Shame on you. Shame on ALL of you. The arrogance and cruelty you have showered upon my mother has reached a new subterranean level by even the subpar standards applied in this guardianship.

You have the gall to allow an eighty-three year old woman to believe she would be able to visit with her ninety-four year old sister today – for a meager one hour visit allowed by the guardian. Then, at the last minute, you pull the rug out from under her? If there was ANY issue regarding supervision, this should have been dealt with weeks ago.

May I remind ALL of you, Judge Connor’s reprimanded the guardian on more than one occasion to be sure that her mother was NOT being isolated or kept apart from her family. You have all had the audacity to allow Judge Stuart to believe that my Aunt is not being isolated, when in fact, you know the opposite is true.

You have been complicit in the viciousness and spitefulness with which a tyrannical daughter has separated her mother from the people whom she loves and cherishes. Your aiding and abetting of the guardian’s actions has allowed her to punish her own mother for crimes unknown, while at the same time inflicting emotional pain throughout what was once a peaceful and loving family.

In your eagerness to have my Aunt guardianized, you erred grossly and placed her with the one person whom she asked to be protected from. It is time you step up to the plate, and do the right thing

As Judge Stuart has said, you are the ‘Eyes and Ears of the Court’, but remember, Judge Stuart is the Supreme Guardian.

~Kathie Bakken

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Democracy is not a spectator sport!

Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Source:  NASGA’s Blog post of 8/1/11

Elder abuse and the financial exploitation of the Elderly are the latest form of genocide and deprivation of human rights to affect our planet. While society is reticent in proclaiming its concern for ‘senior citizens’ a new group of predators has arisen to make certain that many elders of our community are  a source for the remuneration of the political elite.

The recent Government Accounting Office report is replete with examples, but one case stands out to illustrate the perniciousness of the process. This case has its genesis in Cook County, Illinois. Most recently the Cook County Circuit Court became famous for filling the Federal prisons with judges who demonstrated corruption in the course of the administration of justice (Greylord. The guardian scandal may be another episode in the Chapter. The actions of the guardians in the Sykes case are so bizarre as to be almost unbelievable. In Sykes the Circuit Court (Probate Division) sua sponde appointed two guardian ad litem. Exactly what these GALs were intended to do is a mystery; however, this conduct is demonstrative of textbook perfidy. In particular: one guardian ad litem appears to be intent on fostering the isolation of the elderly victim from even telephone contact with friends and family members, and preventing her from having legal representation while the other guardian ad litem has been concentrating on denying the younger daughter of the victim her liberty and property. The plenary guardian was appointed even though the victim sought a protective order against her to prevent abuse and does not even deny the ‘looting of the estate.’

An honored tradition of Anglo American Jurisprudence is the delegation to the Court system the jurisdiction to protect those among us who cannot protect themselves (Parens Patrie). The primary Court delegated the responsibility to which this mandate relates (the elderly) is the Probate Division of the Circuit Court. A disabled person is, pursuant to statute, to obtain the assistance that he/she requires with a full concern for the civil liberties of the citizen needing assistance. To investigate and assist the Court in its important duties a guardian ad litem is appointed. Except in the Sykes case the guardian ad litem is the ‘eyes and ears of the Court.” In the Sykes case the two guardian ad litem act to protect the Court from the troubling fact of a persistent breach of fiduciary relationship by the plenary guardian as well as its own deficiencies.

To protect the Civil Liberties and prevent ambush or exploitation of the elderly by the appointed plenary guardian it is jurisdictional that the close relatives as well as the alleged disabled person are given 14 days prior notice of any proceeding. (The plenary guardian usurps basic human and civil rights of the alleged disabled person.) This notice is mandated and jurisdictional. In addition various reporting mandates are in place and an agency is delegated the obligation to examine all cases of abuse. Each procedure of the probate act is designed to prevent abuse. To further protect the elderly the Illinois Department of Aging is delegated the task of investigating and addressing abuse and exploitation, and persons who would normally have first-hand contact with abuse or exploitation are mandatory reporters.

Unfortunately, in Illinois, it appears that the process has degenerated to a ‘cover’ to mask serious human rights violation. The plenary guardian is given extra-ordinary power over the ‘ward’ in that a miscreant guardian can imprison and destroy the life of the ward. The Mary Sykes case is so obscene that it warrants an investigation by the International Court of Justice and condemnation by an International Tribunal. Every safeguard has been thwarted and, with the unusual event of two guardian ad litem appointed in a garden variety situation, distortion, deception and outright frugality with the truth is officialdom’s legacy. It is alleged that the plenary guardian has removed from the ward, Mary Sykes, all civil rights, immunities and dignity. Mary Sykes is a prisoner in an American Gulag! Her existence and dignity have been illegally delegated to a person from whom Mary Sykes sought legal protection. This outrage has been accomplished by the conscious denial of due process and concern for Mary’s humanity.

The Sykes case commenced as a financial abuse and elder abuse case. Mary Sykes, who is now 93 years old, was taken by her older daughter to a lawyer in 2008. When Mary and the older daughter emerged from the lawyer’s office the older daughter was the primary beneficiary of her mother’s estate, the successor trustee, and the attorney in fact pursuant to a power of attorney. The documents prepared were disingenuous and designed to deceive. The net was that the older daughter had her mother’s life and property under her sole control. Mary is/was a feisty lady and was a community activist (in a good sense) active in her church, her community, garden club etc., and was not one who took things lightly. Thus, when she discovered that the documents that the lawyer explained to her as providing for her two daughters equally in fact provided her older daughter with complete control she became upset.

The older daughter disclosed the new scenario when she removed $4,000.00 from Mary Sykes account! Mary was furious and became more so when the older daughter told her that the reason that she took the money out was so that she could invest Mary’s money in an IRA account! Mary’s next stop was the Circuit Court to obtain an order of protection. The older daughter engaged counsel and filed a petition for a guardian for a disabled person. Video recordings placed on the ‘net’ by Attorney JoAnne Denison reveal that Mary was indeed competent and well able to address her own affairs when the applications for a guardian were filed in the Court by the elder daughter.    Inappropriately, the guardians have taken great care to suppress these videos and recently YouTube unilaterally removed them from the ‘net.’ Previously the guardians were able to quash a CBS interview that was adverse to the guardians.

Mary Sykes, to her detriment, had a million dollar estate and this made her a prime target for certain members of the corrupt fraternity of the political elite. In a manner that has yet to be disclosed, the abuser was able to circumvent the laws of the State of Illinois that provided protection for senior citizens and ram through first a temporary guardianship and then a plenary guardianship. The plenary guardianship was accomplished without a hearing upon the attornment of two guardian ad litem and the abuser. A judge ‘rubber stamped’ the abuser’s appointment as plenary guardian.

Every one of the protections built into Illinois Law was thwarted. The 14 day prior notice of a competency (guardianship) hearing was ignored. Legal representation was thwarted by the simple expedient of a guardian ad litem telling the judge that Mary Sykes did not desire legal representation. Ignored were written demands by Mary Sykes for legal representation. Indeed, one of the guardian ad litem knowing that Mary had made written and oral demands for legal representation blatantly represented to the Court that Mary did not want a lawyer. The Court also having this knowledge ignored the legal, civil and human rights of the victim.

When family members and in particular Mary’s younger daughter sought to intervene and prevent Mary from being forcibly and involuntarily taken hostage and being deprived of her civil rights the Court acted (at the request of the second guardian ad litem) to seize her (the daughter’s property) and impoverish her.

The dehumanizing of Mary Sykes began in earnest in August 2009. Even though Mary’s treating physician refused to certify her as incompetent,  a judge of the Circuit Court directed the ‘abuser’ to go out and find a doctor who would prostitute his profession and certify Mary to be a disabled person. Forthwith, the deed was accomplished.     Thereupon with the legal authorities and the Court, blindly ignoring Mary’s protests and the protests of family and friends, the abuser (now the plenary guardian was able to deny Mary Sykes the totality of her civil rights and human rights.

In summary, the older daughter (the abuser – now the plenary guardian) was able to thwart any attempt to derail her personal dominance of her mother and her mother’s estate and was by a series of Court orders allowed to isolate Mary from her friends, her family, and even her younger daughter. Two guardian ad litem were appointed who spearheaded the assault on anyone who had the temerity to contest the dominance of the older daughter. Mary was cut off from even telephone contact with everything in her prior life. Mary was placed in a ‘day care facility’ that denied her access to her church, her garden club, her friends, her neighbors, and intelligent and/or active social intercourse with persons able to communicate.

So blatant was the action and arrogance of the older daughter that she ‘assaulted Mary’s younger sister’ and then made claims that resulted in Mary’s sibling essentially being barred from contact with the Mary. Mary was totally isolated and a Judge of the Circuit Court and two guardian ad litem enforced the ban. Hardened violent criminals in State and Federal Penal Institutions are afforded more consideration and contact with family and friends than Mary Sykes. Mary’s assets contemporaneously were being dissipated by the abuser (now plenary guardian) under the cover and attornment of the two guardian ad litem!   

One guardian ad litem visited the Naperville home of the plenary guardian. During the visit he observed a scenario that a reasonable person would have required an immediate report to the Court. The GAL  did not report to the Court or the State Agency that the ‘plenary guardian’ in the height of the recession was engaged in exhibiting her new found wealth by doing extensive remodeling and her husband, who previously was unemployed, had now retired and was luxuriating. Systematically the GALs in their official capacity ignored and ‘covered up’ overt evidence of the ‘looting’ of Mary Sykes’ estate and the denial of human rights.

The torture to which the victim was subject was and is open and notorious. A family friend, who had previously been employed by a Federal Agency, investigated the conditions under which Mary was domiciled and reported that she spent her days in a day care center surrounded by non-stimulation. Her companions were people who could not or would not function.  He was appalled and reported his observations. His findings were ignored; however, the attorney for the plenary guardian did report to the Court that Mary was making wonderful progress. He did not define what he meant.

The Estate of Mary Sykes, prior to the guardianship, was quite substantial. Mary’s husband, a former decorated Sgt. of police and a habitual saver, collected gold and silver coins, and was ‘old school’ frugal.  In addition Mary and her younger daughter inherited a gold coin collection from a relative. It is estimated that the Estate was on the ‘west side’ of a million dollars. Having survived the great depression of the 1930’s Mary like many of her generation also had a substantial horde of cash in her mattress. In January 2012 the attorney for the plenary guardian reported that Mary’s estate was now less than $4,000.00.

Thus, a citizen of the United States of America, who by State and Federal Constitution is entitled to due process and equal protection of the law, has been stripped of all human and civil rights. The State of Illinois – and particularly the Circuit Court of Cook County ignored and continues to ignore her plight. If the deprivation of human rights and civil rights mentioned supra were the totality of the problem Mary’s situation would be the ‘garden variety’ deprivation that is reported in the press to be the norm in third world dictatorships.  However, the family and friends of Mary Sykes have also been subjected to the wrath of the politically elite miscreants.

Mary’s younger daughter attempted to exercise her civil rights guaranteed by the Federal and State Constitution and her civil liberties were summarily stripped from her. An insurance claim that was awarded to her was literally confiscated without notice and hearing by a Circuit Court. A guardian ad litem demanded that insurance renovation cease on the younger daughter’s home. Without hearing or the legal protections the Court ordered it ceased and the funds impounded. The attorney for the plenary guardian ordered payments on her (the daughter’s) mortgage be escrowed. They were and the mortgagor was declared in default by the lender Federal and State law being ignored. The plenary guardian ordered utilities to the dwelling that the daughter resided in to be cut off – and they were. All contact with Mary was cut off, and the Court demanded that to visit with her mother the younger daughter would have to engage a supervisor at her expense.

Such activities are generally prohibited by Illinois and Federal Statutes – however, it appears that the Constitution was suspended to accommodate the political elite’s needs in the Sykes case. Indeed, it is axiomatic that America prides itself on its First Amendment. In 735 ILCS 110/5 the State of Illinois announced its policy.   I‘ve attached a copy of the public policy for your consideration. The undersigned, on or about April 22, 2010, was engaged by several members of the community to investigate the Mary Sykes affair. I did. I wrote a letter to the two guardian ad litem and requested a copy of their report. This report is mandatory and must be presented to the Court as one of the protections afforded to citizens so that they will not be deprived of their civil rights.    Having been informed that the treating physician would not sign the certificate of incompetency, I made inquiry of the doctor.   The consequences were immediate.   I received threatening calls from the guardian ad litem and the attorney for the plenary guardian, warning me of dire consequences if I did not cease and desist my inquiry.    As I have been practicing law in the United States of America for half a century and have argued before the Supreme Court of the United States of America, I am a bit arrogant and laughed off the threats.

To my shock I was met with a barrage of harassment and intimidation.    The two guardian ad litem and the plenary guardian filed disciplinary charges against me in both the Circuit Court of Cook County and before the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.   The Circuit Court proceeding sought sanctions against me.  I was illegally fined approximately $5,000.00.     The ARDC demanded my records in connection with the Sykes matter.    I voluntarily turned over the requested records – as I had nothing to hide – and more importantly in the few days that I had been able to investigate I discovered that serious criminal action had taken place.  My complaints were ignored and continue to be ignored.   A safety deposit box in the name of the younger daughter and Mary Sykes had been drilled and the contents containing ‘gold coins’ and other valuables had been ‘looted.’   Valuable antiques had disappeared, and most seriously, all the safeguards that were built into the law were honored in the breach.

The ARDC investigation of me has been quiet, but, it has not been dismissed.    Cross requests for investigation of the alleged conspiracy to deprive Mary Sykes and Gloria Sykes (the younger daughter) appear to have been ignored.    Requests for law enforcement to investigate what is alleged to be ‘felony theft’ and theft by fiduciaries has been ignored as have been the legal requirements for an accurate accounting and inventory of the Estate’s assets.    Mandatory reporting of abuse has not been made, and numerous trips by Mary Sykes to the emergency room for injuries and neglect have either not been made or ignored.    The daughter’s application to the Courts for supervision of the plenary guardian, relief from the illegal takings of her property etc. has virtually fallen on deaf ears.    The Courts, even though the record before them is replete with red flags and evidence of the systematic denial of human and civil rights of both Gloria Sykes and Mary Sykes, ignores them.

I was not intimidated by the plenary guardian, the Court, or the guardian ad litem and filed a successful appeal of my ‘fine.’   The Appellate Court of Illinois found that the Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction and vacated the fine vindicating the age old principle of Judeo Christian law.    However, with Mary’s million dollars estate apparently distributed to the various conspirators Mary’s life is in serious danger.      In December 2010 it was discovered by our investigation that Mary Sykes had been taken to the emergency room and had lost 10% of her body weight due to the admitted neglect of the plenary guardian.    (The plenary guardian admitted that Mary had a swallowing problem and could not eat.   For more than a week Mary was denied treatment.)  We have requested ‘wellness checks,’ as Mary has had numerous trips to the emergency room (one of the signs of abuse), but have had no reports back. At this point in time there is no incentive for the miscreants to keep Mary alive.

Another cause for concern is the fact that recently the undersigned discovered that a number of videos had been recorded contemporaneously with the events described supra.   These have been suppressed.    A key video had been provided to a guardian ad litem and when its return was sought the video was examined and found to have been altered.     All the videos were then placed (at my request) on the internet by an attorney who had been engaged prior to the undersigned.    The attorney had been disqualified from representing the younger daughter because she acted as a notary on a document that Mary had signed.    The guardians filed ARDC complaints against the posting attorney.    It appears that these charges are being investigated even though on their face they are frivolous and clearly contrary to the published public policy of the State of Illinois, 735 ILCS 110/5.  (The act of witnessing the signing of a document is not such an act as would disqualify an attorney in a case such as this. A guardianship case is supposed to be non-adversarial.)

Unfortunately senior citizens are the new third class citizens in the United States.    In particular, any senior who might run afoul of a member of the privileged court appointed guardians is apt to be deprived of his/her civil rights and human rights.    The insidious financial exploitation and abuse as illustrated by the Sykes case constitutes 2012 genocide – after the estate is looted, the victim is disposed of!    As the Government Accounting Office in its report discloses a lack of interest on the part of the American Government to address these issues in a practical and effective manner, we make this appeal to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice to protect the human rights of senior citizens.

Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation.

~Kenneth Ditkowsky

October 5, 2011
Judge Jane Louise Stuart                                 Via Fax 312-603-6721
Courtroom 1804
Circuit Court of Cook County
50 W. Washington Street
Richard J. Daley Center
Chicago, IL 60602

Dear Judge Stuart,

Enclosed is a copy of the decision by Justice Harris in Eric Parker and Lynlee Muehring v. Michael Murdock No. 1-10-1645, Sept 13, 2011 in which Judge Maureen Connors concurred.  It is very clear that you are being misled as to the law by attorneys Peter Schmiedel, Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern. A judgment that I received in Lumbermen’s v. Gloria Sykes is entered to full faith and credit and can be attacked only pursuant to ILCS 5/2 1401. As over two years had pass to appeal, a collateral attack by the Plenary Guardian on this judgment is a violation of 42 ILSC A 1983.  The probate Court cannot obtain jurisdiction to vacate a final judgment!

Let me respectfully suggest that the chaining me with handcuffs to a metal chair and false imprisonment that occurred on March 29, 2011 should have never occurred and the promulgation thereof, was a direct criminal contempt of court by the Plenary Guardian and her co-conspirators. I mention this without waving my rights to address this at a later time because I have respect for the Court, but I have no respect for the Officers of the court who are using the Court to deprive me of my Civil Rights, my property, my assets, my Liberties, and my relationship with my mother, Mary G. Sykes!

The tragedy here is not what has happened to me, although there is irreparable harm, but what has happened to my mother, Mary G. Sykes. My Mother filed a verified petition for an order of protection against the person who was ultimately appointed Plenary Guardian.  This petition was written by a Court Intake Employee and notarized by a notary appointed by the State of Illinois.  Neither found my Mother incompetent!  Indeed, my Mother’s personal treating physician refused to sign the competency form (CCP211)!  Mother, without knowledge of the CCP0214, she herself hand-wrote letters and notes to the court and did so after she stood before the Court twice and objected to the Guardianship!  Only Dr. G. Shaw, who has a reputation for finding people accused of incompetency, found Mother incompetent!  Dr. Shaw, who failed to follow basic medical procedures such as taking a history, talking to Mother’s personal physician, or even talking to or examining Mother prior to testifying under oath, has found my Mother incompetent.

More seriously, the attorneys who represented my Mother’s interest in the Lumbermen’s case provided an affidavit that she was highly competent: this was confirmed by the presiding judge in the Law Division, Mary A. Mulhern, who entered the order.

I respectfully ask you sua sponde this matter to the Illinois States Attorney’s Offices of Cook and Du Page Counties to investigate the elder abuses—drugging, medical and emotional neglect, isolation and financial exploitations of my mother Mary G. Sykes that has and is occurring herein.  The Court has yet to see a true accounting (as ordered) of Mother’s financials 2006 through 2010, or an accurate inventory of mother’s personal property, let alone a full and complete copy of her Trust. There is a “court order” granting visits between my Mother and me “approximately every two weeks”; however, I have not seen my Mother since the last wonderful, loving and fun visit in March 2011.  The Plenary Guardian has also denied all telephone contact.  In fact, no one has been allowed to talk to Mother in about 7 weeks.

I cannot ask you in this letter to vacate the orders that should not have ever been entered, but I feel in light of the Eric Parker and Lynlee Muehring v. Michael Murdock   case, I can ask you for a referral to the Illinois States Attorneys offices of both counties in hope that the State of Illinois will protect my Mother from further Elder Abuse, drugging, isolation and financial exploitation.

At no time do I submit to the Jurisdiction of this Court in re The Estate of Mary G. Sykes as the Court did not meet the requirements of In re Guardianship of Ralph F. Sodini, 172 Ill.App.3d 1055 (1988) 527 N.E.2d 520. 

Respectfully Submitted,

Gloria Jean Sykes pro se
773-910-3310
6014-6016 N. Avondale Ave.
Chicago, IL 60631

Attachments:  Eric Parker and Lynlee Muehring v. Michael Murdock No. 1-10-1645, Sept 13, 2011

CC: Chief Judge T. Evans, Presiding Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan, Department of Justice, Senators Richard Blumenthal, Al Franken, and Amy Klobuchar, and the National Association to STOP Guardianship Abuse; Attorney Peter Schmiedel and GAL’s Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga

In Re Gloria Jean Sykes                     )

)

Debtor in Possession             )                       case No. 2011 BK  39381

)

)                       Chapter 11

)

VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT
OF GLORIA JEAN SYKES IN RE ASSETS HELD UP AT
U.S. FEDERAL CREDIT UNION IN INDIANA

Gloria Jean Sykes, being duly sworn upon her oath says;

My name is Gloria Jean Sykes and I am over the age of eighteen (18) and legally competent to testify as follows that;

1.    That on June 20, 2008, Justice Joseph Gordon delivered the opinion of the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Sixth Division in Lumbermen’s Mutual Casualty Company, v. Gloria Sykes 890 N.E.2d 1086 (2008), the same which awarded Gloria Jean Sykes personal damages in the amount of $707, 623. (Exhibit D)

2.     That on or about the first of November 2008 Gloria Jean Sykes set up a
Symetra account for the sole purpose of Medical expenses as she is a breast cancer survivor and could no longer procure medical coverage in the unlikely event of a new cancer or re-occurrence;

3.  That I appointed Suzanne Nicksic as my Power of Attorney of Medical in August 2010 and nominated her to hold the aforementioned funds, or a portion thereof, specific to my then, current and future medical needs in account number 325520 with the U.S. Federal Credit Union in Indiana.

I swear and affirm under the penalties of perjury that the foregoing facts are true, correct, and within the best of my personal knowledge.

Further affiant sayeth naught,

Gloria Jean Sykes

State of Illinois    )

)  SS:

County of Cook    )

Signed and sworn (or affirmed) to before me on this day of 4^th Day of October 2011 by, Gloria Jean Sykes.                                                                              _______________________________________

Notary Public

My commission expires on _________, ________, 20______.

October 4, 2011

Ms. Michelle Stack, CEO
U S Federal Credit Union
8400 Broadway
Merrillville, IN 46410

In re: Account # 325520

Dear Ms. Stack,

Pursuant our visit in person and subsequent conversations with you yesterday, October 3, 2011, please find the following attachments,

a)      alleged court document and ruling from the Cook County Illinois Circuit Court Probate Division;

b)      sworn affidavit of named account holder Suzanne Nicksic[1],and Ms. Gloria Jean Sykes as the same set forth with Ms. Nicksic legal title holder of the account and, the identity of the account beneficiary and Ms. Sykes legal owner of the assets in the account;

c)      US Bankruptcy Court ECF documentation of chapter 11 bankruptcy filing of and for account beneficiary Ms. Gloria Jean Sykes;

Accordingly, please be advised and take particular note that this is an attempt to marshal the assets of Ms. Gloria Jean Sykes under the chapter 11 automatic stay and debtor in possession status.  Please be further advised this attempt in made in keeping with the Congressional mandates of the bankruptcy stay and while made on this day without Court intervention, should BR Court intervention be necessary it will most certainly be called upon.

Furthermore, be advised that any intentional and willful reluctance and refusal on your part and the part of your financial institution will be viewed and considered not only as a violation of the automatic stay, but also as a tortuous interference for which an adversary proceeding will be brought.

In support of the foregoing and for your consideration also, bankruptcy relief aside, please take note that the “alleged court order”  (given to Ms. Sykes and in Ms. Sykes’ possession) is;

i)                   not signed by any judge;

ii)                 not certified by any public official;

iii)              not recorded by any Indiana Court Clerk;

iv)               not entitled to full faith and credit in Indiana;

v)                 unenforceable in Indiana due in fact that probate courts are clearly without jurisdiction to reach property beyond the jurisdictional boundaries of the Court which, in this instance, sits in Cook County Illinois.  [ see; Hanson v.Denckla, 357 US 235 (1985) ].

In close, it is my hopes to find your cooperation in this matter and that you immediately contact me at the above captioned contact info that we may make the necessary arrangements to transfer the account funds at issue directly to the debtor in possession account per the requirements of the chapter 11 bankruptcy process.

Thank you in advance for your valuable time and cooperation in this matter.  Should I not hear from you in response hereto within seven (7) days of your signed receipt hereof, I will presume you are not electing to be cooperative and I will then take those actions necessary to compel your compliance and seek damages accordingly.

Respectfully Submitted,

Gloria Jean Sykes

Attachments

CC.  Attorney Jeffrey Esser and copied and attached to Bankruptcy Schedules/Documents in re 2011 BK 39381.

[1] Ms. Nicksic will fax or hand deliver her affidavit to your attention directly and with a separate cover letter.

Attorney Ken Ditkowsky on “Jurisdiction”

Dear JoAnne,

The jurisdictional question is a knotty one for the miscreants.   Up to now, they have been getting away ignoring the failure to give notice.   A little lie here or there and a total lack of notice can be justified by an ‘indulgent’ court talking about waiver, estoppel etc.    As indicated by the Tiffany decision reported today in the advance sheets (In re Tiffany W., 2012 IL App (1st) 102492-B (September 21, 2012), the Appellate Court has made a definitive statement –jurisdiction is NOT a technicality and it will not be sweep under the rug.

What this means is that cases like the Sykes case are in for an examination at some time in the foreseeable future.   Mr. Schmiedel, as an example, has admitted in the Sykes transcripts that the Sodini notices were never given.  (I believe he made that admission before Judge Reynolds, among others).   This admission if addressed by an appropriate Court in the same manner as the jurisdictional issue was addressed in Tiffany, the lack of notice is fatal.   It, therefore, follows that the proceedings that he, Ms. Farenga and Mr. Stern are presently conducting against Gloria and her liberty, property, and civil rights  are not only ultra vires but intentionally intended to under color of statute to deprive her of her constitutionally protected liberty and property rights.   In fact, this places the three amigos exactly in the same position as Attorney Barry.   The ARDC prosecuted Mr. Barry!   He was charged with railroading an alleged incompetency into a guardianship!   [I am being prosecuted for protesting that action on behalf of Farenga, Stern and Schmiedel! and saying that “Greylord is alive and well in Cook County!”]

As for Gloria, I understand that she came up with a new line, to wit: in Judge Stuart taking appellate jurisdiction over Judge Mulhurn’s decision (almost four years ago), she (Judge Stuart) is defaming Judge Mulhurn by suggesting the Judge Mulhurn was not doing her job.   There is no question that it is as gross an insult as possible for Farenga, Stern, Schmiedel and Stuart to even suggest that Judge Mulhern did not take Mary’s rights into consideration prior to entering a final order in the prior Sykes adv Lumberman’s case.  It should be noted that Judge Connors concurred in a decision that rendered improper a  735 ILCS 5/2 1401 brought two years after a final order had been entered.   The Appellate Court (with Judge Connors concurring) took into consideration a little legal concept known as ‘full faith and credit!’.   Now four years later, the three amigos appear before Judge Stuart and tell the Court that Judge Mulhern was incompetent and did not do her job and therefore Judge Stuart ought to overturn the ‘final order’.   They ask Judge Stuart to act as an Appellate Court and deprive Gloria of her civil rights and no-one is concerned!

In my opinion, the proceeding that was reported to have occurred yesterday (October 3, 2012) in Judge Stuart’s court represents an arrogance of the part of guardian ad litem Farenga, Stern, and Attorney Schmiedel.   This arrogance is demonstrated by their stated disrespect for the legal process in promulgating such an outrageous proceeding.    Why the ARDC does not act against persons who railroad grandma into guardianships is a mystery; but the Sykes case illustrates how the personages referred to in the Government Accounting Office Report and in other publications are able to get away with this and similar outrageous  conduct.

Even though the legal profession (represented by the ARDC) suggests that the demand for an honest, complete and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes case is unethical and sanction-able,  as a citizen of the United States of America, I respectfully request that the United States of America and the State of Illinois do an honest, complete, and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes case, the Gore case, the Tyler case, the Wyman case, and the thousands of similar cases that are similar.
~Ken Ditkowsky
www.DitkowskyLaw.com