Hush Money and Sealed Settlements to Cover-up Crimes are Crimes not Torts: No Need to Cover-up What is Clean–Only What is Dirty

NEW US SUPREME COURT RULING ON DUTIES OF AND CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS FOR PUBLIC-SECTOR EMPLOYEES AND LEGITIMATE WHISTLE-BLOWERS: Lane v Franks:

This is a whole new ball game as it vitiates all lower court rulings limiting freedom of speech in the workplace for public employees and not only says that if discussing matters of professional responsibility, possible corruption or matters of significant social importance,  must the First Amendment and other Constitutional rights of  public employees be recognized, and that they should be encouraged to use those Constitutional rights, as those who know best the place where they work are in the best position to see and report malfeasance, corruption or the like, but, also,  that public employees indeed have a duty to report that would be dampened or discouraged without relevant and specified First Amendment and other (14th Amendment) Constitutional rights recognized and enforced. No one in power exposed by real and legitimate whistle-blowers ever takes reprisals openly or without having help from collaborators who act as toadies, scabs, snitches, proxies and paid (with public resources and jobs) whores of those in power who want to stay there and see themselves as somehow destined and entitled to be where they are or even higher.
keep the faith,
Jim/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii
SOME OF THE MODUS OPERANDI OF CLARK COLLEGE ADMINISTRATION AND WA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE (USE OF PUBLIC MONIES FOR COVER-UPS AND PREVENTION OF EXPOSURE OF CRIMES AT TRIAL WITH LAST-MINUTE “SETTLEMENT” [HUSH MONEY] OFFERS WHEN FAILURE TO WEAR DOWN OR DRIVE OUT THE VICTIM FAILS AND NEXT STOP IS TRIAL
See 18 USC 4 (Misprision of a Felony), Chapter 73 (Obstruction of Justice), Chapter 13 parts 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights) and 242 (Conspiracy Against Rights Under Color of Law), RCW 42.20 (Misconduct of a Public Employee)…

Note to Readers: As the documents on this subject on this website will attest, I have made good-faith, fully accountable and evidence/law/reason-supported submissions to various federal and state law enforcement agencies on apparent crimes and a climate of corruption were I work as a public employee of the Government of the State of Washington. This is per my legal responsibilities as a citizen and public employee under 18 USC 4 (Misprision of a Felony), 18 USC 73 (Obstruction of Justice), and RCW 9A.080.10 (Official Misconduct), RCW 42. 40.030 (Right to Disclose Improper Governmental Actions–Interference Prohibited), 18 USC 241 and 242 (Conspiracy Against Rights and Under Color of Law) and other possible felonies.

Those in law enforcement that turned a blind-eye to legitimate and good-faith, law-mandated submissions of potential crimes being committed and or being planned or admitted to, are guilty of the above-mentioned crimes along with others. I will be publishing all my submissions to law enforcement along with supporting evidence presented along with any responses. As I do with all posts, I will drag some of them named out into the sunlight, transparency and accountability of the law and clear supporting evidence for the allegations made.

https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/open-letter-for-my-students-and-all-clark-college-students/

https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/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/

https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/18-usc-4-misprision-of-a-felony-18-usc-73-obstruction-of-justice-and-18-usc-241-and-242-conspiracy-against-rights-and-under-color-of-law/

  • What would you do if say you were a cook ordered to serve un-inspected meat and you had already seen someone suffer food poisoning from it?
  • What would you do if say you were a co-pilot and your captain, a close friend and mentor, who had once saved your job, showed up for a flight drunk?
  • What would you do if you were a real teacher and saw all sorts of unvetted, unqualfied–even on paper–persons hired through the back door, in public employment, to “teach” subjects they had never taught nor had even the minimum qualifications to even apply for a full-time position in the subject in some cases, and students were losing opportunities for real teachers?
  • What would you do if you were a senior surgical nurse and saw a botched operation that resulted in a patient’s death caused by a new surgeon, hired through the backdoor by the chief of surgery, his uncle, and that was being covered-up by all who saw it?

Hush Money Offer–Never!

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

Real Victims, Real Crimes:

Craven was a wonderful teacher, and the way he disappeared was all too strange. I wish I would have had the pleasure of being taught by him all quarter, but it seemed as though bigger powers were at play. Unusual man with big opinions, but he knew how to get a message through, he was incredibly helpful and I was enjoying economics.

Mr. Craven is an unusual teacher, however, if you want to learn the subject he is excellent. I had him fall 2013 at Clark and after about 5 weeks in he disappeared. Clark fired him because of departmental politics. There was no notice to students and the sub i received was horrible. I regret spending tuition here to have inconsistent teaching.

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. -Michael I responded to Michael (see below) which prompted this response from him: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:14:13 +0000 From: michael To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com 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! -Michael (P.S. if anything I’ve said in my emails thus far can help you in any way, feel free to use them!)

From: Terada, Bonnie (ATG) [mailto:BonnieT@ATG.WA.GOV] Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 8:58 AM To: Margaret Olney Cc: Darcy Rourk; Tim Cook Subject: Files and proposal

Margaret,

The duplicated official personnel file was mailed overnight yesterday afternoon.

Attached is a Tenure Purchase Agreement and Settlement and Release Agreement for your client’s consideration.  The May 2, 2014 date reflects 21 days from this Friday and as you are know is required by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.  Please let me know by 1:00 PM Friday whether Prof. Craven wishes to have the 21 days to consider the agreement.  I think its best to inform Mr. Stonier by that time so he can inform the 6 faculty members and the College can inform all of their substitutes that the hearing may be rescheduled to allow for the 21 day consideration period. 

Bonnie Y. Terada

Senior Counsel |Office of the Attorney General

Regional Services Division, Vancouver

1220 Main Street, Suite 510 |Vancouver, WA  98660-2964

360-759-2111

1.      $100,000 buy-out of your tenure

2.      Waiver of all claims against the College  (paragraphs 4 and 5)

3.      Agreement not to lodge complaints against College (and its officers/employees) with any state agency (paragraph 6) ever for anything

4.      Mutual agreement to not disparage the other (paragraph  7)

5.    Non-disclosure of even the existence of the agreement

Bonnie,

Thank you for putting together a settlement proposal.  I have had an opportunity to review your settlement offer with my client.  We are particularly concerned about the gag orders contained in the proposal.   Simply put, Prof. Craven is unwilling to compromise his legal and ethical obligations to identify and report malfeasance. 

Again, thank you for taking the time to make an offer. 

Of Counsel

https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/attempts-to-report-felony-crimes-per-18-usc-4-28-usc-1361-exchanges-with-clark-county-sheriff-gary-lucas/

My response (took less than 21 seconds not 21 days to consider and reject the $100,000):

Under progressive discipline, each stage, the correctness and specificity of the charges, properly heard with due process for all, with all findings properly reviewed, is a predicate for the next and higher stages of discipline. Further, in this case, with a series of outright kangaroo courts, each stage and how it was handled, is not proof of a pattern of conduct on my part with charges properly proved, but rather evidence of a pattern of conduct and mens rea on the Clark College that amounts not only to a cornucopia of torts, but of crimes as well.

If I were to even entertain this this “settlement offer”, I would, in my opinion as a citizen required to be able to read, understand and comport myself with the law, with the law being required to be specific in terms and meanings and understandable by an average reasonable and prudent person,  be guilty of taking money and benefits to aid and abet the covering-up of real crimes causing real harm to real people; I would also be derelict in my duty as a public employee; I would also be complicit in future damages and harm to innocents by aiding in the cover-up and keeping in place individuals I know from their conduct alone, are unfit to be in any kind of position of trust or in education–students are being defrauded and worse.

I would also be betraying students like [deleted] and so many others to walk away from what I know is out-and-out fraud going on in the classroom and that is why they must have me gone because I will get even more evidence of it and take it to accreditation and other venues.

Here is some law that applies in this case and why I cannot be bought off and I actually regard this offer as a further attempt at Obstruction of Justice and Misprision of a Felony and an attempt to use public funds to get me to become an accomplice. Otherwise, I should be charged and convicted of false statements to law enforcement officers and attempting to use law enforcement for my own  personal agenda–which I urged them to do if they thought I was either lying, playing games or attempting to use law enforcement and public resources for my own personal agenda.

Please see below why I cannot accept either a settlement or any “findings” that have the legitimacy of the findings of a nazi court against a Jew or a KKK courtroom against an African American… We can walk through my words word by word, comma, by comma, and they are all defensible, on-point, accurate, on union and pedagogical issues, on protected or supposedly protected venues for exchanges on critical issues for union members, and in the case of 7 days off and 8 days off there was not even a hearing or formal complaint.

Here is part of what I am being offered $100,000 of public monies to cover-up:

FROM A SWORN BRIEF SUBMITTED TO ARBITRATION BY LISA LEWISON OF THE WEA: JAMES CRAVEN Vs. Clark College Grievant’s Closing Argument Lisa Lewison hereby submits her Closing Arguments on behalf of James Craven: I. INTRODUCTION On Thursday, November 3, 2010 and Friday, November 4, 2010, an arbitration took place on the Clark College Campus in Vancouver, Washington, involving Clark College (hereinafter “the College”) and the Clark College Association of Higher Education (hereinafter “the Association”). II. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE The Association and the College stipulated to the following issue statement: “Did Clark College have just cause to impose a 108-day (2-term) suspension to Professor Craven? If no, what is the appropriate remedy?” NOTE: Lynn Davidson of the WEA and Dr. Marcia Roi of Clark College AHE both testified, under oath and penalty of perjury,  for the second time in a second venue, the following:

“WEA-Riverside Director Lynn Davidson and AHE President, Dr. Marcia Roi testified to a labor management meeting they attended with President Bob Knight and Vice President Rassoul Dastmozd on Friday, November 9, 2007. AHE President Roi testified she told President Knight there was a “…morale problem on the campus.” President Knight responded “There is not a morale problem; morale will improve when we get rid of Professor Craven.” This was never refuted by management in the hearing. Ms. Davidson testified she was “shocked” President Bob Knight would say something like this to union representatives, and based on her expertise was troubled because his statements showed the union “should expect animosity by the President and the College in future dealings” related to Mr. Craven.

This testimony of Dr. Marcia Roi and Ms. Lynn Davidson, at the arbitration hearing subsequent to the ESD appeal hearing with ALJ Knutson, directly contradicts the sworn testimony of President Knight that he never made nor would ever make the statement “There is not a morale problem; morale will improve when we ‘get rid’ of Professor Craven” [Note Update: This testimony was again sworn under penalty of perjury for a second time in my recent termination hearing by both Lynn Davidson and Dr. Marcia Roi; This testimony from the transcript of Mr. Knight’s testimony in an ESD appeal hearing below was denied for a second time, in a second venue, under oath and penalty of perjury, by Mr. Knight in another official hearing (termination hearing). Now we do not simply have mutually contradictory sworn testimonies in different venues at different times, but now fundamentally opposing sworn testimonies in the same hearing on the same transcript and nothing was noted or reported to law enforcement (perjury by somebody plus derivate felonies from perjury in public employment while on official duties) by the hearing examiner (a former Kelso judge Mr. Stonier), nor by the AAG Ms Terada, nor by the WEA attorneys per their duties as Officers of the Court, Members of the Bar, a judicial officer acting in a quasi-judicial capacity. Please note also, that for the fourth time, in four separate venues, Emma Kim, formerly of Clark College HR who refused to keep a secret file on me, testified to the following under oath and penalty of perjury:

Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 2:38 AM

 Subject: An insider’s view of the civil and employee rights violations at Clark College

Please add my voice to the e-Forum at Clark regarding the indoctrination process of Craven bashing.  I think my unique insights can explain in part why so many of your colleagues, administration and staff suspend their critical thinking skills when you’re involved.  The fact that most of your critics don’t know the history behind the administration’s fertilization efforts is indicative of how deeply rooted the indoctrination process is. Thanks in advance.

Date:  February 12, 2003

To: Clark College Staff, Faculty, Staff, ASCC, Administration, Board, Foundation, Foundation Board, and THE INDEPENDENT

From:  Emma Kim

RE:  An insider’s perspective of your employee and civil rights as practiced by some administrators at Clark

Many of you will remember me.  I worked in Personnel for Donna Kelly and Katrina Golder as their Office Assistant III from January 1997 to March 12, 1999.  Several of you have asked me why I left the college.  I’m prepared now to provide my answer.

For any employee who has felt like civil or employee rights were violated, you were probably right if Clark’s Personnel department was involved.  If anyone has had their mental state questioned after speaking up or out about an issue at the college, your experience is not an isolated one.  In fact, there are number of you who’ve had your mental states questioned.  Based on my interviews, the common thread is not depression but practicing your freedom of speech to expose a problem at the college.

While I was employed in Personnel, I was privy to questionable hiring practices and privy to the deliberate violations of civil rights.  For anyone who has not know what “human resources” functions as, consider what we as a society do to our natural resources and then you’ll have a pretty accurate context to determine your value relative to the power structure. As an HR Administrator, as I laid off 150 members of the workforce, I advised the employees that as a rule of thumb, smile at the HR people, get on their good side, but don’t trust most of them.  That was based on my experience with the HR Managers in two Fortune 500 companies I worked for but mostly based on my experiences at Clark.  The role of HR personnel is not to protect your rights but to protect the state or company from litigation if rights are violated.  It is virtually impossible for any Personnel manager to know all the state and federal employment laws and their nuances, so employee rights are violated all the time.  Let me give you specific examples from my two years at Clark.  What I’m about to disclose may surprise you and create shifts in your thinking:

While I was an employee in Personnel, I was asked by Donna Kelly to engage in a task that involved the violation of Jim Craven’s civil and employee rights.  The specific task was to send all his emails to the AG’s office. (Mind you, not Dennis Watson’s or anyone else’s emails, just Jim Craven’s stuff.  For those of you who might be wondering what’s wrong with that, it is illegal to keep separate files on employees.  It is also illegal to keep a separate file on anyone practicing their freedom of speech as a dissenter or activist.)

Secret file 6 binders, 4900 pages kept since 1994

It is important for the reader to know what my filters were at the time when Donna tried to get me involved in violating his rights.  I was highly critical, vocal in my criticism and fearful of Jim.  I said and held many of the negative sentiments that I continue to hear on campus and continue to read and sense in print.  After all, I trusted my new supervisors and coworkers when I was given the run down that Jim was litigious, slanderous, manipulative, a trouble maker, unreasonable, potentially violent and mean. I also asked about Dennis Watson since his emails were being distributed on the master list at the same time as Jim’s.  Unlike with Jim, I was given an objective run down on Dennis, that he was caught with child pornography using state resources.  There was no subjective demonization like, “Dennis is a creepy slime bag who will eyeball your underage children with a gleam in his eye.”

Equally important for the reader to know in order to understand that Craven bashing is an indoctrination process that all new employees go through as part of an informal orientation is how I felt about working in Personnel for Donna and Katrina.   I thought I’d found two of the best bosses ever in my work history.  Given those filters, I could see exactly what my department was talking about in Jim’s emails.

RCW 49.44.010

Blacklisting — Penalty.

Every person in this state who shall wilfully and maliciously, send or deliver, or make or cause to be made, for the purpose of being delivered or sent or part with the possession of any paper, letter or writing, with or without name signed thereto, or signed with a fictitious name, or with any letter, mark or other designation, or publish or cause to be published any statement for the purpose of preventing any other person from obtaining employment in this state or elsewhere, and every person who shall wilfully and maliciously “blacklist” or cause to be “blacklisted” any person or persons, by writing, printing or publishing, or causing the same to be done, the name, or mark, or designation representing the name of any person in any paper, pamphlet, circular or book, together with any statement concerning persons so named, or publish or cause to be published that any person is a member of any secret organization, for the purpose of preventing such person from securing employment, or who shall wilfully and maliciously make or issue any statement or paper that will tend to influence or prejudice the mind of any employer against the person of such person seeking employment, or any person who shall do any of the things mentioned in this section for the purpose of causing the discharge of any person employed by any railroad or other company, corporation, individual or individuals, shall, on conviction thereof, be adjudged guilty of misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars nor more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than ninety days nor more than three hundred sixty-four days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. [2011 c 96 § 42; 1899 c 23 § 1; RRS § 7599.]

Notes:

     Findings — Intent — 2011 c 96: See note following RCW 9A.20.021.

Despite my own prejudices which were extreme by my own admission, I clearly understood that Jim’s rights were being violated by the very officer assigned to protect the college from discrimination and harassment.  I refused and asked Donna why we were doing something we weren’t suppose to do to which she promptly replied with back peddling, “Oh, that’s okay.  You don’t have to do it.”  And that was the end of it, so I thought.

Shortly after my refusal to violate Jim’s rights, a central part of my duties that I performed for Donna was eliminated.  While I had been privy to sensitive and private documents, all the tasks that included touching or seeing such documents such as copying, faxing, etc. were eliminated. Concerned that Donna had eliminated my job duties as a result of my refusal to violate Jim’s rights, I brought up the elimination of those duties to Katrina who reassured me that changes occurred “all the time.” I was confused and tried to make sense of what was going on. I felt conflicted about Donna.  Was I working for an unethical person?  How could I be?  Donna was married to an African-American civil rights activist.  No, maybe I was just making a mountain out of a molehill.  Maybe, Katrina was right.   Why would Donna violate Jim’s rights?  No, way, she wouldn’t do that.  She’s the AA/EO officer.  These were some of the thoughts that ran through my mind as I tried to make sense of conflicting cues.   Through the process of denial, I eventually rationalized that Donna’s intention was benevolent in trying to protect the college from Jim, so I let the issue go.  After all, it was about Jim, the campus dreg.

But, the red flag kept bleeding.  So, questions about Jim arose and I found myself asking why Jim was so angry, why he was so hell bent on thumping certain administrators.  What was this guy all about?  As I listened and watched I began to realize that there was more going on than what I’d originally been told.  One of the things that seemed strange to me was that I hadn’t heard a single positive remark about Jim since I’d gotten hired. Even if an employee is not well liked, I have enough HR and supervisory experience to know that with critics, there are also supporters.  So where were all of Jim’s supporters?  I had not met a single supporter, not even amongst the tenured faculty.  I had heard that Jim was well liked by students.  But that confused the issue for me even more.  Why did the students like Jim, but why did Clark’s employees detest him.  The only thing I could do was watch and listen and read his emails thoughtfully.

In retrospect, it’s ironic that Donna’s action was what turned on my critical thinking circuitry and made me insatiably curious about what Jim Craven was all about. I was still vocally critical of Jim but given human nature, I feared my supervisors would think I was beginning to support him, so to alleviate any fear that I had subversive intentions, which I didn’t at the time, I told Donna and Katrina that I wanted to talk to Jim and get to know him.  In my naiveté, I believed that these two very educated officers would appreciate the fact that I was up front with them and that I was taking initiative to gather information for myself rather than continuing to go on hearsay.  After all, I worked in higher Ed where research and knowledge were supposed to be encouraged.  Direct research is always better than with secondary or tertiary sources.

Neither discouraged me but each warned me to be careful.  Donna reiterated that Jim could be very manipulative and that if given the opportunity, he would twist my statements and use them against me or the department.  Given the Craven myths, I was still fearful that Jim would blow me me off as Donna’s and Katrina’s “whore” just because I worked for them.  But, I also had enough information by then to offer Craven the benefit of doubt.  So, the OAIII from personnel knocked on his office door one day and introduced herself.  “Hi Professor Craven?  My name is Emma Kim and I work for Donna Kelly and Katrina Golder….”

Since that introduction, Jim and I have become close friends.  In fact, I frequently describe him as one of my best friends.  I know his extended family and he knows my husband, mother and 13 year old niece, Berlin.  He helps out where he can with a 13 year old “at-risk” youth who I mentor who is diagnosed with multiple disorders including ODD, bipolar affect disorder, and ADHD.  I regret that I bought into the indoctrination because for two years, the opportunities for developing our friendship were wasted.  For two years, the opportunity to expand my mind from the great books Jim’s turned me onto were wasted.  For two years, the opportunity to expand my political knowledge from our numerous political discussions was wasted.  But most importantly and significantly, Jim was denied the benefit of a supporter that could have made a difference in his life for two years.  Clark’s administration is directly responsible.  The waste cannot be measured because our friendship is priceless.  I respect Jim so much and I can’t emphasize how troubled I am that so many of you continue to criticize him when most of you have never taken the time as I did to research and extrapolate the history of Jim’s troubles at Clark.  I read numerous documents and interviewed dozens of people.  Piece by piece, I put the jigsaw puzzle together and what the picture revealed was a systematic process the administration used to control dissenters.  I’m writing to expose that pattern.  It is one the ACLU, US Dept of Education, Civil Rights Division, WA Human Rights Commission and WA DOP is interested in.  In fact, WA DOP stated to me unofficially that they were aware of a possible problem at Clark but that they didn’t have the resources to do anything unless the problem reached a certain level.  I was encouraged by WA DOP to write a letter to GAAPCOM!!!!

For the reader, given the time and space factor, I am editing out a significant chunk of why I chose to leave the college.  The following events took place after my refusal to violate Jim Craven’s civil rights.  The significant facts are these:

We have emails from public records requests showing Mr Knight directing from the back-room, and  has been the ring leader in initiating all various complaints against me (through proxies reward with public employment they were not properly hired and vetted for). Then Mr Knight became the “judge”, assessor of discipline and “appeal authority” on two of three possible levels of appeal against his “verdict” and “discipline assessed” on complaints he initiated and guided. Here is what brought a reprimand, assessed with no hearing or appeal, while off contract, for publishing on the message list (where cats and dogs are sold, etc) simply a list of statutes that all public employees should be aware of: From: Craven, Jim Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 2:22 PM To: Roi, Marcia; ‘ldavidson@washingtonea.org’ Subject: On denial of grievance on loss of pay This was central to the letter of reprimand and was not provided to me nor did I get a hearing as it was imposed while off contract. This was found in a public records request. Jim From: Dastmozd, Rassoul Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 11:02 AM To: Knight, Robert Cc: Kotsakis, Ted Subject: RE: [Messages] RCW (Criminal) for Public Employees (1) Hi Bob, I am working with ted to address this. Take care, Rassoul From: Knight, Robert Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 8:46 AM To: Dastmozd, Rassoul Cc: Kotsakis, Ted Subject: FW: [Messages] RCW (Criminal) for Public Employees (1) Rassoul, Each and everyone of these messages is a violation of our procedures and needs to be dealt with. Bob From: messages-bounces@clark.edu [mailto:messages-bounces@clark.edu]On Behalf Of Craven, Jim Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 9:06 PM To: messages@clark.edu Subject: [Messages] RCW (Criminal) for Public Employees (1)

Trading in public office.

(1) A person is guilty of trading in public office if: (a) He offers, confers, or agrees to confer any pecuniary benefit upon a public servant pursuant to an agreement or understanding that such actor will or may be appointed to a public office; or (b) Being a public servant, he requests, accepts, or agrees to accept any pecuniary benefit from another person pursuant to an agreement or understanding that such person will or may be appointed to a public office. (2) Trading in public office is a class C felony.

RCW 9A.68.050Trading in special influence.

(1) A person is guilty of trading in special influence if: (a) He offers, confers, or agrees to confer any pecuniary benefit upon another person pursuant to an agreement or understanding that such other person will offer or confer a benefit upon a public servant or procure another to do so with intent thereby to secure or attempt to secure a particular result in a particular matter; or (b) He requests, accepts, or agrees to accept any pecuniary benefit pursuant to an agreement or understanding that he will offer or confer a benefit upon a public servant or procure another to do so with intent thereby to secure or attempt to secure a particular result in a particular matter. (2) Trading in special influence is a class C felony.

False report.

Every public officer who shall knowingly make any false or misleading statement in any official report or statement, under circumstances not otherwise prohibited by law, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. [1909 c 249 § 98; RRS § 2350.]

RCW 42.20.080Other violations by officers.

Every officer or other person mentioned in RCW42.20.070, who shall wilfully disobey any provision of law regulating his official conduct in cases other than those specified in said section, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. 42.20.090 << 42.20.100 >> 42.20.110

RCW 42.20.100Failure of duty by public officer a misdemeanor.

Whenever any duty is enjoined by law upon any public officer or other person holding any public trust or employment, their wilful neglect to perform such duty, except where otherwise specially provided for, shall be a misdemeanor. [1909 c 249 § 16; RRS § 2268. Prior: Code 1881 § 889; 1854 p 90 § 82.]

RCW 9A.72.010

The following definitions are applicable in this chapter unless the context otherwise requires: (1) “Materially false statement” means any false statement oral or written, regardless of its admissibility under the rules of evidence, which could have affected the course or outcome of the proceeding; whether a false statement is material shall be determined by the court as a matter of law; (2) “Oath” includes an affirmation and every other mode authorized by law of attesting to the truth of that which is stated; in this chapter, written statements shall be treated as if made under oath if: (a) The statement was made on or pursuant to instructions on an official form bearing notice, authorized by law, to the effect that false statements made therein are punishable; (b) The statement recites that it was made under oath, the declarant was aware of such recitation at the time he or she made the statement, intended that the statement should be represented as a sworn statement, and the statement was in fact so represented by its delivery or utterance with the signed jurat of an officer authorized to administer oaths appended thereto; or (c) It is a statement, declaration, verification, or certificate, made within or outside the state of Washington, which is certified or declared to be true under penalty of perjury as provided in RCW9A.72.085. (3) An oath is “required or authorized by law” when the use of the oath is specifically provided for by statute or regulatory provision or when the oath is administered by a person authorized by state or federal law to administer oaths; (4) “Official proceeding” means a proceeding heard before any legislative, judicial, administrative, or other government agency or official authorized to hear evidence under oath, including any referee, hearing examiner, commissioner, notary, or other person taking testimony or depositions; (5) “Juror” means any person who is a member of any jury, including a grand jury, impaneled by any court of this state or by any public servant authorized by law to impanel a jury; the term juror also includes any person who has been drawn or summoned to attend as a prospective juror; (6) “Testimony” includes oral or written statements, documents, or any other material that may be offered by a witness in an official proceeding. [2001 c 171 § 2. Prior: 1995 c 285 § 30; 1981 c 187 § 1; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 §9A.72.010.] Notes: 9A.72.010 << 9A.72.020 >> 9A.72.030

Intimidating a witness.

(1) A person is guilty of intimidating a witness if a person, by use of a threat against a current or prospective witness, attempts to: (a) Influence the testimony of that person; (b) Induce that person to elude legal process summoning him or her to testify; (c) Induce that person to absent himself or herself from such proceedings; or (d) Induce that person not to report the information relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child, not to have the crime or the abuse or neglect of a minor child prosecuted, or not to give truthful or complete information relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child. (2) A person also is guilty of intimidating a witness if the person directs a threat to a former witness because of the witness’s role in an official proceeding. (3) As used in this section: (a) “Threat” means: (i) To communicate, directly or indirectly, the intent immediately to use force against any person who is present at the time; or (ii) Threat as defined in *RCW 9A.04.110(25). (b) “Current or prospective witness” means: (i) A person endorsed as a witness in an official proceeding; (ii) A person whom the actor believes may be called as a witness in any official proceeding; or (iii) A person whom the actor has reason to believe may have information relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child. (c) “Former witness” means: (i) A person who testified in an official proceeding; (ii) A person who was endorsed as a witness in an official proceeding; (iii) A person whom the actor knew or believed may have been called as a witness if a hearing or trial had been held; or (iv) A person whom the actor knew or believed may have provided information related to a criminal investigation or an investigation into the abuse or neglect of a minor child. (4) Intimidating a witness is a class B felony. [1997 c 29 § 1; 1994 c 271 § 204; 1985 c 327 § 2; 1982 1st ex.s. c 47 § 18; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 §9A.72.110.] Notes:

*Reviser’s note: RCW9A.04.110 was amended by 2005 c 458 § 3, changing subsection (25) to subsection (26); and was subsequently amended by 2007 c 79 § 3, changing subsection (26) to subsection (27).Finding — 1994 c 271: See note following RCW9A.72.090. Purpose — Severability — 1994 c 271: See notes following RCW9A.28.020.
RCW 9A.72.150Tampering with physical evidence.

(1) A person is guilty of tampering with physical evidence if, having reason to believe that an official proceeding is pending or about to be instituted and acting without legal right or authority, he: (a) Destroys, mutilates, conceals, removes, or alters physical evidence with intent to impair its appearance, character, or availability in such pending or prospective official proceeding; or (b) Knowingly presents or offers any false physical evidence. (2) “Physical evidence” as used in this section includes any article, object, document, record, or other thing of physical substance. (3) Tampering with physical evidence is a gross misdemeanor.

RCW 9A.76.175Making a false or misleading statement to a public servant.

A person who knowingly makes a false or misleading material statement to a public servant is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. “Material statement” means a written or oral statement reasonably likely to be relied upon by a public servant in the discharge of his or her official powers or duties. [2001 c 308 § 2. Prior: 1995 c 285 § 32.] Notes:

Purpose — 2001 c 308: “The purpose of this act is to respond toState v. Thomas, 103 Wn. App. 800, by reenacting, without changes, the law prohibiting materially false or misleading statements to public servants, enacted as sections 32 and 33, chapter 285, Laws of 1995.” [2001 c 308 § 1.]Effective date — 2001 c 308: “This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately [May 14, 2001].” [2001 c 308 § 4.] Effective date — 1995 c 285: See RCW48.30A.900.
RCW 9A.76.180Intimidating a public servant.

(1) A person is guilty of intimidating a public servant if, by use of a threat, he attempts to influence a public servant’s vote, opinion, decision, or other official action as a public servant. (2) For purposes of this section “public servant” shall not include jurors. (3) “Threat” as used in this section means (a) to communicate, directly or indirectly, the intent immediately to use force against any person who is present at the time; or (b) threats as defined in *RCW 9A.04.110(25). (4) Intimidating a public servant is a class B felony. [1975 1st ex.s. c 260 §9A.76.180.] Notes:

*Reviser’s note: RCW9A.04.110 was amended by 2005 c 458 § 3, changing subsection (25) to subsection (26); and was subsequently amended by 2007 c 79 § 3, changing subsection (26) to subsection (27).
RCW 9A.80.010Official misconduct.

(1) A public servant is guilty of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to deprive another person of a lawful right or privilege: (a) He intentionally commits an unauthorized act under color of law; or (b) He intentionally refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law. (2) Official misconduct is a gross misdemeanor. [1975-’76 2nd ex.s. c 38 § 17; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 §9A.80.010.] Notes:

Effective date — Severability — 1975-’76 2nd ex.s. c 38:See notes following RCW 9A.08.020.Failure of duty by public officers: RCW42.20.100.
RCW 10.14.020

Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter. (1) “Unlawful harassment” means a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person which seriously alarms, annoys, harasses, or is detrimental to such person, and which serves no legitimate or lawful purpose. The course of conduct shall be such as would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress, and shall actually cause substantial emotional distress to the petitioner, or, when the course of conduct would cause a reasonable parent to fear for the well-being of their child. (2) “Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. “Course of conduct” includes, in addition to any other form of communication, contact, or conduct, the sending of an electronic communication. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “course of conduct.” [2001 c 260 § 2; 1999 c 27 § 4; 1995 c 127 § 1; 1987 c 280 § 2.] Notes:

Findings — Intent — 2001 c 260: “The legislature finds that unlawful harassment directed at a child by a person under the age of eighteen is not acceptable and can have serious consequences. The legislature further finds that some interactions between minors, such as “schoolyard scuffles,” though not to be condoned, may not rise to the level of unlawful harassment. It is the intent of the legislature that a protection order sought by the parent or guardian of a child as provided for in this chapter be available only when the alleged behavior of the person under the age of eighteen to be restrained rises to the level set forth in chapter 10.14 RCW.” [2001 c 260 § 1.]Intent — 1999 c 27: See note following RCW9A.46.020.
RCW 10.14.190Constitutional rights.

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to infringe upon any constitutionally protected rights including, but not limited to, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. [1987 c 280 § 19.]   VERSUS THIS SWORN TESTIMONY OF CLARK COLLEGE PRESIDENT ROBERT KNIGHT: EPSON scanner image EPSON scanner image EPSON scanner image EPSON scanner image LISA LEWISON’S BRIEF CONTINUES:

Some of the Relevant Law:

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 agovernment law enforcement body that is not themselves involved in the federal crime.

Another Federal Statute for Forcing A Federal Officer To Perform a Mandatory DutyAnother 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.

These two statutes are among the most powerful tools in the hands of the people, even a single person, to report corrupt and criminal activities by federal officials−including federal judges−and to circumvent the blocks by those in key positions in the three branches of government. That statute was also repeatedly blocked by federal judges and Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.

18 U.S. Code Chapter 13 – CIVIL RIGHTS

Current through Pub. L. 113-100. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
RCW 9A.80.010
Official misconduct.

(1) A public servant is guilty of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to deprive another person of a lawful right or privilege:

(a) He intentionally commits an unauthorized act under color of law; or

(b) He intentionally refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law.

(2) Official misconduct is a gross misdemeanor.

[1975-’76 2nd ex.s. c 38 § 17; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.80.010.]

Notes:

     Effective date — Severability — 1975-’76 2nd ex.s. c 38: See notes following RCW 9A.08.020.Failure of duty by public officers: RCW 42.20.100.

42.20.030  <<  42.20.040 >>   42.20.050

RCW 42.20.040
False report.

Every public officer who shall knowingly make any false or misleading statement in any official report or statement, under circumstances not otherwise prohibited by law, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

[1909 c 249 § 98; RRS § 2350.]

Ads by Webexp EnhancedAd Options

RCW 42.40.030
Right to disclose improper governmental actions — Interference prohibited.

(1) An employee shall not directly or indirectly use or attempt to use the employee’s official authority or influence for the purpose of intimidating, threatening, coercing, commanding, influencing, or attempting to intimidate, threaten, coerce, command, or influence any individual for the purpose of interfering with the right of the individual to: (a) Disclose to the auditor (or representative thereof) information concerning improper governmental action; or (b) identify rules warranting review or provide information to the rules review committee.

(2) Nothing in this section authorizes an individual to disclose information otherwise prohibited by law.

[1995 c 403 § 510; 1989 c 284 § 2; 1982 c 208 § 3.]

RCW 42.40.050
Retaliatory action against whistleblower — Remedies.

(1) Any person who is a whistleblower, as defined in RCW 42.40.020, and who has been subjected to workplace reprisal or retaliatory action is presumed to have established a cause of action for the remedies provided under chapter 49.60 RCW. For the purpose of this section “reprisal or retaliatory action” means but is not limited to any of the following:

(a) Denial of adequate staff to perform duties;

(b) Frequent staff changes;

(c) Frequent and undesirable office changes;

(d) Refusal to assign meaningful work;

(e) Unwarranted and unsubstantiated letters of reprimand or unsatisfactory performance evaluations;

(f) Demotion;

 (g ) Reduction in pay;

(h) Denial of promotion;

(i) Suspension;

(j) Dismissal;

(k) Denial of employment;

(l) A supervisor or superior encouraging coworkers to behave in a hostile manner toward the whistleblower; and

(m) A change in the physical location of the employee’s workplace or a change in the basic nature of the employee’s job, if either are in opposition to the employee’s expressed wish.

(2) The agency presumed to have taken retaliatory action under subsection (1) of this section may rebut that presumption by proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the agency action or actions were justified by reasons unrelated to the employee’s status as a whistleblower.

(3) Nothing in this section prohibits an agency from making any decision exercising its authority to terminate, suspend, or discipline an employee who engages in workplace reprisal or retaliatory action against a whistleblower. However, the agency also shall implement any order under chapter 49.60 RCW (other than an order of suspension if the agency has terminated the retaliator).

[1999 c 283 § 1; 1992 c 118 § 3; 1989 c 284 § 4; 1982 c 208 § 5.]

42.40.035  <<  42.40.040 >>   42.40.050

 

 

 

        

Advertisements

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, http://www.4thMedia.org (Beijing); 7. Other Websites publications at http://www.aradicalblackfoot.blogspot.com; wwwthesixthestate.blogspot.com;https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com; 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 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, Legal System Corruption, Psychopathic Management, Psychopaths in Management, Vantucky Corruption and Inbredness. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Hush Money and Sealed Settlements to Cover-up Crimes are Crimes not Torts: No Need to Cover-up What is Clean–Only What is Dirty

  1. Jim, I admire all that you do. Until people start to stand against those who abuse us and abuse their power, the corruption will continue to grow and gain in power. If there is anything I can do for you let me know. As you know I too am an advocate for judicial and legal reform and will be fighting just as you are.

    Bill

    • jimcraven10 says:

      Dear Bill,

      Thanks so much and I too admire what you are doing. This is non-partisan; this is simply do we have rule of law or of the ruthless, because there is no in-between. Then there is the question of course, whose law? Who wrote it?; Who passed it?; What is the imperative addressed by the law? In whose interest was the law written; does the law serve the people and principles it purports to address.

      But even if the law, those who passed it, those who paid those who passed it in their interests (so they would not need to break it) are rotten. the core principles of the U.S. Constitution, not the particular laws that may be and have been and will again be used by those intent on the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution and its principles, those core principles may also be used to help to protect it–against all enemies foreign and domestic.

      But in any case, the difference between a snitch and a real, conscience-law-driven whistle-blower, is that a snitch sells out the skins of others, often who knew and trusted the snitch closely, to save his or her own skin or for other personal advantages (MICE–Money, Ideology, Compromised Ego; The whistle-blower, risks his or her own skin (and demonization, marginalization, slander, libel and family welfare) to try to save the skins of others he or she will likely never meet, and fight for the rule of law not of the ruthless and psychopathic. And it gets worse because the few with courage expose, if only by example, the cowardice of those, like the townspeople in the movie “High Noon”, stand around, cheering on the hero sheriff, while sneaking around and cutting deals and snitching for the very ones they sent the sheriff out to fight.

      I was a target of FBI and RCMP COINTELPRO both as an American Indian activist, and as someone protesting the Vietnam War, after I came out of military “service” in 1966; my “crime” was to oppose a War that was not “dumb” (Why has no one called Obama on that comment about only being against “dumb wars”?) it was of the kind that Nazis were hanged for at Nuremberg; Conspiracy, Launching and Executing an illegal, aggressive war, founded on lies, pretexts and staged pretexts, that amounted to crimes against humanity, crimes against the peace, war crimes all of which could not have been carried out without Conspiracy.

      I prefer not to be anywhere near those I had to go to, under 18 USC 4, 73 and RCW 42.20, but this is the reason for the law on Misprision of a felony: anyone who has knowledge, not hearsay, not rumors, not conjecture, but actual knowledge of a crime already committed, that knowledge is not some personal possession one can do with as one wishes–perhaps hold on to it and trade on it, or extortion, or blackmail as J Edgar Hoover and his soulmate Clyde Tolson were adept at. People have been harmed, society has been harmed, more victims are possible, immediate redress of harm to the victims is the first imperative and stopping further crime. Ask anyone: if one of your loved ones were attacked and harmed, how would you feel about someone having knowledge of it, but not reporting it, not trying to stop it, perhaps even trading on it, the perpetrator goes on to victimize more, as in the case of so many serial rapists that could have been stopped if both the public and law enforcement knew about and enforced 18 USC4. But when law enforcement is itself breaking or serially ignoring the very laws it is charged with enforcing, and worse they carry guns and badges and testify sometimes “testilying”, and if the people fear them more than the criminals, or regard them as criminals and respect them less than the other kinds of criminals, then the only outcome can be rule of the ruthless not of law (even law rigged for the rich and powerful). And this also makes law enforcement (that has some decent and honorable officers, who do risk and lose their lives protecting real victims from real perps, who do want to investigate without fear or favor to who is making the complaint or who is the target, etc) more dangerous and unsafe as who knows better additional information to solve and prosecute a felony than someone with direct knowledge of it?

      And on top of that, I and my friend were directly threatened with arrest (trespassing) at the Clark County Sheriff’s office after we had just witnessed what be believe to be felonies, we had a tape of the meeting an hour before, we had documents showing that either the president of Clark College, Bob Knight committed perjury in one venue at one time while under oath and acting in an official capacity, or the sworn testimonies of Ms Lynn Davidson of the WEA and Dr. Marcia Roi of Clark College Association of Higher learning at another hearing, place and time, directly and irreconcilably contradicting his testimony (but without apparently knowing their testimony was in direct contradiction with his in another venue) was perjury and other offenses that go with it. But it does not stop with he said/ she-she said. Because Mr. Knight was asked five different times (attempts to turn tapes and court transcripts to law enforcement refused) over to law enforcement, and four of the five times refused to answer or recuse himself as the “decider”, and those four times either Dr. Roi and or Ms Davdison was present and he could have challenged them on the spot or wrote Dr. Roi up as he did me, or had others do, repeatedly. The fifth time, and this is all on tapes turned over to and ignored by the “investigator” Joseph Vance of Miller Nash (to investigate those who hired him on behalf of same?), Mr. Knight claimed he did not make the statement to two union officers: “Morale problem; there is no morale problem. There will be no moral problem when we get rid of professor Craven.”

      But it gets better or worse for the College and all being covered-up. Because in my termination hearing (the panel is partly picked by AHE union members with complaints by me and others pending and unaddressed against them) the hearing officer, a former judge from Kelso selected and authorized by Mr. Knight, this time, in the same hearing, on the same transcripts, again the sworn testimony of Mr. Knight versus the same sworn testimonies of Dr. Roi and Ms. Davidson; some one committed perjury, obstruction of justice and a long list of other federal and state crimes as well as torts; that should be enough to shut down the hearing right there as totally contaminated (Mr Knight then gets the results of the hearing and passes to the Board for their action on my termination; this is like being a Jew in a Nazi court (similes and metaphors are not equivalances for the challenged); any guess how that will turn out?

      This has all been turned over to law enforcement per my duties under 18 USC 4 and RCW 42.20 as I am a public employee as well as tenured professor.

      Thanks again and if you have an email address to send you some docs as I see some of the same names and modus operandi in the AG’s office and elsewhere,
      such as Washington Court of Appeals Division II etc. omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com

  2. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, as I told you Judge Bryan denied my appl. to proceed IFP. When I first filed the case on 2/7/2015 I did so in a hurry to beat the deadline for time statute. I noted in my filing that there would be additional supporting documents filled with the Clerk in a timely manor.

    Right after I filed on Friday the 7th, I received a notice from AT&T on the 8th telling me that over 75% of my Data plan of 15gigs per month had been used. That I knew had to be impossible. For years I have had the same service plan of just 5 gigs per month. But just recently after all of the DOJ hack- ins to my account and stealing all of my data and screwing up my computer, I raised my limit to 15 gigs.

    So I went to Google and checked my account. Sure enough there was another un-authorized access to my account from down in S.F.Ca. right by the 9th Circuit Ct. of App. and U.S. Marshals. I saved the map they sent to me which shows the street level location of the un-authorized access to my account.

    I have saved all of the others from that same location and 2 from right on Penn. Ave in Wa. D.C.. several up in Seattle right on the corner of 7th & Stewart St. which is the Federal Court house, U.S. Attorney , U.S. Trustee and U.S. Marshals Service, and one right behind the Union Station court house in Tac. WA.

    After I received the notice From AT&T, I called them to alert them about the theft of my Data again. My Computer with the new hard drive started acting up again on the 8th also, and it took me most of the weekend to get it sorted out.

    First thing Monday on the 10th, I called the U.S, District Court Clerks Office to let them know that I have had this delay and why. Telling them that i would be filing the additional supporting documents in a Couple of days.
    At that time the Clerk told me that the Case was still not open until the Judge ruled on my Appl. to proceed IFP. So for me not to bother or worry about getting in the additional doc’s in to the Court until the Judge made his ruling for IFP.
    Judge Bryan camped on my case until the 12th of this month to Rule on my IFP appl.

    The clerks office said the copy of his ruling was sent to me on the 12th also. I waited and 3 days later , it still had not arrived in Puyallup from Tacoma.
    I waited over the 4 day weekend and it still did not arrive on Tuesday. Finally it came on Wednesday the 18th. Six days gone from my 10 days to file a motion for reconsideration.

    But Judge Bryan not only ruled on the IFP appl. but used the deficiency in the case that I myself noted and informed them that I would be providing in a timely manor. Did not matter, Judge Bryan said that the case had no Standing and was considered frivolous litigation. So he said that it would not produce anything that would command relief.

    So he dismissed the entire case for Failure to state a claim for which relief could be granted, doing so with prejudice.

    With it widely known that dismissing a pro se case for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted is forbidden. Which this makes the 3rd case I have had at Union Station court house that they have used this forbidden rule to dispose of me and the case.

    So just more RICO, Color of Law, and abuse of authority, legal abuse to deprive me of a fair unbiased proceeding, to harbor justice, to Obstruct Justice, and manipulate the law.

    Having Judge Bryan make a special note on the Order that plaintiff could file more documents in regards to this Case, but he forbid the clerks office from acting upon these Documents .
    That I must now file for the $500 appeal program at the 9th circuit so they can waste more time, ignore the Facts, my Rights and obstruct justice, and then fleece from me the $500 for nothing but more abuse and Fraud.
    I filed a Motion for Re-consideration anyway , plus a motion for district change of venue based upon all of the aforementioned. That it was made clear by the Records concerning me at Union Station that they refuse to provide Due process , that they view a complaint supported by documents of record that prove the Unlicensed practice of Law was allowed multiple times during my divorce proceedings as merely a frivolous complaint and without standing.
    That a complaint regarding multiple intentional improper assignment of venue so as to harbor justice, violate my rights and Obstruct Justice also as Frivolous litigation.
    So Judge Bryan has openly acknowledged his allegiance to RICO, Obstruction of Justice and severe Gross Legal abuse advocate.
    Clearly the bonded Clerks Office is dedicated to the same right along with Judge Bryan. Doing their part to set me up for Obstruction of Justice again.

  3. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, have you ever had any luck with filing a writ of mandamus? I have filed 2 , both of which were outright ignored and refused to be adhered to by the Federal Court.
    I went to the State auditor with issues concerning fraud in the judiciary, the prosecutors Office, the Dept. of Corrections, the Sheriff’s Dept. and the Gov. Office. All of which they insist they have no authority to investigate.

    Our State Senators use the separation of Powers as an excuse not to assist constituents / not to use their authority to disclose Fraud, Felony Crime committed by the Judiciary and executive Branch. Stating they cannot hold accountable another Branch of Gov.

    All while our Governor is currently listed as a current, Active, long time member of the WSBA /judicial Branch

    While at the same exact time is listed as the chief Executive Officer of our Executive Branch. Having his Office Staff lie to me and deny having any authority over Judges in this State while they are in Certified receipt possession of clear documented verifiable on record Proof of Felony crime. Felony Corruption being executed within and by the Judiciary.
    Clearly misprisoning, Aiding & Abetting RICO, Color of Law, Gross Abuse of Office/authority, Severe Legal Abuse, malfeasance, Felony Fraud and Extortion.

    What is your view regarding any approach of action concerning this?

    • jimcraven10 says:

      Dear Bill,

      I just got and have read some of your message. I know where you are, I too have been there and am there now: the more concrete evidence of crimes you bring, the more you expose the serial refusals in the past to look at what you brought to law enforcement and the AG’s office and thus their complicity in enabling and covering-up the present and inevitable future crimes. https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2014/05/04/hush-money-and-sealed-settlements-to-cover-up-crimes-are-crimes-not-torts-no-need-to-cover-up-what-is-clean-only-what-is-dirty/ and https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/attempts-to-report-felony-crimes-per-18-usc-4-28-usc-1361-exchanges-with-clark-county-sheriff-gary-lucas/

      And the more you resist and react justly to serial refusals to look at hard evidence not simply rants and allegations, of real crimes against real people, the more they try to portray you as crazy and reactive and not worth listening to.

      I do not know but I know this story reaches far and wide. But the truth is the truth even if no one believes it just as a lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. Hang on to that; gather and reproduce your evidence with names, dates, times, places, witnesses (you will find others as you found me with the same issues, corrupt cops and lawyers, modus operandi, etc). Here is an example of something I was the originator of in 1972 when I was a grad student at University of Manitoba that is resurfacing today and will go far and wide: http://sttpml.org/canada/interrogation-sensory-deprivation-and-the-cia-a-canadian-connection/

      I finally got FBI on paper and false statements and material omissions (Filing a False Report by a federal officer) about a phone conversation he thought was not witnessed (not recorded but witnessed on speaker phone) plus I got PDX FBI asking me to bring the written hush money offer plus my lawyer at the time to the Vancouver FBI office (I asked but was denied taking it to their office in PDX) and Inow have more 18USC4 (Misprision of a Felony), 18 USC 73 (Obstruction of Justice), Subornation of perjury, RCW 42.20 Misconduct of a Public Employee, 18 USC 241 Conspiracy Against Rights and 242 Under Color of Law and much more that now reaches into FBI, Clark County Prosecutor, Clark County Sheriff, Vancouver Police, WA Court of Appeals Division II, Thurston County Superior Court, Washington State Human Rights Commission, Clark County Clerk Scott Weber, Washington State Employment Department, Washington Education Association, Clark College Board of Trustees, Governor Inslee (who personally asked me to send evidence of corruption and crimes then refused to answer the evidence sent but keeps sending requests for money) WA AGs past and present, and a score of creatures with Bar cards. I am filing formal charges against FBI’s OPR and OIG and I plan to take a personal trip to WA DC with documents to bed presented to James Coney personally at the FBI HQ named after that vile criminal psychopath J Edna Hoover (says it all about FBI like having a shelter for battered women named after Ted Bundy) and other law enforcement and I will drag these scum out into the light of transparency, evidence and law and bring the law to the lawless in law enforcement and government with the very law they clearly have contempt for. I cannot lose because as you can see I cannot bed bought, bullied or schmoozed.

      We need to integrate our files and evidence for common perps, modus operandi, networks, patrons etc and publish network analyses of serial corruption by both parties.

      I will write back when I am able to read and digest more of what you sent.

      Jim/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii

      Sent from Surface

  4. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim , I read your reply to Bill, whereas I assume this was meant to suffice as a response to me, which is fine.
    I can assure you with my previous filed cases, they were not simply rants, they contained specific relevant documents , all verifiable documents of record. Within those documents were undeniable proof that I had notified the Superior Court of the contempt of Court by the Attorneys and my now ex-wife for with holding my Deed release that was agreed to be provided to me in Superior Court. Also notice to the Superior Court once again that I had not agreed to release my now ex-wife from the responsibility of providing child support for her own two children.

    Also notifying the Court of the theft of my money I had agreed to pay for the deed rase to be delivered to me within 24hrs.
    That this illegal contemptuous with holding of my deed release had already caused the loss of my new affordable Mortgage Contract and placed my home into default.
    That without the assistance of the court intervening, and seeing to it that my deed release was provided to me as agreed, that foreclosure and or the illegal forced filing of a totally unwanted and un-needed bankruptcy was imminent.

    So the Superior Court was made aware of the contempt of Court by the Attorneys involved and my now ex-wife. The Superior Court was also made aware of the potential catastrophic damage to my credit., the potential loss of my home, and directly resulting costs and financial unjust burden
    placed upon me by this contempt of court.
    But that changed nothing, because the Superior court knew they were 100% liable for allowing the unlicensed practice of law in my divorce proceedings. The Superior court also knew that I had no idea that the attorney had been suspended from practice on two separate occasions during my divorcé because the Superior Court, nor the WSBA, nor the Supreme court ever informed the directly effected parties who had a legal “Right To Know”
    So the Superior Court intentionally never placed my time and date stamped motions on court docket , nor did they ever respond to me regarding these motions, the multiple calls I had previously made to the sup. Ct. Clk’s Office inquiring about these specific Motions.
    Apparently thinking if they just remained silent, I would be consumed by the Bankruptcy and forced to lose my home of the prior 20yrs.
    That with now no real estate assets, no child support, no bond or no business, and then no home or shop, I would be scrambling to try and place a roof over the heads of my two children, food on the table and trying to figure out how to make a living after Bankruptcy Attorney Desa Conniff had just gotten done with defrauding me, setting me up for an intentionally doomed fraudulent bankruptcy and the ultimate loss of my home . This after Miss Conniff had arranged for the already unbearable mortgage payment that had increased practically 90% while these two attorneys had drug on the divorce for over 2 yrs while they fleeced. Embezzled the proceeds from the liquidation of all of my Real Estate assets.
    Now having Miss Conniff arrange with Judge Snyder to raise the already increased house payment , another $1100.00 per month. Making sure that I would not be able to make these payments that were over $2000.00 more per month than what the mortgage payment originally started out as. Little did they realize as to just how determined I was to make sure they could not strip from me the last thing I had left, my home and the home of my children.

    I worked constantly , and paid each and every one of them.

    When I was illegally forced into this aforementioned Bankruptcy by the Attorneys, my now ex-wife and the Superior Court & its Clerks Office by the theft of my money and the defrauding of my deed release, I immediately notified in writing and on docket, The U.S. Bankruptcy Court Clerks office, the U.S. Trustee, David M,. Howe Trustee, Attorney Brian D. Lynch(now B.R. Judge Lynch) and provided the court copies of my filed time & date Stamped motions I had filed in the superior Court trying my best to avoid this unwanted and un-needed fling of Bankruptcy.

    All to no avail, none of the Officially notified Officials assigned to this Bankruptcy Case ever responded or took the prescribed action they were bound by statute and sworn Oath to take.

    They all being members of the WSBA, remained silent and that proves it could not be an isolated oversight, it establishes that it is civil RICO to deprive me of my rights and financially destroy me and my ability to care for my children and provide a good home for them .
    I would be the first one to admit that perhaps my documents could have done well with being more artfully prepared and presented, but they were damn well legible and specific with names, case numbers and dates.
    So none of my cases have been non specific rants without the support of facts and reinforced by statutes that had clearly been violated or intentionally ignored.

    My pleadings were not disregarded due to being non specific Rants. They were intentionally ignored because these fellow WSBA members were actively riding with RICO, aiding & abetting Felony crimes and gross unprofessional negligence by the Superior Court. .

    On a different note, over the last few days I have been attempting to get an answer from Officials in Olympia regarding our Governor and our Governor’s interpretation of the almighty Separation of Powers. Pasted below is copies of the emails back and forth which are parr for the course regarding the replies I have received. I thought you might find their reply concerning the Separation of powers interesting. Bruce

    Separation of Powers (5)
    People
    me To
    Kyle.Overmiller@leg.wa.gov
    Feb 23 at 6:56 PM
    Dear Kyle Overmiller

    I am at a loss regarding the separation of Powers. I have had and currently do have issues within our State Government . Issues regarding being told by Senator Becker that she would not be able to assist me due to the Separation of Powers. Thusly providing her with no authority to investigate the corrupt illegal activities of the Judicial & Executive Branch of Washington State Government.

    When I went to our Governor about the issues I have, I was told that the Governor has no jurisdiction or authority over our Judicial Branch, and once again the Separation of Powers prohibited the Governor from assisting me either.

    When in fact according to Washington State Constitution, it states clearly that our Governor has total authority over all Judges in Office of Washington State. So Governor Inslee’s Office is not being honest with me.

    As you surely must be aware of the fact that the Separation of Powers was created so as provide no residency for bias/ Corruption within any of the three Branches of our Government.

    Upon further research I have discovered that our Governor who has been an attorney for several years and a very active member of the WSBA which is of course our Judicial Branch of Government.
    Not only has Governor Inslee been a member of the judicial Branch for several years and quite active with the functions of the WSBA. Governor Inslee is still currently listed as an “Active licensed Member ” of the WSBA. All at the same exact time Governor Inslee is also listed as our Chief Executive Officer of our Executive Branch of our Government.

    Having this duel membership to both the Executive Branch and the Judicial Branch clearly violate the Law regarding the Separation of Powers.

    Also giving insight as to what fueled the refusal by Governor Inslee’s Office to assist me after I provided his Office with documented verifiable recorded proof via Certified USPS return receipt requested that our Superior Court is severely Criminally Corrupt.

    Having done this several months ago in June of 2014. This was a large file I sent to the Governors Office complete with undeniable verifiable documentation that proves the Superior Court allowed the unlicensed practice of Law several times during my divorce proceedings.
    .
    That the Superior Court was notified and instructed by the WSBA & the Supreme court to Stop this unlicensed Attorney from Continuing to practice Law while Suspended from Practice. But the Superior Court not only failed to do as instructed by the Supreme Court and the WSBA, the Superior court also never placed on docket two separate motions filed by me complete with time and date stamps on them.

    That the Superior Court never informed the directly effected parties about this Gross Unprofessionally Negligent Blunder clearly violating my legal “Right to Know”. Clearly fueled by corruption and lack of ethics due to the fact that the Superior Court was 100% liable for this unlicensed practice of Law.

    Further compounded by the fact that within the filed motions one being for contempt of Court and the other being an Emergency Motion, both of which notified the Superior Court that this unlicensed Attorney had embezzled thousands of dollars of my money being held in the attorneys trust account and had illegally with held my deed release to my home and property from me intentionally with malice.

    Having this illegal with holding of my agreed in Court to be provided within 24hrs, deed release, directly causing the loss of my new fully approved & affordable,. locked in Mortgage loan. Then forcing my home into default after the loss of my new affordable mortgage loan and then having no other avenue of recourse, I was illegally forced into Foreclosure, then to file for a credit, career and quality of life destroying bankruptcy . A bankruptcy that was unwanted, un-needed as I owed hardly no one , just the home. Having copy of my good credit report to substantiate all of this , complete with the filed motions to the Superior Court that were intentionally never placed on the Docket.

    As I previously pointed out, these motions filed within the Superior Court were filed on different days , removing the possibility of an isolated over sight. Clearly establishing that they were never placed on the docket intentionally.

    Because if the Court addressed my filed motions properly and legally, it would have disclosed the truth about the gross unprofessional negligence of the Superior Court for allowing the multiple appearances of the unlicensed attorney.

    So bankrupt of ethics and criminally corrupt, the Superior Court Clerks Office and judge Armijo’ aided and abetted embezzlement and Fraud , knowingly illegally forced me to lose my new mortgage loan, into default. into foreclosure and ultimately into a fraudulent bankruptcy.

    All so the Superior court could prevent public disclosure, avert financial liability and direct accountability for this Gross Unprofessional negligence.

    Governor Inslee’s Office and Senator Becker’s Office are both emphatically aware of these criminal felony acts perpetrated towards my family and myself without question. Both the Governor and Senator Becker have refused to assist me with the severely Felony corrupt Judiciary. Therefore opting to misprision, aid & abet severe felony corruption and felony fraud committed by the Attorney involved and the Superior court.

    Clearly this is fueled by the total disregard for the separation of powers, total disregard for the law, innocent citizens rights, Sworn Oath to Office & Duty to the people of Washington State. Having allegiance to cronyism & Civil RICO take precedence over honest legal services, Duty , the Law itself. All at the cost to innocent citizens/victims.

    Only using the Separation of Powers as an excuse not to assist innocent victims, not to disclose the corrupt truth about their piers, abuse authority and the Law itself.

    These are clearly described as Felony Crimes both the aforementioned have committed knowingly.

    The separation of Powers is being used against the people and Government of Washington State, and for the RICO protection of a criminally corrupt Government.

    Which upon further research, I have learnt that Washington State is the worst State in the Nation for prosecuting Corruption Cases. Having this specific situation here readily explain as to just why that is the statistical state of affairs at hand concerning Washington State.

    In closing , if you would please be kind enough to explain to me why our Governor is allowed to be a member of two different Branches of our Government at the same exact time. Clearly in defiance of the Separation of Powers as written & its designed purpose and intent.

    Having bias be undeniably demonstrated towards the benefit of, and enabling the continuance of this severely corrupt Judiciary and judicial System. Flagrantly demonstrating 0 regard for innocent citizens/victims of Criminal Felony Judicial Corruption & Fraud.
    Thank You
    Bruce E. Gambill Jr. 253-212-7242

    Reply, Reply All or Forward | More

    Overmiller, Kyle

    To
    me

    Feb 24 at 5:45 PM

    Hii Bruce,
    My role at the Legislature is focused on technology and facilities on the legislative campus; I don’t handle legal inquires since I’m not a lawyer. However, I’ve forwarded your message to Andrew Logerwell, House Counsel, to see if he can provide you with any assistance. You should be hearing from him soon.

    Take care,
    .Kyle

    Show message history
    to
    Overmiller, Kyle
    Today at 12:10 AM
    Kyle

    Thank you for your reply. However what I have question about is simply the Laws that were designed for us all to comprehend, abide by and be able to recognize when they are not being abided by or being flagrantly violated. Therefore not requiring a member of the severely corrupt WSBA to interpret these laws that were in fact, designed for us to conduct our lives and business affairs by. Or when we fail to do so , we are expected to be held accountable for ourselves and subject to legal , criminal penalties.

    Since my issues surround the Judicial branch, having my issue be addressed by a loyal member of that Branch, is not what would be considered the best course of action for honest unbiased results.

    Since the excuse of not being a lawyer appears to be very popular with various agencies , representatives etc. I wonder if that would suffice for the public in court by simply saying that they were not a Lawyer, therefore incapable of interpreting our Laws. So as to avoid accountability. Leave free and clear knowing that they just satisfied the request of the court and the Law itself.

    Bruce

    Logerwell, Andrew
    To me
    Today at 4:43 PM
    Mr. Gambill,

    Good afternoon, my name is Andrew Logerwell. I am the attorney for the House of Representatives also known as House Counsel. Your email below has been forwarded to me to respond to since it addresses legal issues. Mr. Overmiller is our facilities and IT person so these kinds of questions are really not his area of expertise. It’s important to note, I only speak for the House of Representatives as an institution and don’t write on behalf of the governor, Senator Becker, the Senate generally speaking or the House democratic caucus or the House republican caucus. I also can’t give legal advice to anyone but my client, the House, so what follows is only my opinion on an interesting question you raise.

    I know, that’s quite the list of disclaimers but it’s always important to be clear who you can represent and who you can’t.

    It appears that your central question about separation of powers is based on a pretty common misconception about the Washington State Bar Association. The Bar is not actually part of the judiciary, under RCW 2.48, the bar is an executive branch state agency. As a creature of statute, the State has elected to have the Supreme Court play the role of deciding disbarments but other than that, there is judicial involvement.

    Even if the bar was part of the judiciary, it’s only a regulatory body. In much the same way as the Department of Health regulates doctors that fact does not make all doctors in the state members of the executive branch of government nor does it mean all persons who carry a driver’s license are members of the executive branch. Likewise, being a member of the bar doesn’t make you part of any branch of state government. You are just regulated and licensed by a governmental body. The same is true for any other profession where people are regulated, licensed or potentially disciplined by a governmental body.

    I hope this clarifies the issue you asked Mr. Overmiller about. If you want to review the statutes that created the Washington State Bar they can be found in RCW chapter 2.48.

    Thank you for writing us,

    Andrew Logerwell

    House Counsel

    Washington State House of Representatives

    (360) 786 7767

    From: Bruce Gambill [mailto:fourcam89@yahoo.com]
    Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 6:57 PM
    To
    Logerwell, Andrew
    Today at 6:10 PM
    Dear Mr. Logerwell

    It is my understanding that Lawyers/attorneys are considered an Officer of the “Court”. Whereas the Court is the Judicial System. Therefore making Attorneys/lawyers Officers of the Judicial System.

    I am not asking you for legal advice, nor am I attempting to establish any type of fiduciary relationship between us. But if an attorney that is currently listed as a current active member of approx. 30,000 officers of the Court, then that would establish a tie with those fellow Officers. Would it not?

    Whereas since Gov. Inslee has had a long legal career , during which he was quite active with the functions of the WSBA, Would it not be safe to say that Gov. Inslee would be inclined to be bias towards his friends and associates at the WSBA?

    That any reasonable group from the public would naturally think that fellow members of any institution would also be inclined to be bias to wards their fellow members.

    Whereas many judges and all practicing attorneys are fellow members of the WSBA. Having it be known that over 90% of all grievances filed at the WSBA are not adequately investigated, nor given a fair unbiased review, resulting in them being immediately dismissed.

    Example: I went to the WSBA Dics. Bd. with a grievance against an attorney who had violated the Right to Practice Rule, having continued to Practice Law multiple times while currently unlicensed. Having this same attorney defraud me of my quit Claim Deed Release to my home and property. A deed release that was proposed to be provided to me in Superior Court and to be delivered to me signed and notarized within 24hrs of that proceeding.

    Doing so in exchange for me releasing $1500.00 of my money held in the attorneys trust account upon delivery of the Deed Release.

    This was assured to be done by both Attorneys. Instead the money was just taken/embezzled and the deed release was refused to be provided, specifically to fore me into foreclosure and then into bankruptcy.

    Which is exactly what happened but not before I filed motion in Superior Court or Contempt of Court for refusing to provide the deed Release, stealing the money which would fall under uncounted for funds.

    After that motion was never placed on docket or responded to in any way, I filed an Emergency Motion to save my good hard earned credit, my new mortgage loan that needed this deed rele to close. Also so as to avert a totally unwanted, un-needed illegally forced filing of Bankruptcy. As I owed no one but simply the home.

    This same attorney had already been disbarred by the WSBA and the Supreme Court for practicing Law unlicensed once in a different clients proceedings. And he also failed to appear for a child support proceeding costing this client approx. 10k. So that was the basis for disbarment that was placed on record.

    Whereas in my case, he made multiple unlicensed appearances , defrauded me of my deed release, embezzled thousands of dollars of my money from their “Trust” acc. Illegally forced my home into default, losing my new locked in affordable mortgage contract, damaging my credit severely, then forcing me into foreclosure and ultimately into bankruptcy.

    I provided copy of the deal for the deed to the WSBA, proof that the money was taken from my money in their trust acc. never accounted for. This is Felony Fraud and Grand theft. Also causing me to lose my ability to retain Bond with my credit now destroyed. Resulting in losing my ability to retain my previous 25 yr career, jeopardizing the loss of my home and property. Costing me a total of $288.712.36 out of pocket documented.

    Which at this same proceeding the deed release was agreed to be provided to me within 24hrs, this same attorney had the judge sign an illegal order stripping from my innocent children their right to receive the previously Ordered Child support from their own able bodied working birth mother.

    I went to the WSBA with all of these documents, time and date stamped motions I had filed but were never placed on docket or responded to by the Superior Court. Plus proof that this act cost us over $35,000 in child support plus it stripped right out of my hand the Judgments for approx. 8k I had just paid approx. 1 yr of litigation fees to obtain.

    The WSBA dismissed this Grievance that contained far more Rule violations, Statute violations that were Felony Crimes , and costing me thousands of dollars more than what was reflected in his other clients grievance that he was effectively disbarred for and only appearing unlicensed one time.
    So that speaks for itself loud enough. Having this dismissal of my grievance apparently be deemed as necessary to weaken my claim to the Lawyers Fund. But that was not enough , so the lawyers Fund went ahead and falsified the facts in the grievance/application to the Fund and the Funds official denial of the application to the Fund.

    All of which based on no fact or document of record or statement ever made by myself. Just intentional Felony Fraud to effectively cheat me out of $288,712.36

    So that is a prime example of the bias cronyism & RICO exercised by fellow WSBA members, the Disciplinary Board & the Lawyers Fund for Client Protection at the WSBA.

    So based upon this, it would be reasonable to assume that Gov. Inslee would be reluctant to investigate this unethical illegal Felony fraudulent behavior & illegal acts executed by his friends and fellow members of the WSBA.

    Therefore defying the entire purpose and intent of the Separation of Powers. Whereas the separation of powers must be able to determine if the Lawyer is an officer of the Executive Branch or an Officer of the Judicial branch. As well as yourself must be able to determine which branch of government you yourself are professionally associated with.

    I look forward to your reply.

    Thank You
    Bruce E. Gambill Jr.

  5. Bruce Gambill says:

    Here is the reply I received this morning regarding an attorneys explanation concerning all attorneys association to the Courts.

    Logerwell, Andrew

    To
    me

    Today at 7:27 AM

    Good morning,

    Officer of the Court is really just a term of art, not really an official governmental branch designation. Again, if that were true then all lawyers, even those who regularly sue the courts, would be part of the state’s judicial branch. That is not how the system works but it’s understandable you’d come to that conclusion.

    Again, when it comes to your concerns about the governor and the WSBA generally, I only speak for the House of Representatives as an institution.

    Andrew

  6. Bruce Gambill says:

    My reply to Mr.Logerwell follows;

    Today at 12:14 PM
    Hello Andrew

    If the WSBA is truly considered to be the Executive Branch which at the same time deemed an extension/Leg Of, of the Supreme Court which is the Judicial Branch. How can the Judicial Branch create an association that is classified as being the Executive Branch ?

    Compounded by, if in fact these Branches of Government intertwine in that manner, would it not command the intent of the separation of Powers to render itself defunct?

    If a great many Judges & attorneys are current members of an association of the Executive Branch, but at that same time the Judges be also listed as the ultimate Ruling & Ordering Authority of the Judicial Branch,… Then would that not establish the Judges as having a direct association and allegiance to both the Executive & the Judicial Branch all at the same time?

    Whereas having direct ties to, or strong association with, two different Branches at the same time, is considered to be in violation of not only the Rule of, including the purpose and intent of the Separation of Powers.

    With the only apparent cure for this to be to classify the WSBA, which is the child of the Supreme Court, be considered as being the same “race” or “origin” as its parent. That of course being the Judicial Branch.

    As with the WSBA Dic. Bd., we have Lawyers Judging other Lawyers, with proposed unbiased objectivity.

    Would that not be mirrored to having it be ordered, that only Gang members are authorized to judge other Gang members?

    Or to place the Disciplinary task and authority concerning Judges and Attorneys who interpret the Law & Rule on the Law within a totally different organization/Association other than one that was created by the Judicial Branch to be classified as the Executive Branch.

    When I went to the Supreme Court Chief Justice and the Clerk Ron Carpenter with my issues concerning the proven Felony Fraudulent Acts of the WSBA & its LFCP, Mr. Carpenter replied(who is also the task force agent for the WSBA)that neither he nor his Office are concerned with the daily decision making and or conduct of the Executive Officials of the WSBA.

    When I contacted our A.G.O. about the same exact issues as I did with the Supreme Ct. Clerk and Chief Justice, the A.G.O. replied to me that they had no authority or Jurisdiction with the WSBA.

    That if I would wish to pursue these issues of mine, I should do so by contacting the Clerks Office of the Supreme Court.

    This being at the same time as I received the reply from Mr. Carpenter assuring me that he nor his Office were concerned with the Executive Officials of the WSBA committing Felony Fraud proven by the Executive Officials of the WSBA own signature on Fraudulent documents under the letterhead of the WSBA.

    When I went to Senator Becker about the same Felony Fraudulent Issues concerning the WSBA, Senator Becker insisted continuously that she, nor her Office had any authority over the WSBA due to the separation of Powers. Therefore could not assist me, would not assist me.

    Governor Inslee’s Office insisted to me that they had no authority over the WSBA or any Judge in the State of Washington. Based on this, even though I had provided Gov. Inslee’s Office with certified delivery proof of Felony Fraud on Verifiable recorded Documents complete with letterhead and Official signatures on these Fraudulent malicious intent documents.

    Having all of the aforementioned Officials insist that they had no authority or Jurisdiction or Duty concerning the WSBA, Attorneys, the Courts, or the documented verifiable proof of Felony Crimes being committed by any of them.

    I have yet to be able to locate the provision for Officials of any Branch of our Government not being held to the responsibilities concerning misprisoning Felony Crime and or Corruption. Anything that referenced misprisoning Felony Crime & corruption being a personal option for each of which to either abide by or totally disregard.

    So basically what I am attempting to determine concerning attorneys & the WSBA is; are we dealing with a Ford or a Chevrolet here?

    It clearly must be one or the other.

    Generally it would be considered a safe bet that two white people would produce a white baby. Having that child being Officially classified as being white, etc. etc.

    Two Fords do not create a Chevrolet, or visa versa.

    It would appear that I am attempting to establish either the white or black heritage of a very grey area of our Government. A grey area that is danced around the perimeter of, as if it is practically sacred ground.

    What would your interpretation of this scenario be ?

    Bruce Gambill

     Show message

  7. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, I’ve been posting all of this to try to expose this O.C.RICO Corruption Scam the Government & the Public at the same time scenario . Also in hope of getting your input /view on things. I do not post on corruptwa after the jive Chicken shit BS Bill pulled on me. Which amount to lies and half truths. I will not bother to go into it, as I did not even bother to attempt to reply to one of Bill’s suddenly moderated posts that hid the truth and the facts.
    So I’ve been attempting to do my part in helping keep the fire burning so to speak & stay in touch.

  8. jimcraven10 says:

    Thanks Bill, I read everything you send, correlate it with my own documents and experiences (some of the same creatures and networks, some of the same modus operandi, some of the same lies and distortions of law–when the bother to cite any law, some of the same tactics of repression and reprisals, etc. What you are doing, and what I and others are doing as well, is to bring hard evidence to the public (where you will find and link-up with others with similar experiences with the same creatures who hide in backrooms and get toadies to put their fingerprints on what they had no authority to order or do) and drag these scum into the sunlight and transparency of the very law they have clear contempt for. Go to higher levels of law enforcement to file formal criminal complaints if warranted without fear or favor to crimes at any level of law enforcement or justice or the judiciary, and promise them the same at even higher levels if they blow you off. “The truth is the truth even if no one believes it and a lie is a lie even if everyone believes it.”

    Other than that, and previous suggestions (social network analysis of preps) I do not know what more you can do other than what you are doing.

    Jim

  9. jimcraven10 says:

    Excuse me Bruce for my brain transposing your name and Bill’s. I get and deal with so many messages per day from all over the world as I run another site as well, so sometimes I simply cannot immediately respond to all messages.

  10. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, I fully understand. I am just beat down with the constant blocking me from the Court. The Corrupt Judges that will do anything to stop me from exposing the truth. I have never filed in the Wa. State Supreme ct. before , but Madsen and Carpenter are involved in this up to their ears as it is so I am at a point of no where to turn other than the Inspector General.

    Bruce Gambill

  11. jimcraven10 says:

    Bruce, the saying from Sir Walter Scott “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.” Applies to law enforcement and the courts as well. The more you bring to them, the more you bring that is hard evidence not merely rants and allegations, the more you expose what they have serially refused to even look at as well as their own culpability for crimes that subsequently occurred after their serial refusals to do their duty under law. That is the reason for 18 USC 4 and 73; crimes and criminals that go unexposed and not put away go on to do more crimes if not the crime of continuing cover-ups. Each who does corruption with the others becomes a potential weak link that can be used to take down the rest and the others know it. But just as I have never met you, there are others finding each other with the same stories, same preps, same networks, same tradecraft, same lies, same lawyers and AAGs, same corrupt cops, same AG and AAGs, same objectives and same vulnerabilities. Remember they hide-out in backrooms because they cannot stand sunlight, transparency or being questioned at lengthy filmed depositions or in courts with skilled interrogators trained in body language of deception. These are profoundly stupid as well as corrupt creatures; that is why they need political patronage and inbreeding for their jobs; they would have no chance under free and fair competition for their jobs. I have seen them up close and taken out of their backrooms they are not only vulnerable, but will rat each other out in a heartbeat. Friends and coworkers will expose themselves as either for real or as scabs, snitches, informers, frauds, poseurs, and management bootlickers as many of my former “colleagues” exposed themselves and as more will when faced with civil and criminal complaints that will no longer be ignored and are about to come.
    My mother used to have a mantra that keeps me going: “In this world there really is such a thing as evil that you will encounter and more often than not will win when you go up against it because evil wears many masks, evil can be seductive and alluring, evil has no limits to its ruthlessness whereas decent people do; you have to accept this to stay sane; but, but, sometimes, the only victory you will win is at least you did not succumb, you did not allow yourself to be bullied, bought, schmoozed or coopted; never regard such a victory as any small one as it is indeed the stuff and motive force of history–not self-proclaimed “extraordinary” persons doing self-proclaimed extraordinary things but rather ordinary people doing extraordinary things.”
    Jim

  12. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, as I mentioned earlier, the Pierce County Sheriff’s Dept. has refused 3 separate times to take a theft report from me concerning the theft of my personal possessions, vehicles, family heirlooms etc from my home. This was all Stolen by the corrupt criminal insider Edward C. & Denise L. Voss. Right in front of the sheriff’s face , as they had a Sheriff posted across the street from my home for 2 days after they executed this illegal wrongful eviction .

    Since the B.R. Court never provided me a new unbiased Judge or allowed me to start fresh after Judge Brian D. Lynch Recused himself from CASE No..11-49319. Even though Lynch Dismissed the case with prejudice, based on false accusations by the David M. Howe Trustee . The same false accusations that were already proven to be bogus by the B.R. Clerk and placed on Docket No.56 before Lynch used these false accusations to dismiss the case with Prejudice.

    Apparently the Prejudice thing must have just been for show, hoping that I did not know about the void Judgment Doctrine. Hoping that I did not know that once Lynch recuses himself from the case for bias(being the attorney for the mortgage Comp. in the beginning. With lynch getting the same written notice about the defrauding of my deed release, the theft of my money by the attorneys involved, the Superior Court not responding to my time & date Stamped motions for contempt & emergency motion notifying the Sup. Ct. of the fraud and the Felony Grand theft of my money by the Attorneys involved.

    That as a direct result I had been illegally forced into this unwanted and un needed filing of Bankruptcy )
    So Lynch had violated WSBA Rule 8.3 by not reporting this fraud to the WSBA and the Court. So he had probable cause for trying to do away with me & this case. To not only protect himself, but all of his fellow Bar member buddies in Both the Sup. Ct, the U.S. B.R. Ct and the U.S. Trustee, David M..Howe Trustee. Including the fraudulent WSBA and the Fraud Committing Lawyers Fund.

    But point being, according to the Void Judgment doctrine, all of Lynch’s prior Rulings and Orders become Null & Void. Also any other Rulings & orders produced from any other Court are also Null & Void.

    Especially Considering that the Superior Court did not have any jurisdiction, no legal right to rule or judge anything, nor did they have any right to auction my home at their fake auction that was never announced to the public.

    Compounded by the fact that the Sup. Ct. Clerks Office intentionally violated my right to a
    Jury, ignored my filed Jury demand, stole my money I have receipt for pre paying for the jury for that specific case, plus violated both State & Federal Statute that requires a Jury for all contested ReaL ESTATE CASES.

    So improper venue and fraud null & Voids all of that Sup. Ct. proceeding for writ of restitution, that was just a charade to criminally convert title to my home and prop.

    The sheriff’s dept . knew they were performing an illegal eviction of an innocent victim out of his own home and property via forcible entry, on fraudulently obtained With criminal INTENT , A NULL &VOID ORDER. So they refuse to take a theft report from me be cause they are the ones responsible for the theft.

    The sheriff sat and witnessed Voss and his Assoc. haul out truckloads of my belongings . Stealing everything I own right in front of the Corrupt Sheriff’s Face. So any theft report would mandate an investigation, which would mean they investigate themselves!

    So they Refuse to uphold the Law, refuse to uphold my rights, refuse to honor their sworn Oath Duty, involve themselves in RICO up to their necks and refuse to take a theft report so I can not even get relief from my own insurance Company without a theft report.

    I had on site pictures of everything, a complete list of the stolen articles, (over 300 items) all of which were missing from the movers inventory sheets. Which I also had with me to show the sheriff. Did not matter, they flat refused to look at anything or take a theft report.

    So any ideas? I know that I am just spinning my wheels going to Court in the State of Wash. anymore. The Ninth circuit is pro corruption and impossible to get justice from when it involves Judicial corruption, or any Government agency, Dept. etc. etc. Al 3 Branches of Government both State & Federal are so damn riddled with RICO Corruption, they have rendered themselves Defunct. So at this point, all one can expect and demand is better lies and excuses from them.

    • jimcraven10 says:

      Bruce,

      Please forgive the delay in response. I do understand what you have been through as well as the personality types you are dealing with. You have to find others who have suffered the same kinds of corruption by the same players (I have found some) and if you have to launch civil action and continue to file criminal complaints pro se in concert with others perhaps as class action. The truth is the truth even if no one believes it and a lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. Expose them, expose their methods and tradecraft, drag the players into the open to be named, find and expose their networks and cronyism and nepotism. I have been contacted by victims such as you from the exposure on this blog and they are the same players, same agencies of WA Govt, same networks, same tradecraft, same tactics of obstruction of justice, subornation of perjury, other crimes. I am very saddened as to what is happening to you and so many others in your situation.

  13. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, with your knowledge of the Law and the WSBA, are you familiar with the rules used in the Lawyers Fund to deny a claim to the Fund? Rules such as “out of the Jurisdiction of the Fund” Rule.

    Personally I do not think it even exists, other than within the corrupt and perverted mind set retained by the Executive Officials of the WSBA. Representing nothing more substantial or Official than merely a nice warm Official sounding block of warm air. But reeking with the scent of the Barnyard .

    A non specific totally bullshit manor in which to defraud claimants to the Lawyers Fund for Client Protection.

    What nerve, what downright Gaul to take a title that like and apply it to these Corrupt Creeps at the WSBA and the CJC.

    To think that you would be (as a victim) be Officially directed to these agencies, associations , commissions looking for corrective justice, relief, honest legal ethical services. Only to be defrauded, lied to, and treated worse than the Criminal Corrupt attorneys and Judges who brought you to these agencies , associations and commissions in the first place.

    Even though I confronted the Supreme Ct. Chief Justice, Clerk and Task force Agent for the WSBA, Ron Carpenter with all of the verifiable Official Documents that prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt. Defrauding me and my kids of justice, truth, and $288,712.36

    But the Chief and task force agent refuse to honor their Official Duty, like all of the Rest.

    Let me know about the Ol” out of the jurisdiction of the Fund Rule” please. If it is in print, it has to be in their “how to scam, sham , cheat , steal & Totally Defraud the already Defrauded, program success manual. Bruce.

  14. Bruce Gambill says:

    This might be off the beaten path here , but it most certainly seems to be the focus of Government & mainstream new as of late; “RACISM” Back in late 2008, early 2009 I was down in Houston Texas working with a friend of mine who had become just swamped with work after the big hurricane hit that area.
    My job was to go around and bid these multitude of roofing& construction repair jobs on commercial structures and public buildings.

    In the course of doing so, I had placed the winning bid on totally reroofing an all black church over by the University of Houston.

    While on that job, the congregation, the pastor and staff treated my crew and myself so good, bring us out treats to eat and cold drinks from their kitchen.
    One day the pastor , his head assistant and I were talking and the subject of “racism ” came into our conversation. I told them that the subject had always eluded me for some reason.
    I told the pastor that it seemed odd to me since we both believed in the same God, both had two arms and legs. Loved our parents, children, friends, breathed the same air, felt the heat of the same sun on our backs, each had the twinkle of life in our eyes,

    Combined with, during the seven days of the week, we both were always busy with something productive to focus our time & thoughts on.

    I had concluded that just imagine what a luxury it would be to have the necessary extra time on our hands. The “time” , to be able to realistically donate the necessary time it would require to do a first class job of hating each other , or our neighbors due to the different color of our skin.
    Therefore deducting from the facts, that this “Racism” must be in truth,just another activity reserved for the very wealthy & truly elite class. .

    That the vast majority of everyone else attempting to participate in it, clearly had no business in doing so. Obviously neglecting some other portion of their lives by this mis-appropriation of their time.

  15. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, I took your advise and tried to email you on your personal email, but never heard back from you. I tried to call the number you gave me, but no answer so I left a voice mail. But I never did receive a call back from you. I think this site has been hacked, I can barely get it to respond to type on it. Bruce Gambill

  16. jimcraven10 says:

    Bruce,

    I apologize but this is the first message I got. I got some messages from Bill and from Traci and Guy. I had a break-in in my house, I have had pros over to document it, they made some mistakes, but it has gone to certain circles in DC and will go further. Needless to say it was more than a message and some friends are helping me to sort it out. Obviously I cannot go to the locals neither cops nor FBI. So you can imagine what you would do. Also my health has suffered, I have severe neuropathy in my hands and it is hard to type plus the meds I am on for pain make it even more difficult. My email is omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com; it is of course under surveillance as I must assume my house is inside and outside. Traci and Guy suffered the same and the tradecraft was as sloppy in their case; just can’t get good thugs and toadies these days.

    take care,

    Jim

  17. Bruce Gambill says:

    Sorry to hear this Jim, I was concerned about if they had gotten to you. Needless to say, all of our efforts present a very serious thorn in their sides. Even with them being so willing to immediately violate what ever FRCP, Rights of ours, have some low life that’s on the owe to them perform break-ins so as to grab files, disc’s , computers etc. whatever would put a knot in your rope. Be careful Jim, they most certainly are not above setting people up with framed charges, arranging for an unfortunate accident, or some how you just disappeared. Just like the editor & chief of Mercury News down in Calif. when he was printing the truth about all of that cocaine that belonged to Clinton, Bush and the CIA. He all of a sudden accidently committed suicide some how. Last I heard, they still hadn’t officially determined the cause of death. So keep your eyes peeled my friend, because when this type get nervous, they get sloppy/reckless and know no matter how obvious something is, every cop and court presented with it suddenly can’t see any better than Ray Charles=RICO Bruce

  18. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, in regards to your suggestion that I find others that have been subjected to the same thing as I have, believe me, I have looked for years. I just cannot seem to locate anyone who has been screwed out of their good hard earned credit, career, all of their real estate assets , their own personal residence, had thousands upon thousands of dollars illegally extorted from them, had their own prized possessions stolen from them only to be held for cash only ransom extortion via the threat of total loss, had their family heirlooms all stolen, their family photo albums burnt in the same fire as the legal and business records they destroyed, had everything they owned right down to their socks and underwear stolen, all of their vehicles , boats trailers, their office building stolen, their place of busness/shop and all inventory and supplies stolen, had their children kidnapped by this criminal Organized crime syndicate that attempts to put themselves off to the public as the Washington State and Federal Judiciary.

    So I just don’t seem to have a whole lot in common with most of the victims of this severe criminal and civil judicial corruption, corruption within our Governors Office, our Senators and Congressmen all of which being the aiding and abetting enablers of this Organized Crime to continue wide open

    . So to hear that you had a break in does not really have me surprised. Did they leave the foundation?
    A person would think that the least they could do would be to post something like the following outside of all State and Federal Courts. Give me a call when your fingers feel up to it.
    Bruce

    ________________________________________________
    “WARNING!!”
    STEPPING THROUGH THESE DOORS, ENTERING ONE OF THESE COURT ROOMS, YOU RUN THE MORE THAN POSSIBLE RISK OF BEING SUBJECTED TO THE FOLLOWING BY VARIOUS OFFICIALS OF THE COURT OR SUSPENDED FROM PRACTICE ATTORNEYS, AS WE DO NOT PREVENT THEM FROM CONTINUING TO PRACTICE LAW HERE. YOU MAY BE DEFRAUDED, ILLEGALLY FORCED TO BANKRUPTCY, HAVING YOUR CREDIT, CAREER & LIFE DESTROYED. FURTHERMORE, HAVING YOUR CHILDREN, YOUR MONEY, ASSETS & YOUR HOME ILLEGALLY STRIPPED FROM YOU REMAINS A VERY HIGH PROBABILITY. —— YOU ARE HEREBY ADVISED TO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING YOU ARE TOLD BY ANY OF OUR JUDGES, PROSECUTORS, CLERKS OR VARIOUS OTHER EMPLOYEES. WHEREAS WE ONLY APPLY THE LAW AND THE RULES WHERE & WHEN WE WANT TO. MAKING SURE THAT IT SERVES US & NOT YOU. THERE IS NO AGENCY OR AUTHORITY THAT YOU CAN CALL, THAT WILL BE WILLING TO DO ANYTHING FOR YOU AT ALL.
    THIS NOTICE SHALL SERVE AS YOUR ONE AND ONLY REMINDER THAT IF YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE THIS POSTED WARNING & PROCEED, THE COURT, THE WSBA, THE STATE, NOR THE UNITED STATES ARE LIABLE IF YOU DO. SO BE AWARE, IF YOU CHOOSE TO DISREGARD THIS FAIR WARNING NOTICE, IT COULD END UP BEING, JUST TOO BAD FOR “YOU“. YOU HAVE BEEN OFFICIALLY NOTIFIED & WARNED FOR YOUR SAFETY & WELL BEING, AS REQUIRED BY LAW!!

    This is a PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM YOUR DEDICATED COUNTY, STATE & FEDERAL SERVICE PROVIDERS

  19. jimcraven10 says:

    Hi Bruce,

    I can see and feel some of the pain, suffering and injustice that you and so many others have suffered. But we have a chance this time, to expose and drag out into the sunlight, these backroom networks, local businesses, secret cabals, law firms, unions, politicians, trustees and regents, school board members, alumni associations, newspapers, Vancouver Police, Clark County Sheriff’s Office, local FBI, various subterranean creatures in various agencies of WA. State Government, some judges, prosecutors and others, and expose them one by one, by name and organization with hard evidence, from diverse sources, presented to law enforcement publicly, officially, in Washington, D.C. with full media coverage. It is also time to organize local information demonstrations outside of local FBI (who hide behind all sorts of security), VPD, the Mayor’s Office, the AG’s office, Clark County Sheriff’s office with hard evidence and information booths showing patterns of serial corruption, and aiding and abetting the criminal conduct of others.

    I remain within the Democratic Party to fight within as I have always done. Governor Inslee and the others will be seeing me again in depositions in civil action; meanwhile he is clearly unfit to be Governor and I will publish in a separate section, my exchanges with his committee, and their request, and evidence of criminal actions of others about which he not only did nothing, but actively suborned and facilitated perjury and other crimes after the fact as he had been sent clear evidence of perjury by Bob Knight, president of Clark College and his duty under law,18 USC 4 and 73, to report it. I will be doing the same with my exchanges with FBI going back to 1994;all my exchanges with VPD, the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, Washington Employment Security, the AGs, several of them, the Criminal Division of the Washington State Auditor’s Office, FBI Washington, DC, Washington Court of Appeals,Division II, Washington Education Association and National Education Association. Miller Nash Law Firm, Rotary, Masons, various other law firms, These will help others who have also suffered the same crimes from the same scum, by name, place, modus operandi, time periods etc.

    I have contacts out East that I will be going to see soon; they know all about this inbred cesspool, and so many little dumps like it all over America run by these backroom cabals, frightened old bald white men, silver-haired women and some younger minions, terrified of change, terrified of their nothing resumes along with their unfitness for the positions and how they got them being outed, terrified of “The Other”, but able to hold on to power so far because no one serious and connected took them on and/or if the they did, these creatures used public monies and resources to wear them down as they have tried to do to you, Bill, Tracy, Guy, me and so many others.

    Time to expose, rally support against and take out these smugly, proudly, cloistered, hidden real white trash and their networks of minions.

  20. Bruce Gambill says:

    Inslee is such a pathetic WSBA crony, so arrogant and over confident because of their RICO insurance policy being in place. In place primarily because of all the State Senators, Congressmen and U.S. Senators all being on the policy. A RICO insurance Policy where the Provider is the same as the Client, being one in the same. No weak links in the chain, able to break the chain and expose these criminal bastards. Knowing oh too well, that as soon as one of them is leaned on by authority that is not on their policy, that leaned on link will sing like a canary, just like any average street gang punk.

    As soon as one sings, the rest will follow trying to bargain their way out of being held accountable if they give up somebody else that is higher up than they are. The same pathetic criminal M.O.

    When the last Oregon Governor received his walking papers, I sent Inslee a message on Facebook that went like this; well Governor Inslee, it would appear that the people and Officials down in Oregon actually take ethic’s and integrity seriously. So much so that their Governor is looking for a new place to bunk. I wonder if you will be next to get the criminal corrupt boot?

    But with Washington State being the worst State in the Nation for actually Prosecuting Corruption Cases and producing convictions from that prosecution, being pretty much a zero, allergic to busting criminal corrupt Officials. Talk to anyone at the U.S. attorneys Office and they will flat tell you that no matter what these criminally corrupt Officials did , no matter what hard undeniable proof /evidence you have, they just are not gonna do it, They just don’t bust that move , let alone bust their fellow crime syndicate brothers and sisters.
    If you don’t leave them alone and insist on receiving fair , honest legal services, they will just call the U.S. Marshal and have a couple of these flunkies pay you a visit..
    A visit to tell you that they will not adhere to Dept. of Justice employee guidelines, nor will the U.S. Attorney, combined with the fact that the U.S. Attorney refuses to ever bust a fellow crime family member , now , in the future or ever. So they will tell you to go find something else to do with your time, or in so many words , they will arrange it for you. Betting the farm on the RICO Insurance Policy. Confident that there is not so much as one single federal Rep, or Wa. State Rep that will do even so much as 1 legitimate thing to assist one of their victims.

  21. Bruce Gambill says:

    Jim, do you still want my Wash. State Court of Appeals Div.II paperwork sent to your private email address?

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s