Mr. Lanre Amu should be given a Medal of Valor for his endless fight in exposing corruption at the ARDC. Illinois attorneys are fed up with the lawlessness of the ARDC and hot it operates to cover up judicial crimes and crimes of the lawyers involve. Lawyer Ken Ditkowsky has just uncovered the criminal activity (once again) of Charles Golbert and the Cook County OPG (Office of Public Guardian) and how they are terrorizing an 84 year old man, Dean Sallas and plotting and scheming to file a false foreclosure action against him to make Byline Bank and others rich from elder abuse and financial exploitation.

Mr. Lanre Amu exposed the criminal schemes of Judge Lynn Egan and her brothers criminal law firm to make money from a suburban hospital by “handling” their malpractices cases in their favor and to the detriment of untold number of litigants.

It is time to end the corruption of lawyers and judges in Illinois. The ARDC must end the suspensions of myself, Ken Ditkowsky and Lanre Amu for speaking out against corrupt lawyers and judges.

Below is Lanre Amu’s recent petition. Please pray for him and that justice is done.

In the Matter of ’Lanre O. Amu
Underlying Case No:
IARDC No. 2011 PR 00106
Supreme Court No. M.R. 26545
’Lanre O. Amu, the Petitioner.
IARDC Attorney No. 6230736

My Verified Petition to: 1) Unconditionally Vacate the Wrongful
Suspension of My Illinois Law License on August 6, 2013; 2) For a
Certificate of Innocence, a Formal Written Apology, a Certificate of
Commendation for Honesty, Courage, and a Commitment to the
Rule of Law; and 3) For Make Whole Relief for the Trauma,
Violations, and the Damages Caused to Me, My Family and
Dependents, Starting From 2011. Without a Complainant, Accuser,
or Witness Against Me, I Was Targeted, Taken Out of Context,
Framed, Railroaded, Pronounced Guilty Without Proof, and
Persecuted by the IARDC for Demanding an Honest Investigation
into My Ethics Complaint Against Two Connected Attorneys. My
Constitutional Rights to Due Process, Equal Protection of the Laws,
Fair Hearing, and More Were Violated. I Was a Victim of Racism
and Xenophobia Because of My Race (Black) and My National
Origin (Nigeria). The Viciousness Evince Hate Crime Which is
Tragic, Treacherous, and a Disgrace to the Human Race. Integrity,
Faithfulness to the Oath of Public Office, Good Conscience, Truth,
and Justice Mandate that I Be Made Whole from All these Atrocities.

’Lanre O. Amu, IARDC No: 6230736
Self-represented Petitioner
Plot 30 Kugbo (Fled persecution)
Abuja, Nigeria
+234 909 301 3007
lanreamu@gmail.com

M.R.026545
SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
E-FILED
6/24/2021 3:56 PM
Carolyn Taft Grosboll
SUPREME COURT CLERK
1
I, ’Lanre O. Amu, a self-represented Petitioner, respectfully bring this
verified petition pursuant to the inherent and original jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court in attorney licensure matters. In support of this verified
petition, I state as follows:
A Synopsis of the Issues1
1 Petitioner ’Lanre O. Amu’s Initial Disclosures

1. Sometime in the year 2000 or thereabout, I was involved in a
   highly contentious parental rights litigation in the Circuit Court of
   Cook County with the now Chief Justice of the Illinois Supreme
   Court, Justice Anne Marie Burke and her husband, the 14th Ward
   Alderman Edward Michael Burke. For a brief period I represented
   “Baby T’s” biological mother, Ms. Tina Olison. The Burkes I
   believe were then represented by the Patricia Bobbs Law Office.
   That being stated, I have not had any contact with Chief Justice
   Anne M. Burke or her husband, the 14th Ward Alderman Edward
   M. Burke. I have no apprehension of bias from Chief Justice Burke
   in deciding this case. The justice of my case speaks for itself.
2. As a member of the Cook County Bar Association (CCBA) from
   about 1996 until August 6, 2013 when I was suspended from the
   practice of law, I became acquainted with the now Justice P. Scott
   Neville, Jr., as a member of the CCBA. In the mid to late 1990s,
   Attorney Neville was one of many Saturday mornings booth camp
   lecturers we had at the CCBA on various aspects of the practice of
   law. He subsequently became the President of the CCBA, and then
   a Judge. In the course of my legal practice, I have appeared before
   over 200 judges. I have appeared before Judge Neville when he
   was a Judge at the Circuit Court of Cook County at the Daley
   Center. I have also appeared before Justice Neville when he was a
   Justice at the Illinois Appellate Court on LaSalle Street. Since my
   ordeal with the IARDC began in 2011, I had contacted some in the
   CCBA leadership to take up the justice of my cause, but to no
   avail. Many people inside and outside the CCBA apparently
   believed IARDC’s media propaganda against me and kept their
   distance from me. I can understand. I have no apprehension of bias
   from Justice Neville in deciding this case. The justice of my case
   speaks for itself.
   M.R.026545
   SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
   2
3. Please bear with me as this verified petition presents difficult and
   uncomfortable subject matters that arise out of my ordeal at the hands of
   the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission
   (IARDC), to wit: Racism and Xenophobia. My prosecution by IARDC
   and my suspension from the practice of law are products of racism and
   xenophobia. Since the African Slavery Era, and the Dred Scott Era, the
   more things change, the more they seem to remain the same for some of
   us African immigrants in America – the “land of immigrants”.
4. Consistent with the Solemn Oath of Public Office, and in order that we
   can be frank, I respectfully ask the Illinois Supreme Court to take judicial
   notice of the following facts:
   ¶1. In the early 1980s an FBI undercover sting investigation, called
   “Operation Greylord”, revealed that numerous Chicago lawyers,
   judges, and court clerks were fixing the outcomes of court cases,
   from traffic tickets to murder cases, with nobody reporting their
   unethical behavior. Some of them were caught red handed on FBI
   tapes with the assistance and cooperation of honest and courageous
   lawyers and judges posing as crooked lawyers and judges. Overall,
   about 15 judges, 50 lawyers, and 35 court personnel or law
   enforcement officers were convicted in the Scandal.
   ¶2. In yet another Scandal, on June 25, 1986, Attorney Alphonse C.
   Gonzales pled guilty to wrongfully attempting to obtain money
   from an undercover FBI agent to pay a judge and four police
   officers to fix an armed robbery case in favor of his client.
   Attorney Gonzales was a prominent attorney. He was once the
   president of a bar association in Chicago. He hobnobs with the
   high and mighty in Chicago’s political circle. Gonzales was also at
   one time an Arbitrator (Administrative judge) at the Illinois
   Industrial Commission. Gonzalez once bragged to his potential
   clients that he could procure false documents to obtain driver’s

M.R.026545
SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
3
license under false names through his connections at the Secretary
of State’s Office. (See 2013PR0003, M.R. 25825, Dec. 1, 2014)
¶3. On April 16, 1993, Cook County Judge Thomas J. Maloney was
convicted in federal court of accepting bribes and fixing three (3)
murder cases. Before becoming a judge, Attorney Thomas
Maloney shared law office with former 10th Ward Alderman
Edward Vrdolyak, aka “Fast Eddie”. Former Illinois Governor Rod
Blagojevich was also a former law associate of Ed Vrdolyak. ExAlderman Ed Vrdolyak, ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich, and exJudge Thomas Maloney have all served prison time for corrupt
practices. https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases

3. In the wake of Operation Greylord, the Illinois Supreme Court held that
   an attorney’s failure to report his unprivileged knowledge of another
   attorney’s serious wrongdoing to the appropriate disciplinary authority
   warranted a suspension from the practice of law. In re Himmel, 125
   Ill.2d 531 (Ill. 1988).
4. My verified petition in fairness must be judged against the backdrop of
   the above judicial notice (¶¶1-3 above) and the In re Himmel holding.
5. I filed an ethics complaint on or about July 21, 2011 against two
   connected attorneys2
   with the IARDC because I strongly felt it was the
   right thing to do to protect and defend the integrity of the system for
   administration of justice in Illinois. IARDC however ridiculed me and
   refused to investigate my meritorious ethics complaint. This sparked my
   disagreement with the IARDC. I was forced to give IARDC an ultimatum

2 By “connected attorneys” I mean attorneys who have clout and/or
influence and are thereby able to bend the Rules of Professional Conduct
that all lawyers are mandated to obey in court proceedings with impunity
to achieve their objectives at other’s expense within the court system.
M.R.026545
SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
4
to either investigate my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint or face a legal
challenge of its “no investigation policy.” In the impasse, I failed to
anticipate IARDC’s retaliation. IARDC soon began prosecuting me.

6. The reason that IARDC gave for prosecuting me and getting me
   suspended from the practice of law, to wit: “that I made false statement
   concerning the integrity of judge(s)”, is a smokescreen to conceal the true
   reason. The true reason IARDC filed charges against me and got me
   suspended from the practice of law is retaliation for my dissent to
   IARDC’s refusal to investigate my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint against
   two connected attorneys, and my giving IARDC an ultimatum to
   investigate or face a legal challenge of its policy not to investigate.
7. I was betrayed by IARDC which is ironically a Commission of the very
   Illinois Supreme Court that issued the In re Himmel decision in the wake
   of “Operation Greylord”. I now present the chronology of the events:
8. On or about July 21, 2011, I filed with the IARDC, an ethics complaint
   against two connected attorneys who manipulated the system for
   administration of justice against my client and I in a case presided over
   by Judge Lynn M. Egan in the Law Division of the Circuit Court of Cook
   County at the Daley Center. (See Complaint @ Exhibit D, page 21/93)
   Excerpts of My July 21, 2011 Ethics Complaint, filed with IARDC
   Attorney Radusa Ostojic, Attorney Suzanne M. Crowley, the Law
   Office of James Hoffman and Associates, and the Law Firm of
   M.R.026545
   SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
   5
   Pretzel and Stouffer Knowingly Participated in a Scheme to Fix a
   Case Before Judge Lynn M. Egan. (July 2011, Exhibit D, page 21/93)
   ¶3. [Paragraph No. 3] My ability to make a living practicing law in the
   law division is however being impeded through discrimination and
   corruption. I am essentially being told in more ways than one that I
   do not belong in the law division by persons who are even less
   educated or qualified than I am just because they happen to have an
   exalted position in the judiciary. This is very humbling, and its
   implication for my community and our ability to champion our
   own causes in the courts is disturbing. There is nothing going on in
   the law division concerning cases I have there that is rocket
   science. Lawyers do not make the facts in any given case. Lawyers
   simply marshal the facts.
   ¶4. I have personally experienced sophisticated corruption in the form
   of case rigging in favor of powerful insurance [company] lawyers
   by a handful of judges in the law division. The corruption has taken
   various forms and guises such as: grandstanding and throwing of
   cases up in the air and let (sic) the jury do just about anything they
   want; turning a blind eye to facts, unfair and biased ruling to favor
   those who are connected.
   ¶6. Corruption takes its toll. It can lead to serious collateral injuries for
   the defrauded party. . . Even with a reluctance to fight, at some
   point you have no other viable option but to take on the wrongdoer
   head-on. Not because you deliberately want to make trouble with
   anyone, but because you simply have had enough of the
   shenanigans.
   ¶11. Canon 63(c): A judge shall disqualify herself in a proceeding in
   which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
   How can Judge Egan knowingly preside over a case wherein her
   brother is the equity partner of the defendant’s law firm? Why were
   we kept in the dark about this relationship in almost a year of
   contentious back and forth litigation before Judge Egan? This
   behavior undermines public trust in the fair and impartial
   administration of justice in our courtrooms.
   ¶12. Judge Lynn M. Egan did not establish high standards of conduct so
   that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be
   preserved. Judge Lynn Egan a judicial officer cannot be
   independent in resolving a dispute where her own brother Matthew
   Egan’s law firm was hired to be the defense firm. The high
   standard of conduct required of a judge means that even the
   appearance of impropriety must be avoided. There was a looming
   suspicion that there was something odd about the direction the case
   M.R.026545
   SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
   6
   was going before Judge Lynn Egan before the conflict became
   exposed.
   ¶13. Canon 62(A): A judge shall respect and comply with the law and
   should conduct himself or herself at all times in a manner that
   promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the
   judiciary. In this case, Judge Egan was not impartial in the factfinding process. [and this tainted everything else that followed]
   ¶15. When American Family Insurance Company (AFIC) in-house
   Attorneys, the law office of James Hoffman and Associates,
   including Attorney Radusa Ostojic, decided to retain the law firm
   of Pretzel & Stouffer, Chartered, to vacate the default judgment
   entered by Judge Lynn M. Egan, they were aware that Matthew J.
   Egan who is Judge Lynn M. Egan’s brother was an Equity Partner
   in the law firm of Pretzel & Stouffer, Chartered.
   ¶19. At no time in the almost a year of contentious back and forth
   litigation did anyone including: AFIC, the law office of James
   Hoffman and Associates, including Attorney Radusa Ostojic,
   Attorney Suzanne M. Crowley of the law firm of Pretzel &
   Stouffer, Chartered, and Judge Lynn M. Egan disclose this conflict
   to plaintiff and his counsel ’Lanre O. Amu.
   ¶26. The conduct of Judge Lynn M. Egan and the defense counsels
   Radusa Ostojic, Suzanne M. Crowley, and their law firms: the law
   office of James Hoffman and Associates (AFIC in-house law firm)
   and the law firm of Pretzel & Stouffer, Chartered, violate
   Plaintiff’s due process right to a fair and impartial hearing under
   the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
   ¶27. If anything of substance stated in this complaint is denied by
   anyone, then the due process right to fairness and to confront
   witnesses demand that plaintiff’s counsel ’Lanre O. Amu be
   notified and that a face to face hearing be set.
   Wherefore, Attorney ’Lanre O. Amu respectfully requests an
   investigation into these matters and seeks appropriate relief.
   Verified and signed by ’Lanre O. Amu July 2011
9. Hours before IARDC received my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint against
   the two connected attorneys, I was an attorney in “Good Standing” on
   IARDC’s books. All of that changed once I dissented to IARDC’s “no
   investigation” decision on my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint. I demanded
   an investigation, and eventually gave IARDC an ultimatum to either
   M.R.026545
   SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
   7
   investigate my ethics complaint or face legal challenge to its policy in
   federal court or at the Civil Rights division of the U.S. Department of
   Justice. (See Exhibit E @ page 38/93, 2nd full paragraph, last sentence).
10. At issue in my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint is not the amount of money
    ($273,230.02) involved in the underlying case per se. Rather, at issue is
    the way and manner connected attorneys connive and manipulate the
    system for administration of justice against us with impunity. In this
    particular case, it is the filing of fictitious pleadings and the concomitant
    hiring of the presiding judge’s brother’s law firm to prosecute the
    fictitious case before the presiding judge. The secret plot is for the
    presiding judge to breathe life into a fiction and give fiction credence at
    our expense. Any attempt to vet the matter by subpoena or discovery so
    as to expose the fiction and frustrate the plot is foreclosed. By so doing, a
    fictitious case is laundered into an authentic case and can now work its
    way up the hierarchy of courts as an authentic case.
11. When we scheme to subvert the system for administration of justice, we
    make a mockery of the court, everything from the trial court to the
    supreme court, and put innocent lives at risk. This can be demoralizing to
    those of us on the receiving end of this.
12. From my experience and belief, the bitter truth is that these connected
    attorneys knowingly set up the sham proceedings with impunity to put the
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    8
    plaintiff and (myself) his lawyer who are both African immigrants in “our
    place” as the marginalized of our society.
13. Also, from my experience and belief, had Plaintiff and I (his lawyer) been
    both white and/or non-immigrants these connected attorneys would not
    have gone to the extent they went to undermine the system for
    administration of justice against us in the case.
14. To my shock and disbelief, the IARDC saw no ethical violation and
    refused to investigate my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint. (See Exhibits F
    @ page 39/93) IARDC was essentially insulting my intelligence.
15. IARDC knew that when I asked IARDC to first get a written 14-day
    response to my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint and let me file a written
    reply before passing on the merit of my complaint, if complied with, that
    protocol effectively enshrines transparency, creates a paper trail, and
    frustrates IARDC’s ability to sweep the ethics violation under the rug.
16. On August 4, 2011, IARDC formally sent me a dismissive letter stating
    that my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint “do[es] not rise to the level of
    ethical misconduct.” (See Exhibit F @ page 39/93). I felt ridiculed.
17. Fast forward from 2011 to 2014: the ethical issue IARDC failed to see
    and dismissed with its August 4, 2011 letter became exposed about three
    years later when Crain’s Chicago Magazine’s Investigative Reporters’
    March 1, 2014 “Ethics 101” report miraculously surfaced. (See Exhibit R
    @ pages 81/93 to 89/93)
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    9
18. Meanwhile, for my having the audacity to “bell the cat” about three
    years earlier than “Crain’s Chicago” with my July 21, 2011 ethics
    complaint, IARDC ridiculed me, tagged me a liar, prosecuted me, and
    swiftly got me suspended from the practice of law on the pretext that I
    “made false statement(s) concerning the integrity of judge(s).” Crain’s
    “Ethics 101” report is independent confirmation that IARDC’s accusation
    is a pretext and a smokescreen. Where is the false statement?
19. Back to 2011: Starting in July 2011, I registered my protest in writing to
    IARDC concerning its refusal to investigate my July 21, 2011 ethics
    complaint. I was forced to give IARDC an ultimatum to commence an
    investigation into my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint or face my legal
    challenge to its “no investigation policy” at the federal court, and/or the
    Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. (See
    Exhibit E @ page 38/93, 2nd full paragraph, last sentence).
20. I went to law school with a commitment to fight for “Equal Rights and
    Justice for All” which I saw as the roadmap to lasting peace and progress
    in our world. My moral compass directed that I legally challenge the
    rectitude of IARDC’s decision not to investigate my July 21, 2011 ethics
    complaint. I however failed to anticipate IARDC’s retaliation.
21. In a preemptive strike, on December 7, 2011, IARDC charged me with
    making a false statement concerning the integrity of judge(s) on the same
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    10
    facts and occurrence detailed in my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint.
    Please see count II of IARDC’s complaint. (See Exhibit H @ page 48/93)
22. IARDC’s complaint against me is a compendium of half-truths. IARDC
    quoted me out of contexts in pursuit of propaganda against me. The full
    context of my written statements that will show that I was advocating for
    “Equal Rights, Equal Access, and Equal Justice for All” in court
    consistent with the rule of law had been obliterated by the IARDC.
23. IARDC ignored the fact that if I did not complain in 2011 given my
    personal knowledge of what happened, nobody else can, and such unfair
    practices will continue unabated with impunity, as they inevitably did,
    leading up to Crain’s March 1, 2014 “Ethics 101” report.
24. With my suspension from the practice of law, IARDC’s coverup of the
    underlying dispute seemed like a done deal until Crain’s March 1, 2014
    “Ethics 101” report miraculously surfaced and blew the cover on
    IARDC’s ruse. (See Exhibit R @ pages 81/93 to 89/93)
25. Crain’s March 1, 2014 “Ethics 101” report confirmed “in toto” the truth
    and the merit of my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint. The Crain’s “Ethics
    101” report constitutes an indictment on IARDC’s finding that my [July
    21, 2011] ethics complaint “do[es] not rise to the level of ethical
    misconduct.” worth investigating. (See Exhibit F @ page 39/93). The
    Crain’s “Ethics 101” report also debunked IARDC’s claim that I made a
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    11
    false statement concerning the integrity of a judge. It further exposes that
    my suspension is unjustified and morally wrong.
26. The purpose of an attorney disciplinary proceeding is to safeguard the
    public, maintain the integrity of the profession, and protect the
    administration of justice from reproach. My prosecution by IARDC did
    not serve any of those three purposes but in fact violated all of those three
    purposes. My prosecution put me in a ridiculous and humiliating
    situation. My prosecution stood commonsense and logic on their heads.
27. IARDC was prosecuting me for filing my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint
    which sought to safeguard the public, maintain the integrity of the
    profession, and protect the administration of justice from reproach.
28. Without a complainant, an accuser or a witness, I was nonetheless
    railroaded by IARDC, and suspended from the practice of law and my
    thriving 16-year law practice business was destroyed. This is professional
    murder for my demanding an honest investigation into ethical violation.
29. The real danger here is that anybody can be targeted like I was on mere
    propaganda in “an unfair closing of the ranks” and eliminated without
    evidence of any wrongdoing in the record of proceedings. It is a historical
    fact that members of the Ku Klux Klan have employed this very strategy
    against people of African descent who dared to speak up to challenge
    injustice in the United States.
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    12
30. It is a violation of my Due Process right to pronounce me guilty of a
    charge I pled not guilty to, to strip me of my law license, and to destroy
    my 16-year legal practice business, without ever granting my request to
    confront witnesses, complainants, and/or accusers.
31. It is dehumanizing for IARDC an agency of government to persistently
    deny my God given right to confront witnesses against me before I am
    crucified for my ethics complaint: a request I have persistently been
    making from about July 21, 2011 when I filed my verified ethics
    complaint with the IARDC. (See Exhibit D @ page 34/93 @ ¶27)
32. In perpetrating these atrocities against me, IARDC forgot the following
    adages: that “Time Will Tell Who is Telling the Truth and Who is Making
    a False Statement”; that “The Truth That Was Crushed to Earth (by
    IARDC in my case) Can Rise Again”; that “Three Things Cannot Long
    be Hidden: the Sun, the Moon, and the Truth.” By divine intervention,
    these adages came to pass beginning March 1, 2014 when Crain’s “Ethics
    101” report surfaced. I had no hand in this. It was divine intervention.
33. Had IARDC provided a platform for a thorough investigation of my July
    21, 2011 ethics complaint in 2011, I was set to present more damning
    evidence of ethical violations against the connected attorneys than
    Crain’s Chicago Investigative Reporters were able to unearth in their
    March 1, 2014 “Ethics 101” report.
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    13
34. IARDC disguised my persecution to the public at large as legitimate
    disciplinary proceedings when in reality, it was a well-orchestrated public
    lynching of a Blackman who had the audacity to stand up to IARDC and
    give IARDC an ultimatum to do the right thing, to wit: “investigate my
    July 21, 2011 ethics complaint regardless of whose ox was gored.”
35. With all due respect, lawyers by and large become judges by appointment
    or by running for election to that position, not necessarily because of
    superior ethics, morals, intellect or legal knowledge in comparison to
    myself or any lawyer. None of the judges I am accused of writing
    complaints about is educationally, morally, or ethically my superior by
    any objective scale of comparison. What will warrant false statement by
    me against any judge or anyone?
36. I recall that well over a decade ago as a deserving member of the CCBA
    in good standing at the time, I was approached about whether I was
    interested in being appointed an Associate Judge of the Circuit Court of
    Cook County but I declined the offer. I declined the offer in part because
    I had invested so much in the legal practice I built from scratch, and I
    sincerely prefer to be a lawyer and to advocate for members of my
    community as opposed to being a judge. I have never ever lobbied,
    applied, or tried to run to be a judge. I was content and prefer to be an
    advocate for the voiceless in my community. I left a professional
    engineering career to go into law. Legal advocacy is my calling.
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    14
37. If in fact, I made statement impugning the integrity of a judge in the
    context of a case I personally had before the judge, with all due respect, I
    am duly qualified by God given intellect, education, morals, ethics, and
    knowledge of the law to objectively reason things through and come to
    such a conclusion without malice to the judge. Every human being has
    the God given light of Conscience.
38. There is a double standard based on race and/or national origin in
    IARDC’s enforcement of disciplinary rules.
39. For example, IARDC did not question or prosecute Attorney Albert W.
    Alschuler, a White attorney, who represented former Illinois Secretary of
    State and former Illinois Governor George Ryan in his failed criminal
    case appeal at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeal before Judge Frank
    Easterbrook and two other appellate court judges and then wrote a
    Memoir that is critical of Judge Easterbrook titled, “How Frank
    Easterbrook Kept George Ryan in Prison”, Albert W. Alschuler,
    University of Chicago Public Law & Legal Theory Paper Series, N.
    589 (2016).
    https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2066&
    context=public_law_and_legal_theory
40. Attorney Alschuler’s writing is similar to mine but he is White as such
    his writing is automatically seen through a different lens by IARDC and
    subjected to a different standard of review. In this very same fashion the
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    15
    13th Amendment protection has been virtually circumvented against us
    through unfair imputations of wrongdoing to work injustice when if we
    were White there would have been no wrongdoing at all.
41. In Attorney Alschuler’s Memoir, he frankly detailed his reasons for
    questioning Judge Easterbrook’s honesty, candor, and integrity in his
    dealings with Judge Easterbrook in the Ryan appeal. The last time I
    checked, IARDC did not intervene, file any charges, or subject Attorney
    Alschuler to a disciplinary proceeding.
42. IARDC being a stranger to the issues I wrote about, is not in a position to
    conjure without proof that I made “false statements” in the full context of
    my detailed account of what I personally experienced in the course of
    legal proceedings. If Attorney Alschuler was not gagged by IARDC, why
    for God’s sake should I be gagged by IARDC? “If I see something, why
    should I not be equally able to say something like the Alschulers of this
    world?” If for God’s sake we cannot speak freely, how will these “in your
    face” wrongs be ever identified and righted?
43. In yet another double standard, I was subjected to a Dred Scott Era
    System of Justice that denied my rights under the 14th Amendment as an
    African immigrant attorney while non-African immigrant Attorneys
    Brian Keith Sides and John N. Dore facing same or similar charges of
    “making false statement concerning the integrity of a judge” were
    subjected to a fairer, and more humane system of justice that protected
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    16
    their 14th Amendment rights. This Separate and Unequal Application of
    the Laws on account of race and national origin is disgraceful and
    dehumanizing in this day and age. Two specific examples:
    a. In re Brian Keith Sides 11 PR0144, M.R. 26732 (Nov. 13, 2014): Mr.
    Brian Sides, who was licensed to practice law in 2002, was suspended for
    five (5) months, with the suspension stayed after sixty (60) days by a twoyear period of conditional probation. Sides made false and reckless
    statements about the integrity of judges in his judicial circuit and about
    another attorney. At the IARDC hearing, beside Sides’ testimony, the
    other testifying witnesses included: Attorney Frank A. Janello (witness)
    and Judge Chase Leonhard. In the second example:
    b. In re John N. Dore 07 CH0122, M.R. 24566 (September 20, 2011):
    Mr. John Dore who was licensed to practice law in 1974, was suspended
    for five (5) months and ordered to complete the ARDC Professionalism
    Seminar. Mr. Dore asserted frivolous position in order to harass others in
    connection with three different client matters and made false statements
    about the integrity of a judge. At the IARDC hearing, besides Dore’s
    testimony, the other testifying witnesses included: Attorney Thomas
    Piskorski, Wayne Pesek, Attorney Gregory Adamski, Judge Francis
    Dolan, Judge Mary Anne Mason.
    c. Comparing My IARDC Hearing With Dore and Sides’ IARDC
    Hearings Shows Undeniable Double Standard by IARDC: i) The
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    17
    Dores and the Sides could not be suspended from the practice of law after
    they pled not guilty on the same or similar charges without the judges and
    the lawyers involved coming in “flesh and blood” to testify at their
    IARDC hearings. Not so for me apparently because I am of such an
    “inferior race and national origin” that no witness need testify after my
    plea of not guilty in a legal forum where my means of livelihood and
    survival are involuntarily put at stake by the IARDC. ii) The Sides and
    the Dores were not denied their rights to examine or cross-examine the
    judge and the lawyers at their IARDC hearings to test for truthfulness,
    bias, and validity. But as a Black African immigrant, I apparently have no
    such right that IARDC was bound to respect. My subpoenas to the
    judge(s) and the lawyers to appear to testify under Oath in my defense
    were swiftly quashed to suppress the bombshell that IARDC did not want
    to come out at the trial to exonerate me prior to my being crucified. iii)
    My unimpeached and uncontradicted testimony which in light of Crain’s
    March 1, 2014 “Ethics 101” report, we now know is the truth, was
    rejected Dred Scott System of Justice style by the IARDC Hearing Board
    handpicked to do the hatchet job. iv) I was pronounced guilty by the
    IARDC Hearing Board without evidentiary basis, without factual basis,
    with no witness testifying against me, and while protesting my innocence.
    v) The 14th Amendment right to Due Process, Fair Hearing, and Equal
    Protection of the Laws, were denied to me on account of my race and
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    18
    national origin but were afforded to the Sides and the Dores facing the
    same or similar charges. vi) The guilty Sides and Dore each received a
    paltry five (5) months (or even part suspended) sentence that preserved
    their law practices (means of livelihood) from major interruption (a slap
    on the wrist sanction), while an innocent Amu, a Blackman, received 3
    years and 9 months suspension and until further order of the court – a
    draconian and professional death sentence that assured the complete
    destruction of my 16-year law practice and my means of livelihood. Here
    we see an innocent falsely accused black attorney given more than 8
    times the sanction given to similarly situated but guilty white attorneys.
    There was nothing I could do as a Blackman to extricate myself from this
    “official” oppression. For God’s sake, how do we justify these inhumane
    atrocities to a fellow human being in this world in this day and age and
    still call ourselves civilized? vii) IARDC a stranger to the occurrence I
    wrote about took my statements out of context, unilaterally decreed they
    are false in pursuit of its agenda, asked its Hearing Board to rubberstamp
    its decree and they complied. IARDC believes that because I am Black it
    can lord it over me, but in its double standard, IARDC will never lord it
    over the Dores, the Sides, and the Alschulers of this world because they
    are White. viii) We see a tragic and deeply disturbing departure from
    what the U.S. Constitution commands on the self-evident premise that all
    men are created equal and they are endowed by their Creator with certain
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    19
    inalienable rights. The basics of Human Rights and Human Dignity: Due
    Process, Fair Hearing, Equal Protection of the Laws, that ought to be
    equally guaranteed to all of us as creatures of God without regard to race
    or national origin consistent with the 14th Amendment to the U.S.
    Constitution were guaranteed to others but denied to me by IARDC on
    account of my race and national origin. This is essentially Dred Scott all
    over again. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
    Constitutional Provisions, Rules, Laws, and the Policy
    Statements Involved.
44. Illinois Supreme Court’s Statement on Racial Justice, June 22, 2020
45. IARDC’s Statement on Racism, June 29, 2020
46. Rule of Law Principles Embodied in the U.S. Constitution: Assures
    the equality of everyone before the law; that there will be fair and
    impartial hearing; that the accused is presumed innocent until proven
    otherwise by due process of law; that everyone be accountable to the law;
    that the rights of the minority be protected against the tyranny of the
    majority; that the 99.9% majority cannot close ranks to deprive even the
    0.1% minority of their inalienable rights, etc.
47. The 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Congress shall make no
    law abridging the Freedom of Speech, or of the Press; or the Right of the
    People to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances.
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    20
48. The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: No State shall deprive
    any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor
    deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
49. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 8.3(a): A lawyer who knows that another
    lawyer has committed a violation of Rule 8.4(c) shall inform the
    appropriate professional authority.
50. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 8.4(c): It is professional misconduct for a
    lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
    misrepresentation. The conduct of the American Family Insurance
    Company (AFIC) in hiring Judge Egan’s brother’s law firm to prosecute
    its cause then pending before Judge Egan and the conduct of Judge
    Egan’s brother’s law firm in agreeing to such incestuous representation
    amounts to conduct designed to undermine the fair and impartial
    administration of justice in the courts. Neither Judge Egan nor Mr.
    Matthew Egan, in dire straits, will ever agree to be on the receiving end
    of such an arrangement if the tables were turned. AFIC will also not agree
    for an insured to file a bogus insurance claim or engage in the very
    unethical conduct it engaged in in this case if the tables were turned. As
    faithful men and women of integrity, we are to do unto others what we
    will accept if done unto us by others if roles are reversed.
51. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 8.4(g): it is professional misconduct for a
    lawyer (here IARDC Attorney) to present * * * professional disciplinary
    charges (against ’Lanre O. Amu) to obtain an advantage in a civil matter
    (dispute). To obtain an advantage in my dispute with IARDC concerning
    its refusal to investigate my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint, IARDC
    turned the tables by filing disciplinary charges against me on December
    7, 2011 in clear violation of Rule 8.4(g). An unlawful preemptive strike.
52. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 753(c)(6): Except as otherwise provided in
    these rules, the standard of proof in all hearings shall be Clear and
    Convincing Evidence. IARDC a stranger to the issues could not have met
    this burden of proof without a witness, an accuser, or a complainant when
    I pled not guilty to the charges. This is basic logic and commonsense.
    Further Statement of Facts
53. Since I have been licensed to practice law in 1996, I have had cause to
    file three ethics complaints that are similar to my July 21, 2011 ethics
    complaint which the IARDC refused to investigate, telling me it’s “my
    word against another’s word” each time, and that IARDC cannot meet its
    burden of proof by Clear and Convincing Evidence.
54. Count II of the December 7, 2011 IARDC complaint against me was
    based on the same facts and occurrence I alleged in my earlier July 21,
    2011 ethics complaint. It is impermissible retaliation. It is also a violation
    of Rule 8.4(g). (See Exhibit D @ 48/93)
55. IARDC further stacked the deck against me by adding the three (3) prior
    dormant uninvestigated ethics complaints I filed as counts I, III and IV.
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    22
    Count IV in fact dates as far back as 2004 (6 years dormant). These are
    prior ethics complaints which IARDC earlier told me it could not
    investigate because it could not meet the burden of proof. All were dusted
    from archives and turned to additional charges against me that I made
    false statements concerning the integrity of a judge in each case.
56. In each of the four (4) count complaint against me, IARDC cherry-picked
    and took my statements out of their full contexts to conjure that I made
    false statements concerning the integrity of a judge. At the IARDC
    hearing, IARDC was however unable to find anyone to testify to what is
    false within the full context of my writings.
57. Once I pleaded not guilty to the charges of making a false statement
    concerning the integrity of a judge, IARDC had the duty to confront me
    with witnesses, accusers, and/or complainants at the IARDC hearing, and
    to prove my guilty by Clear and Convincing Evidence. Illinois Supreme
    Court Rule 753(c)(6).
58. IARDC failed in this regard and I should have been acquitted of all the
    charges pursuant to the Rule of Law, including the 1st, 13th, and 14th
    Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, etc.
59. After all of my subpoenas to compel witnesses in my defense were
    quashed, the only testimony I was left with at my IARDC hearing was my
    sworn testimony before “a closed minded” IARDC Hearing Board.
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    23
60. My sworn testimony articulating the full context of my writings in similar
    detail as the Crain’s Chicago Business Magazine Investigative Reporters’
    March 1, 2014 “Ethics 101” report was disregarded by the “closed
    minded” IARDC Hearing Board in clear violation of my right to a fair
    and impartial hearing.
61. Without a complainant, an accuser, a witness, or a factual basis, the
    Hearing Board by fiat pronounced me guilty of making false statement
    concerning the integrity of a judge in each of the four (4) counts.
62. I appealed the decision of the Hearing Board to the Review Board. The
    Review Board affirmed.
63. I appealed the decision of the Review Board to the Illinois Supreme
    Court. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the Review Board and
    suspended me from the practice of law.
64. I filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court of the
    United States. The petition for a writ was not granted.
65. Having reached the end of the road in the courts in mid-2015, I fled
    persecution to Nigeria from where I immigrated in 1982.
    My Background
66. My full name is Olanrewaju Olakunle Temitayo Amu. I am a Yoruba
    originally from West Africa. My name is commonly abbreviated in my
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    24
    native Yoruba [African] language as ’Lanre O. Amu. I have never used
    any other names. I was born in Lagos, Nigeria on August 1, 1961.
67. I am the last of four surviving children born to a Lay Preacher in the
    Wesley Methodist Church in Lagos, Nigeria. I attended Methodist
    Schools for my basic education in Nigeria. I was brought up with the
    Christian Moral Code.
68. I learnt at a young age to always strive to do what is right and to always
    stand up for what is right even if it means having to stand all alone
    because one with God is in the majority. That Honesty is the Best Policy.
69. I am a first-generation African immigrant to the United States. That being
    stated however, the concept of “foreigner” being conveniently used as a
    malign word and to disenfranchise a person like me, is relative and a
    function of who writes history and the authenticity of what is in fact
    written. The undeniable truth of history is that able-bodied men and
    women who constitute the first-generation of our peoples arrived on the
    shores of what we now call the United States of America bound in chains
    having been imported as slaves from West Africa during the transatlantic
    slave trade long before the United States of America gained its
    independence from Britain. The descendants of these people are the
    African-Americans today. Mr. Elon Musk I learnt is also a firstgeneration African immigrant like myself, but of a different skin color, as
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    25
    such, he and his likes are better able to escape the “foreigner” stigma and
    the roadblocks many of us Black African immigrants are mired in.
70. After my basic schooling in Lagos, Nigeria, I immigrated to the United
    States in the fall of 1982 to attend the Institute of Technology at the
    University of Minnesota as an undergraduate student. (Exhibit C @ 5/93)
71. In Minnesota and at the University of Minnesota, I was not a
    troublemaker. Rather, I was a people person. I got along well with
    everyone: Whites, Blacks, Asians, Jews, and Indigenous Americans.
72. I graduated at the top of my civil engineering class with a Bachelor’s
    degree with a High Distinction from the Institute of Technology at the
    University of Minnesota in 1984. (Exhibit C @ pages 5/93, 9/93) This
    academic achievement is a major feat for a Blackman at the University of
    Minnesota. With less than 2% blacks and about 90% whites in my
    engineering class, my graduation at the very top of my civil engineering
    class was on the one hand record setting for Black youths coming after
    me, and on the other hand unsettling on the possibility for us black
    peoples and other minorities, when all hinderances to progress are
    normalized for.
73. It is on record at the Civil Engineering Department at the University of
    Minnesota that I, ’Lanre O. Amu, a Blackman came directly from Africa
    and shattered the mythical glass ceiling for many Blacks my age in
    undergraduate civil engineering in one of the top engineering schools in
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    26
    the United States. However, I will be quick to add that I was only able to
    accomplish that feat because the University of Minnesota through its
    faculty at the time provided me, without discrimination, a level playing
    field to excel like my white counterparts during my studies at the
    university. For that I am eternally grateful to the faculty at the University
    of Minnesota. Had I been discriminated against at the University of
    Minnesota, I most likely would have dropped out of college and not
    finish my undergraduate studies, much less lead my graduating class.
74. After my undergraduate degree in 1984, I attended the graduate school at
    the University of Minnesota. In 1986, I graduated with a Master of
    Science in Civil Engineering degree (M.S.C.E.). (Exh. C @ page 13/93)
75. In 1986 after graduate school, I was hired as a structural engineer by an
    international engineering company in Chicago called Sargent & Lundy.
    Sargent & Lundy is a technical partner to Commonwealth Edison
    Company (ComEd, now Exelon Corporation). I was one of thousands of
    engineers of various fields working on the Braidwood Illinois Nuclear
    Power Plant project in early 1986.
76. I was hired by Sargent & Lundy purely on outstanding academic
    performance before they knew of my race and/or national origin. From
    my name and credentials, they perhaps assumed I was Asian, and clearly
    did not expect to see a Blackman or African when I showed up in person
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    27
    to start work. By the time I showed up and they knew my race and
    national origin, it was too late to safely rescind the offer. This is the truth.
77. The percentage of black engineers in Sargent & Lundy, located at 55 East
    Monroe Street (by Michigan) in Chicago, when I was there, was a lot less
    than 1%, more around 0.15%, i.e., one sixth of one percent. Whites were
    about 80%. Chinese about 2%. Indians/Pakistanis about 10%, etc., etc.
    This in 1986 was eye opening and mind boggling to me a newly arrived
    Blackman because I saw nothing in the engineering we were engaged in
    that is out of the reach of black people in Chicago to have less than a
    fraction of 1% representation in such an important international
    engineering company. I was being re-educated.
78. As time went by, I settled down to realize that the opportunity for
    advancement for me in the corporate engineering world as a Black
    African immigrant was bleak as race, having a mentor, the “old boys
    network”, national origin, etc., took center stage and what I knew was not
    as relevant. The level playing field that obtained on the university
    campus, in the classrooms and in the engineering laboratories, in
    Minnesota simply evaporated for me in the corporate world. I had no
    clout, no mentor, no connections, and I was not acceptable in the “old
    boys network” on account of my race and national origin.
79. In 1986-87, I moved on to an engineer position at Consoer Townsend
    Envirodyne Engineers, Inc., then on Clinton Street and West Lake Street
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    28
    in Chicago. I became a licensed Illinois Professional Engineer (P.E.) in
    this Company. (Exhibit C @ page 15/93)
80. I educated myself in business while working at Envirodyne Engineers in
    Chicago, by attending the graduate school at the University of Illinois at
    Chicago, Circle Campus (UIC) at night. About 1989, I obtained an
    M.B.A. degree from the University of Illinois. (Exhibit C @ page 14/93)
81. In 1990, armed with the M.B.A. degree, I was hired by ComEd in
    Chicago. I worked for ComEd for a couple of years. In 1992, I was laid
    off in a reduction in force, as they called it.
82. Like many immigrants to America, I had my dreams when I set out for
    America in 1982. That dream however did not contemplate that I will be
    treated like a second-class citizen, a displaced person, a marginalized
    person, less than human, not allowed to reach my full potential, and make
    contributions to life as a human being created by God on God’s Earth
    solely on account of my race and national origin by others who came to
    America before me. I was ignorant of racism and its impact on the
    everyday lives of Black people when I immigrated to America in 1982 at
    the age of 21.
83. My first real life experience with racism occurred when I entered the
    corporate world in Chicago in 1986. As an engineer, I did not fully
    appreciate the value of the legal profession until I was personally
    confronted with racial injustice in Chicago. That personal experience with
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    29
    racism sparked my interest in the law, ushered me into a courtroom for
    the first time, made me a litigant for the first time, and led me to drop-out
    of the corporate world and to train to be a professional Advocate.
84. In 1992, I enrolled at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago as part of
    the journey to fulfil my calling in the law. I paid my way through the
    John Marshall Law school. I did not apply for or take any loans. Upon
    admission to John Marshall Law School, I joined the Black Law Students
    Association (BLSA) to meet and learn from other black people.
85. I saw in the law profession an opportunity to become an independent
    professional free of corporate politics and to make positive contributions
    to society in the area of Equal Rights, Access, and Justice for All.
    My Character and My Fitness to Practice Law
86. On August 31, 1995, I graduated from the John Marshall Law School. I
    took the bar examination when it was offered in early 1996 and I passed
    the bar exam the first and only time I took it. (Exhibit C @ page 19/93)
87. As a people person, I am well known and respected by many people in
    the African-immigrant Community, in the African American Community,
    and beyond as an upstanding person, a role model, and a trustworthy ally
    in the struggle for Equal Rights, Access and Justice for All. I am
    commonly referred to in the African immigrant Community as “The
    Peoples’ Lawyer” or simply as “The Law” in clear recognition of my
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    30
    Advocacy on behalf of the African immigrant Community. (See Exhibit
    L @ pages 65/93 to 66/93)
88. While a law student at the John Marshall Law School, besides my
    membership in the Black Law Student Association, I was known to many
    outside the black community at the school, including but not limited to
    fellow White students, Hispanic students, a few Professors, an associate
    Dean, and the Dean of John Marshall Law School at the time. (See
    Exhibit K @ pages 63/93 to 64/93)
89. As far as honors, I am the proud recipient of the Certificate of
    Recognition from the Black Learning Resource Center at the University
    of Minnesota. This was in recognition of my pacesetting academic
    performance with a GPA of 4.00 as an engineering student at the
    University of Minnesota in 1985. (Exhibit C @ page 10/93)
90. In 1985, I was also acknowledged by the Black Community of the
    University of Minnesota as a Model of Leadership and Success. (Exhibit
    C @ page 11/93).
91. In 1990, I was awarded the Raymond C. Reese Research Prize by the
    American Society of Civil Engineers for my graduate level research work
    in structural engineering at the University of Minnesota. (Exhibit C @
    page 18/93).
92. It is on record that on May 21, 1986, on account of my excellence in
    academics and the integrity of my character at the University of
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    31
    Minnesota, I was inducted into the Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi.
    (Exhibit C @ page 12/93).
93. For a while after I became licensed to practice law, I was an adjunct
    instructor at the Harold Washington College in the Chicago Loop where I
    taught Business Law and Family Law in the evening paralegal program.
94. As at August 6, 2013, when I was suspended from the practice of law, I
    was admitted to practice and did practice law before the Illinois State and
    Federal Courts, the 7th Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court.
95. Due in part to my upbringing, I live a sober and a disciplined life. I do not
    drink alcohol. I do not take caffeine. I do not smoke. I do not do drugs. I
    make no claim to perfection, but I strive to improve myself day by day. I
    stay out of avoidable trouble. I am law abiding. I have no criminal record
    anywhere. I have not been convicted of any crime anywhere in my life. I
    have no mental health issues. I have no health issues. I do not take
    medications other than dietary vitamin B-12. I have never taken
    psychotropic medication before in my life. I am not a threat to the public
    and I have never been a threat to the public in my entire life. In my
    opinion, my character and fitness to practice law was and is excellent. If
    with my upbringing, education, lifestyle, and objective record of
    accomplishments, someone in an office at the IARDC that does not know
    me drafted a complaint stating that I made false statements concerning
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    32
    anyone, fairness demands that a robust hearing, with full subpoena
    powers, be held to ascertain the truth. I must not be taken out of context.
96. On May 9, 1996, I was admitted to the Illinois bar, and granted the honor
    and the privilege to practice law in Illinois. On being admitted, I made the
    following solemn Attorney Affirmation before God and Man, that:
    I, ’Lanre O. Amu, do solemnly affirm that I will support,
    protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States
    and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, and that I will
    faithfully discharge the duties of the office of attorney and
    counselor at law to the best of my ability.
    So Help Me God.
97. To the best of my knowledge, I have always been faithful to the Attorney
    Affirmation I made on May 9, 1996. My word is my bond.
98. On becoming licensed to practice law in May 1996, I joined the Cook
    County Bar Association (CCBA), the Chicago Bar Association (CBA),
    and very briefly, the American Bar Association (ABA) and the Illinois
    State Bar Association (ISBA).
99. For about the first five (5) years of legal practice, I was associated with a
    mentor and an inspirational African-American Attorney whose legal
    practice focused on Civil Rights, Police Brutality, Criminal Defense, and
    Serious Personal Injury. Thereafter, I practiced as a solo attorney with
    support staff. (Exhibit C @ page 6/93)
    M.R.026545
    SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
    33
100. By 2007 and beyond, I handled mostly major personal injury cases,
     wrongful death, medical malpractice, product liability, workers
     compensation, and Civil Rights cases.
101. My upbringing, education, focus, life experience, and access to resources
     combined to prepare me to competently practice law no less than any
     other law firm and to make positive contributions to society.
102. Unfortunately, there have been a few times when some judges with no
     knowledge of who I am instinctively judged me on the color of my skin,
     rather than the quality of my legal work and the content of my character.
103. While I make no claim to perfection by any means, I work at all times to
     uphold what is fair, just, true and right in the practice of law and in
     human relations in clear recognition that there is an ultimate judge of the
     affairs of men to whom each and every one of us must give an account.
104. I am a fearless advocate for the persons I represent because as a person of
     faith and conscience, I harbor no ill-will against any human being. I am
     able to confront any wrongdoer regardless of title, position, or race in the
     faithful discharge of my duties as a lawyer and an advocate.
105. Prior to December 7, 2011 when IARDC filed charges against me, I had
     successfully practiced as a licensed professional first in engineering and
     then in law for a combined 25 years (1986-2011) in Chicago, Illinois
     without any ethical issues. I had an unblemished record of good behavior.
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     34
     The Racial and National Origin Underpinning of My Dispute with
     IARDC Before IARDC Brought Trumped-Up Charges Against Me.
106. As I progressed in the 16+ year legal practice, I became increasingly
     aware of subtle impediments to practicing law “while Black” especially
     in cases where a lot of money is at stake, which invariably means the Law
     Division at the Daley Center.
107. There have been a couple of times when I appeared in a courtroom as one
     of just a handful or so black/minority lawyers in a sea of white lawyers,
     before a new or unknown judge who unwittingly gave away his
     assumption that by virtue of my being a black African immigrant, I am
     either in the wrong place, or that my white (insurance company defense)
     attorney(s) opponents ought to prevail in the controversy at hand.
108. Prior to being charged by IARDC on December 7, 2011, as I explained
     earlier, I had issue with IARDC’s policy of refusing to investigate some
     legitimate ethics complaints and silencing dissent to its policy. I had filed
     complaint against two connected attorneys in which I alleged that the
     connected attorneys colluded to subvert the system of administration of
     justice against my client and I. The crux of the issue in all of the ethics
     complaints I have ever filed is best articulated by restating verbatim what
     a former client, Ms. Anita Bowden, told me orally on the telephone on
     January 12, 2015. (Exhibit J @ pages 58/93 to 62/93) Ms. Anita Bowden
     unwittingly cut to the chase during our telephone conversation thus:
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     35
109. On Monday January 12, 2015, at about 12:11 p.m., Ms. Anita Bowden,
     an elderly African American lady then in her 70s, called me out of the
     blue. I had not seen or spoken to Ms. Bowden in about 5 years. I had the
     honor and privilege of representing Ms. Bowden at least twice prior: one
     case started in 1997, and another case started about 2002.
110. During our January 12, 2015 telephone discussion, Ms. Bowden
     reminded me that a couple of years prior, I had agreed to represent her in
     another case pending at the Illinois Workers Compensation Commission
     (“Commission”) located at 100 West Randolph Street, in Chicago. That I
     then instructed her to tell the Arbitrator who gave her time to retain a
     lawyer that she had retained me as her lawyer, that I had agreed to
     represent her, and that I will be filing my appearance shortly but due to a
     scheduling conflict on that date I could not appear with her.
111. Ms. Bowden told me that when she went to the Commission on her case
     and told the Arbitrator that she had retained me, Attorney ’Lanre Amu, as
     her lawyer, the Arbitrator told her not to hire Attorney ’Lanre Amu
     because Mr. Amu is a “foreigner.” And that if she insists on having Mr.
     Amu as her lawyer, “they will make sure she loses her case at the
     Commission.”
112. The above statement attributed to an Arbitrator (a judicial officer)
     succinctly cuts to the chase in all of my four (4) ethics complaints. My
     ethics complaints to IARDC were attempts to spur IARDC – a
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     36
     government regulatory agency to investigate and to help provide a
     platform where the “how and manner in which “they” manipulate the
     system and make sure we lose cases on account of race and/or national
     origin” is exposed and dealt with. My ethics complaints did not seek to
     sanction any attorney or judge but sought (relief) reform and to ensure
     that these tactics did not occur again. (See Exhibit D @ 34/93, Relief)
     Unfortunately, IARDC wanted none of that and refused to get involved or
     investigate. An investigation of each of my ethics complaints could not
     have taken IARDC more than 5 billable hours if the will is there.
113. In perspective, I filed four (4) ethics complaints in 16 years of active legal
     practice in which I had represented over a thousand (1,000+) clients and
     appeared before over 200 judges.
114. Immediately I finished the telephone conversation with Ms. Bowden, I
     composed myself and mailed Ms. Bowden a witness statement form
     asking her to put in writing what she told me orally on the telephone. Ms.
     Bowden sent me back a letter refusing to put what she told me in writing.
     (Exhibit J @ page 62/93)
115. I then called Ms. Bowden to ask why she refused to fill out the witness
     statement form stating what she told me on the phone. Ms. Bowden
     replied that I was only concerned about myself, and that I was not
     considerate of her own predicament. That she still has a Workers’
     Compensation case pending at the Commission, and that she called me
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     37
     thinking I was still practicing law and could be of assistance to her on her
     pending case. And that she also still has a pension case pending.
116. Apparently, Ms. Bowden was afraid that if she wrote down and/or swore
     to what the Arbitrator told her, it will come back to hunt her in her
     pending cases. Ms. Bowden told me that she first has to protect herself
     which I can understand. But this is the dimension the IARDC an agency
     of government charged by law to be socially responsible knowingly
     suppressed while taking my statements out of context to prosecute me
     and professionally lynch me. This is not a socially responsible use of
     governmental powers by IARDC when we are all aware or ought to be
     aware of the real problems of race in society and government’s social
     responsibility to ameliorate its effect on victims.
117. This in a nutshell is the crux of all of the four (4) ethics complaints I filed
     in the 16-year period between when I became a lawyer in 1996 and
     December 7, 2011 when IARDC filed retaliatory charges against me.
     IARDC’s Compromise of the Rule of Law, Conflict of Interest,
     Confirmation Bias and Cognitive Dissonance.
118. The allegations in my July 21, 2011 ethics complaint did not sit well with
     IARDC. The allegations did not fit into IARDC’s narrative on those
     implicated which invariably include Matthew Egan and his sister Judge
     Lynn M. Egan. IARDC had a conflict of interest in the matter.
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     38
119. I found out after the fact that Judge Lynn Egan, her brother Matthew
     Egan, and their father the late Justice Edward Egan had clout among the
     collegiate judges, justices, and at the IARDC with the resulting tendency
     to close ranks in defiance of the Rule of Law. After all, I am an unknown
     entity vis-à-vis these known colleagues. The late Justice Edward Egan
     was a highly respected and acclaimed Cook County Judge, an Illinois
     Appellate Court Justice, and a former chieftain of the IARDC. This
     however should not have mattered pursuant to the Rule of Law.
120. Matthew Egan, Judge Egan’s brother, is an Equity Partner and a
     Shareholder of the defense law firm of Pretzels and Stouffer, Chartered.
     Mr. Matthew Egan served for over a decade as a member of the IARDC
     Inquiry Board. He also served on the IARDC Hearing Board. He also
     served as special counsel to the IARDC. The Illinois Supreme Court
     appointed Mr. Matthew Egan to serve on the Court’s Committee on Jury
     Instructions – Civil. He also served on the Judicial Evaluation Committee
     of the Chicago Bar Association. So, he is undoubtedly clouted. But again,
     these should not have mattered pursuant to the Rule of Law.
121. I also learnt that Judge Lynn M. Egan was a highly respected Circuit
     Court judge in the Law Division and certainly a colleague of the judges
     and justices who sat in judgment of me – the unknown entity. Again,
     these should not have mattered. The Rule of Law is very clear that the
     focus should have been on the issue.
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     39
122. The outstanding, Pope-like, credentials of Judge Lynn Egan, her brother
     Matthew Egan, and their father, the late Justice Edward Egan, are not
     disputed by me. But with all due respect, laudable as they are, they are
     not relevant considerations concerning the specific ethics issue I
     complained about and should not have stood in the way of a detached and
     sober analysis of the ethics issue I complained about. The reality however
     is that clout contributed to the conflict of interest, compromise of the
     Rule of Law, cognitive dissonance, and confirmation bias. The easiest
     way out was to discredit the messenger and to scapegoat the messenger.
     My Unlawful Targeting, Prosecution, Persecution, Stigmatization,
     Defamation and Suspension from the Practice of Law “Engineered”
     by the IARDC Without a Complainant, an Accuser, or a Witness
     Against Me is Unfair and Oppressive.
123. On IARDC’s website, the following statement is published as the reason
     for the suspension of my law license:
     https://www.iardc.org/lawyersearch_Expand.asp
     Mr. Amu, who was licensed in Illinois in 1996, was suspended for
     three years (from August 6, 2013) and until further order of the
     Court. Amu made false statements about the integrity of several
     judges before whom he was representing different clients in
     litigation.
124. The above IARDC statement on why I was suspended from the practice
     of law is false, a pretext, a smokescreen, and is defamatory. For reasons
     already stated in this petition, the guilty finding and my suspension from
     the practice of law violate the fundamental principles on which the
     American Legal System is based.
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     40
125. No judge in question accused me of making false statement concerning
     his or her integrity. There was not witness, complainant, or accuser. The
     judge in fact knowingly contributed to the crisis of confidence by
     entangling herself in the incestuous representation relationship. After
     Crain’s “Ethics 101” exposé, the judge in fact corrected herself and
     resigned from one of the conflicting situations she knowingly put herself
     thus raising legitimate ethical inquiry, given that she knew or reasonably
     should have known that judges are held to the highest ethical standards,
     and they are to avoid even the slightest appearance of impropriety. (See
     Exhibit R @ pages 85/93, 86/93) It is unfair for IARDC to make me the
     complainant and messenger the scapegoat for other’s misconduct.
     I Was Forced to Flee Persecution to Nigeria But I Was Trailed Even
     in Nigeria by IARDC’s Stigma, Propaganda, and Defamation.
126. In June 2015, after the U.S. Supreme Court denied my petition for a writ
     of certiorari, I came to my wit’s end in this battle. I felt if I remained in
     Chicago, I could be further framed for more serious charges and/or even
     criminal charges and conceivably in similar fashion railroaded and found
     guilty without evidence, accuser or witness with even more severe
     consequences. So, I fled persecution to Nigeria from
     Unfortunately, with my one and only global identity as ’Lanre O. Amu,
     there is no hiding place for me even in Nigeria as the IARDC’s
     defamation is accessible worldwide.
127. In 2015, I applied to attend the Nigerian Law School. In the application
     process, I was required to explain my circumstance in Illinois and to get
     letters of recommendation.
128. I got a letter of recommendation from the Dean of the John Marshall Law
     School during my years as a student, Professor Emeritus, the late Robert
     Gilbert Johnston. (Exhibit K @ page 63/93).
129. I also got a letter of recommendation from a Chicago-based Africanimmigrant evangelist the Reverend Gabriel O. Farombi. Mr. Farombi had
     a towering stature arguably similar to that of the American Evangelist the
     Reverend Billy Graham in the Nigerian setting in the 1990s and has
     known me in Chicago for over a decade. (Exhibit L @ page 65-66/93).
130. I also got a letter written by IARDC’s general counsel Mr. James G.
     Grogan (Exhibit M @ page 67/93).
131. IARDC’s propaganda, stigma and defamation caused further setbacks and
     complications in my relationship with the Nigerian authorities and the
     Nigerian Law School. I was denied admission to the Nigerian Law
     School on the basis that I was suspended from the practice of law in
     Illinois for making false statements concerning the integrity of judges.
     (Exhibits O, P, @ pages 69/93 to 71/93) These entities found the IARDC
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     42
     propaganda and defamation too damaging and virtually impossible for me
     to overcome. As such, I faced rejection at every turn including in
     Nigeria’s legal system, institutions of government, and places of business
     opportunities. (Exhibits O, P, @ pages 69/93 to 71/93).
     In 2017, after the 3 years and 9 Months of Suspension, I Demanded
     of IARDC the Unconditional Reinstatement of My Law License and
     the Payment of $35 Million in Monetary Damages. IARDC
     Demanded that I Admit to Making False Statements Concerning the
     Integrity of Judge(s), Apologize, and Show Proof of Rehabilitation as
     a Condition for My Reinstatement, and Did not Respond to My $35
     Million Monetary Damages Demand. I Refused to Apologize.
132. On or about March 21, 2017, after the 3 years and 9 months period of
     suspension, I made a demand on the IARDC through its Administrator,
     Mr. Jerome E. Larkin, to unconditionally move to reinstate my law
     license and to also compensate me to the tune of $35 Million for the
     damages caused in this ordeal. (Exhibit Q @ pages 72/93 to 93/93)
133. The damages I have sustained since this ordeal began in 2011 include but
     are not limited to damages for the trauma, defamation of character,
     embarrassment, humiliation, pain and suffering, loss of a normal life, loss
     of enjoyment of life, suspension of my law license, destruction of my 16+
     years of legal practice business, loss of my ability to make a living and
     support my family and dependents, loss of benefits, loss of clients and
     business opportunities. Monetary estimates include: 1) the opportunity
     cost of defending the IARDC charges from 2011 to 2015 ($0.5M); 2) the
     damages resulting from the suspension of my law license from August 6,
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     43
     2013 ($5M); damages resulting from the destruction of my 16+ years of
     legal practice ($14.5M); damages from the loss of goodwill and clients
     ($10M); damages from the defamation of my character ($5M), and more.
134. On March 22, 2017, I received an email from Mr. Al Krawczyk, an
     attorney at the IARDC, asking me to comply with Illinois Supreme
     Court’s Rule 767 and Commission rules, including Rule 402, as condition
     for reinstatement. IARDC stated that I must apologize for making false
     statements, show remorse, and show rehabilitation to be reinstated to the
     practice of law. IARDC did not respond to my $35 Million monetary
     damage demand.
135. The reinstatement rules IARDC referred to apply to a lawyer who is
     rightly suspended from the practice of law for an ethical violation proved
     by Clear and Convincing Evidence at an IARDC hearing subject to fair
     hearing, due process, rule of law, and equal protection of the laws. I was
     not so lawfully found guilty. I am innocent.
136. I refuse to apologize because it is illogical and morally wrong to ask me
     to apologize. IARDC should be the one to apologize to me and to make
     me whole for the betrayal of public trust and for scapegoating me.
137. It is axiomatic that unless you have evidence of a wrongdoing against a
     person, you cannot find that person guilty of a wrong he pleads not guilty
     to. A judge falsely accused has no less recourse to directly address the
     false accusation than IARDC – a stranger to the issues. No judge has
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     44
     accused me of making false statement concerning his or her integrity.
     Why is IARDC an outsider to the issues crying more than the alleged
     bereaved “judge” who has not lodged the complaint IARDC advanced
     against me? Who refused to show up at trial, even after notice and
     subpoena, to testify in support of the IARDC’s complaint on his/her
     behalf? Who chose not to use his/her contempt powers? Who chose not to
     sue me for defamation when at that time I was in fact professionally
     insured in the millions of dollars for defamation on account that truth is
     an affirmative defense in a professional liability insurance claim? How is
     it fair for IARDC to target my law license and destroy my means of
     livelihood under these circumstances? Why is this not a hate crime?
138. If as minorities in a majority rule setting we cannot freely exercise our 1st
     Amendment rights to dissent to policies, practices, and/or procedures that
     we feel curtail our Civil Rights, remove a level playing field in the
     professions, hinder our progress in life, and/or prevent us from equally
     prospering for fear of retaliation by the majority law enforcers then let us
     all stop deceiving ourselves, there is hardly any peaceful pathway for the
     total eradication of racism in the United States. The consequences of this
     will be tragic and a disgrace to the human race. Frankly, the right policy
     for social progress is “if you see something say something and we will
     faithfully judge it honestly, transparently and accountably.” We should
     neither be afraid to speak up nor concede to be intimidated and silenced.
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     45
     A Catalogue of Betrayals: To Kill Attorney ’Lanre O. Amu, a
     Mocking Bird, Who Merely Delivers a Truthful but Bitter Message
     to IARDC as a Mirror Reflects.
139. If an exposed insurance company has a court case, can it secretly scheme
     to sit a sympathetic judge without violating the opponent’s due process
     right to a fair trial? See Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company, 556
     U.S. 868 (2009), Hale v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
     Company, 12-cv-00660, United States District Court, Southern
     District of Illinois (East St. Louis).
140. Can the insurance company scheme to hire the judge’s spouse or sibling’s
     law firm to prosecute its case before the judge as here? The obvious
     objective is to get a judge to do its bidding. This incestuous relationship
     tips the scale of justice in the mind of any reasonable person. In light of
     In re Himmel, why should a lawyer who encounters such an incestuous
     arrangement be afraid to expose or question the secret “family affair”?
141. When as minorities we are encircled, given the runaround in an influence
     peddling scheme of sort and we kick and try to expose what is happening,
     we get slapped in the face on trumped-up IARDC charges, unfairly
     labeled a liar, and suspended from the practice of law. How is this fair?
142. IARDC’s leadership, led by the Administrator, Mr. Jerome E. Larkin, are
     fond of giving lofty annual lectures on practical ethical issues in the
     abstract and they seemed convincing in lecture halls. However, when the
     rubber met the road, as in this real case, and the ethics complaint
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     46
     concerned connected attorneys and cronies of the IARDC, the IARDC
     and Mr. Larkin chickened out. Talk is indeed cheap.
143. IARDC refuses to be conscious of some untoward practices resulting in
     injustices in the courts and the role it can play to bring about reform.
144. IARDC fails to recognize that it has a Moral, Ethical, and Legal
     responsibility to provide a platform where obscure practices that subvert
     the system for administration of justice in the courts are articulated and
     exposed so that there can be reform, even without sanction to anyone.
145. We must also be mindful that a “corrupt judge” is in fact no judge at all,
     at least concerning the “corruption” controversy at issue, but is in fact an
     imposter that should be exposed for the betterment of the judicial system
     and society concerning that issue. This is no different than the
     hypothetical case of the Pope who ran a red light and injured a sober
     atheist pedestrian lawfully crossing the road inside the crosswalk. There
     is no hiding from the fact that the Pope is guilty. To condemn the
     innocent and acquit the guilty is morally, ethically, and legally wrong.
     Debunking the Propaganda, Myths, Rumours, African-Immigrant
     Bashing, Stereotypes, Putdowns, Unfairly Unleashed Against Me.
146. Ever since IARDC charged me on December 7, 2011, I have been the
     subject of ridicules, propaganda, stereotypes, and immigrant bashings, all
     aimed to kill my spirit, to humiliate me, and to discredit me. I do not want
     to be judged based on any of those. Rather, I will like to be judged on the
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     47
     content of my character as reflected in my objective conduct. I feel it is
     necessary and appropriate to debunk the following:
147. I have been accused of being unstable, a mental case, and that I got into
     trouble with IARDC after I stopped taking my medications. My response:
     I am of sound physical and mental health. I have never taken
     psychotropic or mental health medications in my life.
148. I was told that my problem is that I refuse to know my place in society as
     an African immigrant attorney. That I was venturing into high stakes
     legal practice areas where millions of dollars are at issue, that I should
     have known that those areas of practice are closed to someone in my class
     as an African immigrant. My response: I agree that it may well be part of
     the issue. I however believe that my education, integrity, character, ability
     and the law license ought to open doors of opportunity to me that should
     not be shut on account of my race and national origin.
149. Its been alleged that we Black African immigrants unfairly take
     advantage of the systems of America. That we get public aid, food stamp,
     medicaid, welfare benefits, and take jobs reserved for the native-born
     Americans. That I got my degrees through government student loans, etc.
     My Answer: I appreciate the opportunities given to me in America to get
     an education and to practice law. However, it is unfair to stereotype me or
     any group. Many of these stereotypes do not even apply to me. For
     instance, I have never applied for and I have never received public aid,
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     48
     food stamp, medicaid, welfare benefits, student loan or government loan
     before in my life. I dutifully paid my way all through each and every one
     of the four colleges and/or universities I attended and graduated from in
     America. As a self-employed lawyer, I think I created job by hiring
     support staff. All of these objectively speak to my character and value
     system as a Blackman vis-à-vis the unfair stereotypes.
150. After my suspension, some judges who believed in IARDC’s propaganda,
     took me on to humiliate me and do me in. In a case I had won outright,
     the judge went back to reopen the case on a pretext only to reverse the
     judgment previously entered in my favor without logical explanation
     solely to ridicule me for “fighting the system.”
     Additional Authorities and Relevant Public Pronouncements of Some
     of the Justices on the Illinois Supreme Court
151. Quoting Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Anne Marie Burke: My
     judicial philosophy is to get it right from the facts to the law. In
     everything you do, you have to be honest, truthful and professional.
152. Quoting Illinois Supreme Court Justice Rita B. Garman on Law Day
153. Theme: Advancing the Rule of Law Now! If civilization is to
     survive, it must choose the Rule of Law. Our way of life as free men and
     women flourishes when the Rule of Law is acknowledged and upheld as
     the foundation of an orderly society. The principles of Equal Treatment
     and Due Process. These God given freedoms and protections must not be
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     49
     taken for granted. Where law ends, tyranny begins. We must preserve our
     Constitutional rights and uphold the Rule of Law. Use your voice and
     talents to spread this message. If not you, who? We must preach the
     importance of respecting the laws. Civil society thrives when citizens
     adhere to its rules. Our world will be a different place if stop signs are
     routinely ignored. We must ensure that the law applies fairly and
     impartially, no matter a person’s race, gender, ethnicity or social status.
     The law must apply equally to lawyers and judges, to the rich and to the
     poor, to ordinary citizens and chief executives. Only then will our
     promise of liberty and justice be not for some but for all.
154. Quoting Illinois Supreme Court Justice Mary Jane Theis. Campaign
     Promise: There must be a commitment to legal ethics, integrity, fairness
     and impartiality. I spent more than three decades as a public defender and
     a judge knowing that my actions can change lives. The robes that we
     wear is about guaranteeing that every voice is heard. Fair and Square.
155. Quoting Illinois Supreme Court Justice Daniel K. Overstreet.
     Campaign Promise: I will be fair, impartial, and honest. Justices must
     uphold the Rule of Law and uphold Constitutional rights.
156. Do not set your heart on being a judge, unless you have the strength of
     character and the moral courage to put an end to injustice. If you let
     yourself be influenced by someone in a position of power, your integrity
     will be damaged.
     M.R.026545
     SUBMITTED – 13815385 – ‘Lanre Amu – 6/24/2021 3:56 PM
     50
     CONCLUSION
157. This is the Moment of Truth: Please help put your words into effect in
     this case. Please help walk the talk in this case. Please let your action in
     this case speak louder than your words. Integrity and the Oath of Public
     Office demand that you apply the same standard of justice that you would
     want applied to you, your spouse, your children, and/or your loved ones
     in this verified petition of another human being created by God. I believe
     that Justice in this case mandates that I be made whole from all of these
     atrocities. That those who sought to get rid of me and leave me for dead
     must not prevail. Please let Justice prevail.
     PRAYER FOR RELIEF
     WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, ’Lanre O. Amu, respectfully petitions this
     Honorable Court to grant the following reliefs:
     1) To Unconditionally Vacate the Wrongful Suspension of My Illinois Law
     License on August 6, 2013;
     2) For a Certificate of Innocence, a Formal Written Apology, a Certificate of
     Commendation for Honesty, Courage, and a Commitment to the Rule of
     Law; and
     3) For an Award of Make Whole Relief for the Trauma, Violations, and the
     Damages, Caused to Me, My Family and Dependents Starting From
     2011; and
     4) To Grant Further Relief as this Honourable Court Deems Just and Proper.
     Respectfully submitted,
     /s/ ’Lanre O. Amu
     ’Lanre O. Amu, Self-represented Petitioner