From Gloria, her views on the case and her mother’s status

Image

 

—–Original Message—–
From: GLORIA Jean SYKES
Sent: Jan 30, 2014 2:03 PM
To: Cynthia GAL , Adamm Stern GAL
Subject: Toerpe fails to provide adequate care for my Mother..

and this constitutes “causing death”: the ‘slayer statute” is titled, “Person causing death”  The statute bars “a person who intentionally and unjustifiably causes the death of another” from receiving “any property, benefit, or other interest by reason of the death.” The determination of whether a person has actually “intentionally and unjustifiably” caused the death of another can be made “by any court of competent jurisdiction separate and apart from any criminal proceeding arising from the death: however, as you, me, and the thousands of people who read the MaryGSykes blog, or are part of the hundreds of people I am associated with daily, it is known that Judge Jane Louise Stuart — ignores all case law(s) and the statutes that, in a perfect probate proceeding, guide the Court’s actions.  In sum, your client and friend, Carolyn Toerpe claimed to have purchased Mother new teeth partials, and has cared for Mother’s teeth and gums, subsequently, being able to take a least $5,000 from mother’s pension and social secuity and pay for said dental care: however, you, me and any person who has been blessed to see mother over the last few years while she’s been held hostage at the Toerpe home, (Toerpe being a named abuser and financial exploiter) Mother’s teeth are rotting, and Toerpe has done nothing or very little to care for the serious condition of Mother’s Pyorrhea… which if it goes uncared for any longer, THE TOXINS WILL CAUSE SUCH SERIOUS INFECTIONS IT WILL KILL HER — and I write to inform you of this, for if anything happens to my mother, i will also bring each one of you up for charges causing my mother’s death.

I AM MOTHER’S CHOICE FOR POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR MEDICAL.  If you read the judicial notice I filed with the trial court, then you cannot play ignorant now longer.

That the power granted under a power of attorney supersedes that of both a guardian of the person and a guardian of the estate pursuant 755 ILCS 5/11a-17(c), 5/11a-18(e) and that Mary G. Sykes named me,  Gloria Jean Sykes Power of Attorney of her medical and this was done under the guidance of an attorney. (In support of see, Exhibit 5)  (Cf., Illinois Power of Attorney Act, 755 ILCS 45/1-1, et seq.)  There is case law to support this and as attorneys, your ignorance of the law is no excuse.

.

Suffice, GAL’s Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern, AS POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR MOTHER’S MEDICAL I DEMAND THAT I HAVE ACCESS TO MY MOTHER INSTANTER, THAT I TAKE HER TO HER LONG-TIME DENTAL DOCTOR AND THAT SHE IMMEDIATELY BE TREATED FOR THE HORRIFIC INFECTION that has caused her teeth to blacken and weight loss due to her inability to eat.

On June 22, 2013 my mother, Mary G. Sykes invited me to visit with her at the Sunrise Senior Living, LLC in Naperville.  Please note, there was no and is no order to have had mother placed in said facility.  Friends accompanied me and for almost an hour, we, including Mother, had a loving, peaceful visit.  As you know, Adam Stern was able to convince law enforcement that no one could take photographs of digital recordings of my mother, although there was no such order, and the male cop confiscated Scott’s and JoAnne’s cell phones and deleted what was Mother telling all: the cop did not confiscate my cell, and I do have evidence of Toerpe’s physical and emotional abuse.  This will be a topic for another time, however, as this email is to inform you that I am the Power of Attorney for Medical. 

Now, the “slayer statute” is titled “Person causing death.”16 .

A recent Illinois case, Estate of Malbrough, 329 Ill. App. 3d 77, 768 N.E.2d 120 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 2002) Although no one was criminally charged, by finding failure to provide adequate care “could” cause death, this case is groundbreaking just as the January 1, 2004,  new probate statute entitled “Financial Exploitation, Abuse, or Neglect of an Elderly Person or a Person with a Disability” takes effect. The new law prevents any person convicted of financial exploitation, abuse, or neglect of an elderly person from receiving “any property, benefit, or other interest by reason of the death of that elderly person” . . . “whether as heir, legatee, beneficiary, survivor . . . or in any other capacity.” The law also covers the financial exploitation, abuse, or neglect of disabled persons. The new law can be circumvented only if the convicted person demonstrates “by clear and convincing evidence” that the victim knew about the conviction and still wanted to transfer property to the abuser.9 Since abusers are usually relatives of the elderly victim and, as such, are the persons most likely to become the elderly victim’s heirs, using the probate code to address elder abuse seems commonsensical.

However, other than California, no other state has yet taken the radical step of penalizing elder abusers in this fashion, and unless you make certain I have access to my mother, (I’ll pick her up any morning in the next few days, and do so with a police escort and with witnesses, in order to secure my safety, my mother’s safety, et al, I will be filing in a court of proper jurisdiction to make certain my mother isn’t yet another ‘victim’ of the two of you, for your, and attorney Peter’s Schmiedel’s financial gain.

FYI, as you know, NOTHING is ever lost that is saved on SmartPhones, IPhones, or other devices in this wacky world of computers, and alough you may beleive that you are immune from tortourtiously interferring with my rights as POA of Medical, and worse, preventing my Mother from the medical and dental care she needs to protect Carolyn Toerpe and your anticipated (if you have not already received any funds) financial landslide from my mother’s and my estate, ya better start reading case law and the statutes that legislature and our appellate and supreme courts have in place to protect the elderly and disabled from perpetrators as yourselves, attorney Peter Schmiedel, and attorneys who work at the law firm of Fischel and Kahn. (Oh, did you know that Peter Schmiedel was paid $12,000 from Mother’s estate already and now plans to steal my money for the remaining $200,000+ he claims he and other attorneys at Fischel and Kahn have estimated in billing for over 800 hours to intentionally and willfully cause my mother’s death?  FYI, I am certain that Peter Schmiedel and Deborah Jo Soehlig are asking Toerpe to keep mother healthy enough so they can complete their agreement with Toerpe to steal and/or destroy everything I own … including the Lumbermen’s proceeds)

This is the only and last correspondence I will have with either of you.  I will be copying this email and filing it in the court of proper jurisdiction, as well as providing copies to law enforcement, the DOJ, the JIB, Chief Judge Evans, Presiding Judge Coughlan, and even Judge Stuart.  I am giving permission to all bloggers, and or media to publish this email and I will publish it on my websites, and share with the media, too. 

I WILL DO EVERYTHING WITHIN THE LAW TO SAVE THE LIFE OF MY MOTHER and to make certain that her kidnappers, torturors, financial exploiters, and murders are known.

So, the bird is in your hands.  Do you comply with the satutes and case law(s) and let me pick up my Mother ASAP and get her the dental and medical treatment she desperately needs, or are you going to participate in her death?  

My mother has a right to live our her life with he people she loves and trusts and no guardian or court can vacate the Power of Attorney mother granted me.  Not even you Adam Stern or Cynthia Farenga. 

Your beloved Struck v. Cook County Public Guardian does not apply.  (It’s interesting that Peter Schmiedel was some big shot with the Cook County Public Guardian when you were the GAL in the Struck case, is it not?)

In the meantime Cynthia Farenga, you have yet to provide me with copies of any orders which gave you the rights and privileges to procure my financial information, including copies of checks, et al?  And Adam Stern, apparently there is no subpoena as you testified to for your dear friend Carolyn Toerpe to enter the safe deposit box and ***.  In fact, it’s just the opposite.  Similar, Stern giving Judge Stuart copies of alleged affidavits from Sunrise Senior Living LLC.   

Suffice, Toerpe with your support and guidance, has already stole Mother’s entire estate leaving nothing in the Trust, (where’s the order again to sell my Mother’s home????) and the cash $238,000 given to Toerpe has gone inventoried.  In sum, it is clear that between attorneys Peter Schmiedel and Deborah Jo Soehlig, and with your help, Farenga and Stern, you believe that by rendering my mother a pauper, vacating a living revocable Trust, stealing, destroying, and/or selling all of her valuables, and ignorning all of my mother’s directives set in place long before you ever stepped in to this ‘game’ of yours, the slayer statute is moot. 

You have little faith in he law and in the grand public interest in In re the Estate of Mary G. Sykes. 

The bird, now is in your hands for 24 hours. I can be reached by email gloami@msn.com.  Again, I have arranged for police protection and escort to and from Toerpe’s home — therefore, at all times, there will be law enforcement supervision in order to SAVE MY MOTHER’S LIFE and get her the medical and dental care Toerpe claimed she had administered in 2011 and 2012 and stole $5000 or more claiming she paid out for such care and ‘new partials’. 

A picture tells a million words…

Attached please find a photo with me and my mother on June 22, 2014.  I will share the digital recordings with law enforcement when asked or for discovery in a court of proper jurisdiction.  

 

 
Gloria Jean Sykes 
Bon Ami Productions, Inc. 
BELIEVE (BeLive) LLC
773.910-3310(cell)
 773-751-1310 (fax)
855-376-0040 (business)
 

Another article on Humana–the strange inability to cancel

 

Dear Readers;

As you know, SR has filed a civil action against Humana in ND Illinois Federal Court and we are waiting to see what the judge will say about dismissing our complaint against this mega-insurance corp that has every lawyer in the world to make sure our complaint does not succeed and that we cannot proceed further to sue for damages when a 90 year old man was left without stroke rehab for 21 days while the claim was appealed and he suffered and is now in a nursing home.

In comes more reports of problems with Humana:

http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/i-team-experts-say-court-approved-sale-was-below-market-value

The consensus so far is to drop the Advantage programs–they are in fact no advantage at all and to go with simple Medicare, which appears to have fewer problems.

This is a good and interesting read.

JoAnne

First Portion of Trial Over–Plaintiff Rests!

First Portion of Trial Over–Plaintiff Rests!

Dear Readers;

After a grueling week of trial, it’s finally over and I am amazingly relieved.  It was hard work and as you know I could not find an attorney.  I advertised repeatedly on this blog, I emailed every “ARDC defense” attorney on their list, BUT I AM THE ONLY ATTORNEY WILLING TO DO THIS WORK, WELL, MYSELF AND KEN, AND KEN WAS DISQUALIFIED.

I will not be publishing about the details of the trial until a decision is made, we will be filing motions to strike exhibits (no foundation or authentication) and a Motion for a Directed Finding, because I don’t believe Mr. Larkin has proved I was lying or that there is no jurisdiction, Mary wasn’t served, the sisters were never served (Yolanda is furious), numerous procedures were never followed (and many ARDC witnesses even testified to them, what a CITATION TO DISCOVER ASSETS was, what  CITATION TO RECOVER ASSETS WAS, what a PETITION TO DRILL A SAFE DEPOSIT BOX was; what a section 2-1401 petition was.

AND A HUGE, HUGE, THANKS TO ALYECE FOR ALL HER DEDICATED WORK HELP AND SUPPORT.

Aleyce Russell is the secretary/treasurer of Justice 4 Every1, NFP and she was an angel to drive up from South Carolina and come here to assist me and support me at trial.

It was wonderful.

Mr. Larkin has rested, so now I get to put on my case and that will be Mar. 10th and 11th at 9:30 am each day.  Uuugh.  It’s hard enough to get to the backfilled area and now he’s shooting for 9:30 which means to drive there I have to be out the door at 8 am, battle the worst traffic of the day to get to the Pru Plaza by 9:30 am.

BUT I do this all for YOU, my most beloved probate victims.  I know and see how unfair and unjust it is in some cases and I am most committed to you.  I will do a trial for a week for you, and then I will do 2 more days of trial for you.  I don’t care.  I am here to tell the truth, be the truth and spread the truth because I want to be proud of our nation’s court system and lawyers admitted to the Illinois bar.

There is something truly amiss and seriously wrong right now in the Sykes case.  I have published the facts, the pleadings, the witness reports and their declarations (Gloria, Scott, Yolanda, Kathie, Tim, Judy Ditkowsky and others who have come to court, come to trial and blogged and taken notes to ensure fairness and justice via the media.

While the judges can’t read the news about the cases before them, the lawyers can. They can see their reflections in the mirror.

I don’t have any money, I don’t know if I can even keep my office, but I’m not going to stop and I’m not going to quit.  I have several new cases I have to catch up on from last week, so if anyone can make some donations, that is appreciated.  If you can’t then I send you peace and blessings and financial healing.

JoAnne

Trial is here and now–130 E Randolph St, 8th floor, bring an ID

Trial is here and now–130 E Randolph St, 8th floor, bring an ID

While we are actively taking notes and blogging during this trial, the Chair has asked me to post a statement that I will blog about witness testimony, but those posts will not appear until trial is over and we reach closing arguments.

 

I didn’t put it on a prior post (which I can’t find now) because the purpose of that post was only to make everyone aware that we would be taking notes (blogging) and those would eventually get posted.

The rule is, witnesses must be sequestered during a trial so they don’t talk among themselves and change their testimony.

The Chair wanted me to make it clear that was not going to happen.  There is the rule of “witness squestration” so witnesses don’t compare notes and change testimony.

He wanted to make that clear.

Fine by me.  Come on by and see what is going on.  It is very interesting.

joanne

From Atty Margaret Dore–is assisted suicide for the elderly a good thing

Some articles to consider:

Actually, I am heavily involved in the assisted suicide issue, which takes abuse to a whole new level.  My blogs/website include Choice is an Illusion, which is undergoing a face lift, and Montanans Against Assisted Suicide.

Here’s a short article regarding some of the problems:  http://www.choiceillusion.org/2014/01/washingtons-assisted-suicide-act.html   This is a court case that I’m involved in:  http://www.montanansagainstassistedsuicide.org/2013/12/judge-hears-assisted-suicide-arguments.html

and while I am not a proponent of suicide, I do believe that a senior can self administer any and all pain meds they need, and if they want to refuse artificial life sustaining machines, that is fine also.  That’s JMHO.

 

joanne

Mrs. Bradwell. “no precedent, no English precedent and no necessity” “unsuited to many occupations in civil life” “timid and delicate” — what will happen on Tuesday

 

You know, I cannot, for the life of me, reconcile the fact that I must appear before the IARDC and explain this blog and how it helps the public and all of you.  KDD cites Buck vs. Bell (sterilize the stupid which was later utilized to support Hitler’s “work camps” Albreit mach Frei or Work will Set you Free) and Dred Scott (AA’s are property).  But there are more important decisions the IARDC can cite for me.

From the NY bar we can learn something:

(nycbar.org thank you– you have inspired me and I blame you for all of this)

Women as Lawyers

In Maryland, Margaret Brent, arrived in the new country in 1638, received a land grant in St, Mary’s City and subsequently handled legal matters for Governor Calvert. It wasn’t until 1869 that a women, Belle Mansfield, (pictured at left) from Iowa, became the first attorney licensed to practice law in the United States. In the same year, Myra Bradwell from Illinois was denied admission to the state bar on the basis of her sex. Also in 1869, Lemma Barkaloo became the first women law student in the nation, attending Washington University in St. Louis after being refused admission to the Law School at Columbia. The following year, Ada Kepley, became the first women to earn a formal law degree in the United States, graduating with an LL.B. from Union College of Law in Chicago, now known as Northwestern University. Katherine “Kate” Stoneman became the first woman admitted to practice law in New York. She did so against enormous odds; supporting herself as a teacher and working nights, weekends, and summers as a clerk to an Albany lawyer until she graduated in 1898. She was the first woman to pass the New York State Bar Exam, but her application to join the bar was rejected because of her gender. The reason given by the three Supreme Court justices who denied her admission were “No precedent,” “No English precedent,” and “No necessity.” She then launched a successful campaign to amend the Code of Civil Procedure to permit the admission of qualified applicants without regard to sex or race. These and many other pioneering women have built the foundation for equality in the legal profession. According to the 2005 ABA Commission on Women in the Profession, women represented almost 30% of practicing attorneys and over 47% of new students entering law school.

In the matter of the application of Mrs. Myra Bradwell for a license to practice law, 1869
55 Illinois Reports 536, 1869-1870

In 1869, Myra Bradwell (pictured at left) passed the Illinois Bar Exam with honors. She then applied to the Illinois Supreme court for admission to the bar. The court refused her application because she was a woman. The decision was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bradwell v. Illinois despite Bradwells’s argument based on the Immunities and Privileges Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which says: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. The opinion of Justice Bradley in the case reflected the nineteenth century society belief about women not participating in the workforce, “Man is, or should be, woman’s protector and defender. The natural and proper timidity and delicacy which belongs to the female sex evidently unfits it for many of the occupations of civil life.” Eventually, Illinois changed the rules for admitting women to the bar. In 1890, Bradwell was admitted to the Illinois bar and in 1892, she received a license to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In Maryland, Margaret Brent, arrived in the new country in 1638, received a land grant in St, Mary’s City and subsequently handled legal matters for Governor Calvert. It wasn’t until 1869 that a women, Belle Mansfield, (pictured at left) from Iowa, became the first attorney licensed to practice law in the United States. In the same year, Myra Bradwell from Illinois was denied admission to the state bar on the basis of her sex. Also in 1869, Lemma Barkaloo became the first women law student in the nation, attending Washington University in St. Louis after being refused admission to the Law School at Columbia. The following year, Ada Kepley, became the first women to earn a formal law degree in the United States, graduating with an LL.B. from Union College of Law in Chicago, now known as Northwestern University. Katherine “Kate” Stoneman became the first woman admitted to practice law in New York. She did so against enormous odds; supporting herself as a teacher and working nights, weekends, and summers as a clerk to an Albany lawyer until she graduated in 1898. She was the first woman to pass the New York State Bar Exam, but her application to join the bar was rejected because of her gender. The reason given by the three Supreme Court justices who denied her admission were “No precedent,” “No English precedent,” and “No necessity.” She then launched a successful campaign to amend the Code of Civil Procedure to permit the admission of qualified applicants without regard to sex or race. These and many other pioneering women have built the foundation for equality in the legal profession. According to the 2005 ABA Commission on Women in the Profession, women represented almost 30% of practicing attorneys and over 47% of new students entering law school.

In the matter of the application of Mrs. Myra Bradwell for a license to practice law, 1869
55 Illinois Reports 536, 1869-1870

In 1869, Myra Bradwell (pictured at left) passed the Illinois Bar Exam with honors. She then applied to the Illinois Supreme court for admission to the bar. The court refused her application because she was a woman. The decision was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bradwell v. Illinois despite Bradwells’s argument based on the Immunities and Privileges Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which says: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. The opinion of Justice Bradley in the case reflected the nineteenth century society belief about women not participating in the workforce, “Man is, or should be, woman’s protector and defender. The natural and proper timidity and delicacy which belongs to the female sex evidently unfits it for many of the occupations of civil life.” Eventually, Illinois changed the rules for admitting women to the bar. In 1890, Bradwell was admitted to the Illinois bar and in 1892, she received a license to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court.

If the Tribunal declares I am “unsuited to many occupations in civil life due to my gender” I guess I must be sorry for that and hold the Tribunal in high esteem.

Got that.

Will never happen.

JoAnne

From Lanre Amu–his brief to the Sup. Ct. of Illinois

From Lanre Amu–his brief to the Sup. Ct. of Illinois

We are pleased to announce that Mr. Amu has filed his brief with SCOI and is kind enough to share it with us:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6FbJzwtHocwa2trWEJYbkU4ek0/edit?usp=sharing

I think he did an excellent job this time of pointing out how difficult it is to convict anyone of political speech.  In his brief he makes it clear that discussion and discourse is essential to a vital and free society.

Kudos to him and let’s hope the briefs are well taken by SCOI.

These two lawyers (Mr. Amu and Ditkowsky) did not steal anything, they betrayed no client confidences, they did absolutely nothing wrong.

Rather, the IARDC has now entered into a campaign to defame and libel these two very good and honorable men by taking the approach (which is not legally permissible via dozens of SCOTUS cases), that “judges are perfect, judges can do no wrong, judges never have bad ideas”.

We know that is not true from Greylord and reading the Greylord books, the feds knew that plenty of hanky panky was going on in the upper case divisions too where the money is quite serious–law division, probate and chancery, but they knew they could not simply make up cases, it would be near impossible for any atty to bust out that system and wear a wire.

But now the hanky panky and shennagins have become soooo serious, and the internet connects us all together in a way never before seen, such that hiding this hanky panky and covering it up, Mr. IARDC is near impossible.

I hear complaints each and every day about new cases, so does the staff at NASGA and believe me, we talk all the time, comparing stories and putting together the pieces.

Then we turn it over to the authorities.

And I don’t care about criminal this or that, I am not a criminal lawyer and have absolutely no interest in that.  I think civil lawsuits are just as effective, if not more effective.

I have now trashed my entire law practice to dedicate my life to putting together the pieces and stopping the nonsense in court.  Our nation’s court systems should not be a playground for the powers that be and money grabbing simply because the other side is infirm and cannot speak for themselves.

Next week the IARDC will be after me for lying on this blog. I have no less than 6 character witnesses and 6 expert witnesses that say this is not true and more blogs like mine are needed and not fewer.  So what does the IARDC do?  they strike my expert witnesses saying they are “not experts” when in fact, the 9th circuit has just said that bloggers get the same First Amendment protections as do professional journalists.

Am I not a woman, said Soujourner Truth.

JoAnne

The truth about guardianships — from another Attorney, no less

Read what Atty Margaret Dore has to say about guardianships in Seattle:

http://nasga-stopguardianabuse.blogspot.com/2014/01/10-reasons-people-get-railroaded-into.html

It’s interesting that the title is about railroading seniors into guardianships, is it not?

Again, this blog speaks the truth and it’s not the only source out there that is giving you, the public the truth about probate courts, in Illinois and across the nation.

Thanke you Ms. Margaret Dore for your honest thoughts and comments.

JoAnne