Formatted for Convenient Printing

HOME

 

This page will describe a number of interactions with the Kent Police department in the matter of Dart Trucking and T&L Leasing. This document and all documents within the web of this Internet site represents my opinions, hunches, suspicions and extrapolations.

 

The following letter was sent to Ed Crawford, chief of police for the town of Kent, Washington. We have no way of knowing if Ed Crawford was involved in, or even aware of this rather embarrassing leak. What we DO know is that his office is the ONLY office the document in question was sent to, therefore the leak MUST have originated from that office. And we know that we've endured a number of problems with this office in another, unrelated case. Ed Crawford is ultimately responsible for what goes on in his office---therefore, the letter was sent to him. We have decided to repost the original website which details problems with the Kent Police Department and Ed Crawford in an unrelated case. That site will be available through this link.

 

 

Ed Crawford
Chief of Police
220 4th Ave. So.
Kent, WA. 98032

Mr. Crawford,

About two years ago a man told me he had "connections" in the Kent PD, and offered to try to have a ticket "fixed" for me. I declined.

A week ago I sent you a letter regarding my knowledge and suspicions of drug use and/or trafficking within the management of a local trucking company, a company in which this same man is employed. Those suspicions included the probable use of tractor-trailer rigs to transport small amounts of drugs between Los Angeles and Kent---which brings it into the Federal jurisdiction.

Your office signed for this letter on 3-21-01.

In a hearing on 3-23-01 regarding these same individuals, the judge asked me if I had made the local police aware of my allegations.

I replied that I had.

The judge then asked me if there had been any arrests.

The question seemed peculiar, as did most of the hearing, but I answered:

"I doubt it. I would expect an investigation like that to take a year or more. They (meaning you) only received the information, what----"

And before I could [finish], a person on this companyís side of the table shuffled a paper and whispered, "two days".

Mr. Crawford, despite the reprehensible actions of your department two years ago, and your apparent nonchalance regarding those actions, I, in my extreme and profound naÔvetť, (stupidity) had still managed to hold out just a few molecules of hope that your office was straight.

I no longer hold such hope. Iíve only witnessed a more corrupt system in one place---among the Chicano Mafioso along the US/Mexican border. The Seattle/Tacoma region, and specifically Kent, is fast convincing me it is worse than even that.

If youíre going to leak confidential correspondence which pertains to a criminal investigation, at least donít leak it to the suspects. That has a tendency to make them just a little bit harder to catch, wouldnít you agree?

 

3-24-01

CC: FBI Bureau; King County Prosecutor; Kent Mayor

BCC:

Post: Internet

 

 

 

Update:

On 6-22-02 the following letter was sent to the Kent, Washington, police department. That department had been made aware of a number of crimes committed by Mark Mcfarland and Delann Lamb. The department was supplied documentation of these activities which could in no way be ignored or dismissed. Yet the department apparently chose to utterly ignore the allegations and requests for investigation. This came as no surprise to us---it is exactly what we expected. After all, Mcfarland boasted that he had "connections" within the Kent P.D., and boasted that he could have charges "taken care of" by someone "high up" in the department. Mcfarland often boasted that he played golf with this individual and mutual friends. We also have a situation where we know that Lamb and Mcfarland were made aware of a criminal complaint against them within hours, perhaps within minutes of the department receiving the complaint(s).

We finally acknowledged the notion that requests for proper police work which were directed to the chief's office were a waste of time. We therefore decided to route the criminal complaints, complete with documentation, to every officer in the Kent police department, via registered mail. There would then be no one in the Kent police department who could say they were "unaware" of the allegations, or that they "didn't have enough documentation to pursue the matter", which is the usual local P.D. cop-out.

In order to submit such a complaint and request for due process to officers of the Kent police department, we, of course, needed the names of the officers employed by the Kent police department and anyone else to whom a crime could appropriately be reported. We didn't need addresses or phone numbers or anything else for them---we simply needed names to which registered letters could be addressed, in care of the Kent police department. My attorney advised me of the procedure for requesting such information, and I drafted a simple letter which makes a simple request. The Kent police cannot legally refuse the request, and if they do, they are easily liable for attorneys costs for forcing compliance. I submit that there is not a second grade school kid in the state who could misunderstand the request or who would be confused as to what it was asking for. But Mr. David Santos, Support Services Manager for the Kent Police Department seemed to be utterly confounded by it. Here is our letter to the Kent police, and here is Mr. Santos's brilliant response:  

 

Kent City Police Dept.
220 4th Ave. So.
Kent, WA. 98032

Dear Sirs,

Pursuant to the public disclosure act please send me the names of any and all persons working for the Kent Police department to whom a crime may be reported, and a contact address for each (Iím assuming theyíre all reachable through your office, but please provide a contact address for each one in which thatís not the case, if any).

I understand that I may be responsible for reasonable copying and postage charges. 

It would be in your bests interests not to force us to re-mail this request via registered mail.

Yours truly,


6-22-02

 

Reply from David Santos:

 

And our reply back to Mr. Santos:

 

Kent City Police Dept.
220 4th Ave. So.
Kent, WA. 98032

Mr. David Santos,

Re: yours to me of 7-10-02

I do not believe for one moment, nor does anyone reading this on the Internet believe, that you were unable to understand the nature of my request dated 6-22-02 (above). Were we to persuade ourselves that you were incapable of understanding the simple request that was put to you, we would also be forced to conclude that you are so utterly incompetent as to be completely incapable of performing any job at all for the Kent police department. And that's not the case, is it? Then you must be playing this game for some other reason.

The request asked for the names of any and all persons to whom a crime could be reported within the Kent police department. You have replied and said, in effect, that you know of no such persons.

Mr. Santos. You MUST know that your reply will be seen by all as yet another instance of unconscionable (and illegal) bias on the part of the Kent police department regarding the case of criminal complaints against Mark Mcfarland and Delann Lamb, two of your finest citizens down there in Dogpatch USA  --excuse me, I meant to say Kent. We have already been forced to alert the Olympia Bureau regarding some of Kent P.D.'s shenannigans. It would not be in your department's best interests to continue to make fools of yourselves.

You MUST know that your silly letter of 7-10 will not prevent us from enforcing the Public Disclosure Act, perhaps at your department's expense, and that the information WILL be forthcoming---it's only a matter of how, and when. You could have chosen the easy---and honorable---way of disseminating it. Instead you chose to supply the world with yet another example of Kent P.D.'s pettiness and bias.

Again, we are demanding, pursuant to the Public Disclosure Act, a list of names of all personnel employed by the Kent City police department to whom it would be appropriate to report a crime. That includes but is not limited to all police officers employed by the city of Kent. If there are any other such persons who just happen to pop into your head, you are directed to supply those names as well. We do not require, nor do we want addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, or social security numbers for any of those persons. We simply want their names, and an appropriate address at which to contact them. We assume they may all be contacted at the address at the top of this letter. If that is not the case---that is to say that if some of them work out of a different building or use a different work-related address, you are to supply those as well, so that all the names on the list may be contacted. It's really very simple, isn't it?

We are not required by law to disseminate to you WHY we want their names, but we will do so regardless:

Mark Mcfarland and Delann Lamb have committed numerous crimes of perjury. They were upset because I posted a FEW of my reasons for quitting their employ on the Internet. They were unable to legally remove my editorial from the Internet, so they went to court and lied. They did not only "stretch" truths and tell "little white lies"---they made things up out of thin air, in an effort to persuade the court that I had somehow bothered or harassed them. This ploy ultimately failed and my right to state facts on the Internet was not only upheld, but reaffirmed beyond what I had asked for, and beyond that which I felt and feel was in good taste. Be that as it may; the fact, the fact remains that these two little skunks conspired together, carefully matching their stories, to strip me of my First Amendment Civil rights. I have amassed a good deal of documentation to demonstrate this which cannot possibly be ignored by any semi-competent investigator, including letters and emails written by Delann Lamb's own hand which are directly at odds with statements she made in court, under oath, on repeated occasions. They call this particular crime, as if you were unaware of the title, perjury. We have asked your chief of police to investigate this crime. He has apparently declined to even give the matter a passing thought. We believe this constitutes an extreme bias on his part, and we find it disgusting.

While we realize that your department will never, ever, no matter how logical it is, or no matter how much it makes sense, no matter how much it would be in your best interests to do so, no matter how legally right and morally correct it would be to investigate and ultimately recommend these crimes for prosecution, your department will not do it. We believe your department would cut off its proverbial nose to spite its proverbial face. Well, so be it. All we're working to accomplish here is to demonstrate the incredible lengths to which the Kent police department will go to keep from doing its jobs when it so chooses not to do its job, and when it is working under the influence of extreme bias. And we're working to document and demonstrate just how hard and how diligently we tried to make the system work properly. In that regard, we wish to document that every single officer, every single person in the employ of the Kent police department to whom it would be appropriate to report a crime, has been made aware, by registered mail, of our criminal complaint against Lamb and Mcfarland, and that they have received all documentation which makes the case compelling from a criminal investigator's point of view. Then we'll let those officers explain to anyone who asks, why they did not pursue the cases.

Will that cause anyone within the Kent police department to actually investigate the crimes and to bring or recommend charges against Lamb or Mcfarland? Of course not. And, further, we believe that if any officer grows a rogue hair and attempts to take it upon himself to pursue the matters, he/she will be unceremoniously swatted down and either ostracized within the department for his/her interest in doing "the right thing", or perhaps outright TOLD not to pursue these crimes.

I'm sick of liars. Kent seems to have more than its share. Perhaps it is a ground-water problem. In any case, this problem isn't going to go away. You can deal with it professionally, or you can continue to deal with it as you have.

You have twenty (more) days, after which you may consider yourselves liable for attorneys fees which will be incurred in forcing you to adhere to the law.

I have always found that a straightforward course of honor is the easiest path in the long run. I'm sorry your department does not seem to have learned that lesson.


7-13-02

 

UPDATE: And yet again Mr. Santos could not be bothered to follow the law and supply the requested data. The following letter has been sent via registered mail, and civil action is being initiated against the department. The citizens of Kent will ultimately pay for Kent's defense--a defense it cannot possibly win. Is it time for Kent's citizenry to begin taking a closer look at its elected officials?

 

Kent City Police Dept.
220 4th Ave. So.
Kent, WA. 98032

Mr. David Santos,

(third request since 6-22-02 for public disclosure: 8-06-02).

You are now liable for civil action and its inherent expenses. Such will be initiated against you by mid-week.

I do not believe for one moment, nor does anyone reading this on the Internet believe, that you were unable to understand the nature of my request dated 6-22-02. Were we to persuade ourselves that you were incapable of understanding the simple request that was put to you, we would also be forced to conclude that you are so utterly incompetent as to be completely incapable of performing any job at all for the Kent police department. And that's not the case, is it? Then you must be playing this game for some other reason.

The request asked for the names of any and all persons to whom a crime could be reported within the Kent police department. You have replied and said, in effect, that you know of no such persons.

Again, we are demanding, pursuant to the Public Disclosure Act, a list of names of all personnel employed by the Kent City police department to whom it would be appropriate to report a crime. That includes but is not limited to all police officers and detectives employed by the city of Kent. If there are any other such persons who just happen to pop into your head, you are directed to supply those names as well. We do not require, nor do we want addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, or social security numbers for any of those persons. We simply want their names, and an appropriate address at which to contact them. It's really very simple, isn't it?

I'm sick of liars. Kent seems to have more than its share. Perhaps it is a ground-water problem. In any case, this problem isn't going to go away. You can deal with it professionally, or you can continue to deal with it as you have.

You have NO MORE TIME in which to adhere to the law. You must follow the law NOW, without further delay or frat-house shenanigans.

I have always found that a straightforward course of honor is the easiest path in the long run. I'm sorry your department has not learned that lesson. Each and every stunt you or your office pulls digs a deeper hole in the Public sense of right and wrong, in their sense of decency and confidence in your department. Is it really in your best interests to continue to act illegally, dishonestly and unprofessionally? WHY?

In continued and growing disgust,


8-06-02

POB 3718
Kent, WA.
98032

 

UPDATE:

As of 10-2-02, the Kent Police department has refused to respond in any way to the above demands. This means that the Kent Police department is breaking the law. What does the Kent Police department have to gain by breaking the law? Only one thing: The protection from prosecution of Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland for numerous crimes of perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury. At this time I'm willing to make the statement: The Kent Police Department is corrupt. Period.

The following letter has been delivered to Kent P.D. Of course the department will continue to break the law---we expect that---the letter is mostly a formality to cement our position in the lawsuit that will be brought against Kent P.D. in about twenty days, failing their compliance with the Public Disclosure laws. As a Kent citizen, you should know that the law in this case is crystal clear; we have satisfied all the requirements placed upon us by that law; Kent P.D. has NO legitimate position. Kent P.D. will lose the lawsuit, and you, the Kent, Washington taxpayer, will foot the bill for the entire fiasco. You may wish to ask yourselves once again: Are these the caliber of individuals you want in control of your police department? But perhaps more importantly ask yourselves: Are your current elected officials, who are ultimately responsible for the antics of the Kent P.D., the caliber of people you want in your elected offices? If your answer is yes, then the old adage holds true: Every people deserves the government it has.

Will the Kent Police Department finally adhere to the law? Of course not, and so be it. The Public lawsuit documents have already been pulled from the files and await completion. Planet of the Apes, you say? Indeed.

UPDATE 10-28-02:
It is now nearly two years since the Kent Police Department (specifically Ed Crawford) was delivered a registered-receipt complaint of perjury against Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland. That complaint has not been investigated. We do know that Mcfarland boasted often of having "connections in high places" within the Kent PD. We see this as one of the perks Mcfarland enjoys as a result of that mysterious relationship. Since Ed Crawford (chief of police) has refused to handle the case, we decided to file a complaint with every police officer employed by the city of Kent. Of course the crimes still would never be investigated properly or prosecuted, but we wanted to be able to demonstrate the lengths to which we had gone in our pursuit of justice via the enforcement and judiciary systems. And we wanted to be able to demonstrate to what lengths the city of Kent would go to deny us that process. As per the above documents, the Kent PD has steadfastly refused to follow the law with regard to supplying us a list of Kent, Washington police officers and detectives. Kent PD has BROKEN THE LAW in a bizarre and adolescent attempt to keep us from obtaining those names. Remember that we have never asked for addresses for these officers, or telephone numbers, or social security numbers, or anything else---in fact we specifically do not want any of those data. We simply want the names so we can properly address our complaints. But Kent PD apparently thinks it's above the law. When my attorney demonstrated to them by the above letter that they really had no choice in the matter, they wrote back and said they were now ready to comply. They asked for forty five cents to cover their costs in preparing the two page list. My attorney sent them a check for forty five cents, and also a SASE (self addressed stamped envelope) into which Kent PD could merely insert the two pages and drop in the mail. Instead of doing that, Kent PD used one of their own thirty seven cent stamps to return the check for forty five cents, saying that someone must pick up the two-page list in person. My attorney's response is below. Personally, I find myself hoping this gaggle of witless hillbillies continues in this vein, as in doing so they are most spectacularly making my case and proving my allegations of corruption, malfeasance and incompetence within the Kent PD. I've been hinting for three years that I felt this office might be corrupt----and now, bless them, they're proving it. I would say that these folks are not the brightest bulbs in the string. I should send them a thank you note (thank you for providing such amusement and entertainment, and for confirming all our suspicions).

So once more we wait. We'll give this outfit about twenty days, then file a Public lawsuit against the City of Kent. They'll lose the lawsuit, will be instructed to mail us the data per the Public Disclosure Act, will be instructed to reimburse us for time and trouble, and will look like fools for having even considered pulling such a stunt in the first place. Once again the old adage harks true: Every country has the government it deserves. If the City of Kent enjoys paying me to sue them, then they should continue to hire and vote into office exactly the same caliber of turds they've installed to date.

We believe at this time we have enough to file a complaint against the Kent Police Department for obstruction of justice and refusal to investigate. We'll keep this site updated.

Stoopid is as Stoopid does.

Good grief. 

 

UPDATE 4-8-03:
In response to the above letter we've have received the list we asked for. The original documents were so sloppily prepared that they could barely be OCR'd. Since Kent PD assigned someone with the coloring skills of a 3 year old, much of the useful portion of the documents were blacked out---that means that some of the names were incomplete. We suppose this was Kent P.D.'s adolescent way of sticking it to us just a little more. The list appears below.

As stated previously, our original intention was to send a registered-mail copy of a criminal complaint of perjury against Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland, to each officer on the list. This may or may not have brought the desired results---but it certainly would have stopped the nonsensical comment that keeps coming back to us: "We weren't aware of your complaints; please submit them again".

But the Kent Police Department has by now shown such a blatant resistance to even accepting the complaints, let alone to actually investigate them, that we will probably just take the whole matter to the state police. At that time we'll file a complaint against Kent P.D. for failure to investigate. We provide the list below only for information purposes---it's public information; it was supplied to us; so here it is in case anyone else can use it. Ranks have been omitted, as there seems no need to include them. We will never provide personal information regarding these individuals, such as social security numbers, addresses, or phone numbers, so please DO NOT ASK US. If you want to know, you're free to write to any of these people in care of the Kent Police Department, and ask them yourself.

Law Enforcement Officers Employed at Kent,
Washington Police Department as of this writing

Barbour, Tim
Bateman, Kevin
Blowers, Bill
Bourne, Randy
Buck, Dave
BURI  
BURWELL. BOB
BUTENSCHOEN. DAN
CLARK. STEVE
CLARK. TOM
CLIFT. JASON
CLINE. BOB
COBB. JEFF
ENGLEDQW, HOWARD ARR.
CONNELLY. FRANK
Crawford, Ed
Dexheimer, Donevan
Domena, Jorge
Duffin, Greg
Durhan, Todd
Eades, Kevin
Ellis, Pat
Emerson, Allen
F., Laine
Focht, Derrick
Ford, Tim
Gagner, Joe
Garret, Doug
Gee, Jerry
Gilchrist, Rick
Glaze, Doug
Griffin, Bill
Gurr, Tracey
Gustafson, Mark
Hale, Eliot
Harvey, Brian
Hemmen, Eric
Hemmen, Susan
Henson, Ken
Himple, Wayne
Holmes, Matt
Holt, Bob
Holt, Kathy
Holt, Steve
Hudnell, Mike
Johnson, Philip
Jones, Brian
Jones, Mark
Joseph, Rodd
Kammerzell, Derek
Seemeyer, Bare
Shipman, Jon
Shirey, Jeff
Sievers, Gene
Sifferman, Ben
Spooner, Autumn
Sprague, Chris
Straus, Jon
Thomas, Ken
Trigdon, Dave
Wales, Brendan
Walker, Rusty
Warmington, IA
Weissich, Bruce
Wescott, Doug
Williams, Jeff
Williams, Mark
Wilson, Marvin
Winters, Donal(d)?
Wong, Les
Woods, Glenn
KASNER. JAROD
KAUFMANN. BOB
KELLAMS, ROB D
KELLAMS, RODGER L
KELLY. STEVE         
KELSO.ANDY
LORETTE. MATTHEW LOWERY. PAT
LOWREY. GLENN
LOZANO-DAY. TIA
LUKE, PAUL
MAJACK, DARIN
MAK.HANS
MAKINGS, JOEL
OREIU.Y. MIKE
ORR. TERRY
PAPILLA. RAFAEL
PAGANUCCI. DINA
Mccrillis, Denis
McCuistion
Ohlde, Steve
McVicar, Steve
Miller, Charles
Miller, Jim A.
Miller, Jim M.
Miller, R E
Morfoot, Michael
Murray, Geary
Murray, Natalie
PAGEL. JOHN
PAINTER. MICHAEL
PETER. PAUL
Peterson, Paul
Pocock, Mark
Price, Lisa
Price, Ron
Quackenbush, Jon
Rankin, Scott
Richards, Gregory
Riener, Tom
Robnett, Bill
Rossmeier, Ryan
Ruffener, Lorna
Sagiao, Tyson
Schanbacher, Mike
Scholl, Rob