This site documents our experiences with:
Carl Johnson (respondent)
3603 Oak Bay Lane
Port Ludlow, Washington
James Doros ("attorney")
3502 North Fremont Street
The following statement was submitted to the court in Rhonda's Domestic Violence Protection Order case against Carl Lee Johnson. The order was initially granted. When the hearing came up for the order to become permanent, Carl's attorney, James Doros, hand-scrawled a note only hours before the hearing, asking that it be continued because he had "business elsewhere". Rhonda was not able to get the case back to court again due to lack of funds. The last of Rhonda's savings was exhausted in simply getting the case dismissed without prejudice---which means it can be refiled at any time. She is re-grouping, amassing more evidence, and her case WILL be re-filed at the proper time.
In the above document Carl refers to a letter sent to his ex-wife by Rhonda. Lynn did not choose to help Rhonda, but immediately forwarded the letter on to Carl. That letter is below:
Lynn Marie [Johnson]
1937 Broadway Ave.
Hoquiam, Wa., 98550-1955
My name is Rhonda -----. Way back in 1973, when I was 15 years old, in Aberdeen, I dated a Carl Lee Johnson for a short time. Carl was 17 at the time and attending Weatherwax High School. We broke up amicably and I moved on to another boyfriend. Several weeks later Carl and a friend of his forced me into the back seat of a car and kidnapped me. As I was being driven out of town at about midnight, some of my friends who had been searching for me spotted the car. They tried to force it off the road but were unable to do so. Finally one of my friends stopped the car at gunpoint and I was rescued.
Several weeks later I saw Carl on the street and he introduced me to his new girlfriend. I was shocked that he even felt he had the right to speak to me. I mumbled something and walked away. I married someone about a year after that, and never saw or thought of Carl again. I have been with that same person now for 32 years.
In approximately 1996 I received a bizarre letter from Carl, stating that I actually belonged to him, not to my husband. It was a long, rambling letter which was at times threatening. I was shocked and horrified that this man had found me and contacted me. I delivered back to him a very blunt two-line letter telling him in no uncertain terms to cease and desist. Shortly after that someone tried to break into the marina where we were living. He was run off by management and security and was never identified.
I heard nothing from Carl for the next eight years. I assumed he had gotten the message and had gone off to harass someone else. But a few days before Christmas, 2004, I began receiving extremely graphic, illogical, threatening calls from Carl. On one of these days he called my restaurant all day long, even though he was told repeatedly by employees to cease.
At this point we had no choice. We had to go to Weatherwax High School and find him in the year book, just to get his last name. Since then we have hired an investigator who has supplied a great deal of information regarding Carl. That’s how we located you.
We have also filed several criminal complaints with Seattle Police, with Jefferson County Sheriff’s office, and by the time you receive this Carl will have already been served with an anti-harassment order and a domestic protection order. We are pursuing a variety of other remedies against him as well.
We need to know what kind of threat we’re facing. I would like to hear from you regarding Carl. I’d like to know if there’s anything at all you can tell me which would help guide me in my threat assessment. I need to know how dangerous he might be. At this point I have no idea what to expect. His behavior is beyond bizarre. The judges we’ve been before in this case simply shake their heads---they haven’t heard of anything this bizarre either. I am now escorted to and from work by armed personnel.
I have established a “safe” mailbox at the following address. I really want to hear whatever you can tell me. I simply need to know what I might be facing. Our investigator has not yet pulled your divorce records, but he will do so in the next few weeks.
What's wrong with Carl Johnson's statement to the court (shown above)?
(1) Carl states that he was never involved in any kidnapping. This is a lie. It is a FACT that Carl Johnson kidnapped Rhonda in 1973, and that is not "our opinion". Carl Johnson has lied to the court and in so doing has committed perjury. I saw the kidnapping. Rhonda certainly saw it (and endured it). Carl's accomplice, the elusive "Pete" certainly saw it and helped perpetrate it. And at least six other individuals saw it and reacted by chasing after the kidnapper. It's possible as many as twenty people witnessed the beginning of the kidnapping, and half a dozen witnessed the conclusion. We are working hard to locate those individuals. When we have amassed at least three or four statements, we will bypass law enforcement and file a "citizen complaint" against Carl Johnson for perjury.
(2) Carl states that his 1997 letter to Rhonda was polite. In point of fact it was a scrawled page of inappropriate and sexually suggestive nonsense. Carl has lied to the court, and in so doing has committed another instance of criminal perjury.
(3) Carl states that he simply wanted to know if Rhonda's son was his son. In point of fact, Rhonda's son was born roughly THREE YEARS after she was kidnapped by and last saw Carl Johnson. Rhonda will testify that she did not have sexual intercourse with this little pig of a man in any case. For Carl to state to the court that he wondered even fleetingly if Rhonda's son was his son is another instance of criminal perjury. Even Corky Thatcher is smart enough to have not attempted that particular ruse.
(4) Carl states that he and Rhonda "grew up together" in Aberdeen. In point of fact Rhonda had lived in Aberdeen barely three years when she met Carl. She still had a pronounced southern accent. Though we cannot see what Carl thinks he has to gain by lying to the court again in this instance, the fact remains that he did, again, lie to the court and this constitutes yet another instance of perjury.
(5) Carl states that he did not try to contact Rhonda at her work place in 2004. The fact of the matter is that the mannerisms of the caller, the wording of the caller, the threats made by the caller, the statements made by the caller are exactly, identical, and verbatim those made by Carl on at least two previous occasions. We have also traced the origin of the calls back to a cellular tower near Carl's home. Once again, Carl Johnson has lied to the court and committed yet another instance of criminal perjury.
We believe that in all or most of these instances, Carl's attorney, James Doros, knew or had strong reason to suspect Carl was lying, but did not caution Carl about the penalties associated with criminal perjury, because the case would have, at that moment, been over, and Doros could not have then continued to bleed Carl Johnson and his wife for money. This tends to be the level of decency and honor that most attorney's exude---but most especially James Doros. We feel that if Carl ever figures out what a disservice Doros has done him, he should sue the guy for malpractice.
The capper: Carl Johnson states that he has never been arrested and he intones that that fact, if it is a fact, must somehow speak to his innocence in this case and in these crimes. Let us remind the reader that Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer, had never been arrested either---but he was by no means innocent. Dennis Rader, the BTK Killer, had never been arrested, but that doesn't mean he isn't one of the most evil and destructive sociopaths ever to insult humanity. Carl's logic is nonsense. As usual.