Clark County, Vancouver, State of Washington and Federal Apparent Serial Corruption: Like a Ferguson, Missouri on Steroids

jerry spence 51z+H1Zv7uL__SX328_BO1,204,203,200_

Hogwash, Ms. McJilton,

If the cell phone information has been extracted by the forensics team then how are we suppose to be able to differentiate between the email information extracted by the IT department? The cell phone data and email information look the same. 

In addition, as already communicated in a separate email, there are at least 24, TWENTY FOUR, email communications during this same time period (Mar 1, 2014 – July 31, 2014) that failed to make the list of several hundred emails as provided in PDR FIN 2015-617. It took 8 weeks for the city to gather and prepare this data, yet none of this information as provided has been redacted. Are we to assume that this is the total of all of Ms. Aldridge’s email during this time frame? If that is the case, then the information contained in the total number of emails provided in PDR FIN 2015-617 indicate that Ms. Aldridge’s work ethic and supervisory oversight is sorely lacking.

I’m sure many other city of Vancouver residents would agree, that Ms. Aldridge’s salary would be better spent filling the “pot holes” that riddle the road ways throughout the city than continue to support the FRAUD that emanates from the desk of Ms. Sandra Aldridge.
To reiterate,
1) How do we differentiate the cell phone extraction from the email data? and,
2) Where is the redacted cell phone and email data from Ms. Aldridge during this time frame?

Please advise.
Guy Bini

Subject: RE: Aldridge’s emails
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:57:10 +0000

Dear Mr. Bini:

As I indicated in my previous email to Ms. Eccles, we did not redact any information from the partial installment of emails that were produced.  These emails messages were exported as pst files in their native format as requested.  I have asked for examples so we could research this matter but have not received any instances or examples.  Cell phone information is extracted by our police forensics’ team, and email information is extracted by our IT department. 


Raelyn McJilton

From: Guy Bini []
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 3:40 PM
To: McJilton, Raelyn; Traci Eccles
Cc: Jamie Jackson; Kent Steinmetz; Judy McDonald; Bonnie Smith; Larry Smith; Jeff Smith
Subject: RE: Aldridge’s emails

Ms. McJilton, 

Are we to assume that there were no redaction of internet header information associated with any of the subject email as per Ms. Eccles’ reference to Dawson vs. Daly below?

I find that it is strange for a the VPD “forensics dept” to be involved in an email data query when allegedly all of the City’s email is sorted via Symantec Accelerator. That is unless “forensics” is necessary to scrub potentially inculpatory evidence detrimental to its involvement in a cover up of Ms. Aldridge. Oh, beware of the flatterer. The monkey always seems to burn the cat(s).

To reiterate, were there any redactions to the internet header information associated with PDR FIN 2015-617?

Please advise.

Guy Bini

Subject: RE: Aldridge’s emails
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:29:40 +0000

Dear Ms. Eccles:  Please comments below to your questions.  Hope this helps to clarify.  Best regards,  Raelyn McJilton

From: Traci Eccles []
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:24 PM
To: McJilton, Raelyn
Cc: Guy Bini
Subject: Re: Aldridge’s emails

Ms. McJilton,

We would be happy to provide you with examples of our concerns regarding missing and inconsistent header information found in Detective Aldridge’s native format emails provided through your office as a part of PDR FIN 2015-617.  First, however, I would like to request a clarification so that I better understand the process behind gathering of information responsive to our requests.

In September 2015, I received PDR FIN-254-2015 (originally requested in July) that included Detective Aldridge’s Government Issue cellphone call logs and texts.  In a separate PDR of City of Vancouver emails connected with my name, it was revealed that Detective Aldridge had been contacted by your office in regard to preserving her call logs and forwarding her texts/related information to your office. There were significant issues with missing and suspect data provided in the disclosure of Aldridge’s phone logs/texts.

This information was extracted by the Police Departments forensics team.  She was informed so texts messages would be preserved. 

My question, and concern, is whether it is common practice (and within regulatory guidelines) to allow those named in a records disclosure request to be a participant in—or even exclusively in charge of—organization and submission of records to be disclosed.  Further, was Detective Sandra Aldridge involved or in full control of supplying emails to be submitted in their native format regarding the current disclosure at issue, PDR FIN 2015-617? 

Emails are extracted by our IT Department, and Detective Aldridge does not provide them for the records request.  All employees emails are saved in a backup process using Discovery Accelerator which is maintained by our IT department.

This information will help tremendously in our explanation regarding the problems that are pervasive within much of the header information provided with the recent set of emails.

Thank you.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:54 AM, McJilton, Raelyn <> wrote:

Hi Traci:

Can you give me an example?  I’d like to research this on my end as the City did not redacted any emails that were provided to you.

Thank you, Raelyn McJilton

From: Traci Eccles []
Sent: Monday, January 18, 2016 8:05 PM
To: McJilton, Raelyn
Cc: Hatley, Kevin; Creager, Scott; McElvain, James
Subject: PRD: Aldridge’s emails

Ms. McJilton:

Upon review of documents (emails) received per our public records request under RCW 42.17.250, we notice apparent redactions in email headers and other information that reveal chains of custody and communications in reading/forwarding said emails. Per Dawson v. Daly, you are obligated to provide specificity in documents or parts of documents redacted or excluded along with legal authority (statute and case law) for any such materials excluded or redacted. 

Thank you for a quick remedy to this apparent oversight.


Traci Eccles



About jimcraven10

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

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s