To: “AJO@BSOLAW.COM” <AJO@BSOLAW.COM>
Cc: “JoAnne M. Denison” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Mr. Lanre Amu — Honest Atty Unfairly Persecuted By ARDC” <email@example.com>
Subject: Fw: THE SHAME OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION – Justice Served with Andy Ostrowski
Date: Oct 17, 2015 3:13 PM
I think the Lanre Amu case is particularly interesting in that it has a racial card to play. As I understand it Crain’s Chicago Business made the same averment that Amu made. Larkin (IARDC Administrator) knowing that Amu’s statements were true, nevertheless made verified statements that they were untrue and directed his kangaroo panels to not only suspend Amu’s license but to ask for an interim suspension. The suggestion of racism arises because Amu is a naturalized America who happens to be ‘black’ and from Africa. The subsequent barring of Diane Nash (a famous activist) from an open hearing by Larkin ( and his lack of apology confirms the racist nexus).
JoAnne Denison’s situation is just as compelling in that she has a blog that discloses elder cleansing and other felonies. 47 USCA 230 protects bloggers from such an assault on First Amendment Rights, but Larkin (IARDC) not only flaunts Federal Law, but by his stooge Melisa Smart represented that disclosing felonies committed by corrupt lawyers (and jurists) is akin to crying fire in a crowded theater (an outdated legal standard from the turn of the 1900’s. The reporting of criminal activity perpetrated against the elderly or the disabled under Illinois law is protected also by 320 ILCS 20/4. The protection specifically runs to disciplinary proceedings. Of course, Larkin and the Illinois Supreme Court ignored the immunity.
What this points out is that even though there was no need for the legislature (or the Congress) to provide parallel protections to the First Amendment and Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution because in their wisdom the legislative branch had no confidence that members of the judiciary or the executive branches of government would read the Constitution (Federal and/or State) they enacted redundant legislation that also would not be read or enforced.
Indeed, neither the Constitution or the legislation has been observed and we wind up in this situation wherein lawyers who comply with Rule. 8.3 and/or 18 USCA 4 can be (and will be) suspended from the practice of law for years. To the miscreants the Rule of Law as promulgated by the SCOTUS is just a technicality!
My own situation is almost humorous. I wrote a letter to the Attorney General of the United States asking for an HONEST investigation of the elder cleansing frauds. I did this after I started making my FRCP 11 investigation and was not intimidated by threatening telephone calls from the guardian ad litem and the attorney for the wrongful plenary guardian in the Sykes case. Even a sans jurisdiction ‘sanction order of almost $5,000.00 wrongfully assessed against me had no effect on me. I appealed to the Appellate Court of Illinois and they were forced to reverse and nullify the sanction order. Larkin (IARDC), upon the request of the other Guardian ad Litem in the Sykes case, instituted disciplinary proceedings against me when I continued to demand an HONEST investigation and the blog Probate Sharks published my demand. (You cannot make this stuff up! At my “hearing” before the IARDC another of Larkin’s stooges asked me if I was repentant for writing to the Attorney General of the United States requesting an HONEST investigation. He literally drew a laugh as he held my letter to the AG in his right hand and waived it at me as if it was child pornography! If it were, I probably would have gotten a commendation; however as I was never repentant (for reporting felonious activities of clouted lawyers and judges) I got a four year suspension of my law license.
As the entire situation is so absurd, I write every day to law enforcement demanding an HONEST investigation and the enforcement of the RULE OF LAW. I also demand that as breach of fiduciary relationship is a taxable event that the miscreants and those who act in concert with them in violation of 18 USCA 242, and 18 USCA 371 pay all the Federal and State Income taxes (including Interest and Penalties) that are due proximate to the exploitation and confiscation of elderly and disabled person’s estates.