Kidnapping

Justice Department.

October 18, 2011

Mr. Mark J. Kappelhoff, Section Chief
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20530

Re: Mary Sykes and other senior citizens.

Dear Mr. Kappelhoff,

Thank you for your letter of October 12, 2011.

I realize that the primary emphasis of the Civil Rights division involves excessive physical force or sexual abuse by law enforcement officers; however, as indicated by the recent GAO reports the actions by Court appointed guardians meets the criterion. The only distinction is the fact that ‘grandma’ is the victim rather than some rosy cheeked sweet young thing or a miscreant with a criminal record as long as your arm who happens to be an ‘honor student!’

Law enforcement has a dismal record in protecting the elderly from abuse and financial exploitation. Unfortunately this unattractive and unrewarding area of the law is becoming a much more obvious blemish on our society. Demographics indicate that there are more elderly to be exploited and more on the way. Therefore, what was a problem that could be swept under the run is about to become a National scandal unless government is willing to address the issue of ‘grandma’ being isolated from her family and friends, robbed of the pennies that she and her husband worked their tails off for, and most significantly be deprived of her liberty, her property, and her privileges and immunities by the sanitized process of Court orders entered pursuant to ‘clout’ and expediency.

The Sykes case is a too common example. Mary Sykes’ older daughter took her mother to a lawyer, and when they emerged the older daughter was her mother’s successor trustee and attorney in fact. The younger daughter had been virtually disinherited. A while later, Mary discovered or just realized the perfidy and sought to obtain information as to what, if anything, she had done. The daughter and the attorney refused to give her any information, and when mother discovered the full extent of the problem she sought help from the Court system.

The Court intake helped her fill out a petition for an order of protection, and after it was filed the daughter countered with an incompetency petition. Without a hearing on either the older daughter became the ‘plenary guardian.’ Appointed also were two guardian ad litem. What transpired thereafter was the systematic deprivation of Mary’s civil rights. The Petition for a protective order was never heard and the Court refused to appoint or allow Mary to be represented by an attorney. The GALs instead of acting as the ‘eyes and ears’ of the Court acted to obfuscate and facilitate the separation of Mary from her garden club, her church, her politics, her friends and her family. Mary’s safety deposit box was ‘looted’ and even a mattress that contained cash was removed from the premises. Naturally, the contents of the safety deposition box and the cash removed from the mattress were not inventoried. Naturally the basic statutory protections enacted by the legislature were ignored. Naturally any objection was soundly punished. The Rule of law and equal protection of the law were vigorously thwarted!

Mary has been rushed to emergency rooms on a bunch of occasions. In December 2010 Mary had swallowing disorder. The plenary guardian denied her medical care until Mary lost 10% of her body weight and had to be taken to the emergency room. In spite of mandatory reporting requirements the hospital failed to report the incident – allegedly admitted by the plenary guardian to the proper authorities and neither GAL even mentioned the matter to the Court. The younger daughter was punished for her objection to the treatment of her mother – funds from a insurance company settlement were frozen. The Court entered an order essentially freezing funds held outside the jurisdiction of the Court!

Today the younger daughter reports that her mother is kept isolated without ‘teeth’ and without her hearing aids for long periods of time under the control of the plenary guardian. Indeed, the attorney for the plenary guardian’s attorney has bragged to the Court of the progress that Mary Sykes was making. Unfortunately for the attorney Mr. Scott Evans, a former analyst for the United States of America, took upon himself to search for where Mary was secreted. He found her in a ‘day care’ facility surrounded by people who were totally ‘out of it’ and having no stimulation of any kind.

The Sykes mirrors the Philadelphia kidnapping case. The only difference is the fact that the Court did not appoint Ms. Weston as the plenary guardian and there were not two guardian ad litem to run cover for Ms. Weston. Please allow me to respectfully suggest that if Justice Department Policy does not find cases like the Sykes case to be worthy of vigorous prosecution, then the policy should be changed instanter.

Thank you for your patience

Ken Ditkowsky

Cc: Friends and Family of Mary Sykes

For your information I reprinted the Philadelphia story.
 
Editor's note:  Well done!