An Open Letter to Washington State Attorney General Ferguson and Governor Inslee on Allegations of a Climate of Corruption and Repression at Clark College and in Clark County

Article 6 Section 2 U.S. Constitution Supremacy Clause:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Amendment XIV

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state 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.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]

Please note time of this posting October 25, 2013 7 am PST

Dear Mr. Ferguson,

Please regard this as an official submission to you not only as the Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer in Washington State, but as an Officer of the Court and Member of the Washington State Bar, under the responsibilities of all public employees and citizens under

I write to you again to try again to try to stop real crimes and real harm to real people.

First of all, you need to take a very close look at AAG Colleen Warren and her interactions with me and my associates as I respectfully requested in my prior submissions. But this is URGENT. Here are my interactions with Ms Warren and those representing her. and why I objected repeatedly to her inserting herself into this process. She has a clear agenda as well as contempt for basic due process but her intrigue today was over the top.

Today, Ms Warren told Mr. Dean Lookinghawk, who has been with me at all hearings with the Clark College administration and Robert Knight, the president, that as far as she was concerned my termination from employment will proceed and that the process is being followed contractually. The problem is that I have a meeting with Mr.,Knight, who I have asked to recuse himself for cause repeatedly, tomorrow (October 25, 2013 at 4pm to 5 pm) where he says he MAY decide to recommend my termination after 21 years at Clark College. Do you see any problem here? Last time, and it is all documented in the urls I sent that appear to have been intercepted by Ms Warren, my replacements were hired, my name kept on the teaching schedule to draw-in students (bait-and-switch fraud), BEFORE the one-hour hearing I got that was supposed to decide IF or IF NOT I would be teaching.

Further, Mr. Lookinghawk advised Ms Warren that he had gone to personally report what he believed to be felonies he witnessed during a disciplinary hearing he had attended when Mr. Knight ordered the Dean and Vice-president of instruction not to even answer the question “Are you a public employee”. Ms Warren according to the account given me today, asked him if it was really an official hearing or just a meeting. He also advised her, in response to her comment that “We have confidence in Bob Knight” and he does not need to recuse himself, that he was present at all times when Knight was asked about his alleged perjury and how he refused to even answer (when the union officers whose sworn testimonies revealed perjury in previous sworn testimony at an ESD Appeal were present in the room and could have ben challenged by him) or rebut.

There is so much more but you need to look at your own house and in particular Ms Warren and Ms Terada who, by the way, did not attempt to rebut the sworn testimonies of Lynn Davidson and Marcia Roi of the WEA that accused Knight of perjury, even as she was fully aware, an as an AAG. Officer of the Court and Member of the Bar she was obliged to report, that the sworn testimonies of Davidson and Roi meant Bob Knight had committed perjury, obstruction of justice, and several other felonies or vice-versa, Davidson and Roi had.

The following are urls of documents I sent to you before that you clearly did not get or if you did, did not read because in your letter to me (and thank you for responding in writing as below will attest I rarely got any written responses to any of my documents submitted to law enforcement, federal and state, to the Courts, and Employment Security) you tell me to go to law enforcement about crimes and an attorney about torts, but as the urls attest, both Dean Lookinghawk and I did exactly that and were threatened with arrest yet sent to Vancouver Police where they refused even to take a statement.

I have acted in good-faith, sworn all my statements under penalty of perjury as I do all of my statements in this submission; I have made myself fully accountable to the law if anyone believes I am not acting in good-faith, or without substantive cause and basis for my beliefs, or am acting with hidden agenda or to use law enforcement for my own private issues and torts or as instruments of reprisals. I have always accompanied the evidence and basis for all my beliefs and allegations and invited rebuttal; and always publicly corrected any errors.

There is a climate of terror, reprisals, intimidation and conspiracy against rights and under color of law going on at Clark College and this has gone on for many years. Adjuncts are being hired through the backdoor, unvetted, and recruited to file complaints when proper exception is taken to how they were hired and who vetted their credentials, rewarded with public employment, unprecedented course loads, medical benefits, all while others are losing their jobs and medical benefits. Nepotism is going on in hiring along with rank cronyism all of which is not torts but crimes in the context of public employment. And the AG’s Office is used as an in-house counsel for miscreant and corrupt administrators when the AG is supposed to investigate and represent the law and prosecute those breaking it and protect those who are being abused by the breaches of law.

What is going on at Clark College, and real students are being hurt in real ways, is simply that corruption only can breed more of itself as each person who commits corruption, becomes vulnerable to being taken down by others and vice-versa. So those acting as proxies to file complaints that will be heard by those who caused them, are being rewarded with teaching jobs they are not qualified for and have never been vetted for, students ripped-off through bait and switch, good teachers driven out or denied, and massive amounts of public resources are being expended for cover-ups and preventing issues coming to law enforcement and the Courts where real crimes and their perpetrators will be exposed.

Here is but one of many real victims of perpetrators I have been trying to stop:

This also drives me as I have received so many emails like it and for the same reasons:

From: michael.
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 12:10 PM
To: Craven, Jim
Subject: Macro Economics

Hi, my name is Michael . I took your micro economics class last spring quarter. I was registered for your macro economics class this fall, but I recently checked my schedule and I’ve been switched to a guy named Kraley. This isn’t okay with me, I was wondering if there was a reason, that you knew about, why I was transferred. It also could have been a glitch in the system, and I could still be registered for your class. It’s unlikely though, and I would really like to take your class, not Kraley’s class. I left you a message on your answering machine, but you may not get it until Monday. I will try to catch you on Monday, and hopefully we can figure this out.


This was the response that I gave to Michael:

From: “James Craven”
To: “michael
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 5:42:24 PM
Subject: FW: Macro Economics

Hi Michael,

Please reply to me at this address not at Clark College as I am under suspension with pay until next quarter and then off for one year without pay. I am charged with hostile, threatening and disrespectful speech. The problem is no complaint has been filed. Further, this time they kept my name on the schedule to draw in students like you when they had already told me I will not be teaching, and, and this is the good part, BEFORE my hearing this Monday, September 26th, 2011 that is supposed to be about the very question of if or if not I am guilty and, if so, what discipline do I deserve (already set).

The last time I got two quarters off for the same thing (felony truth telling and refusal to turn a blind eye to or participate in any corruption) that time they took my name off the schedule and replaced it with replacement names, again BEFORE the one Laudermill hearing I got to determine, again, if or if not I was guilty.

What was I protesting? Well we have a bunch of adjuncts hired around me as department head of economics and the only one qualified to vet teachers for competence in economics and the teaching of it (John Fite, the only other full-time tenured economist got his masters from Georgetown in the early 1970s, never once worked as an economist, took no additional courses, never taught prior to coming to Clark) and I do not know what most of them look like and have never spoken to the others—and I am department head.

I am sending you something that tells the whole story or a lot of it. Please tell as many students as possible that they need to investigate if they are being ripped off and in this case, as they did with you, they kept my name on the schedule (after screwing up last time and taking it off before the hearing) to draw in students not caring one bit who was teaching and how and by whom had the teachers been vetted.

I have my hearing on Monday at 1 pm and it will be taped plus all of this has been turned over to the attorney general. Please keep these messages secure but I owe you and the other students an explanation and I will be writing an open letter to the students. See next messages coming for what is going on.

take care,

Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:14:13 +0000
From: michael
Subject: Re: Macro Economics

Oh my Gosh! This is some crazy stuff! Although, I can’t say I’m surprised. You never hold back when it comes to speak the TRUTH! That’s what I loved about your class. I will mention this to as many of the students I know about from your previous classes as I can. Anything I can do to help. As far as Clark lying to me about who my professor for Economics would be, I feel very ripped off, and wish there was something I could do. I wish you the best of luck on your hearing, and I hope that no injustice is found so that you can continue to teach in the incredible way that you do! I thoroughly enjoyed your micro econ class. You truly are a fantastic teacher!

(P.S. if anything I’ve said in my emails thus far can help you in any way, feel free to use them!)

This letter will also be sent to Governor Inslee and made public to the media. It is in your interest to read these urls, or at least the one dealing with Ms Warren and her apparent intrigue and not-so-hidden agenda. No matter what happens to me and my family, we know that real crimes, nor just torts, crimes, are being covered-up as well as enabled and real people are being harmed.


James M. Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii
Professor of Economics and Geography
Biographical subject Marquis Who’s Who in: The World; America;The West; Science and Engineering; Finance and Industry; American Education.

Misprision of a Felony

Misprision of a felony is the offense of failure to inform government authorities of a felony that a person knows about. A person commits the crime of misprision of a felony if that person:

• Knows of a federal crime that the person has witnessed or that has come to the person’s attention, or failed to prevent.
• Fails to report it to a federal judge or other federal official (who is not thems4elves involved in the crime).

Federal Crime Reporting Statute

The federal offense of failure to disclose a felony, if coupled with some act concealing the felony, such as suppression of evidence, harboring or protecting the person performing the felony, intimidation or harming a witness, or any other act designed to conceal from authorities the fact that a crime has been committed.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

A federal judge, or any other government official, is required as part of the judge’s mandatory administrative duties, to receive any offer of information of a federal crime. If that judge blocks such report, that block is a felony under related obstruction of justice statutes, and constitutes a serious offense.

Upon receiving such information, the judge is then required to make it known to a government law enforcement body that is not themselves involved in the federal crime.

Another federal statute exists for reporting high-level corruption in government:

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.

This federal statute permits any citizen to file a lawsuit in the federal courts to obtain a court order requiring a federal official to perform a mandatory duty and to halt unlawful acts. This statute is Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361.

Submissions to the Washington State Attorney General under penalty of perjury:

“Response” by AG’s Office:

Subject: Response to emails to Attorney General’s Office Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 15:14:31 -0800 From: LisaC2@ATG.WA.GOV To:

Sent on behalf of Assistant Attorney General Justin Kjolseth

Dear Professor Craven:

I am responding to several emails you have recently sent to the Attorney General’s Office. To review, you sent an email to the Attorney General’s Office on September 17, 2013 making numerous allegations of criminal conduct by your employer and denial of your rights in the workplace. You also made allegations about various persons working at the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, the Court of Appeals, the Employment Security Department, and this Office. On October 9, 2013, we responded by advising you of the limits of this Office’s authority respecting criminal investigation and prosecution. On October 14, 2013, you replied with another email noting that you have tried to refer the alleged felonies to law enforcement agencies but they have apparently declined to pursue the matter. On October 28, 2013, you sent three more emails. The email at 8:28 PM asks us to regard it as an official submission to the Attorney General as the chief law enforcement officer in Washington and describes again workplace issues and your perception of a climate of intimidation and conspiracy in your workplace. The email at 8:40 PM repeats your concerns over a climate of “terror, reprisals, intimidation and conspiracy against rights” in the workplace, and includes an email exchange between you and a supportive student. The third email sent at 8:50 PM continues the colloquy between you and the student.

We are sorry if your initial response from local law enforcement was unsuccessful. However, that does not change the authority of the Attorney General’s Office to investigate crimes or to prosecute crimes absent referral from a county prosecutor or the Governor. Our authority has been recited to you in previous communications; please see RCW 43.10.232 regarding the Attorney General’s criminal prosecution authority. In addition, the Attorney General is directed to be the legal advisor for all officials and agencies of the state, including the institutions of higher education. Accordingly, we are prohibited from providing private legal advice and must supply legal counsel to Clark College. Taken together, the authority and role of this Office requires us to respectfully decline your request that we launch an investigation into the qualifications of instructors, workplace practices, or alleged employment crimes. I understand that you may not be satisfied with this response but we have provided all that we can on these issues.


Justin Kjolseth

Assistant Attorney General

Lisa Cole, Legal Assistant

Office of the Attorney General

Education Division

RE: Response to emails to Attorney General’s Office?

James Craven 12/04/13 To: Cole, Lisa (ATG),, Jason Borba, Michael McNamara, Jay Inslee Picture of James Craven Dear Ms Cole and Mr. Kjolseth:

Thank you for your letter and responses. First of all, as an individual as well as a public employee I do know the difference between torts and crimes and would never bring torts to your office or to law enforcement as that would be misuse of public resources and some other potential felonies on my part. I also do know something about what is evidence yielding reasonable suspicion or probable cause to warrant further investigation (with subpoena powers and the power of the badge) of the allegations brought to the offices of law enforcement, the Clark County Prosecutor, FBI and other agencies.

Secondly, I am fully aware, perhaps more than most people, that allegations of crimes are not any kind of facts of evidence of crimes; I sent to your office and to law enforcement at various levels, over and over, not simply my allegations of crimes and which crimes I believe have occurred and are still occurring, and not only allegations by me but also by others who have witnessed and participated in the events and patterns of conduct documented in the documents sent, but I sent links to urls and other documents, documents that I had no hand in originating or any influence on the content of, that showed irrefutably, actual perjury on the part of either Robert Knight, president of Clark College, or by two union officers Lynn Davidson of the WEA and Dr. Marcia Roi of the Clark College AHE, concerning conflicting sworn testimonies, under penalty of perjury, of Knight versus Davidson and Roi as to whether or not Knight made the statement to them “There is no morale problem; there will be no morale problem when we get rid of professor Craven” ( and I sent also evidence of the seriousness of perjury in any case, not just this one. This is not simply about potential perjury on the part of Knight about his sex life in a divorce case (which is also serious as it is also obstruction of justice and other derivative felonies per se) but about a statement of intent, reflecting mens rea, on the part of someone who, subsequent to his alleged statement, set about to engineer and pile-on complaints by proxies rewarded with public employment and benefits, complaints that were then turned into formal charges to be “investigated”, with “findings” of supposed facts, pre-assessment of progressive discipline, and even appeals handled by the very persons, Knight and his proxies, that engineered the complaints and turned them into formal allegations and charges.

But I also sent you so much more. I sent you evidence, not simply my allegations, that for example I was given one year off with no pay or medical coverage for my family, my name was kept on the schedule of courses to be taught to draw in students seeking me as a teacher, my replacements hired, all BEFORE the one-hour hearing I got to determine if or if not I would be teaching, had scheduled overtime pay taken, and put on leave pending my hearing that was, I documented in unrebutted submissions to the principals involved, a kangaroo court along with bait-and-switch fraud against students. Again, as in this letter from you, as in the case of the few responses from law enforcement that dared to go to paper, no reference was made to the content of the actual documents and evidence I submitted to you and others, and in most cases I did not even get references to my allegations let alone supporting evidence.

Thirdly, a basic predicate of the law is that it cannot be vague such as to allow arbitrary and capricious interpretations and uses of key constructs and terms, it must be comprehensible to the average prudent person so that he or she can understand it and comport himself of herself to it without having to be a lawyer to understand and comport oneself to it, and it must be equally applied (protections and accountability) without fear or favor (5th and 14th Amendments of equal protections and due process) otherwise the whole of law itself is undermined. That is why neither I nor anyone can go to court charged with a crime and claim that not being a lawyer, I am ignorant of, or unable to understand and comport myself with, the law.

Fourthly, it was not only me, but also Dean Lookinghawk, a former police officer who also knows the difference between torts and crimes, who also went to law enforcement (Clark County Sheriff, Vancouver Police) to report what we believed to be crimes that had just occurred that day (obstruction of an official grievance hearing, held on public property using public resources) and we were both threatened with arrest if we did not leave, referred to Vancouver Police (not told there was nothing there) who also refused to even take formal statements from us (sworn under penalty of perjury as all my statements and allegations have been to hold myself accountable if anyone thinks I am attempting to misuse law enforcement and public resources for my own agenda or as instruments of reprisal) with full citations of 18 USC 241 and 242, 18 USC 4 (Misprision of a Felony), 18 USC on Obstruction of Justice and 28 USC 1361 on duties of a public official or employee).

Fifthly, there is the conduct of AAG Colleen Warren that I asked to be examined, given that she wrote a “report” of “findings” on my allegations and my witness to her conduct Michael McNamara in her 10 minutes with us. She did not identify herself, did not give us her card, did not invite us to sit down and give our presentation of allegations and supporting evidence, she merely inserted herself into the process and cranked out a “finding”. She inquired as to who Michael McNamara was and his ethnicity but made no attempt to ascertain if he had anything probative to my allegations or even ask for specific evidence for my allegations. She had a clear agenda which her own conduct and correspondence through proxies showed and that agenda had nothing to do with a fair, free, open and dispassionate examination of the allegations and evidence brought to your office and others.

Sixthly, your duties to represent officials in public employment are trumped by other duties under the U.S. Constitution and the laws of Washington State and Federal law. No one engages in reprisals against whistle-blowers openly and without pretext as such reprisals are illegal and thus always dressed-up. Your duties also include a free, fair and open examination to ensure that public resources are not being used, under various guises and pretexts, not to obstruct justice rather than promote it, to cover-up crimes and torts rather than expose them, to shield certain persons from accountability. We have had several cases at Clark College where settlements were achieved and used with public monies that had the effect of preventing going to trial where certain major felonies might well have been exposed. We had a woman’s basketball coach, who was a whistle-blower on alleged diversions of Title IX federal funds from women;’s to men’s basketball, fired under various piled-on charges by some of the same people, with the same modus operandi as in my cases past and present, that resulted in a $450,000 settlement plus legal costs born by public resources. Many of the facts, patterns of conduct, modus operandi and forms of serial denial of due process in that case paralleled my own case and those of others at Clark College also subject to the backroom intrigue and machinations of some apparent miscreant administrators.

Seventh, corruption of any form is like FTD Flowers” “The Gift That Keeps on Giving”. Those who do corruption in concert with others, leave themselves vulnerable to blackmail or as Tom Paine put it with respect to his fellow conspirators against the Crown “We must all hang together or surely we shall all hang separately.” This is exactly what has happened at Clark College where unqualified adjuncts, unvetted and beholden for jobs they are not qualified to hold and did not acquire via standardized hiring procedures mandated by law, have also been handed unprecedented course loads, pay and benefits, thus defrauding the students who thought they were signing up for other and qualified teachers, but they have been placed in the position that they are able to extort further employment and course loads and benefits: “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive” as each is able to take down the others if crossed. So incompetence and worse on the part of law enforcement only produces more crime which is the exact reason for laws against crimes like Misprision of a Felony and Obstruction of Justice as these crimes (not merely torts) are instrumental in the perpetuation and ongoing harm of crimes derivative from previous or other crimes and even torts (some torts are also crimes in the context of public employment).

Eighth, do you notice in my response to you, past and present, I give detailed responses to your own responses when they have ever come. I have a full record of all my submissions to your office as well as various agencies of law enforcement, posted on my website as this response will be eventually, for all to see what was brought to law enforcement and the courts along with the “quality” and character of the responses to my submissions. I promise you that I am as serious as my medical condition and the heart distress that I have suffered in all of this and will not rest of quit because of the real seriousness and real harm being done to many innocents in all of this. And my own resume, which includes undercover work in an intelligence and research capacity with the Government of Puerto Rico and elsewhere should attest that I do know that conspiracy against rights looks like, what masks and guises are typically used to promote and cover it up, how to build a conspiracy case and connect the dots and that is what I will continue to do in this case.

I did not simply bring to you my “perceptions” and allegations, and I resent such characterizations, I also brought supporting documents, evaluations of evidence by others, tape recordings of 4 actual meetings where Mr. Knight was confronted with allegations of perjury and his statements to union officers and his refusal to even address those allegations while refusing to recuse himself for cause in all decision-making given his demonstrated malice and animus as well as alleged and unrebutted statement of intent to “get rid of professor Craven.” This apparent perjury will not go away nor will the real harm to many innocents caused by it, and I promise you that this non-response will wind up in a federal court and in the court of public opinion in the future:

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

A federal judge, or any other government official, is required as part of the judge’s mandatory administrative duties, to receive any offer of information of a federal crime. If that judge blocks such report, that block is a felony under related obstruction of justice statutes, and constitutes a serious offense.

Upon receiving such information, the judge is then required to make it known to a government law enforcement body that is not themselves involved in the federal crime.

Another federal statute exists for reporting high-level corruption in government:

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.

This federal statute permits any citizen to file a lawsuit in the federal courts to obtain a court order requiring a federal official to perform a mandatory duty and to halt unlawful acts. This statute is Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361.

The fact is that in the case with your office as well as with law enforcement, not once have my statements, allegations or supporting evidence for them been taken down in any official complaint that, by the way, would also make me accountable for my own submissions in the event that those against whom I have made serious allegations or serious crimes, feel they have been wrongly accused and with no substantive basis for my own allegations. This response by your office, and in this medium no less (I sent for the most part actual formal, signed and sworn under penalty of perjury letters to your office as well as email submissions) is totally insufficient and I would say self-impeaching in its content given the seriousness of the charges, allegations, potential crimes and effects on real innocents brought in good-faith to your office. Even if I have to act pro se, even given my fragile health condition, even given the fight I have at Clark College against serious corruption and again aided and abetted by your totally incomplete and inadequate responses, I will continue both a public and legal campaign to expose corruption and serial refusals to address it because of the seriousness of the issues, crimes and harm to real innocents involved.


Jim Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii Professor of Economics and Geography

About jimcraven10

About jimcraven10 1. Citizenship: Blackfoot, U.S. and Canadian; 2. Position: tenured Professor of Economics and Geography; Dept. Head, Economics; 3. Teaching, Consulting and Research experience: approx 40 + years all levels high school to post-doctoral U.S. Canada, Europe, China, India, Puerto Rico and parts of E. Asia; 4. Work past and present: U.S. Army 1963-66; Member: Veterans for Peace; former VVAW; Veterans for 9-11 Truth; Scholars for 9-11 Truth; Pilots for 9-11 Truth; World Association for Political Economy; Editorial Board International Critical Thought; 4.. U.S. Commercial-Instrument Pilot ; FAA Licensed Ground Instructor (Basic, Advanced, Instrument and Simulators); 5. Research Areas and Publications: International law (on genocide, rights of nations, war and war crimes); Imperialism (nature, history, logic, trajectories, mechanisms and effects); Economic Geography (time and space modeling in political economy; globalization--logic and effects; Political Economy and Geography of Imperialism); Indigenous versus non-Indigenous Law; Political Economy of Socialism and Socialist Construction; 6. Member, Editorial Board, "International Critical Thought" published by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences; International Advisory Board and Columnist 4th Media Group, (Beijing); 7. Other Websites publications at;;; 8.Biography available in: Marquis Who’s Who: in the World (16th-18th; 20th; 22nd -31st (2014) Editions); Who’s Who in America (51st-61st;63rd-68th(2014) Editions); Who’s Who in the West (24th- 27th Editions);Who’s Who in Science and Engineering (3rd to 6th, 8th, 11th (2011-2012) Editions); Who’s Who in Finance and Industry (29th to 37th Editions); Who’s Who in American Education (6th Edition). ------------------- There are times when you have to obey a call which is the highest of all, i.e. the voice of conscience even though such obedience may cost many a bitter tear, and even more, separation from friends, from family, from the state, to which you may belong, from all that you have held as dear as life itself. For this obedience is the law of our being. ~ Mahatma Gandhi
This entry was posted in Academia and Academics, Academia as Fraud, Clark College, CLARK COLLEGE: PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON SERIOUS ISSUES, Conspiracy against Rights and under Color of Law, Corruption and Intrigue in Government, CORRUPTION IN "HIGHER" EDUCATION, courage and treachery in government, Government Corruption, Psychopathic Management, Psychopaths and Sociopaths in Politics, Psychopaths in Management, Vantucky Corruption and Inbredness, Whistleblowers. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to An Open Letter to Washington State Attorney General Ferguson and Governor Inslee on Allegations of a Climate of Corruption and Repression at Clark College and in Clark County

  1. Under common law, when a person committed a major crime that included a lesser offense, the latter merged with the former. This meant that the accused could not be charged with both crimes. The modern law of merger applies only to solicitation and attempt. One who solicits another to commit a crime may not be convicted of both the solicitation and the completed crime. Likewise, a person who attempts and completes a crime may not be convicted of both the attempt and the completed crime.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s