Gloria and her mom lived together for 10 years and Gloria took admirable care of her.  Then Mary G was ripped from her home and family and neighbors she knew since the 1950′s and has been isolated in Naperville.  Go look at the videos, please sign the Petitions to get her home.  Look at the FACTS.  They are selling the homes only for greed.   The Soldini notices ARE jurisdictional.  You are now wound up in a proceeding without standing or authority.  It is clearly ultra vires  in nature and their liability becomes yours.

Your job is only a paycheck.  When you elevate your soul, the rewards are much, much greater in life.

I hope you can find your spine and read the blog, the entire Probate file and do your own investigation.  Then quit.  Walk out and go on your own.  Apologize to Gloria and the court and set the record straight.  I have been on my own now for years and years, but I need not be involved in greed and corruption and creating unjustified pain and sorrow for others.

If you can do this, I promise to help you.  It has NOT been easy for me, helping others often without pay or promise of pay or anything on the horizon.  But I have done it and I am still doing it.

Sincerely

JoAnne Denison

Now, for Gloria’s Complaint:

From the Desk of Gloria Jean Sykes

TO:  The ARDC Illinois

RE: Attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig of Fischel & Kahn

To Whom It May Concern,

Yesterday, February 17, 2012, attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig stood before a federal bankruptcy judge, (Pamela Hollis) and LIED.  This is not the first time she (and her colleague of Fischel & Kahn–Peter Schmeidel) misrepresented the facts to a FEDERAL JUDGE, or even a STATE JUDGE, but this time she did it with vindictive retaliation in order to further ‘bully’ me and dispossess me from not only my property “Homestead”, but also all property of my bankruptcy estate and procure a favorable ruling in order for her to have a huge financial gain.  It is a matter of fact that:

(1)  Deborah Soehlig will NOT get paid one penny for her unethical and lawlessness services provided to her client Carolyn Toerpe, the Plenary Guardian, unless she successfully does me great harm (renders me penniless and homeless in order to silence me);
(2)  Deborah Soehlig is giving Carolyn Toerpe legal advice on how to financially exploit, willfully deprive, and otherwise, perpetrate egregious and deadly elder abuses against my mother, Mary G. Sykes,
(3) Deborah Soehlig knows she is before a Federal Judge without standing: that she or her client, are not “creditors” and she is wilfully interfering and abusing me in a proceeding that she does not belong involved in;
(4) Deborah Soehlig knows or should know the law(s) and the Bankruptcy Codes and the Rules of procedure, but still, she pretended that she had me served notice regarding her Motion to Adopt she (allegedly) filed with the U. S. District Court in re the Estate of Gloria Jean Sykes, when in fact I was never properly served and the Affiant lied;
and,
(5) Deborah Soehlig knows or should know that her client is a ‘fraud’ and that there is but a “Naked Trust” or the trust property was improperly claimed in the Mary G. Sykes Trust rendering it thereby invalid, and that her client has no right to possession of the property at 6014 N. Avondale (“Subject Property” or “Homestead”) in whole or in part: that said, Deborah Soehlig knows or should know that the illegal and wrongful eviction perpetrated against me dictated that I be dispossessed of the second floor only and that her client LIED to the Deputy Sheriff, creating false statements against me, in order to have me forcibly removed from the entire Subject Property against my will or consent.  Deborah Jo Soehlig knows or should know that the Sheriff placed their purportedly legal sticker of dispossession on the second floor but that her client changed the locks on the first floor in order to dispossess me of the entire premises–an action which was false and unwarranted under the allegedly proper court order the Sheriff had attained color of authority thereunder.

Attorney, Deborah Jo. Soehlig, not unlike her ethically challenged colleague attorney Peter Schmiedel, have violated the same codes of ethics and professionalism and so the ARDC only need to refer to my numerous prior complaints against attorney Peter Schmiedel to pursue their investigation.  Deborah Jo Soehlig knowingly has committed serious torts and criminal acts no less than that amounting to acts of civil terrorism against both my mother and I for her own greed and financial gain, and she told me yesterday that she will “dictate when or if I get my personal property, my tools of the trade and intellectual property,  and or any of my confidential legal documents– including evidence much needed to prevail in the Federal Cases”, back into my possession. She LIED to the federal judge yesterday when she knows that the Order of October 25, 2012 is being appealed and that the court lacked jurisdiction to address that order — and yet, Attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig created the false and improper illusion that I was a “dangerous” person and her client was “in need of protection” and therefore a security company was hired to protect Carolyn Toerpe and Toerpe’s property at the Subject Property.  Deborah Soehlig knows that none of the property currently housed at 6014 N. Avondale belongs to her client, or has ever in fact belonged to her client.

I have submitted numerous claims and requested protection under the ARDC’s Client Protection Program and I have been repeatedly denied. The loss of the properties of my estate, the egregious lies  narrated by attorney(s) such as Deborah Jo Soehlig have caused me (1) loss of money and property as a result of the intentional dishonest statement by attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig;
(2) that Deborah Jo Soehlig has wrongfully misappropriated or converted, is using, and withholding my money and my property;
(3) that these loses occurred while Deborah Jo Soehlig was acting as Carolyn Toerpe’s lawyer and in a fiduciary capacity related to the practice of law (attorney for the alleged Plenary Guardian of the Estate of Mary G. Sykes);
(4) that because of the huge losses of property, income, et. al, due to Attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig’s deliberate fraud on the court which she perpetrated in several court proceedings, she must be investigated and disbarred, or at least suspended;
(5) that I have made reasonable efforts to pursue civil remedies and as late as yesterday, in motioning the U. S. Bankruptcy Court for a Rule to Show Cause based upon numerous misrepresentations, half truths and even outright lies, attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig, after court in the hall when I once again attempted to “work things out” and “set up a cooperative time to procure my properties while we work out the adversary proceedings– the Appeal, the ADA claim and the section 2-1401 that her client will be served today or tomorrow by the DuPage County Sheriff’s office–she has REFUSED TO OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE OR REASONABLE COOPERATION WITH THE INTENT TO BULLY ME, TO CAUSE ME MUCH PAIN AND SUFFERING in an attempt to silence me!

My losses have been massive since Attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig first became involved in these court proceedings relating to the Estate of Mary G. Sykes and these losses are due in full to her negligence, her lack of reasonable investigation into the facts and affidavits previously placed on file with the ARDC and posted on this blog,  and her gross malpractice (rather than intentional dishonesty).
Some of those losses (financial and emotional), occurred because she and her client is not in fact an ‘creditor’ of my Estate in Bankruptcy.  Rather, because she is falsely parading around in the Bankruptcy court as such, my claim is for lost profits, consequential damages, and costs to recover my personal, professional, and legal litigation properties. (Deborah Jo Soehlig has and continues to obstruct justice and she further instructs and advises her client on how to obstruct justice as well, inter alia).

To ignore the egregious and wrongful conduct of Deborah Jo Soehlig, who has LIED on motions filed, verbally LIED to state and federal court judges (the transcripts of proceedings where she has appeared are replete with such lies) and yesterday, she lied again to Judge Hollis in order to influence a Judge and discredit me for her own financial gain.  Attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig’s motivation is simple: greed and money!  She made an agreement with her client Carolyn Toerpe that the only way she will get paid is if she does me great harm, renders me penniless and homeless, and in doing so, illegally sells my mother’s home (and forces the sale of my home — “No, hell no I won’t let her do that and neither should the ARDC”), for her own personal financial gain.

You can easily check on all of these facts.  Deborah Jo Soehlig cannot prove or show that she has been paid for her services over the past two years she’s represented Carolyn Toerpe.  Her and her firm are waiting to sell the Subject Property and my home as well (“my Homestead”) by forcing a partition proceeding when she knew or should have known that I paid for the home in full, paid the mortgage and I was the only individual residing on the premise and that this arrangement was well known by reputable (that is, most all) of my family members–not those who stand to financially gain by the sale of my Homestead.

The financial exploitation, the willful deprecation of both my mother and myself is so blatant, that even a challenged child can see the FACTS that Attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig is using her position and office as an attorney, and using the courts in order to not only churn assets of our estates, but also to set a course that will ultimately ‘murder’ my mother. And inasmuch as Deborah Jo Soehlig threatened my life and livelihood yesterday outside the Courtroom of Judge Hollis in a direct pursuit of  what attorney Peter Schmiedel wrote in an email to my one time attorney Joel Brodsky, that the law firm of Fischel and Kahn will do whatever they must to render me penniless and homeless for their own benefit (to get paid).

The legal profession depends upon the public’s trust.  It’s been over two (2) years since I first filed a complaint against attorney Peter Schmiedel who appeared for the first time as Toerpe’s client on February 10, 2010 and I reported to the Probate Court that he was going to sell my mother’s home and my home too for his own financial advantage and gain.  Because the ARDC has failed to act, failed to investigate, et al, Peter Schmiedel and Deborah Jo Soehlig’s wrongful acts amounting to little more than civil terrorism, I am now homeless and penniless and without any of my personal and professional property as well as my intellectual properties needed to generate an income, and of course all my legal documents.  That said, attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig, if not stopped, she will assuredly not only instruct her client Carolyn Toerpe not just on how to murder Mary G. Sykes, but also on how to murder me as well.  You at the ARDC continue to laugh, continue to charge innocents like Kenneth Ditkowsky or JoAnne Denison, and while ignoring the obvious, you are empowering criminals wearing legal suits and carrying legal briefcases and pleadings to do great harm to the exact people and general public that you, as a oversight agency, were lawfully appointed by the State of Illinois to protect.

I am extremely fearful for my life. I fear for my mother’s life.  Meanwhile, Attorney Deborah Jo Soehlig continues to LIE to Illinois Judges in order to obtain rulings that will fill, or which may be currently filling her pockets with the hard earned money of good American citizens who have repeatedly  reached out to the ARDC pleading for basic legal protection afforded to all.

I, and I’m certain other innocents, live in fear for their lives every day because of attorneys like Deborah Jo Soehlig.

FYI I have not received any confirmation that the ARDC is dong any investigation on attorney Peter Schmiedel after so many complaints were filed against him, that it appears that this is a John Wayne Gacy situation, that the ARDC will do nothing until many die — and then, it will be simply too late.

The last words Deborah Jo Soehlig said to me yesterday as I ‘begged’ to arrange for a cooperative time for me to get my properties from the Subject Property, are “You can’t dictate to me.  We will dictate when, how, and if at all you get your property back.” She then turned on her heels and with her buddy, attorney Peter Schmiedel, simply walked away from me.  Other attorneys heard this and a couple walked up to me in shock!  Hitler is still alive and well…. is the ARDC going to allow Deborah Jo Soehlig to walk me (and my mother) into the Showers, too?

Right now, we’re both living in this Concentration Camp stage of hell on earth, and we can see not too far afield the Shower buildings which is assuredly the next step in this grisly process perpetrated with the assistance of the Schmeilig team.

Gloria Jean Sykes
Bon Ami Productions, Inc.
773.910-3310(cell)
773.631-9262 (fax and office line)

Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else–please leave a comment as to what you think is better.) This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.
PS – This blog is primarily for entertainment purposes only and please don’t file any pleadings or documents in court without checking with the sources for errors. My rate to review is $300 per hour.  Sorry, but portions of this blog have to be entertaining so we can get the word out.  There is most certainly a great deal of (stinging) truth in it, esp. for the GAL’s, the probate court and a society that ignores (thereby condoning) the sleazy world of probate, and in particular the 18th floor of the Daley Center in Chicago, but everyone needs to understand, these are not pleadings, there is no Motion, Response and Reply set by any court, together with extended legal argument recorded by a court reporter and subject to a Motion to Reconsider if errors or new evidence is found.  So don’t take it that way.  Like a good reporter, do your own due diligence and check with the sources first.  Honestly, I have to explain blogs to attorneys?  Have they no life? Do they not know how to email me or use the “comments” section at all?

Is the new Jim Crow in American’s Law Enforcement with regards to Senior Abuse and Probate abuse

Posted on April 16, 2012

From Ken Ditkowsky–all good questions for Law enforcement to consider and reconsider!

APPEAL TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
JIM CROW IS ALIVE AND WELL
At all times relevant Mary Sykes was a well-adjusted female, aged 90 years old.    In approximately 2005, Mary’s older daughter took her a lawyer.   When they emerged a series of documents surfaced that were deceptive and misleading; however, the intended effect was clear.  The older daughter was to have full and complete control over the mother’s substantial estate.
Unfortunately for the older daughter Mary discovered what had happened to her when she examined her bank account and discovered that $4000 had been removed from her account by the older daughter.     Mary confronted the daughter and was told “mom, I invested your funds in an IRA”      Even Mary knew that at her age she was not eligible to invest in an IRA and after an altercation Mary sought an order of Protection in the Circuit Court.    The Court personnel helped her prepare the verified petition.
The daughter responded with a Petition to have a guardian appointed for Mary Sykes.     Even though Mary’s treating physician refused to sign the ‘doctor’s report’ the Judge advised the older daughter to find another doctor.     An ethically challenged doctor who would attest to both President Obama and President Bush being in need of a plenary guardian – such as the older daughter- was quickly found and he executed the documents.
The Court appointed two guardian ad litem.   These ‘clout’ rich miscreants immediately joined with the older daughter in her quest and they submitted an agreed order to the willing judge who promptly appointed the older daughter as the plenary guardian with authority to separate Mary Sykes from her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights.     The entire story is set forth in the probate file of Mary Sykes housed in the Circuit Court of Cook County 69 W. Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois.
This saga is repeated every single day in Probate and orphan’s courts across the United States of Illinois.    Alleged abusers and other miscreants are given absolute control over seniors with little or no concern for civil rights, human rights, statutory protections or common decency.    In the Sykes case all the protections afforded by Law have been ignored.   A simple precaution such as naming and serving all the close relatives prior to an incompetency hearing for Mary Sykes was ignored and two years later continues to be ignored.
Just for the record the incompetency hearing provides for standard of proof referred to as ‘clear and convincing.’    The agreement of three interested people to the detriment of the alleged incompetent is disingenuous.     Other protections most of which are jurisdictional have been equally observed by avoidance or just distorting the truth.
One of the easiest ways for a dictator or a criminal to destroy dissent is to have opponent ‘put away’ as crazy, incompetent, etc.        Today, as reported on the Blogs and the Report of the United States Government Accounting office is the rampage of Elder Abuse and Financial Exploitation of the Elderly.    Sheriff Dart (Cook County) sponsored a conference that addressed this serious problem.     The most vicious of these criminal conspiracies is promulgated by the appointment by the Courts of avarice motivated clout heavy individuals who are not burdened by the Judio- Christian Ethic that permeates American Law.    By Court orders, as occurred in the Sykes case, a plenary guardian is appointed (whether the individual needs such assistance of not) and this plenary guardian exercises complete control over the person and property of the victim.
With the aid of a ‘rubber stamp’ Judge, who approves whatever whim and desire of the guardian put before him (the judge) the senior’s liberty and human rights are forfeited.      As long as the money holds out the senior is kept from obtaining his/her final resting place; however, as is indicated in Scott Evan’s affidavit the interim between the guardian’s appointment and final reward may be a living hell!
Lincoln freed the slaves!    You and I by our procrastination have made our senior citizens the new victims of an even more vicious Jim Crow than existed in the 1860’s.       The new Klu Klux Klan headquarters in our probate courts.   A written order signed by judge substitutes for burning a cross or a worn bed sheet.
I urge Law Enforcement and particularly the Sheriff of Cook County and the States Attorney of Cook County to independently and fully investigate the Sykes case   My office will co-operate fully as will friends, neighbors, and family of Mary Sykes.
There are hundreds of people similarly situated who are literally dying for Law Enforcement to investigate the incarceration and looting of their mothers, fathers, brothers et al estates by Court appointed miscreants.    The ‘rape’ of the seniors in the United States is a National disgrace.    The ‘cover up’ is outrageous and a testament to the breakdown of the American culture.    The terrorist threat is from us!    We by our failure to root out the criminals who take advantage of the Justice System to destroy the lifetimes of saving and hard work of our mothers, father’s et al are disingenuous.   Every day that the guardians appointed in the Sykes case continue their nefarious actions is a sad day for every single citizen and another lesson to our children and grandchildren that if you have ‘clout’ it does not matter what the law says.

Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else–please leave a comment as to what you think is better.) This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.
PS – This blog is primarily for entertainment purposes only and please don’t file any pleadings or documents in court without checking with the sources for errors. My rate to review is $300 per hour.  Sorry, but portions of this blog have to be entertaining so we can get the word out.  There is most certainly a great deal of (stinging) truth in it, esp. for the GAL’s, the probate court and a society that ignores (thereby condoning) the sleazy world of probate, and in particular the 18th floor of the Daley Center in Chicago, but everyone needs to understand, these are not pleadings, there is no Motion, Response and Reply set by any court, together with extended legal argument recorded by a court reporter and subject to a Motion to Reconsider if errors or new evidence is found.  So don’t take it that way.  Like a good reporter, do your own due diligence and check with the sources first.  Honestly, I have to explain blogs to attorneys?  Have they no life? Do they not know how to email me or use the “comments” section at all?

So much to read today, and so little time!

So much and so little space for today

Posted on April 14, 2012

I hope everyone is doing fine.  Our court watchers are out there in full force.

Two major (fun) topics to read today.  1)  Peter Schmeidel’s complaint against myself and Ken Ditkowsky which he apparently filed in April, 2012 which was a renewal of something he wrote to the ARDC in Feb. of 2012 which they held was DISMISSED.  Yeah for the First Amendment and actually reading it, and believing in it.  A link to the actual documents are attached and I think it particularly funny where he attached a  copy of my blog; and

2)  The Probate is still trying to erect a completely dead horse and attack a 2.5 year old judgment?  Don’t they know that horse is dead.  In December of 2009 Harvey Waller and son wrongfully froze all of Gloria’s accounts causing her much grief and consternation.  Then what happened is they corrected that and Gloria moved the money to Indiana, I believe in someone elses’ name. Then they continued to freeze money in Indiana as if Cook County Probate court never heard of State’s rights and don’t believe it’s jurisdiction only extends to state borders.  Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern stood idly by, turned a blind eye, and I believe supported this move which was clearly ultra vires!  Yikes.

Now it has been 2.5+ years since the underlying judgment (the Lumberman’s money to repair Gloria’s house), was wrongfully seized and frozen.  The whole case makes absolutely no sense because the house is lying to waste, it is not getting repaired to sell, the court and GAL’s stopped that for some strange reason.  Now they want to partition the house–it’s all insane.  (Could it be money, money, greed, greed?  you betcha!) But worst of all, the two year deadline has come and passed, and the Probate Court says it does not have to follow the rules of Illinois Civil Procedure, as if a King or Queen were sitting in the court room.  Last I heard, the US did NOT adopt a monarchy  in 1780 and appoint royalty in the courtrooms on the 18th floor of the Daley Center!  I heard George Washington was elected and refused to adopt a monarchy on this soil and that happened more than 200 years ago.

Am I missing something or do we now have King Rahm Emmanuel, or perhaps the Board President Toni Preckwinkel has declared herself Queen and confirmed royalty status upon the Circuit Court judges? Was there a ceremony?  Did I miss that edition of the SunTimes.

Anyone want to explain this to me?

Here’s the link to the documents you won’t want to miss reading, esp. since Prince nearly appointed Peter Schmeidel declared his ARDC complaint to be “confidential” (he might want to read those rules a bit more carefully, the recipient holds the privilege and not the respondent, duh!  And I’m a generous chick that will willingly share stupid ARDC complaints for entertainment purposes on this blog)  He wants his complaints to be enforced AND secret, as if that will happen with a mouthy chick running a blog.  If I want to run a blog that is hypercritical of the ethically challenged antics of Peter Schmeidel, Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern, I have the legal right to do this and question every bit of their greedy self serving actions in Courtroom1804.  I’ll be darned if I give up that right.  They are indeed the three stooges of the courtroom.

Ohh, don’t get me going

Check this doct out:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwVHVMbGhRaEZQbU0

And now for the rest of the posts for the day.  Thanks so much to the contributors who are willing to bravely share their thoughts to make this world a better place for grandma and grandpa and who refuse to sell out to the status quo!

Dear Gloria (from Ken Ditkowsky)

Even though Stern was quiet it  is still three on one.

In the not too distant past ganging up on someone was considered ‘bad form.’     The Motion in Limine that I sent you once submitted should is reasonably calculated to force Stuart to sit up strictly to protect herself (as you will be sending a copy to the Judicial inquiry board) and make inquiry on the three stooges to respond.   If she asks for advice from whomever is advising her he/she will tell her to quickly address the Sodini issue and if there is no compliance to immediately order the notices sent out and set a hearing.

By the motion in limine concerning Dr. Shaw you have countered the anticipated new step.   That will not be lost upon her.   By outlining all the jurisdictional aspects that are violated you have blocked Schmiedel’s next anticipated gambit.   There is just too much wrong with he proceedings that will be on record for the Court to quickly hold a bunch of hearings and then proceed with business as usual.

It is clear that you are smarter than either Stern or Farenga.   You frustrate Schmiedel as he cannot understand why it is so difficult to deal with Carolyn and her destructive moods and no matter what he does he cannot push you over the edge.

If you want a laugh – think what he had to deal with when he and Carolyn left the courtroom.    There is going to be real shortage of fishing worms this year in the Naperville area.   I imagine that when your sister reads the Motion in Limine Schmiedel is going to need asbestos panties!     Count 2 will give him full credit for being so stupid as to be defeated in Court by a mere ‘girl!’

Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

From: GLORIA  to KEN D.
Stern said absolutely nothing yesterday as CF did 80% of the objections and Adam asked one question at the end about mothers attorney Larry from the center of concern. It opened the door to ask Kevin if he knew whether or not mother spoke with Larry about the appropriation agreement. They objected to the question but k was allowed to answer: he said no. I asked him if he ever advised mother too seek outside counsel regarding signing any agreement and he said he may have but really did not recall.

That at all times KS never reported to the court or anybody that mother was incompetent and didn’t understand or was not under legal advisement is interesting. I was not allowed to ask Kevin if he found my mother competent at the time he met with her when he did nit recall the conversation. Another words mothers counsel could not speak on behalf of mothers mental capacity but if mother was incompetent then they the attorneys should be libel for the financial exploitation.****

Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 05:01:09 -0700
From: kenditkowsky, To:  Gloria, Joanne and Tim

From the reports of yesterday’s hearing Gloria knocked the cover off the ball.

That gave me the opportunity to send Schmiedel an e-mail that should help both he and Cynthia on their diet.   I did not copy either Farenga or Stern – just an oversight that should make the effect more *** when they see it.

What Gloria told me yesterday was that Stern, Farenga, Stuart and Schmiedel are in denial.   They know that there is no jurisdiction but they are continuing their harassment in the hope of ‘cracking her.’    In fact they are completely at sea because they have not been successful.   What is even more disturbing to the ‘bad guys’ is that they have not gotten Gloria to the point where she antagonizes all her friends and is alone in the wilderness.    For this reason we are now the friends, family and neighbors of Gloria and Mary.

The bad guys know that they have no jurisdiction and the proceedings have great moment in their lives as they have placed their economic livelihood in our hands.    Their insurance does not cover intentional torts, and the Greylord conduct can result in 7 figure non dischargable verdicts.    The flurry of ARDC complaints being filed by these clout heavy criminals against JoAnne and me continues.   As late as April 7 Schmiedel filed another ARDC complaint – this one was that I had a blog!    So what – I have a right to have a blog -  I don’t but these miscreants are not concerned with the truth, or the facts.

Mr. Schmiedel and Mr. Stern threatened me.    I do not like green eggs and ham.     therefore I will continue to engage in my little acts of friendship and brotherhood.

The next focus point is helping Farenga to reach her goal of being 300 lbs.   In my opinion it would held  Diane’s therapy is to feel anorexic

Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

*******

Mr. Schmiedel,

I read in your ‘latest’ complaint about me to the ARDC.  This one appears to be that I have a ‘blog!’  That is news to me!   Let me enlighten you – I am a citizen of the United States of America and I have a good faith belief that Chicago, Illinois still is part of the USA.   If you have any information to the contrary I would appreciate your immediate communication of such information.

Attached to your ARDC complaint was your response to complaints by ordinary citizens concerning your lawyering.   They were indeed interesting.   I know that I’ve mentioned this before when we had our first conversation – like it or not we live in the United States of America in the year 2012.    At least for the forseeable future Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution and the First Amendment are still in full force and effect and neither you, Cyntha Feragna, or Adam Stern et al have any authority or right to interfere with my right or my client’s rights of free speech, assembly or our right to complain to the government.

NOw as to the Blog.   In your complaint letter to the ARDC you complain about my having one.   I understand that Ms. Feranga and Mr. Stern have made similar complaints.   If I do indeed have such an entity (Apparently I also have a website.) my American citizenship gives me the such a right.   Indeed, I also have the right to say any damn thing in it that I desire without your permission.   Indeed, I do not need Adam Stern or Cynthia Feranga’s permission either.   Why you think that the Illinois Attorney Registration and Discipline Commission can censor the words and phrases that I utter is also very interesting?   As a public entity any action taken to limit a citizen’s First Amendment or Article 1 rights is strictly ultra vires and more importantly barred by Federal and State law.   In fact you can also create a Blog and say anything you want.   The only limitation is that the statements should be truthful or defamation could occur.   A complaint to law enforcement that criminal conduct is suspected is not a defamation, unethical, improper or fattening.   In 2012 United States of America even being critical of such luminaries as Schmiedel, Farenga, and/or Stern is not a defamation, unethical or in anyway improper.

Let me make it very clear to you.   As I informed you in our first conversation I do not take kindly to threats or intimidation.   I am very resentful of your attempt to intimidate me with the spurious sanction motion that you, Farenga and Stern brought pursuant to Rule 137 in a court without jurisdiction.   The fact that the Appellate Court vacated the sanction because there was no jurisdiction will be addressed in due time.  My clients and I will seek substantial punitive damages for the outrage.

The friends of Mary Sykes and Gloria Sykes are similarly aggrieved by what appears to us to be extra- judicial activity directed against both Mary and Gloria Sykes.   Let me remind once again.   Your statements on the record have been recorded and the record of the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois will not be spoliated.  They admit (in my opinion) that the Jurisdictional Sodini notices were never served!   In my opinion that at no time prior to any hearing on the issue of Mary Sykes’ competency has the Sodini notices been served on close relatives of Mary Sykes.   As this is jurisdictional and for the purpose of protecting a senior from being railroaded into losing her civil rights, privileges and immunities protected by the Federal and State constitutions it is my opinion that if Mary Sykes and her family are entitled to Equal Protection under the Law and the probate proceedings in regard to Sykes have been proceeding without jurisdiction.    That should have some very serious consequences.

Finally the Friends of Gloria Sykes are aggrieved that Gloria Sykes’ Lumberman judgment should be collaterally attacked and that in spite of the full faith and credit criterion you, Stern and Farenga are proceeding before Judge Stuart in an Appeal to overturn the judgment entered by a Circuit Court Judge in the Lumberman’s case.   What is really interesting is the fact that Judge Connors was part of a concurring opinion that pointed out that after a judgment becomes final, the only attack that is available is pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2 1401.    In essence in my opinion Judge Stuart is sitting and hearing testimony concerning the Lumberman case as an Appellate Judge without designation.   In my opinion she does not have jurisdiction and the freezing of Ms. Sykes assets was and is illegal.

Justice Sotomeyer in the Jerman case made it very clear that Lawyers and Judges are presumed to know the law, and this is a very strong presumption.    It is my opinion that these jurisdictional issues that seem not to matter in the Sykes case. – however, Mr. Schmiedel in the year 2012 in the United States of America we judge lawyer’s conduct by the ‘clear light of hindsight!’  Lawyer to Lawyer these jurisdictional deficiencies should be remediated instanter so as to mitigate damages.  Additional complaints to the ARDC complaining about my exercise of my right to Free Speech is just going to ultimately enrich my heirs!   The acting under color of statute to deprive a citizen of his/her civil rights in my opinion is a tort that is not dischargeable in Bankruptcy.

You, Farenga, and Stern complained to the ARDC that I offered a ‘safe harbor’ to you in consideration of Justice being afforded Mary and Gloria Sykes.   This ‘safe harbor’ was refused and is not being offered again.

I still desired to ‘free Mary Sykes’ and in the interests of being a good citizen and recognizing that I might be wrong (though I truly believe that I am correct) I then suggested that we all agree that the States Attorney be requested to do an independent investigation so as to sort out the averments and the alleged miscreant activities.   That was also refused by your and it appears to me a concerted effort was undertaken to ‘shut me up!’  This effort is an admission that something is rotten in Denmark!

As you can observe intimidation has not worked on me or the friends family and neighbors of Mary Sykes and Gloria Sykes.   We are continuing to call upon law enforcement to investigation and make certain that Mary Sykes, Gloria Sykes, JoAnne Denison, yours truly and every other person involved as a friend, relative or neighbor of Mary Sykes and/or Gloria Sykes be afforded their civil rights, human rights and equal protection of the law.  We do not attorn or agree with you that we are second and third class citizens because we lack ‘clout!’   That said,  Mr. Schmiedel I disagree with you, and will resist you at ever juncture, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to disagree with me.

As to my alleged Blog – The only problem that exists is the fact that everyone but me can access it and apparently knows all about it.   I would appreciate it if you would assist me in finding it and accessing it.   To my knowledge the only Blog that I have or maintain is in your imagination!
you may post this memorandum on your blog – or anyone else who desires to post it can do the same.   What has happened in the Sykes case and similar cases is a travesty and a terrorist attack on the Civil Liberties of the senior citizens of the United STates of America.   This new form of “Jim Crow” is a cancer that is killing the soul of America.
Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

************

APPEAL TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
JIM CROW IS ALIVE AND WELL
At all times relevant Mary Sykes was a well-adjusted female, aged 90 years old.    In approximately 2005, Mary’s older daughter took her a lawyer.   When they emerged a series of documents surfaced that were deceptive and misleading; however, the intended effect was clear.  The older daughter was to have full and complete control over the mother’s substantial estate.
Unfortunately for the older daughter Mary discovered what had happened to her when she examined her bank account and discovered that $4000 had been removed from her account by the older daughter.     Mary confronted the daughter and was told “mom, I invested your funds in an IRA”      Even Mary knew that at her age she was not eligible to invest in an IRA and after an altercation Mary sought an order of Protection in the Circuit Court.    The Court personnel helped her prepare the verified petition.
The daughter responded with a Petition to have a guardian appointed for Mary Sykes.     Even though Mary’s treating physician refused to sign the ‘doctor’s report’ the Judge advised the older daughter to find another doctor.     An ethically challenged doctor who would attest to both President Obama and President Bush being in need of a plenary guardian – such as the older daughter- was quickly found and he executed the documents.
The Court appointed two guardian ad litem.   These ‘clout’ rich miscreants immediately joined with the older daughter in her quest and they submitted an agreed order to the willing judge who promptly appointed the older daughter as the plenary guardian with authority to separate Mary Sykes from her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights.     The entire story is set forth in the probate file of Mary Sykes housed in the Circuit Court of Cook County 69 W. Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois.
This saga is repeated every single day in Probate and orphan’s courts across the United States of Illinois.    Alleged abusers and other miscreants are given absolute control over seniors with little or no concern for civil rights, human rights, statutory protections or common decency.    In the Sykes case all the protections afforded by Law have been ignored.   A simple precaution such as naming and serving all the close relatives prior to an incompetency hearing for Mary Sykes was ignored and two years later continues to be ignored.
Just for the record the incompetency hearing provides for standard of proof referred to as ‘clear and convincing.’    The agreement of three interested people to the detriment of the alleged incompetent is disingenuous.     Other protections most of which are jurisdictional have been equally observed by avoidance or just distorting the truth.
One of the easiest ways for a dictator or a criminal to destroy dissent is to have opponent ‘put away’ as crazy, incompetent, etc.        Today, as reported on the Blogs and the Report of the United States Government Accounting office is the rampage of Elder Abuse and Financial Exploitation of the Elderly.    Sheriff Dart (Cook County) sponsored a conference that addressed this serious problem.     The most vicious of these criminal conspiracies is promulgated by the appointment by the Courts of avarice motivated clout heavy individuals who are not burdened by the Judio- Christian Ethic that permeates American Law.    By Court orders, as occurred in the Sykes case, a plenary guardian is appointed (whether the individual needs such assistance of not) and this plenary guardian exercises complete control over the person and property of the victim.
With the aid of a ‘rubber stamp’ Judge, who approves whatever whim and desire of the guardian put before him (the judge) the senior’s liberty and human rights are forfeited.      As long as the money holds out the senior is kept from obtaining his/her final resting place; however, as is indicated in Scott Evan’s affidavit the interim between the guardian’s appointment and final reward may be a living hell!
Lincoln freed the slaves!    You and I by our procrastination have made our senior citizens the new victims of an even more vicious Jim Crow than existed in the 1860’s.       The new Klu Klux Klan headquarters in our probate courts.   A written order signed by judge substitutes for burning a cross or a worn bed sheet.
I urge Law Enforcement and particularly the Sheriff of Cook County and the States Attorney of Cook County to independently and fully investigate the Sykes case   My office will co-operate fully as will friends, neighbors, and family of Mary Sykes.
There are hundreds of people similarly situated who are literally dying for Law Enforcement to investigate the incarceration and looting of their mothers, fathers, brothers et al estates by Court appointed miscreants.    The ‘rape’ of the seniors in the United States is a National disgrace.    The ‘cover up’ is outrageous and a testament to the breakdown of the American culture.    The terrorist threat is from us!    We by our failure to root out the criminals who take advantage of the Justice System to destroy the lifetimes of saving and hard work of our mothers, father’s et al are disingenuous.   Every day that the guardians appointed in the Sykes case continue their nefarious actions is a sad day for every single citizen and another lesson to our children and grandchildren that if you have ‘clout’ it does not matter what the law says.

Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else. This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.
PS – This blog is primarily for entertainment purposes only and please don’t file any pleadings or documents in court without checking with the sources for errors. My rate to review is $300 per hour.  Sorry, but portions of this blog have to be entertaining so we can get the word out.  There is most certainly a great deal of (stinging) truth in it, esp. for the GAL’s, the probate court and a society that ignores (thereby condoning) the sleazy world of probate, and in particular the 18th floor of the Daley Center in Chicago, but everyone needs to understand, these are not pleadings, there is no Motion, Response and Reply set by any court, together with extended legal argument recorded by a court reporter and subject to a Motion to Reconsider if errors or new evidence is found.  So don’t take it that way.  Like a good reporter, do your own due diligence and check with the sources first.  Honestly, I have to explain blogs to attorneys?  Have they no life? Do they not know how to email me or use the “comments” section at all?

Finally–(some) relief from the ARDC!

Posted on April 13, 2012

Note:  Apparently, today both Ken Ditkowsky and I received a notice from the ARDC that attorney Peter Schmeidel had filed a complaint against the two of us and that the ARDC was taking no action!  Way to go Ms. Black!  We are not getting paid for all of our help on this case.  Ken and I are outraged at the complete lack of procedure, protections and assistance to Mary G Sykes, a 93 year old woman ripped from her own home so that her one daughter Carolyn could sell the house and put the money in a trust fund Carolyn benefits from.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

Now, from Ken Ditkowsky:

I have to file my 253 notice and the Answer on or before April 27.  There will be another telephone conference concerning discovery on May 4 at noon.   The ARDC will want to take some depositions.   The only deposition that they have mentioned to date is that of Gloria Sykes.   However, I assume that they will want to take my deposition and that of Scott Evans.    To take those depositions they will have to subpeona witnesses.   I will not furnish anyone, except me.

arranging for the discovery will eat up about six months.   In the meantime I have outstanding interrogatories, request to admit, and a request for documents.  The administrator is in a bind.  He has not done the required investigation required by the Civil Practice Act.   It is apparent that the ARDC complaint was intended to frighten me and get me to put in my horns and go the way of all flesh.

It looks like Ms. Black is getting an education.    ON april 4, 2012 Schmeidel filed yet another complaint against Ms. Denison and myself.   the complaint was another attack based upon the fact that we reported his ethically challenged conduct.   Ms. Black sent PS a letter on April 11 telling him the ARDC was not interested.

This letter is important as it is an admission that the ARDC complaint filed against me was filed for a wrongful purpose – had it not been, it should have generated yet another count.   Thus, two things are disclosed  1) the ARDC is recognizing that Stern, Farenga and Schmiedel are using it to cover up the fact that:

1) the Court lacks jurisdiction to interfere with Gloria Sykes Lumberman award and to continue the Probate fiasco that involves Mary (Sodini) and

2) that we are in 21st Century America and there are in fact Civil Rights that citizens enjoy and

3) that the US Attorney is alive and well and available to prosecute lawyers, judges and others who think that justice equals clout and criminal conduct is going to be overlooked by who is your clout.

The denial of PS’s latest complaint hopefully is an indication that we are recruited Ms. Black to the cause of equal protection of the law for senior citizens!  

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Legal Disclaimer–
Although this is obvious, no person in this blog has been accused of any wrongdoing, crime or even arrested unless stated otherwise from a website reporting actual arrests and convictions. We are stating our opinions and we have the right to do this. Only the particular author is responsible for his or her content. (So don’t blame me if you dislike some posts from someone else. This site is newsworthy because it is picked up automatically by many other blogs and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Illinois State Constitution and violations will be taken seriously with charges under the Illinois Citizens Participation Act. We ARE participating in government here–we are lawyers trying to make a difference to make things better for grandma and grandpa. We don’t care how much money you’re making–directly or indirectly from Probate or a nursing home or home health care wired-in business. Do yourself a favor and get a different job, it’s not worth it.  And if you’re someone filing ARDC complaints against this blog, we are all exercising our rights to disseminate important news to protect the rights of the elderly and respect their wishes.  Again, go get another job–it’s not worth it.
PS – This blog is primarily for entertainment purposes only and please don’t file any pleadings or documents in court without checking with the sources for errors. My rate to review is $300 per hour.  Sorry, but portions of this blog have to be entertaining so we can get the word out.  There is most certainly a great deal of (stinging) truth in it, esp. for the GAL’s, the probate court and a society that ignores (thereby condoning) the sleazy world of probate, and in particular the 18th floor of the Daley Center in Chicago, but everyone needs to understand, these are not pleadings, there is no Motion, Response and Reply set by any court, together with extended legal argument recorded by a court reporter and subject to a Motion to Reconsider if errors or new evidence is found.  So don’t take it that way.  Like a good reporter, do your own due diligence and check with the sources first.  Honestly, I have to explain blogs to attorneys?  Have they no life? Do they not know how to email me or use the “comments” section at all?