This is a story many longtime Lake Foresters probably know, but if you’ve never heard it, or maybe just forgot, you are in the right place for a North Shore classic.
You’ve likely heard the name Mr. T. From the mohawk to the enormous muscles to the gold chains… he’s a pop culture icon who played the role of B.A. Baracus in a popular 80’s action drama series called “The A-Team.” Students, ask your parents about him. They remember.
Mr. T, real name Laurence Tureaud, also played the role of Clubber Lang in Rocky lll and was a part of many other action movies. He also made appearances in the wrestling scene. He and Hulk Hogan were tag team partners in WrestleMania l, which they won. Off screen, Mr. T was famous for his “tough guy” persona and notable catchphrase: “I pity the fool!”
The legendary muscle man also has a connection to decorous Lake Forest.
Here’s what happened…
In 1987, Mr. T, who moved to town a year earlier, hired a crew to chop down more than 100 oak and maple trees on his 7.5-acre, $1.3 grandeur estate at 395 N Green Bay Rd. The incident brought national attention to town. The media dubbed it the “Lake Forest Chainsaw Massacre.”
Why would someone do such a thing, you might ask? The gold-chained celebrity’s brother claimed to one reporter that Mr. T had “allergies.”
This was not the first time that Mr. T had been issued a stern warning by the Lake Forest City Council. Shortly before the tree incident, the pop culture symbol installed a stockade fence and had it painted white. It was ordered to be sandblasted in order to restore its traditional appearance.
He complied and took care of it the following day. After this visit, Mr. T was well aware of the local ordinances and that they would be sternly enforced. However, that did not stop him from poking the bear.
On the morning of the “massacre,” after a night of chainsaw rumble, neighbors discovered the property, which looked like it had been clear cut by commercial loggers.
Throughout the morning, Mr. T chatted with neighborhood children, flaunting his handy work. He had cut down an estimated 100 trees. Many of them were full grown oaks and maples.
He allegedly said that he had plans to install a large, iron “T” on the front gate to his mansion property. That’s how he rolled.
Chicago native Mike Saunders, who is the grandfather of LFHS students Cate and Emmet Lee, says he remembers the incident well.
“To me the ‘tree massacre’ that occurred in 1987 was in many ways the beginning of a trend that we see happening repeatedly today. It is where some feel they are plainly above the law and can do what they want without regard to the long term ramifications to their friends, neighbors, society and the environment. It’s as if rules are for others,” Saunders said.
It is safe to say Mr. Saunders’ thoughts were in alignment with much of the town. Trees are beloved in our community. Afterall, we are Lake Forest.
“To me a stand of mature and stately trees is a testament to time and natural beauty. It’s a natural event that cannot be replicated easily or quickly. It can represent nature at its best,” Saunders said. “It is a classic example of enlightened self interest. You have an individual, because of his fame and notoriety, who felt he was above the rules that the rest of us are supposed to follow. An individual who because of his stature could do what he wanted.”
Mr. T gave the property to his girlfriend in 1993. She sold it for $2.4 million, which is equivalent to $4.5 million today. The owners from 2009 to 2021 planted 150 trees in an effort to restore the damage of the arboreal mass destruction of 1987.
There is a bright side, however, in 1988 the village enacted a tree preservation ordinance to prevent developers and homeowners from chopping down trees.
Jim A. LFHS Security • Dec 6, 2024 at 10:04 am
I remember this incident and many others involving Mr. T and his family very well. I was a Police Officer for the City of Lake Forest at the time and it created a bit of controversy.
Alex Mann • Dec 6, 2024 at 7:34 am
Love the spirited (and well-articulated) debate around this issue…perfect to discuss when we get to Property Law in class!
Shay • Dec 5, 2024 at 3:09 pm
LF has a strong undercurrent of racism, probably even more so today. From the initial city warnings – I wonder how the city would have responded if he was a world famous white celebrity? Something to consider…
guys telling shay he wrong • Dec 6, 2024 at 11:50 am
LF would respond the same—no reason to bring race into it.
Shay • Dec 6, 2024 at 2:01 pm
As a minority myself living in LF I’ve been profiled here downtown, turned away from LF restaurants with “no tables available” and asked if I work in LF stores while clearly shopping there. My minority friends in million $$ homes here have been bullied about simple updates to their patios by HOA’s and many have become so frustrated that they have moved to minority friendly areas like HP, Glencoe & Winnetka. I think Mr.T had no idea what he was in for. So it’s very hard to overlook how Racism plays a tremendous role in this community both then and now.
someone • Dec 10, 2024 at 5:36 pm
Sure people sometimes make jokes, but i am a minority and i don’t think Lf is rascist.
Jason Kowalski • Dec 4, 2024 at 2:05 pm
Mr. T did nothing wrong.
The city of Lake Forest has no moral right to mandate “traditional” appearances of private land. It has no right to prohibit fences on a basis as immaterial as paint color. Such restrictions are inherent violations of people’s right to control their self and their property.
Despite our rights, the oligarchs continue their tyrannical imposition – the ultimate form of “enlightened self-interest” – upon the people. This overreach cannot be tolerated.
It is our duty to defy unjust laws and to demand their repeal.
Anonymous • Dec 4, 2024 at 10:06 pm
First of all, Mr. T did nothing wrong? That’s a bold claim. His actions—chopping down a reported 100+ trees on his property—obliterated an ecosystem that benefited the entire community. Sure, it’s his property, but private ownership doesn’t exempt anyone from their environmental and social responsibilities.
Lake Forest’s appearance regulations might seem arbitrary to you, but they’re built on community values—values that residents agree to uphold when they move in. Aesthetic harmony and environmental preservation contribute to shared prosperity. You don’t like it? Then maybe Lake Forest wasn’t the neighborhood for Mr. T’s “no rules, just right” philosophy.
Now, calling city officials “tyrannical oligarchs”? Let’s not get carried away. This isn’t Orwell’s 1984. It’s local governance ensuring that one person’s whims don’t ruin it for everyone else. Civil societies have laws for exactly this reason: to balance individual freedoms with the greater good.
Lastly, “defying unjust laws” might sound heroic, but it falls flat when the laws in question are protecting the public from reckless environmental destruction. Do you want to fight over paint colors? Sure, maybe some rules are excessive, but razing trees isn’t just a violation of city code—it’s a slap in the face to everyone affected by urban heat islands, stormwater issues, and habitat destruction.
Not all defiance is noble. This isn’t sticking it to the man—it’s selfishness with a chainsaw.
Jason Kowalski • Dec 5, 2024 at 1:52 pm
“An ecosystem that benefited the entire community” surely ought to be owned by the community or governed by a deed restriction if it matters that much.
“Lake Forest’s appearance regulations … [are] built on community values” is not a compelling argument. Slavery was a community value in the Southern states, but that didn’t stop the Union from intervening. Many other evils – racial hatred, communism, theocratic nationalism, etc – were “values” of many communities.
“values that residents agree to uphold when they move in” continues the series of falsehoods. These values are not mentioned anywhere on the deeds, and many residents are not voluntarily here. Furthermore, the “rights” of the community cannot justify violating the rights of the individual.
The Lake Forest municipal government is designed to confine power to the elites, to deny dissidents the possibility of any power.
Laws do not exist to “balance individual freedoms with the greater good”. Most laws merely authorise select officials to wage robbery, rape, and murder upon the general populace. Ethical policies are the exception, not the rule.
Mr T’s defiance, while ultimately pursued in self-interest, is morally less flawed than that of Randy Weaver and Marvin Heemeyer, people far more heroic than any councilman or tax collector could be.
Anonymous • Dec 5, 2024 at 9:01 pm
First off, Jason, the idea that an ecosystem benefiting the community “should be owned by the community or governed by a deed restriction” is a false dichotomy. Shared benefits don’t require shared ownership. Environmental resources often serve public interests without needing to be explicitly communally owned. Trees provide cleaner air, cooler temperatures, and better stormwater management. Destroying them isn’t just a personal decision; it’s a public harm, like dumping toxic waste in a river. The fact that these values aren’t spelled out in a deed doesn’t absolve someone of responsibility to the broader community.
Comparing Lake Forest’s appearance regulations to slavery, racial hatred, or communism is a textbook false equivalence. Let’s keep some perspective here: painting your fence or planting certain trees is not equivalent to violating human rights. Community regulations exist because unchecked individualism can harm everyone else. Rules about tree removal or aesthetics might be inconvenient, but they’re hardly tyrannical – they’re attempts at shared governance in a densely populated area.
The claim that “many residents are not voluntarily here” deserves scrutiny. Who is being forced to live in Lake Forest? If someone can afford to live there, they likely have the means to move if they disagree with the regulations. And yes, by buying property there, you are implicitly agreeing to abide by local rules, whether you read them beforehand or not. That’s how contracts and governance work.
Now, your claim that laws “merely authorize robbery, rape, and murder” is so extreme it borders on self-parody. Yes, some laws and governments have historically been unjust. That doesn’t mean every ordinance about fence color or tree preservation is akin to authoritarianism. Your blanket cynicism about laws is more a venting of frustration than a serious argument against regulations designed to preserve communal well-being.
Finally, comparing Mr. T to Randy Weaver and Marvin Heemeyer is another reach. Both men were extremists whose actions had catastrophic consequences – hardly paragons of moral defiance. Elevating Mr. T’s tree massacre to the same plane as their violent stands against the government is overkill. His “defiance” wasn’t noble resistance to tyranny; it was an exercise in entitlement that ignored his community’s shared interests.
If you want to talk about unjust laws, let’s focus on those that genuinely oppress people. Defending Mr. T’s environmental destruction doesn’t pass the test.
ME • Dec 6, 2024 at 9:22 am
I love this debate going on here. people are sharing and arguing their beliefs in a constructive manner. I personally believe that such regulation could be in place in a subdivision or something like that as long as they are clearly stated in the documents signed before buying the property, but merely as a city i’m not sure if it should regulate property like that. the issue is comparable to burning trash on one’s property which is regulated, and I think should be. but I don’t thinks you can compare it to dumping waste in a river because the trees are privately owned unlike a river. i do wholeheartedly disagree with the regulation of paint colors on a fence unless theres anything provocative.