Evidence of Corruption in Clark County Sent to Governor Inslee per His Request



Dear Friends,

I will be publishing all of my submissions of evidence of corruption in Clark County sent to Governor Inslee per his own request and per the request of a member of his election committee prior to his election. I will let the readers conclude if he was given hard evidence (document files were attached always) that he has refused to report and act upon per his duty under 18 USC 4 Misprision of a Felony and 73 Obstruction of Justice, as well as dereliction of duty…

Here is all I ever get or got back in response:

I will be working actively against his re-election and Inslee will be named in civil litigation for a long list of torts and I believe crimes as wll


Next week in Vancouver with Governor Inslee

Dear James,

Thank you for your continued support of Governor Inslee! I am writing today to follow up on a message from the Governor, inviting you to join us for a garden party in Vancouver next Thursday at the home of Jane and Paul Jacobsen. We’d love to see you for a gathering of friends and an opportunity to discuss the Governor’s work in Olympia and our plans moving forward to 2016.

Please let me know if you have any questions or if you can join us!

Best regards,


Seamus McKeon

Jay Inslee for Washington

(206) 328-2969


Dear James,

With the long 2015 Legislative Session finally over, we have a great deal to be proud of. I hope you will join me in celebrating our accomplishments and help launch our reelection campaign. On Thursday, August 6, Jane and Paul Jacobsen are holding a party for me to discuss the successes from this legislative session and the major issues still facing our state and nation.

There is no doubt this session was tough, but after a long fight and three special sessions, we made important progress on critical issues facing our state. We fought for and secured $1.3 billion in new education funding – the largest additional investment ever. We are reducing class sizes in kindergarten through third grade, where it matters most; we secured funding for all day kindergarten; and we will make a historic investment in early childhood education.

We are also reducing tuition at all public colleges and universities in our state and making a 16-year, $16 billion investment in transportation which will create tens of thousands of jobs and begin to fix the gridlock that has been paralyzing our communities.

This budget agreement is important to the future prosperity and success of our great state.

But there is still more work to be done, and I can’t do it without you. The Republicans blocked us on many key issues; it’s more important now than ever to keep up the fight. I hope you can join me to celebrate our accomplishments and discuss our strategies to keep Washington moving forward:

Garden Party for Governor Inslee

Thursday, August 6 from 5:30 to 7:00 PM

At the home of Jane and Paul Jacobsen

703 E Reserve St. | Vancouver, Washington

$1000 Co-Host, $500 Sponsor, $250 Friend, $100 Guest

RSVP to Seamus McKeon | seamus@JayInslee.com | (206) 328-2969


Thank you for all that you do to help keep Washington State a great place to live, work, learn, and raise a family.

Very truly yours,

Jay Inslee


Corruption in McKenna’s AG Office

Corruption is rampant in AG’s office see attached also see https://jimcraven10.wordpress.com see files on Clark College and attempts to report corruption obstructed including by McKenna and various law enforcement.

Jim Craven presently in China

From a letter and sworn testimony of Emma Kim formerly of Clark College HR

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

For Jay Inslee eyes only AG McKenna Corruption FW: URGENT eyes only  For Head Judge WAC Div II Case No 49255-I-II
To: coa2filings@courts.wa.gov; dionnep@atg.wa.gov
Subject: URGENT eyes only For Head Judge WAC Div II Case No 49255-I-II
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 13:38:14 -0700

Dear Your Honor:

I am in China and had a heart attack again, here, will return Sept 1 and try best to meet 9-11 deadline for correction of defects of brief. Please read all do something about ESD garnishee of bank account of my daughther’s mother and daughter that had my name but no association on it.
Also my credit rating damaged. They are worried here I may not make it back to US alive thus this letter in case I don’t, This  is contempt for your Court as well. No need to cover-up or deny due process in a clean case only dirty one. The complete record of this case is in the hands of friends in case I do not make it. Please see pp 60-66 CR Pomeroy. Do we execute people with appeals pending? I beg you not for me but for my family, My wife is 8 months pregnant and I may not see my new child. As an Officer of the Court, member of Bar and human being do something whatever you think of the merits of my case this is a separate issue but related.

I swear under penalty of perjury all statements true  and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and that this is sent to ESD Counsel.

James Craven
Appellant pro se


can’t speak on phone or email.

Jin Chun Yuan hotel 212 at Tsinghua gravely ill family under attack at home by feds and others. had serious heart problem they did not want to let me out of hospital.



Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 21:56:51 +0800
From: chiefeditor@m4.com.cn
To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
Subject: Re:URGENT Prof. Chung The 4th Media

Prof. Craven,

Where are you?

Which hotel are you in?

I’ll stop by tomorrow morning.

Can you call me?

Hope you can survive this time, too!

Prof. Chung

—– Original Message —–
From:James Craven <omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com>
Send time:12-08-29 18:33:21
To: Chief Editor 4th media <chiefeditor@m4.com.cn>
Subject: URGENT Prof. Chung The 4th Media

Dear Prof Chung,

Just got out of hospital very serious heart condition. Leave Saturday they are worried I will not make it. need to speak to you privately. Will interview before I leave. Room 212 same place

Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:52:03 +0800
From: chiefeditor@m4.com.cosn
To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Prof. Chung The 4th Media

Dear Prof. Craven,

Hope your conference was a wonderful, productive, and successful one!

Also I do hope you were able to recover from the jet lag last week.

Again I sincerely apologize none of us were able to join your conference last weekend!

When the conference organizers are ready to share with the outside, and if allowed, it’d be great if we could get speech manuscripts, presentations, and papers, etc.

As agreed before, before your return back to States, let me know when it’d be most convenient for you to come over to have an Interview with The 4th Media.

Your papers will be continually posted accordingly.

Deep gratitude to the struggles and work you’ve been endlessly waging throughout your life!

In deep respect and undeterred solidarity with your peoples’ justified struggles for self-determinations and liberation,


Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:24:49 -0700
From: annfl@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: URGENT Chief Judge WAC Div II eyes only Case No 42955-I-II
To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com

The sad thing is that Christina is about to pay for tuition and books on Tuesday. Thanks for helping.

From: James Craven <omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com>
To: Court Filings Division II WCA <coa2filings@courts.wa.gov>; Dionne Padilla-Huddleston <dionnep@atg.wa.gov>; Laura Loughlin <laura.laughlin@ic.fbi.gov>; Ann Florindo <annfl@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 6:38 AM
Subject: URGENT Chief Judge WAC Div II eyes only Case No 42955-I-II

.ExternalClass #ecxyiv846952219 .ecxyiv846952219hmmessage P { padding:0px; } .ExternalClass #ecxyiv846952219 body.ecxyiv846952219hmmessage { font-size:10pt; font-family:Tahoma; }

For Chief Judge WAC Div II:

Dear Your Honor:

I just got this note from my daughter’s mother. Please examine my motions and documentation on ESD machinations. This is 18 USC Parts 241 and 242 and now they are after innocents. I am in China and will return asap. How can there be a court order that I know nothing about?
This will also go to the media as this is pure evil using government to do it. I am a whistleblower against corruption this shows a nerve hit.

James Craven
Appellant pro se

—– Forwarded Message —-
From: Ann Florindo <annfl@yahoo.com>
To: Omahkohkiaayo_ipoyi <omahkohkiaayo@yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: So Angry2955-

ESD garnished my bank account because your name was on it. They took all the money Christina and I had. I think it was a court order.


From: Omahkohkiaayo_ipoyi <omahkohkiaayo@yahoo.com>
To: Ann Florindo <annfl@yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: So Angry

I have no idea what you are talking about or what I had to do with it. I am in China now and have had to deal with ESD on other issues maybe this is reprisal of some form.

From: Ann Florindo <annfl@yahoo.com>
To: Jim Craven <omahkohkiaayo@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 10:30 AM
Subject: So Angry

Hey, you!  the employment security department has just wiped out my entire account because of you, . They did this just because your name just happened to be on it. I hope you are f–cking happy now.

From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.comy
To: fredawjf@yahoo.com.cnuse is
Subject: FW: EXTREMELY URGENT .for Dave, Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 04:39:41 -0700

From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
To: ptrause@esd.wa.gov
Subject: FW: EXTREMELY URGENT for Dave, Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 15:26:18 -070

From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
To: bpcunit@esd.wa.gov; lookinghawk@hotmail.com; john.horch@clark.wa.gov; shettinger@esd.wa.gov
Subject: FW: EXTREMELY URGENT for Dave, Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 14:14:37 -0700

Dear Dave,

I’ll try this with you again as your supervisor Ms Nobel appears to have a problem with answering requests for answers to assertions and requests for her supervisor to look at all of this. Even after sending money I do not have, $150 per month, you finally wound up determining after seeing my financial state, but without doing so previously when demanding some $740 per month, even while I have an appeal still pending in Division II of the Washington Court of Appeals, and now I get more bills with the previous asserted amount owed not even reset and you continue to charge interest when I was never even accused let alone found to have committed any forms of fraud and misrepresentation in my original application for ESD benefits, so this will go on and on until this is looked at. How, if I prevail at Division II in my appeal, can I be made whole while you demand payment of alleged overpayments that are still the subject of an allowed appeal–an appeal that would not have been allowed were it patently frivolous.   Further I sent a copy of the transcript where it says when I raised this issue with Judge Pomeroy about repayment with an appeal pending and it says right in it that she is not ordered immediate repayment and Ms Nobel refuses to supply the written order for repayment and refuses to supply the name of the person that Anita says she spoke to about my case and is putting on the pressure to force me to repay with an appeal pending.

Please send this to the supervisor of Ms Nobel as well as a copy of this to her. These attempts at bullying, serial denials of my basic Constitutional rights and threats to my credit rating will not pass without response. My allegations involve corruption in government including in the AG’s office and this continual harassment and not even resetting the past amount owed when I complied with your demands with no written authorization or authority of a debt at this time provided by you even after repeated requests.

Please pass this on to Ms Hettinger and also to her supervisor and this will also go to law enforcement as someone by Anita’s own account is pulling strings and does not want my appeal and my own allegations to be examined as past outright fraud upon the Court of Judge Pomeroy and others may well be discovered and taken further to other venues. Please read the last pages of the attached court transcript on the issue of immediate repayment while having an accepted appeal pending. Please see  latest bill with no corrections or reset even on past amounts asserted to be owed.

I have had serious medical issues that have been documented to you and to the court and have had to operate pro se against forces arrayed by elements with the resources of State government. Please address these issues and please forward this to Ms Hettinger and to her supervisor as this will not end and will go public that in America one can have final discipline assessed with appeals still pending.

James Craven

From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
To: nnoble@esd.wa.gov; lookinghawk@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: EXTREMELY URGENT for Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:56:13 -0700

.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P { padding:0px; } .ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage { font-size:10pt; font-family:Tahoma; }

Dear Ms Nobel:

I asked that my letter be forwarded to your immediate supervisor. You, like me are a public employee and thus accountable in ways that private-sector employees are not  which is why we have Constitutional rights that private-sector employees do not because we have legal responsibilities they do not.

Again I respectfully refer you to my resume which was not sent to you for employment purposes as I am employed. It should tell you that I can spot evasion and distraction and it just makes me wonder more and more what is going on. At one time I taught Business Law so I can tell you that as a matter of both tort law and criminal law, I am obliged to attempt to mitigate damages when I have a good-faith basis to believe that they are being generated and that my basic rights are being compromised and tangible damages are occurring. That is what I have tried to do. I asked you politely to forward my correspondence, along with the file that shows the totality of all exchanges, to your immediate supervisor. Now eventually this exchange will also be forwarded and will be the subject of inquiry at another time in another venue. You have the transcript of the court session with Judge Pomeroy. You have my requests for the name of the person in your Seattle office to whom Anita referred as having had a conversation about my case and his or her alleged take on what was determined and what I am alleged to be guilty of (and that I too should know  what I am guilty of and thus why I must pay according to Anita). You have your own words played back to you with respect to $150 or what I can afford per month. But you still refuse to get the main point that I have had nothing to do with the timing of  the charges or how long it has taken to get to court. I never committed fraud in any form, never, unlike the president of Clark College Bob Knight, committed perjury in the ESD hearing according to the sworn and unrebutted and cross-examined testimonies of Dr. Marcia Roi and Ms Lynn Davidson and no one has ever alleged fraud on my part or any influence whatsoever on ESD and its decision to grant me unemployment benefits. But I have the statements of Anita that someone high up is interested in my case and is pulling some strings from the shadows but that you appear very determined to divert my attention from. The fact is that I am getting pressures from other fronts also designed to keep me and my family off guard and financially destitute because they know there is no way out as the perjury of the president is on tape, in an official ESD hearing and there is additional evidence of other felonies that go hand and hand with perjury or any form of filing a false  report (including orally on the phone) by a public employee while on duty and there is additional evidence to support more than a he said versus they said situation.

Now let me leave you with a thought and I urge you to seek advice from your legal counsel. If I am correct in my allegations, that I am a subject of a conspiracy since 1994 to remove me from employment from Clark College as I am a whistle blower (against a faculty member who bragged to me about collecting and disseminating child pornography–see the Watson file sent to you previously) and that you and your colleagues are being used as unwitting instruments in this ongoing campaign, and have refused to do due diligence and have legal support for your own actions that are denying my basic Constitutional rights and without legal authority. well in conspiracy law it works  like this: two or more persons forming a common plan to pursue objectives or engage in activities that are illegal or that they should know are illegal, if undertaking at least one material and affirmative step in furtherance of the common plan are guilty of conspiracy against rights as well as conspiracy to engage in specific crimes, and, each shares guilt for all the actions of all the participants of the common plan even if they were not explicitly aware of what was being done in their name or in furtherance of the common plan. Further, if this common plan is ongoing, and there are common links between the past and present, where some have left the common plan while others carry it on, then the period before the statute of limitations takes effect, does not begin with the completion of the common plan but with the termination of attempts to meet the objectives of the plan and thus those presently involved in conspiracy against rights or some other form, may wind up in shared culpability for the previous acts of those they have never even met.

I have done my best to lay out my position, provide evidentiary support for it. I have asked that you route this to your immediate supervisor and to receive a response to this and my  file of all of my interactions with all of you from your immediate supervisor and again you hand me back some quotation that means nothing in the context we are discussing and given the actual court transcript and my discussion of these issues with the judge. You have the fact that I am being charged interest as if I am guilty of fraud and misrepresentation in my application for ESD benefits and/or that I am late on payments established with written and legal authority  as well as agreed upon and you refuse to answer on that issue that it defames me as well as imposes a hardship and outright abridges my civil rights.

So now this goes to law enforcement and I will be going to Olympia personally to find  out who your supervisor is and have a little chat about the law on the duties and responsibilities of public employees. This  will also be sent to media, to the AG’s office and elsewhere because you are causing real hardship on me and my family and I am done trying to deal with your shifting and contradictory positions about which you will be asked in exquisite detail  and under oath and a deposition at another time and venue.

I apologize for wasting your time with concrete reason, evidence, law and basic logic for my arguments and request for simple transparency,  accountability and ability to explain and defend your shifting positions with law, evidence and reason rather than summary, evasive, contradictory and rather autocratic responses that go nowhere except that you feel you are somehow unaccountable to giving a simple explanation of how someone can be given final punishment while accepted appeals are pending and if it turns out that the court finds for me, how do you simply  repay, even with interest, the sums lost at a time when I were deliberately made destitute in order to divert me and the law from bringing a perjurer and his accomplices including in  other felonies  to the law. I do not know if you have ever had an economics course, but I am also a  court-qualified expert witness in King County Superior Court and I can tell you that we cannot really measure the opportunity costs, the lost valuje of lost opportunities that could have been gained with that money taken while appeals were still pending. This also needs to go to the media maybe next we will start executing death row inmates while their appeals are pending and if it turns out they were innocent, like 13 out of 127 inmates on death row in Illinois let off, one 45 minutes prior to execution, then we can just tell their families we are sorry about that and give them some kind of settlement for their lost loved one.

This was part of testimony sworn under oath in two trials, subject twice to cross-examination with no rebuttal, and also being investigated by law enforcement: This is my last good-faith attempt to warn you of current and impending damages and an attempt to mitigate them for me as well as for you:

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.)

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.

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.


Professor James Craven has been a tenured Professor of Economics at Clark College since September 1992. He is featured in multiple academic versions of Marquis “Who’s Who in: the World; America; the West; Science and Engineering; Finance and Industry; American Education and has been nominated as Weilun Visiting Professor of Economics at Tsinghua University in Bejing, the MIT of China (only four given each year in the world) three times. Mr. Craven has served as a visiting professor in China on four occasions, and recently was asked to join the Editorial Board of a journal of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Mr. Craven has served as the Clark College Business Division Chair from 2001-2009, was a member of the AHE Senate for over seven years, and served on multiple academic committees. Mr. Craven volunteered as the Faculty Sponsor for the Native American Student Association and the Veteran’s Club. Mr. Craven is a traditionally enrolled Blackfoot Indian, from the Apatohsipipiikani (Northern Peigan ) Blackfoot Band in Alberta, has served as a tribal judge, and is published in aboriginal law. Mr. Craven is a Vietnam-era veteran of the US Army from 1963-1966.

On October 15, 2007, Mr. Craven attended an “Open President’s Dialogue.” Mr. Craven asked a question of President Bob Knight, who angrily shouted him down, effectively silencing the audience for the remainder of the forum. Jennifer Wheeler, former President of the Classified WPEA union attended the forum, and testified she took verbatim notes, which she provided to Mr. Craven and his union.

On Friday, November 9, 2007 AHE President, Dr. Marcia Roi and UniServ Director Lynn Davidson met with President Knight and Vice President of Instruction, Rassoul Dastmozd, for a labor management meeting in his office. While in this meeting AHE President Roi, 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. This testimony, by Dr. Marcia Roi and Ms. Lynn Davidson, sworn under penalty of perjury, directly and irreconcilably contradicted the sworn testimony of President Knight during the previous hearing before ALJ Knutson, that he never made such a statement and that, when asked twice, in two different meetings,  about if he had made such a statement,  he not only denied having made the statement, he also claimed that he had only refused to answer and affirm or deny the statement (meetings were taped), in two separate meetings, because he was there to ask not answer questions.

2007, 2008, 2009 were difficult years for Professor Craven on the Clark College Campus, as the College began “piling on” discipline in an attempt to get rid of him. During this time frame, Mr. Craven served as a visiting Professor in China on three occasions and was also on medical leave for great durations due to recovery from one possibly two heart attacks. [Comment J Craven: Please note during this time, while on sick leave, I was given a summary reprimand for posting on the message list, where people advertise their cats etc, with no rhetorical comments, a list of statutes—federal and rcws—relevant for public employees (the same list the Dean praised me for giving him and a same list posted three  times previously on the same message  list with no comments or sanctions); then given 7 days off without pay, no Laudermill Hearing, no Stage I and II appeals per the Clark College-AHE contract, thus no opportunity for arbitration self or otherwise financed,  and no opportunity to create a record for future venues. This was followed by 8 days off without pay and again,  no Laudermill Hearing, no Stage I and II appeals and thus no possibility to go to arbitration or create a record for future venues. The union was basically first assured of delayed timelines for grievances while I was on medical leave and then was summarily played on delayed timelines that were suddenly and unexplicably dropped with no challenge from the union, resulting not only in my punishment without due process, and while lower levels of discipline had not been imposed without the allowed appeals that I never waived, my discipline was then timed and imposed to commence the first week of my return to teaching (two separate quarters) which was then used a pretext to take my classes and assign them to adjuncts who had been hired unvetted by anyone qualified to vet them for competence and skill in teaching economics. This cost more loss of pay as I was scheduled to teach overload and this also deprived the students of the teacher for whom they had signed up. This again speaks to the levels of animus and malice driving those who have charged me and engineered accelerated progressive discipline aimed at the object to “get rid of professor Craven”].

Mr. Craven suffered a heart attack and from September 2008, and was on medical leave until April, 2009. While on leave, Ted Kotsakis, Dean of Business and Technology, initiated a Division Chair election to remove Professor Craven from the position of Division Chair, which he had held since 2001 and which he was not due to leave until September 2009.

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (Article III. Personnel, I.) Division Chairs provides clear and unambiguous language delineating the process by which a Division Chair is elected. Mr. Kotsakis, contrary to the Collective Bargaining Agreement, inserted himself in the Division Chair election process which resulted in Mr. Craven losing the Division Chair position, wages, and associated benefits. As a result, Professor Adnan Hamideh was elected Division Chair. ..
Please forward this to your immediate supervisor as it is in your interest to do so as this will go to other venues.


James Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii
From: NNoble@ESD.WA.GOV
To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: EXTREMELY URGENT for Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 22:58:02 +0000

Dear Mr. Craven:

The benefit overpayment became a final debt due when the appeal period passed.  Please review your determination letter to find that date.

We recover the benefit overpayment by law of RCW 50.20.190.

Again, I wish you good luck in pursuing your issues.


Nancy A. Noble, Manager
Employment Security Department
Benefit Payment Control
(360) 902-9787
(360) 902-9265 Fax
(866) 697-4831 Toll Free

From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 3:24 PM
To: Noble, Nancy A. (ESD); Dean Lookinghawk
Subject: RE: EXTREMELY URGENT for Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829

Dear Ms Nobel:

This is about law, about due process, about process that is due as a matter of law and the U.S. Constitution and not my personal feelings about whether I was justly or unjustly required to pay. We do not in this country, especially in government employment, assess final punishment while appeals are pending because one can never be “made whole” (the mandate of law) if the punishment is assessed first only to be reversed when someone’s innocence is finally established on appeal which often happens. I have simply asked for the written authorization that you must have in order to take the actions you have  taken (that a legal debt exists and the order to repay is legal along with the terms of repayment are legal and founded on facts and not malice or reprisal or pretexts) and I have not simply asserted, but have given court transcripts and other documentation that Judge Pomeroy was explicitly asked about this and you have her response that any order for repayment would be suspended in the event of annly  accepted appeal. You continually refused to address any of my arguments and supporting evidence with simple non-recogntion, non-acknowledgement and non-response to legitimate questions.

So I’ll just try one more time. Please do not write me back and do this dance over and over; I got it who you are, what you are arguing or asserting and we will examine your take versus mine in future venues where all of the basic due process for which you appear to have considerable contempt you will no doubt demand and will be accorded with me as your most forceful advocate.  You will get a subpoena in due course and your name will be added personally to the list of those named in a civil suit for civil conspiracy against rights. But all I need from you, since you control the addresses, phone numbers and emailaddresses of your direct supervisors, just as I am liable to greivances from students and members of the public as I am a public employee, so are you as you are not working in some boiler room with the ususal types that are attracted to and do well in collections, you are a state employee and even a supervisor. So wel will test your notion of what constitutes legal authority to engage in the kinds of threats and harassment and tampering with my credit rating without any notion of legally mandated transparency and accountability. I have laid out my requests and given legal citations and texts to support them, their relevance and my right to pose and have answers to the questions posed. The 118 pages of documents to which you refer and to which I have referred over and over, document with sworn testimonies that I had no prior knowledge of and influence on, that I am a victim of serial reprisals against a whistleblower; reprisals that included members of the AG’s office keeping a secret file and aiding and abetting serial violations of my basic Constitutional rights, which is why I have asked for the name of the higher up in your Seattle office to whom Anita referred as the source of a denial of exemption from immediate repayment and presumably the order to charge me interest as if I am also (to plant the notion on the public record) guilty of misrepresentation and fraud in my original application for ESD benefits (an outright lie never once alleged by anyone) or that I was ever charged with gross misconduct–only in the assertions and piling on with apparent false testimony, provable misrepresentations and apparent outright fraud against the  court of the AG’s Counsel and not even by Clark College.

Please send this to your immediate supervisor and his or her immediate supervisor and please let me hear from them not you as I requested below. I do not wish to cause you more headaches or do this dance with you simply ignoring what you cannot or will not even acknlowledge let  alone answer. But I am sure that if you are found liable in the future for serial breaches of my civil and human rights and rights to due process, or perhaps as an unwitting or even knowing accomplice to a broader conspiracy against rights, and if you are assessed civil damages or even found criminally liable, you will no doubt appeal, you will no doubt feel you have been wrongly convicted, you will no doubt demand that all your due process and legal rights be respected, you will no doubt appeal if  found guilty, and most of all, you will not be asked to pay, nor will you likely agree to pay damages while  appeals are pending. That is the issue: not you, not me, not  anyone including your Ms or Ms Big whispering in your ear and that of Anita and the others with whom I have corresponded are above the law or determinative of my or anyone else’s basic civil and Constitutional rights.

The old saying by Sir Walter Scott is so true: “Oh what a tangled web we weave,  when first we practice to deceive.” Just as each lie requires a bodyguard of more  lies to cover the first ones, so it is with serial denials of due process or any forms of deception; deception only begets more of the same until, like a knitted sweater or shawl, someone finds and pulls on the anchor string and, the whole fabric of interwoven deception, like knitted the sweater or shawl, comes unraveled. This is what is happening here I believe because those who have a righteous case and have the law on their side, and who fear no transparency, investigation or accountability, need no forms of disingenuosness,  lying, contradictory assertions, backroom intrigue, refusals to address issues raised and the like. Those who are innocent and/or have innocent intentions and agenda do not fear going to paper, do not fear transparency and accountability, they do not fear appeals and review, and they do not fear making their assumptions and assertions clear and open to rebuttal.

Please pass this on to your immediate supervisor and please have him or her respond to this and the files I sent including all of our exchangs, because this will be going to other agencies of the Government both State and Federal as it is my sincere belief, for which I have given evidence and asked for rebuttal and correction over and over, and no substantive response has been given by you or the others with whom I have corresponded, and since a review of my resume should convince you that I do know from some very dangerous work experience what conspiracies against rights look like and  how they are documented and eventually broken up, this should be enough to convince  you that I am neither frivolous nor do I bluff when it comes to knowing something about the law and how to assert my rights within the law.

Thank you for your consideration and for passing this on to your supervisors from whom I expect at least an acknowledgment of this note and the files that have been sent to you. I apologize for disturbing your workload with my responses but unlike you, I give my responses in detail,I provide supporting evidence and law to support my beliefs, I ask for rebuttal, and all of my errors are unintended and bring sincere public apologies far more public than my errors.

Thank you for your consideration of and response to this request. What you call my “rehashing” I prefer to call repeating and highlighting for the written record for future venues, your continual refusal to even acknowlege let alone respond  to, my  questions and understanding of the issues, refusal to provide written legal authority for your own assertions, refusal to provide a narrative of WRITTEN, SIGNED and LEGALLY SOURCED findings on immediate repayment with by whom and when,  and refusal to even provide authority  for why my inquiries do not legally deserve a response. As someone who has worked undercover under various dangerous condtions, I find that what people serially refuse to acknowledge and respond  to and asked politely, is often very revealing and a good guide of where to dig deeper in assessing backgrounds, agenda, associations and motives in other venues.


James M. Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii

From: NNoble@ESD.WA.GOV
To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: EXTREMELY URGENT for Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 17:57:47 +0000

Dear Mr. Craven:

I can understand you are frustrated that you are being required to repay the overpayment that you disagree with.  Rehashing all of it within each correspondence isn’t solving anything though.  You will obviously do whatever you feel is necessary.  If you have new information to consider about repayment that hasn’t already been covered in the 118 pages of documentation, we will be more than happy to consider it.  If there is nothing new for consideration on the repayment topic we will file your correspondence without a response.

Good luck with your appeal.


Nancy A. Noble, Manager
Employment Security Department
Benefit Payment Control
(360) 902-9265 Fax
(866) 697-4831 Toll Free

From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 10:07 AM
To: Noble, Nancy A. (ESD); John Horch
Subject: RE: EXTREMELY URGENT for Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829

Dear Ms Noble:

I have asked over and over for the written order, signed, dated, that you must have to acertain that I have a debt that is owed, how much is owed, terms for repayment negotiated and that it is to be paid immediately even as I have an accepted appeal in Division II of the WCA, even as I have sent you a transcipt of the trial and the issue of repayment raised with Judge Pomeroy and that she did not order immediate repayment, even I have sent you evidence of my financial status and inability to pay as I am off work without pay for one year, even as I have sent you evidence that I have never committed nor even was alleged to have committed fraud or misrepresentation in my original application for ESD benefits granted by ESD on the basis of 118 pages of documents that still stand unrebutted, and despite the fact that in this county we do not demand and carry out punishment with appeals pending. And I specifically asked for the names of the supervisor to whom you report directly, and the name of the person to whom that person reports directly and I have asked for the name of the person in your Seattle office who discussed his or her take with Anita and to whom she referred. All of these requests are within my rights and your duty as a public employee to perform. I also noted that my response was also a formal grievance to be forwarded to your immediate supervisors. I can and will send another and I also plan to have a direct chat with your supervisor and my attorney on the issue of the documentation and anwers to my questions that you continually refuse to provide or even acknowleged having been asked for.

So this will go to law enforcement with a specific criminal complaint against you ( see below: Conspiracy Against Rights, Conspiracy RCW, Filing a False Report by a Public Employee, Misconduct of a Public Employee, Dereliction of Duty by a Public Employee), and I suspect after a lengthy deposition under oath and penalty of perjury with you there will be more because there is no need to cover-up what is clean only what is dirty just as there is no need to continue to refuse to answer questions to which I have every right to and that you have a duty under law to provide an answer unless something is dirty or you cannot answer;  and of course in any litigation you will be named personally because this now appears to go beyond normal dereliction of duty to some personal animus manifested in the disingenousness and content of some of your reponses and non-responses. I have tried every way possible to alert you to my take on the law, to provide concrete evidence (trial transcipt) that the judge did not order immediate repayment, and to mitigate the damages that you are giving aid and comfort to with your own demands and refusal to provide the transparency, accountability and legal authority in writing for.

The fact is that due process is mandated by the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution which is the supreme law of the law. Due process means process that it due, as in mandated to be due, not as a matter of your personal whims and proclivities but as a matter of law and rights which are not privileges and are not granted by law and lawmakers but recognized and protected by law. We do not execute people with appeals pending because one cannot unring a bell or undo punishment and its effects that have not been fully considered and established as warranted through review at all allowable levels including those of appeals. To force me to repay while a serious appeal is pending, with no concern even for ability to pay in your original demands that were not even negotiated and then on top of it to demand interest payments that mean I have either committed fraud and misrepresentation and/or am late in my payments by more than two payments, is defamatory on its face. I sent you my resume

So please, I do not need to hear from you again; you have made it clear that what you cannot answer you even refuse to even acknowledge having been asked so please,  I just want to hear from your immediate supervisor which I expect my last submissions and supporting evidence (I have only your threats and summary assertions that I have a legal obligation to pay now with an appeal pending and to pay interest on top of it) and please have him or her respond to this message so I know that it has been reviewed by someone above your level. Since you appear to have contempt for the law and the U.S. Constitution, I will endeavor bring them to you and to your attention in ways that will be instructive I am sure. This is being sent to both Washington State Patrol that governs criminal complaints against Washington State Government and to FBI as Conspiracy Against Rights is a Federal crime.

Below are some of the statutes that I believe that you and this person alluded to by Anita may be in breach of and thatg I will request to be investigated as part of a criminal complaint. I have given concrete and still unaddressed and unrfebutted evidence for my positions and you have given nothing but threats to back up tour own demands. Now we take it to law enforcement and to the courts because we are a nation run by laws not some bill collectors who think they are somehow above or not accountable for their own demands and responsiblities as public employees.

Finally your statement was that I was to send $150 or whatever I am able to send. I expect the last statement to be corrected as to minimum monthly payment due, past interest charged and that you keep your own word in writing as to my obligation in your view for monthly payments.
I see nothing more in your email to respond to. Please pay $150.00 per month until your appeal is resolved. If you disagree with that payment amount please provide the amount you feel you can pay monthly until your appeal hearing.

James M. Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii
Professor of Economics and Geography, Head, Department of Economics,
18 USC § 241 – Conspiracy against rights

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.


RCW 9A.28.040

Criminal conspiracy.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal conspiracy when, with intent that conduct constituting a crime be performed, he or she agrees with one or more persons to engage in or cause the performance of such conduct, and any one of them takes a substantial step in pursuance of such agreement.

(2) It shall not be a defense to criminal conspiracy that the person or persons with whom the accused is alleged to have conspired:

(a) Has not been prosecuted or convicted; or

(b) Has been convicted of a different offense; or

(c) Is not amenable to justice; or

(d) Has been acquitted; or

(e) Lacked the capacity to commit an offense; or

(f) Is a law enforcement officer or other government agent who did not intend that a crime be committed.

(3) Criminal conspiracy is a:

(a) Class A felony when an object of the conspiratorial agreement is murder in the first degree;

(b) Class B felony when an object of the conspiratorial agreement is a class A felony other than murder in the first degree;

(c) Class C felony when an object of the conspiratorial agreement is a class B felony;

(d) Gross misdemeanor when an object of the conspiratorial agreement is a class C felony;

(e) Misdemeanor when an object of the conspiratorial agreement is a gross misdemeanor or misdemeanor.

[1997 c 17 § 1; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.28.040.]


RCW 69.50.407


Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this chapter is punishable by imprisonment or fine or both which may not exceed the maximum punishment prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.

[1971 ex.s. c 308 § 69.50.407.]


RCW 10.14.190

Constitutional 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.]

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 or she intentionally commits an unauthorized act under color of law; or

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

(2) Official misconduct is a gross misdemeanor.

[2011 c 336 § 408; 1975-’76 2nd ex.s. c 38 § 17; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 §9A.80.010 .]


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.

Public Officers And Agencies – Chapter 42.40 State Employee Whistleblower Protection

Legal Research Home >

  • 42.40.010 Policy
    It is the policy of the legislature that employees should be encouraged to disclose, to the extent not expressly prohibited by law, improper governmental actions, …
  • 42.40.020 Definitions
    As used in this chapter, the terms defined in this section shall have the meanings indicated unless the context clearly requires otherwise. (1) “Auditor” means …
  • 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, …
  • 42.40.035 Duty of correctness — Penalties for false information
    An employee must make a reasonable attempt to ascertain the correctness of the information furnished and may be subject to disciplinary actions, including, but not …
  • 42.40.040 Report of improper governmental action — Investigations and reports by auditor, agency
    (1)(a) In order to be investigated, an assertion of improper governmental action must be provided to the auditor or other public official within one year …
  • 42.40.050 Retaliatory action against whistleblower — Remedies
    (1)(a) 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 …
  • 42.40.070 Summary of chapter available to employees
    A written summary of this chapter and procedures for reporting improper governmental actions established by the auditor’s office shall be made available by each department …
  • 42.40.080 Contracting for assistance
    The auditor has the authority to contract for any assistance necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter.[1999 c 361 § 4.] …
  • 42.40.090 Administrative costs
    The cost of administering this chapter is funded through the auditing services revolving
    account created in RCW 43.09.410.[1999 c 361 § 5.] …
  • 42.40.100 Assertions against auditor
    A whistleblower wishing to provide information under this chapter regarding asserted improper governmental action against the state auditor or an employee of that office shall …
  • 42.40.110 Performance audit
    The office of
    financial management shall contract for a performance audit of the state employee whistleblower program on a cycle to be determined by the …
  • 42.40.900 Severability — 1982 c 208
    If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application …
  • 42.40.901 Severability — 2008 c 266
    If any provision of this act or its
    application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application …
  • 42.40.910 Application of chapter
    Chapter 266, Laws of 2008 and chapter 361, Laws of 1999 do not affect the jurisdiction of the legislative ethics board, the executive ethics board, …

Last modified: April 7, 2009

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.]


RCW 42.20.100

Failure 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.]


Official misconduct by public servant: RCW 9A.80.010.


From: NNoble@ESD.WA.GOV
To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: EXTREMELY URGENT for Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 22:11:11 +0000

Dear Mr. Craven:

Thank you for your continued payments of $150.00.  The attachment is your receipt for your payment.   Interest continues to accrue on the balance of your overpayment until it is current or paid in full.  If the appeal decision is in  your favor all funds that you paid will be refunded to you including the interest.

Much of your email deals with your appeal.  As previously stated, Benefit Payment Control will only address repayment of the overpayment.  You can make your arguments directly to the judge when you have the appeal.


Nancy A. Noble, Manager
Employment Security Department
Benefit Payment Control
(360) 902-9265 Fax
(866) 697-4831 Toll Free

From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 6:09 PM
To: ESD Benefit Payment Control, Collection Unit; James Craven; Dean Lookinghawk; John Horch
Subject: EXTREMELY URGENT for Jesse #975, Rene #960, Ms Susan Hettinger, RE: Financial Documents ID#951839829

Please see attached and route this to the supervisor of Ms Nancy Noble. I have complied with the demands of Ms  Nobel to pay $150 when I can yet as you can see from the attached nothing has changed (I used the online function last time with the ID number 951839829 but now cannot access it to pay again and this new bill charges interest (I engaged in no fraud) and makes no reference to my previous payment of $150 accept to establish it). Please see my exanges with Ms Nobel and my presenting concrete reasons why I believe that I am not bound to pay immediately when I have an accepted appeal in Divison II of the WCA and I have the court transcript where I asked the judge about repayment with an appeal pending and she said I did not have to repay if I had an appeal pending (an appeal she herself urged me to file and gave me assistance in doing so) as paying now would prejudge the very issues to be decided that is if I am or am not a whistleblower against serious corruption and felonies at Clark College and in the AG’s office which is why I asked over and over for the name of the person referred to by Anita as the someone way above her level that seems so interested in my particular case to discuss it with her and push behind the scenes for immediate repayment with an appeal pending that would have been summarily dismissed for cause were it seen as frivolous and without potential merit.

Please regard this also as an official protest and grievance against Ms Nobel and others who have refused to provide me simply the written order for immeidate repayment, when and by whom were terms of repayment negotiated, why has my credit rating been accessed and now damaged, all of which involves dereliction of duty, abuse of someone with known medical disabilities, abuse of position and power of a government employee, misconduct of a public employee, filing a false report by a public employee and complicity in denial of my most basic Constitutional right not to suffer punishment while appeal is pending (how many innocents were found to be so even after losing several appeals because of how the system is loaded and run and due to prosecutorial misconduct, perjury and the like that I and my family have suffered?)

Please see, read and respond to the attached. Even without income, I am sending $150 when I and my family have it until this can be addressed by law enforcement and the WCA who will also get this and supporting evidence for all my assertions and allegations. This will gopublic as not yet in America do we administer punishment while allowed appeals are pending unless there is the safety of the public at stake. Even accused murderers are allowed bail while trial or appeals are pending.

Dear Linda:

Thank you for your partial response to my inquiry but I refer you again please to my requests, repeated ones, below. Please let me explain in detail the exact reasoning behind my request for the name (employee id number) of the person with whom I originally spoke, Anita and also the name of the person to whom she referred, as “someone high up, way above me, in the Seattle office” denied an exemption for immediate repayment even with an accepted appeal in Division II of the Washington court of Appeals.

Now part of the basis of my appeal (see attached) is serial and provable falsehoods, misrepresentations, material omissions and contrived even contrived misquotations in the brief of the AG’s office. Further, please see attached (none of these letters did I solicit, have any prior knowledge of or any input into in any way and the contents have all been sworn under penalty of perjury and subject to cross-examination), there is twice-sworn testimony, subject to cross-examination from Emma Kim, that when working in HR at Clark College where I am a tenured professor and whistleblower whose allegations were sustained previously, she was ordered to keep a secret file on me to be sent to the AG’s office and was recruited into and participated in ongoing campaigns of marginalization an demonization in the workplace ; that file was subsequently discovered in a public records request after the existence of the file was made known in her letter in 2003 (a letter I had no knowledge of or influence on and a secret file about which I knew nothing). There is also sworn testimony from Dr. Marcia Roi and Lynn Davidson of the WEA that the president of Clark College committed perjury during the ESD hearing with Judge Knutson when he denied having said to both of them at the same time and place “morale will improve around here when we get rid of professor Craven.” That statement contained within it the essential elements of the crime of Conspriacy Against Rights supported by the attached letters that I had no hand whatsover in or knowledge of prior to their being written and sent with a copy to me.

Now let me get to the punch line. Both Judge Sells and Judge Pomeroy (who urged me to appeal believe it or not) in their orders, never ordered me to pay back the asserted over payment because both of them did not even know that I had indeed been granted ESD benefits on the basis of my allegations and 118 pages of supporting documentation (they thought they were affirming a previous denial of benefits by ESD) that not only had I been serially denied due process, but was at least possibly a victim of reprisals under pretexts and conspiracy against rights as a result of my whistle blowing against serial corruption at Clark College where I am a public employee bound by law not to turn a blind eye to corruption. I have sent letter after letter (in fact the 4900 pages in the six binders of the secret and illegal file are repeated protests against corruption sent to the AG, Brian Sonntag, FBI, Clark County Sheriff, Washington State Patrol none of whom wrote me back telling me to cease and desist or that I was misusing state resources etc). Why did they not know that the appeal by Clark College four days before the deadline (timing is also significant) was to reverse the granting of my ESD benefits and the fact that both judges failed to note even my true status, not only spoke to the extent to which the Judges even reviewed the basics or considered my evidence and arguments in the case, but also because of the outright misrepresentations in the brief by the AG’s representative (pointed out in my responses Court and in my brief to Divison II for granting of an appeal hearing) where in her own brief, on the first two pages she says that I was denied ESD benefits but in the middle of the brief, one comment in the middle of the page, saying that initially I had been granted ESD benefits on the basis only of the duration of time between the alleged offense and imposition of discipline. Both judges, and their orders beasr this out, were taken in by this deception. There was no mention that I am a public employee of the Government of the State of Washington, a whistelblower including against those who charged me and kept this secret file long ago.

So I asked Judge Pomeroy about this; do I have to pay back this money as I am going to appeal this. She said no, my order is only on the issue of Judge Sells rulings on law. The AG’s representative offered to set up some repayment arrangements but the Judge dismissed her arguments and my last comment to her Honor was I guess that it is only at Clark College where you have to pay a fine or lose pay before your appeals are exhausted.” So obviously, if the situation remains that I do not repay until after my appeal in Division II, this further highlights the duplicity, deception (and thus contempt for and fraud upon the Court) of the AG’s brief clearly misrepresenting my initial status with ESD (note there is a big difference between my having been granted ESD benefits to be paid back versus appeal to sustain a previous denial of benefits in terms of who has a greater burden on appeal), with no mention of the 118 pages of documents in support of my argument (plus the fact that my replacements had been arranged for even before notice of a complaint and far before the one Laudermill Hearing I got to determine even if or if not I was guilty and would be teaching). Further, if I had been ordered by Judge Pomeroy to pay back the money, when she knew I had no pay or medical coverage for a year now, there would have been an order for repayment and of course an order to arrange repayments (there was never any allegations by anyone of any fraud or misrepresentations or any lies in my application for ESD benefits that were granted in unprecedented time) and there was none. This is all on the Court record and can be confirmed with Mr. Bales who was present or with Judge Pomeroy.

So I want to know the name of Anita as I will be asking for her to be subpoenaed as in her conversation she indicated that indeed I should know what I am a guilty of (then why would I appeal?) mentioned gross misconduct with which I was never charged or mentioned in any complaints by Clark College, and she indicated that she had had conversations with this person she referred to as way above her.

So you know the old saying from Sir Walter Scott: “Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” That is what is happening here. Just as lies beget more of the same, deception and piling-on beget more of the same until, like finding the anchor strand on a knitted sweater to pull on it and unravel the whole piece, so it is that basic facts (like no order and arrangements for repayment of ESD benefits already paid in accordance with what I could possibly pay–yet someone ordered $700+ per month now you say possibly only $300 + per month minimum) further point to the deceptions in the AG’s brief and thus in the AG’s own serial non-responses (see attached) to my repeated inquiries. I am also attaching some of my own background as given by Clark College itself. That background includes previously working for the Government of Puerto Rico, Office of the Governor, investigating and documenting “in the field” the “dimensions, linkages, leakages, dynamics and impacts of the underground economy of Puerto Rico (drugs, prostitution, bolitos, and tax evasion) as well as work in G-2 in the U.S. Army.

So now I have taken ample time to explain what I am requesting and why I am requesting it and this will also go to law enforcement because my own background and training tells me there is much more to all of this than you perhaps know about in terms of background and players in this case, but in any case, I have asked for this information and have seen no order or modified order from Judge Pomeroy to back up your summary assertion to repay the monies again ignoring my requests below and the reasons for them.

Please answer my request for the information requested and please then tell me in writing (I do not work on the telephone as such conversations cannot be taped and thus not usable in legal venues) how I can arrange to make the payments you require and since I am an economist and court-qualified expert witness in King County Superior Court as one, please tell me how you propose to “make me whole” if I am found by the Washington Court of Appeals to indeed be a victim of a campaign of intended unlawful removal from employment plus many other felonies as reprisal for doing my duty by law as a public employee as you are also.

thank you for your consideration of this request;


James M. Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii

Professor and Department Head of Economics

To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Urgent–response needed Another Follow-up on Your e-mail to ESD’
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 19:22:26 +0000


Dr. Mr. Craven:

Thank you for your inquiry. Collection on your account will continue. If you are unable to send the $371.00 minimum monthly payment, please contact our office to establish repayment arrangements at 866-697-4831.



Employment Security Department

Benefit Payment Control

From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 1:56 PM
To: ESD Benefit Payment Control, Collection Unit; Det Kevin Allais; Laura Loughlin
Subject: FYI: Urgent–response needed Another Follow-up on Your e-mail to ESD’

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see the attached notice of statement adding and compounding the amount of money that I supposedly owe (and thus more induced stress on me and my family) ESD due to the Superior Court Decision of Judge Christine Pomeroy, who, by the way, when asked directly in court about repayment, made no order for repayment and specifically said, in response to the Counsel for the AG, whose own brief will be the subject of intense examination (for provable falsehoods, material ommissions and misrepresentations that I believe amount to outright fraud upon and contempt for the court and basic principles of due process and the U.S. Constitution itself along with some other possible felonies) at the Appeals Court of Division II that has accepted and his processing my appeal.

In any case, this refusal to go to paper will itself be examined in future venues. That is why I need Anita’s name and/or state employee number as I need to have her name for purposes of issuance of a subpoena. Why? Because she herself said to me on the phone (that is whyI do not want phone calls but on paper, as I am, accountable for all that I say and write for truthfulness and intent) that someone “very high up” in the “Seattle Office”, “way beyond her” ordered the repayment while I have an appeal pending with Division II. She said further that I should know why I was being ordered to repay even with an appeal pending and mentioned “gross misconduct” which was alleged by the AG but never by Clark College in any of the few formal charges that I ever received. So Anita was obviously in communication with someone and that is why I need to know who she is and to whom she was reporting.

I have asked for the name, and the order in writing, when, where, title and position, with that higher level someone’s name and a chain of accountability that I can subpoena and question in depositions and in court. I am further, myself, a state employee, a bonafide whistleblower on several serious issues, and all my allegations were sustained publicly or privately, and I have publicly and privately alleged and provided to ESD in my original submission of 118 pages of documents that resulted in ESD finding initially for my benefits while on disciplinary leave, serious forms of corruption not only at Clark College, but in the AG’s office as well. Further, my allegations are serious and I am accountable, and should be, as I have formally alleged crimes, by crime and by name, committed at Clark College and by some members of the AG’s office, and my personal politics are such that Ic ould expect no comfort or mercy if I have given any grounds whatsoever for law enforcement to question my motives, my sincerity of belief that crimes are being committed, and my sincerity as a whistleblower long ago that led to a long chain of actions that have included outright compound perjury by the president of Clark College, during an ESD hearing the subject of appeal in Division II, according to the sworn testimonies of Dr. Marcia Roi and Ms Lynn Davidson in an arbitration hearing. That alone, not one more thing, compromises the whole structure (a highly poisoned tree of serial violations of due process and thus inedible fruit of that tree”) of all the various charges made, investigated by, verdict determined, appeals to, the same person, Bob Knight, who, according to the sworn testimonies of Roi and Davidson, said to them both at the same time and place that “Morale will improve around here when we get rid of professor Craven”, following which statement (not revealed to me for almost two years) al the issues being investigated at appeal began.

So all I am asking from you, as I did below, and this will also go to law enforcement, because your refusal to simply provide me the legal authority that is higher than Judge Pomeroy’s non-order to repay, plus, how and by whom was the minimum payment per month arrived at? (I am off for one year without pay and medical coverage) from more of the same from the same source Bob Knight.) Further, perjury is not only a very serious crime, because it is a compound crime when done by a public employee on public time and duty (also obstruction of justice, misconduct of a public employee, filing a false report by apublic employee, blacklisting,) but, it also attempts not only to obstruct but to steal justice and plant on the legal record a body of lies and abuses of due process that canonly be used to leverage and cover-up future as well as past abuses of due process and criminality.

So every time you refuse to go to paper and send me one of these bills, with no legal authority cited overriding the situation that I have represented with Judge Pomeroy in her Court, knowing full well that I have medical disabilities, knowing full-well that I am a whistleblower who has alleged serious offenses by named public employees at Clark College and the AG’s office, knowing full-well that I am without work and pay, knowing full-well that I have an accepted appeal (if I have an appeal then no, Anita, I do not “know” that I am guilty and thus why I need to repay as if so, I would not have appealed and/or my appeal would have been dismissed as frivolous or worse possible abuse of judicial process) in Division II, knowing full-well the relationship between induced stress and health and life expectancy, then , each continuation of this Kabuki theater or avoidance of responsibility and accountability, I will simply take it that there not only a cover-up going on, but that there also is no need to fear going to paper on, or to cover-up, what is clean only what is dirty. There is no need for any public employee to fear giving their name or being subpoened for cause if they are doing their duty with the proper authority and motives. And thus each time I get a bill orphone call, without, as I have requested over and over, and accounting of when, by whom, under what authority, where, was the order given to pursue my repayment (with no attempt to schedule payments that are doable and do not bankrupt me andmy family as we have almost lost our home three times so far), along with Anita’s name and contact information for future subpoenas, then each time you will get this back to be used in other venues and your responses will add to a long and gathering list of “dots” that seem to connect themselves almost because those who lie and intend deception need to have very high IQs and good memories, whereas the innocent, who do not fear going to paper (where contradictions are easily spotted and also ducumented in print) and whose stories andnarratives do not change because they are true, they do not need high IQs and good memories. But when you have the innocent with not a low IQ and a good memory up against the intrigues of some with apparent not so high IQs and bad memories, then of course going to paper is more problematic for those not honest and without honest intentions.

The old saying applies: “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive” Sir Walter Scott. From my letter below:

I will comply with the law at all times but I do need in writing, especially when I specifically asked Judge Christine Pomeroy about immediate repayment with an appeal pending and she said that I need not repay pending my appeal (in civil actions for example, awards are never paid out with appeals pending nor are prisoners executed with appeals pending).

Thank you for your consideration of this request for a waiver on immediate repayment and for written documentation on the whole process, names involved, dates, titles, authority and rationale for the order from way above Anita’s level, according to her, for immediate repayment.

What is unclear or unreasonable about this request? The more this kind of intrigue goes on, refusal to go to paper and give names that are accountable for the decisions they make and the consequences and legality of them as I am responsible in the classroom and have made myself accountble even in this response which will also go to law enforcement because I do believe a whole lot is very wrong here. There is simply no need to frame, pile-on, put the pressure on, serially deny due process to a guilty person (they above all you want to have due process so that you get a perp-walk instead of a perp walking like OJ) only an innocent one. And there is no need to avoid gfiving me in writing, as I requested, the information I have sought giving you full reasons WHY I am seeking it and my legal authority for doing do; just what I am asking of you.

From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
To: bpcunit@esd.wa.gov
Subject: FW: Follow-up on Your e-mail to ESD’s BPCunit@esd.wa.gov has been received, and is being processed.
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:43:18 -0800

From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
To: bpcunit@esd.wa.gov
Subject: Follow-up on Your e-mail to ESD’s BPCunit@esd.wa.gov has been received, and is being processed.
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 09:27:36 -0800

To Whom It May Concern:

I have spoken with “Anita” in your department handling waivers and orders for replayment. She told me several times that my request for waiver was turned down by someone from the Seattle Office much higher than her office. I have asked her several times to please provide me in writing the name, date, written order and basis for the order to pay back alleged overpayments for alleged offenses that are the subject of Appeal in Division II which would not have accepted or allowed the appeal (even urged and assisted by Judge Pomeroy whose Court did not order me to immediately pay back the alleged overages when I noted to her that her ruling meant paying back monies owed (which she and a previous Judge did not know that I actually had been granted not denied ESD benefits by ESD, with no suggestion of any fraud or misrepreentation on my part at any time even by the appellant Clark College) without some basis for it and allowable grounds and a tangible basis for appeal evident. If I am to pay this money back (I am now again on one year leave without pay) how am I to be made “whole” (lost income, lost interest, lost retirement) if the Appeals Court finds for me and against ESD (as this case, absent fraud and misrepresentation, is thus about ESD versus ESD and the basis upon which I was granted benefits in the first place. Further, some of the issues, including alleged outright and provable (from the documents submitted to the AG’s office) falsehoods, misrepresentations and material ommissions in the brief to the Superior Court by the AG’s office that form part of the basis for the appeal (which is also why I need in writing when , where, by whom, date, legal support and connections with the AG’s office if applicable) as I have also filed criminal complaints as according to the sworn testimony of Dr Marcia Roi and Lynn Davidson from the WEA, the president of Clark College, Robert Knight, the central figure in all of this, committed perjury in the ESD hearing when he denied having made the statement to both of them at the same time, “morale will improve around here when we get rid of professor Craven”. From that point I will then, if this request for waiver and authority for any denial of it is denied, then I have no choice to make arrangements to pay what I can when I can as I have no income until April when I begin to receive social security benefits.

I will comply with the law at all times but I do need in writing, especially when I specifically asked Judge Christine Pomeroy about immediate repayment with an appeal pending and she said that I need not repay pending my appeal (in civil actions for example, awards are never paid out with appeals pending nor are prisoners executed with appeals pending). Further, the charge of gross misconduct was never made in any of the initial appeals only that my discipline was deserved; this was all added and piled-on in addition to the other charges made and sustained with no Laudermill hearings, no appeals and not one reference to RCWs on Gross Misconduct only to alleged “email policies” and violations in terms of lack of respect and hostile speech. And in any case I made a good-faith application for ESD benefits accompanied with 118 pages of supporting documents, I knew and know no one in ESD, it was clear that I was on disciplinary leave to return, and ESD granted me unprecedented response time (my first check was on Dec 19th the first day of eligibility for it) and I complied with all requirements and beyond. Further, the length of time and the fact that Clark College clearly controlled the timings of all charges, the impositions of discipline along with the serial denials of due process that were aided and abetted by the union being played on timelines while I was on medical leave from two heart attacks. Further, I am a whistleblower and no one who goes after whistleblowers has ever done so not under pretexts and without revealing real agenda and intentions. There is no need to serially deny basi due process to the guilty; you want to make sure they do not walk so due process is essential; that is what ESD picked up and why they awarded the benefits when my siituation was clear.

thank you for your consideration of this request for a waiver on immediate repayment and for written documentation on the whole process, names involved, dates, titles, authority and rationale for the order from way above Anita’s level, according to her, for immediate repayment.


James M. Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii
Professor of Economics and Geography

Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 13:51:14 -0800
To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
Subject: Your e-mail to ESD’s BPCunit@esd.wa.gov has been received, and is being processed.

–Forwarded Message Attachment–
From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com
To: bpcunit@esd.wa.gov
Subject: Urgent Request
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 13:51:04 -0800


To Whom It May Concern

Please see the attached Statement of Account sent to me. Please also note that I have an appeal pending in Division II of the Washington Court of Appeals and further have a criminal complaint pending against the president of Clark College Robert Knight for apparent perjury during the Employment Security Department Appeal Hearing with Judge Knutson (18 USC Article I Chapter 13 Part 241 Conspiracy Against Rights) based on sworn testimonies in other proceedings subsequent to the ESD appeal hearing, as well as on a matter of allegations of provable and serial falsehoods in the brief submitted by the AG’s office in Thurston County Superior Court (part 242 Conspiracy Under Color of Law). Further, Judge Pomeroy, who did not even know that I had been granted already unemployment benefits and had already returned to work by the time all of this got to her court, specifically noted, when asked about repayment and terms of repayment, noted that she was not ordering specific terms of repayment as I indicated that I would be appealing and she even urged me to do so as there were matters that she thought could not be dealt with in her court but wanted a higher ruling on it for her own interest also.

Thus, because of an active complaint and request for investigation on these and other related issues (see attached) exists, and because I have a pending appeal (only where I work is it possible to get the sentence first, then the verdict, then the trial or hearing, then the charges to fit the sentence and verdict then whatever can be piled on and that can stick to justify the charges) I must respectfully ask you to provide me in writing exactly how, when, by whom, and under what legal authority was this order for repayment and minimum repayment amount determined including the minimum payment amount specified.

At present I am off work for one year without pay, without medical coverage that is being appealed right now. How could any minimum payment amount be pre-specified with no notion as to my present employment, income, debts, responsibilities? By whom, when, where, under what authority was this determined? This also does not take note of the fact that I have known medical disabilities. Finally, I was granted unemployment benefits and my first check in unprecedented time on Dec 19, 2009 the first possible day of eligibility after one week without coverage. My application included 118 pages of documentation that I was a whistleblower on several matters, a state employee and tenured professor, due to return to work after 108 days off, and the documents showed not only a long time period between alleged offense and the imposition of discipline, but also that the discipline had been determined and replacements hired, and thus a verdict and sentence determined and imposed BEFORE even notice of a complaint (never served) let alone a legally mandated Laudermill Hearing or appeals that took place long after my time off was imposed and I had returned to work and even after the ESD appeal hearing for Clark College during which perjury was committed according to the sworn testimony of Dr. Marcia Roi and Ms Lynn Davidson in an arbitration hearing that took place after the ESD hearing.

Finally, not even Clark College or ESD ever alleged any misrepresentations, lies or any kind of fraud in my application for ESD benefits which I will have to apply for again as I am off work again due, I have alleged under oath and to federal and state law enforcement (for which I am and should be fully legally accountable) that the serial denials of due process to which I have been subject constitute reprisals against a whistleblower under pretexts as well as serial denials of and conspiracy against basic Constitutional Rights.

Because of the timing and interest charges of this order, I must respectfully ask that this matter of this order, its origins as well as the magnitdues of repayment demanded with no notion of my present employment and financial situation or my legal appeals pending, be addressed immediately and this order rescinded. This principle, that sentences are imposed after not before appeals are exhausted, let alone before verdicts have been determined that were determined before hearings that were before charges or “evidence” presented or still not presented, is what ESD saw in the 118 documents submitted in my original application for unemployment benefits. I cannot possibly pay $734 per month and I would like to know how, by whom, when, where, under what legal authority or court order, was that amount determined.

thank you for your consideration of this matter.


James M. Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii



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: PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON SERIOUS ISSUES, Conspiracy against Rights and under Color of Law, Corruption and Intrigue in Government, CORRUPTION IN "HIGHER" EDUCATION, CorruptWA, Faces of Fascism, Fascism in America, FBI-DOJ CORRUPTION, FOUNDATIONS OF FASCISM IN AMERICA, Legal System Corruption, MSM Mainstream Media Sycophancy, Psychopathic Management, Psychopaths and Sociopaths in Politics, Psychopaths in Management. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Evidence of Corruption in Clark County Sent to Governor Inslee per His Request

  1. Guido A. Bini says:

    Great work, Jim! You are blazing a trail for others to follow. The corruption in Clark County and elsewhere in WA abounds. All Governor Inslee has to do is observe what is happening. If he actually followed up on any of the corruption leads, he may not want to run for re-election. Yes, it’s that bad, but you already know that. Thanks again for keeping the fight alive.

    Guido A. Bini
    Vancouver, WA
    PS We will prepare a list of examples with evidence of the corruption in Clark County and have it ready for your review in time for publishing prior to next Thursday’s dinner party.

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 )

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s