Formatted for Easier Printing
Question: Is it
"OKAY" to Lie to the Court in King County, Washington State?
You bet it's OK.
Lie to your heart's content.
Absolutely no repercussions will befall you,
no matter how blatant your perjury, no matter
how well documented your lies.
There. Is. No. Consequence. For. Lying.
The. Court. In. Washington. State.
Governor Gary Locke's Office Says
Perjury in Washington State:
"..is not an activity worthy of a law enforcement investigation."
Perjury Complaints Against
Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland
Any inexplicable inaction by the
office addressed below will be detailed on this page.
We are virtually certain we'll be forced to petition a judge for due process
in order to bring this matter to trial. We "dare" the prosecutor's office to
do its job. And if it does, that will be detailed here as well.
Note that the belly of this document has
been deleted pending investigation.
At an appropriate time it will be re-inserted.
King County Prosecutor
601 SW 149th St
Seattle, WA. 98166
Certified: 7000 1670 0011 1971 4016
includes polygraph test results, opinions, suspicions, conjecture and hunches.
All of it may be proven true, given time, and interest
on the part of the investigator(s). Many sections are easily proven true with
almost no investigation.
Due to my
experiences with the King County Prosecutor’s office in this matter, and based
on a number of attorneys’ summaries of the behavior of your office, I am
forced to believe that the King County Prosecutor’s office lives exclusively
in “political land”---that is to say that your office appears to do
nothing unless it benefits the careers of the employees of your office
directly. I’m sure that statement pisses you off. I have no doubt that that
one statement will cause your office to look especially hard for methods and
techniques by which it can justify, however flimsily, blowing this case off.
By saying that I expect that, I am saying that I believe your office to be far
less than professional, not even borderline honorable, and perhaps even
downright corrupt. Now is your opportunity to prove me wrong, and if I am
wrong, I’ll happily and dutifully post that misjudgment right along with the
rest of this case online.
Your office has
been advised of this complaint twice beginning as early as the summer of 2001.
Your office could not even muster the professionalism to respond by saying you
would not prosecute the case. Instead, you simply ignored the complaint.
Twice. I have therefore gone back to the examination of this mess, and I have
taken yet another polygraph (and passed it)(enclosed), and have rewritten the
entire complaint so as to make it more clear. If the average Internet surfer
who reads about this case on-line has no trouble understanding every single
facet of it, as they report, then I’m confident your office can figure it out
This is a case in
which many incidents of perjury did, in fact, occur. This is a case in which
many, if not all, of those incidents can be almost effortlessly proven. This
is a case in which the perjuries that were committed caused a victim a
colossal amount of grief and expense---and those things continue to this day.
This is a case which has been laid out before you, via this document, more
painstakingly and more accurately than the vast majority of cases submitted to
you by the average citizen. You only need follow up on the data.
If you do not do
so, you will be asked very specifically why. If you refuse to
respond, you will be asked again, in a more public manner. If you still refuse
to respond, or to supply an adequate, believable reason for not pursuing the
cases, you may well find me camping outside your office with a sandwich board
and a stack of flyers detailing the cases---and your mysterious unwillingness
to lift one finger to do your jobs with regard to them.
persons named below live and work in Kent. I have documentation which
indicates that certain employees of the Kent police department, and perhaps
certain clerking employees of the Aukeen courthouse, have worked to protect
Mcfarland and Lamb from prosecution based on personal relationships with
Mcfarland. Mcfarland admitted he had a “connection in a high position” inside
the Kent PD. I think I know who it is, but am not yet positive. I can also
document a number of very mysterious interactions with the Aukeen court staff.
For instance, when I requested tapes of the original hearing in this matter,
way back on 3-23-01, I was supplied a blank tape by the court. When I
requested a tape that actually had a recording on it, I was again supplied a
nearly completely unusable tape. Isn’t it curious, then, that counsel for the
opposition (Tift for Mcfarland and Lamb) was supplied a mostly clean, clear
copy of the tape by Aukeen court clerks---and isn’t it more curious still that
there seem to be a number of blank spots in that otherwise clean copy, which
rendered many of my key defense points inadmissible to the appeals court
because the transcriber couldn’t hear what was said? More curiously still,
none of Mcfarland’s or Lamb’s words were missing on Tift’s copy. Could this
all have anything to do with the fact that for a couple of years I maintained
a website which detailed several instances of corruption in an unrelated
problem with Aukeen court? I’m by no means a conspiracy theorist---but there’s
a lot of evidence here to suggest that Mcfarland and Lamb are being “helped”
by someone in the Kent PD and by employees of Aukeen court. For that reason
I’ll state flat-out that it would be absurd for your office to use Kent PD for
investigative purposes in this case. That would be like asking the fox to keep
an eye on the dog.
This is a complaint against the following individuals alleging multiple
counts of perjury. Both individuals are included in this complaint because
both were involved in the same situation, and both parties arranged and
drafted their testimonies so as to comply with one another’s stories:
#1 Last known address:
135 9th St. SE
Auburn, WA., 98007
#1 Last known employment:
Dart Trucking or T&L Leasing
7724 So. 259th
Kent, Wa. 98032
#2 Last known address:
26308 184th Pl. SE
Covington, Wa. 98042
#2 Last known employment:
7724 So. 259th
Kent, Wa. 98032
Ms. Lamb was at first a co-worker then a superior while I was employed at T&L
Leasing, which is a company that procures class-A drivers for Dart Trucking.
Mcfarland is and always was Lamb’s supervisor. Both companies are represented
at the same office listed above.
I was employed by this company as a class-A driver and “Compliance Officer” (I
administered driving tests to class-A applicants) from roughly March of 1998
to December 15th of 2000, a span of nearly three years. I first
self terminated in about the middle of September, 2000, due to increasing
moral problems with drugs in the office, and with incompetence and dishonesty
on the part of Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland. I was essentially begged to
reconsider, which I did. However I quit again, this time successfully, for the
same reasons, on 12-15-2000.
Upon my termination Lamb stated to many people that she would fire anyone who
may have had anything to do with my quitting. She refused to speak to the
secretary, Sarah, for three days, stating that she (Lamb) believed that Sarah
had talked me into quitting. Lamb also sent me an email (original enclosed)
which indicates clearly that she wanted me to stay on, and that she was sorry
to see me go; I’ve marked the pertinent passages on the copy titled “Yahoo
Mail”. Lamb made statements, in the office, in front of witnesses, to the
effect that I was “loved”, and would be missed.
Immediately after I quit I began receiving hang-up calls which traced directly
to the Dart office. I interpreted this childish behavior as typical of Lamb’s
temper. She was angry that I had quit and did not try to hide the fact. She
had engaged in this type of behavior in the past, when other valued employees
had quit (some for the same reasons I did). In one instance, Lamb made it
known, in the office, in front of witnesses, that she was “stalking” one or
To curb Lamb’s telephone harassment, I issued a no-contact demand (enclosed).
Delann Lamb acknowledged receipt of the demand, and apologized for the calls.
However the calls continue in earnest to the present. I was finally forced to
file a complaint with SPD last year. I don’t believe the complaint was
After serving Lamb with the no-contact demand, I began to receive requests
from Lamb that I fill out and submit to the main office in Los Angeles an
“exit interview”. This was simply a statement as to why I had quit. I was
reluctant to do this because I would have to list drug use, incompetence and
dishonesty as my reasons for leaving. I didn’t wish to cause anyone trouble. I
simply wanted to purge these people from my life and move forward.
At the same time, I began receiving numerous heads-up type messages from
friends who still worked at Dart or who worked with Dart, that Lamb was
defaming me mercilessly. I had been trying hard to find a new job, but, even
though it was a driver’s market, and my experience and pre-Dart references
were beyond reproach, I found that I was unable to secure a new job with any
company, performing any task. I remembered that Delann Lamb had boasted on
several occasions that she had many techniques for making sure an ex employee
could never find a new job, if that was her wish (see polygraphs, attached). I
began to surmise that Delann Lamb was providing derogatory and false
references to prospective employers who called her for a reference on me. I
began to realize that I needed a written reference from the
company so I could submit it to prospective employers. I knew that Lamb
wouldn’t lie on a written reference, because the company would be sued for it,
so I began to request one in writing.
Lamb informed me several times that my request for a written reference had
been “accidentally thrown away”, or it had been “ruined by spilled coffee”, or
it had been “damaged by the fax machine”, and would I send another. So I did
each time. But my written reference was never forthcoming, nor was an
explanation as to why it wasn’t. I was finally notified that Lamb had made the
statement, in response to my last request for a written reference: “You know,
whatever [he] asks for, we’re going to do the exact opposite.” The
statement was made during working hours, in the company office, in front of
At this point I determined that the harassment from Lamb, in the form of
hang-up calls and the campaign to prevent me from finding a new job, was
likely to continue. I therefore felt I should make my reasons for quitting
known to the main office, so as to hopefully prevent some other employee from
inadvertently falling into the mess I had.
I completed the exit interview, which was relatively short and to the point,
and covered only a small percentage of my gripes, and submitted it to the main
office in Los Angeles. That office refused to respond to this “whistle
blowing” in any way, shape or form. I then also posted a copy of the document
on the Internet.
This angered Lamb and Mcfarland, and they probably felt it put their jobs in
jeopardy. Lamb then began to conspire with Mark Mcfarland, her immediate
supervisor in the office, to find a way to get the data removed from the
Internet. I believe they consulted an attorney (a sleazy pig of a woman named
Leigh Ann Tift (my opinion!)), and were told that that pesky thing called the
First Amendment prohibited them from having the data removed simply because
they didn’t like it. They were told they could sue me for defamation regarding
the document, but of course to sue successfully for defamation, the data
disseminated must be untrue. Both parties knew it was true, with
much more incriminating information not even having been revealed. This
attorney, however, perhaps saw dollar signs, and to hell with any notion of
right, wrong, or decency. Lamb and Mcfarland were told that this law firm
could get the material removed from the Internet if it could somehow be shown
to be a larger part of some sort of harassment by me, against Lamb and
Mcfarland. In point of fact, this advice to Lamb, Mcfarland and
their employers, was erroneous, and my personal view is that
Tift knew it was erroneous at the time she supplied it. But the firm made a
good deal of money on the scheme.
I believe Lamb and Mcfarland scurried home, rubbed their little heads
together, and tried to come up with something, anything that
could be construed, no matter how remotely, as harassment. But they had
nothing, since no harassment had occurred. Therefore, being the fine,
dishonorable people that they are, they simply made things up.
On 3-23-2001 I appeared in district court in Kent, in front of a part-time pro
tem judge named John Lawson, to answer to no less than four civil complaints
of harassment. Just a little superficial research will illuminate Mr. Lawson’s
curious reputation on the bench---I’ve no doubt your office is well aware of
his shenanigans, though you would never admit it publicly.
Two of the complaints came from Lamb and Mcfarland’s superiors in the main
corporate office in L.A., a Mr. Paul Martin (President of the company), and a
Ms. Colleen Butler (holding some other corporate position). The two complaints
from Butler and Martin were tossed out in the first five minutes. It seems
Martin had forgotten to mention to the court that I had never heard of him,
and he had nothing to say when I informed the court of this. It was about the
same for Butler. They went and presumably sulked on the back bench in the
courtroom, from which Martin, from time to time, made asinine and adolescent
comments about the proceedings. I had been unable to afford an attorney to
accompany me to the hearing, but it seemed to be going pretty well so far.
But Lamb and Mcfarland had made up quite a story, and that brings us to the
crux of this complaint. Virtually every statement made by Delann Lamb and/or
Mark Mcfarland in this matter, made under oath, in the courtroom, and in their
original complaint, under penalty of perjury, was false. That is
not to say their statements were extrapolations from truths, or were enhanced
or modified truths. They made statements that were utterly and totally
invented from thin air. As a result, “Judge” Lawson granted them two identical
restraining orders which caused me to remove my document (the exit interview)
from the internet.
Having not been able to find a job for some time, I was broke. But neither
could I choke down such an incomprehensible injustice. Over the next weeks and
months I sold virtually every belonging I owned---every piece of furniture,
every piece of camping gear, my tools, my books---everything I owned, and was
able to find an attorney to take the cases to appeal. I won the major segment
of both appeals, and the data was re-established on the Internet. I then
served all parties with new no-contact documents, but at least one of the
parties has violated that demand and the attorneys are once again thrashing it
out between themselves. Judge John Lawson was significantly reprimanded for
his outrageous handling of the original hearings. He will be dealt with much
more harshly by me, in a document to the bar.
That’s the background. Here are the facts, referring to the
original harassment complaints filed by Lamb and Mcfarland. I did complain to
the prosecutor’s office last year, but that office could not be bothered to
respond in any way. I felt I would have better luck if I could supply more
polygraph documentation, so I paid for another test. I am now routing this
through the PD so it can be tracked by case number. This is far more than a simple, single count of perjury. This is an
orchestrated, multi-faceted plot to do harm, to circumvent the court system by
trickery and deceit, to personally harass me for making public my reasons for
quitting my job, to willfully strip me of my First Amendment rights, and to
Allegations against Delann Lamb (Mcfarland follows):
(Item 1) (para 3)
About fourteen pages deleted from this section pending investigation
Several attorneys have told me, “You’ll never get the prosecutor’s office to
file charges of perjury against anyone. Everyone does it [commits perjury].
Everyone accepts it. No one cares.” My own attorney has advised me that that’s
essentially true, suggesting that the only way the prosecutor’s office will
file charges of perjury is “if you find someone in the prosecutor’s office who
has a ‘thing’ for perjury.”
If no one cares about the crime of perjury, why do we have courts? Why should
anyone even bother to show up in one? Why did “I” feel compelled
to tell the truth in the hearing on 3-23-01, when apparently I didn’t
have to! I told the truth, and have paid dearly for it---yet Mcfarland
and Lamb lie in virtually every single statement they exude, and are granted
everything they ask for. And now my attorney tells me the prosecutor’s office
won’t punish them for it? Without the aggressive and systematic enforcement of
perjury laws, we have no judicial system whatsoever. It simply
does not exist and might as well be dismantled today.
I realize that polygraph tests are not admissible in court. Judge John Lawson
seemed to be absolutely thrilled to be able to tell me that in the original
hearing on 3-23-01. As far as I’m concerned, the man had not the slightest
interest in getting at any truths at all. In fact, by promising to fine me
$1500 per day, payable to every person in the courtroom, for every day my
witnesses took up the court’s time by testifying, the man very neatly
circumvented any justice whatsoever that might have fouled his courtroom in
Aukeen court. But regarding polygraph tests, they can be used as
an investigational tool, and I think in this case you have more than enough in
the form of polygraphs to point you in the direction of truth. And if you
don’t, I’ll be happy to take some more, at my expense, or at yours, using the
examiner of my choice, or of yours. Attached you’ll find my offer to pay for
tests of Lamb and Mcfarland, and to kick in a few hundred bucks to boot, for
their time. They refused my kind offer, through their attorney.
Mcfarland and Lamb make poor liars. They stumbled on their lines in court. It
was clear to everyone except the judge that they were lying. I believe that
many years of heavy drug use has reduced their intellectual capacities such
that while they seem to think they’re quite sharp and are
fooling those around them, they’re actually pretty transparent. I believe that
with a little pressure, they’ll fold and offer to cop to something. I can
virtually promise they won’t hold up to even marginally intense scrutiny
on the stand. In fact, I think they’ll avoid the stand like the plague. They
know what they’ve done. They know I’m after them for it. They’re sick of this
whole mess. I think they never dreamed I would actually stand up
and fight them (funny how folks mistake kindness for weakness). They regret
making mistakes so bold and obvious. When it was coming down to the wire in my
appeal of their original anti-harassment orders, their attorney was on the
phone to my attorney for days, trying to find a way to settle and bail out of
the whole thing. I refused to settle with them, and won anyhow. Curiously,
Lamb’s and Mcfarland’s attorney offered to give me a written reference more
positive than the one I had originally sought, if I would just drop the whole
thing and stop trying to tell my story publicly.
About one page deleted from this section pending investigation
Lamb and Mcfarland’s little stunt has cost me a lot. It has cost me everything
I own, all of my money, all of my savings. I haven’t worked in 14 months and
counting, nor do I expect to be able to in the foreseeable future. Without a
written reference, I have no way of controlling what the company tells
prospective employers about me. When applying for a class-A job, it is Federal
Law that the new employer check with the old employer for a reference. I
cannot simply say I haven’t worked for four years, nor do I want to. I went
out of my way, as never before in my life, to create and cultivate the
best possible reference from this employer. Now I have nothing to show
for it. While I’ve won my appeals and have reposted my documents and
polygraphs, I’ve also lost much, and the loss continues.
While I may never recover what I’ve lost monetarily or health-wise, neither
will I allow two such miserable skunks to get away with this. If the
prosecutor’s office will not pursue this matter, I’ll begin the process of
petitioning judges for due process, and will, in that manner, file the charges
myself. This is a drastic measure, and one I don’t take lightly, nor do I
relish the work it entails.. But this was a horrendous series of crimes
perpetrated by these people. If the court system hopes to retain any
credibility at all, it can’t allow people to get away with things like
this. And believe me, more than a few are watching this case on-line.
(residence in Seattle proper)
We finally decided that we had given the King County
prosecutor enough chances to do its job. On 6-22-02 the following letter was
sent to the prosecutor's office. The intent was to obtain a list of those
persons within that office who hold any position that would enable them to
cause an investigation to be undertaken into my allegations of perjury. We
would then send a copy of the complaint, along with all available evidence, to
each and every appropriate employee of that office, via registered mail. Would
one of those employees then take it upon him or her self to actually do the
job and investigate the matter and bring charges against Lamb and/or
Mcfarland? Of course not. The King County prosecutor's office has shown a bias
in this case that cannot possibly be explained away and we KNOW that no matter
what evidence or documentation is brought before them, they will not do the
job they were hired to do. But we will have demonstrated just how far that
office is willing to go to shirk their duties, and how hard we tried to use
the system as it's supposed to be used. Then we will petition for due process,
effectively bypassing the prosecutor's office altogether. So the following
letter was mailed as the first step in this process:
King County Prosecutor
601 SW 149th St
Seattle, WA. 98166
Pursuant to the public disclosure act please send me the
names of any and all persons working for the King County Prosecutor’s office
who would be in a position to pursue, in any way, the investigation and/or
filing of charges of the crime of perjury, and a contact address for each (I’m
assuming they’re all reachable through your office, but please provide a
contact address for each one in which that’s not the case).
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.
Comment: Of course the prosecutor's office could not muster
the simple professionalism to respond in any way to this legal request.
Therefore, it has been sent again, via registered mail. As far as I'm
concerned, the King County prosecutor's office has shown itself to be little
more than an adolescent frat house, picking and choosing its cases on a whim,
depending on whether or not any political positioning might be achieved as a
result of handling, or not handling certain cases. I believe that if employees
of the prosecutor's office don't happen to personally "like" an individual
(and they don't like me because I say what I think of them), they'll either
find a way to go after them legally and criminally, or will refuse to handle
their complaints. On the other hand, if the prosecutor's office feels any
particular issue is popular, trendy, or might help them or their friends in
their infernal ladder climbing and political mobility, then they'll pull out
the stops. Am I saying I believe the King County prosecutor's office is
blatantly and shamelessly corrupt? Yes, that's the statement I am making.
Remember that we are not attempting to force the prosecutor's office to file
charges. We are attempting to force them to investigate this matter, and to
file charges if charges are warranted. Of course, with the amount of
documentation we have, charges are eminently warranted. So, when the
prosecutor's office formally refuses to file charges, and they will, we will
begin the process of demanding to know exactly, specifically, explicitly WHY
they refuse to file charges. If (when) they cannot or will not adequately
explain their position and their thread of logic for their decision, we will
begin the process of filing formal complaints against their office for failure
to investigate. Remember, also, that we anticipated all of this from day-one.
We knew exactly the course this matter would take because, after all, this is
how prosecutor's offices work across the country; arrogant, backward,
incompetent and often criminal. Our second request in what should have been an
otherwise excruciatingly simple matter, follows:
King County Prosecutor
601 SW 149th St
Seattle, WA. 98166
Re: criminal complaints of perjury against Delann Lamb
and Mark Mcfarland.
We’re sorry you could not find the professionalism or
honor to respond to the first request detailed in this document (below). You
have shown yet another instance of bias and incompetence in this case.
Second request via registered mail, receipt # 7000 0520
0017 6913 xxxx :
Pursuant to the public disclosure act please send me the
names of any and all persons working for the King County Prosecutor’s office
who would be in a position to pursue, in any way, the investigation and/or
filing of charges of the crime of perjury, and a contact address for each (I’m
assuming they’re all reachable through your office, but please provide a
contact address for each one in which that’s not the case).
I understand that I may be responsible for reasonable
copying and postage charges.
NOTE: No reply was ever received. We set this letter up
knowing the prosecutor's office would not reply. We set it up such that we
could come back at a later date and file a public lawsuit which almost
automatically awards the petitioner about $8/day for every day the
information is not forthcoming. This notation is made on 7-2-2004.
Locke's Office Says Perjury in Washington State:
"..is not an activity worthy of a law enforcement investigation."
Washington State Governor’s Office
Attorney General’s Office
Ron Sims (county executive)
King County Sheriff
We need help.
Roughly four years ago I was the victim of a multitude of perjuries from
two individuals, Mark McFarland and Delann Lamb. This is a cut-and-dried
case. For instance, Mark Mcfarland testified in court and in court documents
that he had never taken drugs and that he does not take drugs. Yet we have
his repeated failed drug screens for illegal drugs. Delann Lamb testified in
court that I harassed her. Yet we have letters from her stating how much she
enjoyed my company and wanted to be friends. There are perhaps a dozen
points equally as strong as this. This is a good, solid case.
Over three years ago I began appealing to law enforcement agencies in
western Washington for some relief from these crimes. I wanted Lamb and
Mcfarland prosecuted. I began by filing complaints with the Kent Police
Department, where Lamb and Mcfarland live. I was not surprised when the Kent
department refused to even reply to my requests over the next year and a
half, since Mcfarland had often claimed he was close personal friends with
someone in the Chief of Police’s office, and that his relationship with this
individual was strong enough to have traffic tickets “taken care of”. In
fact Mcfarland offered to have a speeding ticket of mine taken care of
through his friend in the Kent Chief of Police’s office. The mystery person
may or may not be the chief himself. There is no point in asking Kent PD to
investigate at this point—I would even resist having them investigate it; I
would stake my life on the fact that any investigation by Kent PD would be a
whitewash and a scam. I believe that agency’s corruption ratio is almost as
high as Tacoma’s.
I also sent complaints by registered mail to the prosecutor’s office. I
received no reply from that office for a year and a half. The only reason
they finally did reply was that I told them their lack of response was being
posted on the Internet. At that time the prosecutor’s office replied and
informed me that the complaint must come to them from a law enforcement
agency. –Too bad they couldn’t be bothered to advise me of that a year and a
I then sent the complaint to the Seattle PD. This seemed logical, since I
lived in the Seattle City limits, and most of the perjuries actually took
place at Lamb’s and Mcfarland’s attorney’s office, within the city of
Seattle. Seattle PD replied and stated they would not take the case because
Lamb and Mcfarland lived in Kent.
I then appealed to the King County Sheriff’s office, and sent them the
complaint by registered mail. The S.O. replied and said they would not
investigate because it was Kent’s jurisdiction. I reminded the S.O that Kent
had ignored repeated appeals for help for a year and a half. I received no
reply to that.
I finally sent the complaint to the State Patrol. They replied with
documentation demonstrating to my satisfaction that in cases where the Kent
P.D. was obviously ineffective, the S.O. was the next agency up the chain,
and therefore was, in fact, responsible for the case. So I sent the
complaint back to the King County Sheriff’s office, by registered mail, as
always, back in October of 2003. I asked for a reply and a case number. I
received no reply whatsoever. Since 10-2003 I have repeatedly written to the
King County Sheriff’s office, asking for, then demanding a case number;
asking for, then demanding a reply, and finally advising them that they were
leaving me no choice but to file a complaint against their department. I
still received no reply and have received no reply as of 6-15-04, eight
months after my second complaint to the King County Sheriff.
I then appealed back to the State Patrol for guidance. The State Patrol
has refused to reply.
While we might expect this kind of horrendous incompetence and dishonesty
from the Taliban in Afghanistan, we don’t expect it from every single law
enforcement agency in Washington state. If perjury is “OK” in Washington
state, as my attorney, Elena Garella suggests, please have the decency to
state that outright, so at least we’ll all be playing by the same rules. If
perjury is not OK in Washington state, and if law enforcement agencies
really do have a moral and professional responsibility to at least muster
the simple human decency to RESPOND TO A REGISTERED LETTER, then please help
us figure out what avenue of relief to explore next. My attorney is
stumped---she does not know to whom we might next turn for help. No one
Along with the rest of this case, this letter may be accessed on the
world wide web. Your reply, or refusal to reply, will be posted there as
well. As nearly as I can tell, after over three solid years of trying to
gain a bit of relief in this case, Washington state law is virtually
non-existent. Incompetence, corruption and dishonesty rule. No morals exist
within the government or law enforcement communities. The judicial system is
in chaos and must be considered utterly and completely ineffective. If these
assumptions, based on experience and documentation, are incorrect, please
help us find a glimmer of logic and decency in any government agency in the
state of Washington.
This letter should be considered a grain of sand on the beach, compared
to the media campaign I am prepared to launch. This is a small matter. I’ve
done most of the work already for any investigating agency. A conviction
should be little more than a formality. Yet every agency in the state
steadfastly refuses to show even a molecule of competence or honesty.
On 7-1-04 we received a reply from the Governor's office (no reply from
any other agency). This reply is, perhaps, the single most amazing letter
from any government agency we have ever received. It flat-out scares us. The
above letter alleged that many perjuries had been committed by two
individuals (perjury is a quite serious crime, as anyone knows), and that no
law enforcement agency in the state would even respond to three years of
registered letters, let alone actually investigate the case. That was the
gist of the complaint as mailed out above. The State of Washington
Governor's office under Gary Locke wrote back and stated, effectively, that
perjury in Washington was not (!) a crime, and that it was not surprised no
law enforcement agency would respond to the complaint. Finally, it seems, we
have something genuinely newsworthy from the state of Washington. Here's the
Governor's letter (below), and below that our reply.
Office of the Governor
Olympia, Wa., 98504-0002
Reply to yours of 6-29-04
Our original letter to you
appears above this letter, for your reference.
In that letter we described to you instances of blatant perjury committed
by two individuals. We reported to you that no law enforcement agency in the
state would investigate our repeated criminal complaints, and that in fact
almost no agency would even reply to us.
In reply, you have stated that these acts (repeated perjuries, totaling
perhaps two dozen in number), do not (in your words): "appear to rise to the
level of a law enforcement investigation".
Over many decades we have received many responses from government
agencies that we found lacking, or materially suspect, or even downright
dumb---perhaps even criminally stupid. But no interaction we have ever
endured with any agency, state or Federal, in the US or in other countries,
has ever topped this one.
Since when is perjury not a matter which comes under the jurisdiction of
It would be easy to dismiss the writer of your letter of 6-29-04 as
mentally handicapped. Perhaps Locke himself wrote it---that would certainly
explain it. But we cannot grant the writer that benefit of the doubt because
of one exceedingly mysterious line in the aforementioned letter: "Thank you
for contacting Governor Locke with your concerns about the alleged actions
of a former employer".
That's a curious statement because, if you'll take a moment to re-read
our letter to you, no mention is made of these folks being a former
employer. As it happens, they are---but you were never told that.
This means, quite documentably, that someone in Locke's office has
investigated this case, and knows what it's about. That means your office
knows damned well this is a complaint of perjury, and you have
consciously chosen to reply to us with utter nonsense.
Now, we might ask ourselves why, exactly, your office would want to
purposely and conspiratorially whitewash this case, and why you would want
to actively protect these two defendants (Lamb and Mcfarland), and/or the
various law enforcement agencies involved.
You've investigated the case. You know what it's about (perjury and law
enforcement's flat-refusal to respond to the complaint). And yet Governor
Locke's office tries to assert the viewpoint that perjury is not a crime and
should not be investigated by law enforcement.
And you wonder why the backwoods, hillbilly government of Washington
State is the laughing stock of the nation...
How should the Washington voter interpret your assertion that perjury is
"not an activity worthy of a law enforcement investigation"? Should the
voter finally admit that there's simply no one home in the
Governor's mansion? The bats have left the belfry? The cuckoo's are
running the nut-house? Should we consider that even the governor's office is
corrupt? Clearly it's one thing or the other---stupid and incompetent, or
dishonest and corrupt. Which is it? This is not a rhetorical question! Is
the governor's office stupid or corrupt? Inquiring minds want to know!
Are you saying that it is competence and professionalism that asserts
that perjury is not a crime?
Or are you saying that you know perjury is a crime, and you simply wanted
us to think it wasn't? What would be the purpose of that? There is only one
possible purpose: To protect those who have committed perjury, and/or to
protect various law enforcement agencies who have steadfastly refused to do
So is Governor Gary Locke's office stupid or corrupt?
It must be one or the other!
Below please find a handful of statutes, all of which apply to this case,
all of which have been broken by Lamb and Mcfarland. Yet your reply is that:
"[this activity does not] appear to rise to the level of a law enforcement
Are you insane?
||Perjury and false swearing -- Inconsistent statements --
Degree of crime.
||Perjury and false swearing -- Retraction.
||Perjury and false swearing -- Irregularities no defense.
||Statement of what one does not know to be true.
CC: Attorney; Senate; Attorney General
So.....once and for all, is it "OK" to lie under oath in Washington State?
Absolutely. Don't give it a second thought.
Office of Citizen Complaints Ombudsman
400 Yesler Way, Room 240
Seattle, WA 98104
We are enclosing several documents which will give you a pretty good idea
of our problems with the KCSO. We have been attempting to file a criminal
complaint with that office for four (4) years by registered mail. They
refuse to respond.
This is not laziness. This is not incompetence. This is willful
corruption, through and through. If I were to simply assert allegations of
corruption, incompetence, malfeasance, and even insanity within Washington
State’s various government and law enforcement agencies, I may or may not be
taken seriously. Letters like the attached [above], however, written by the
Governor’s office, on official state letterhead, serve far more effectively
to demonstrate to Gary Locke’s constituency that the state is out of
control, and that madmen are at the helm. For that, at least, we thank the
writer of the letter.
We don’t expect your office to be able to help us---we are sending this
to you merely to document the fact that you’ve been made aware of the
problem (and will most likely provide no real or meaningful relief). Any
relief you provide, or fail to provide, will be posted publicly along with
this letter at the url noted on the accompanying documents.
We have come to the conclusion that the [King County] Sheriff’s office
needs a change of leadership. To that end we are researching local TV
advertising rates to expose this problem.
It's no wonder it took this outfit a decade or more to
catch the Green River Killer.
CC: Internet post
We are exploring the ramifications of proceeding under CrRLJ 2.1 (c) at
On 7-26-04 we received a communication from a KCSO (King
County Sheriff's office) (verified) law enforcement officer. Although the
individual did not request it, we're going to keep his/her identify
anonymous for the time being. The communication was one line, as shown below
"You should call your local FBI office."
The writer signed it and included his/her rank and phone number. No other
reference or inference was made. The entire message was that one line.
We had not considered that this mess might fall within the jurisdiction
of the FBI. Our experiences with them (the FBI) in the past, working from a
position of law enforcement, have been almost exclusively poor. It's been
our experience that they're far too big and cumbersome to be as effective as
they might be, and we've often questioned the competence of their actions.
We've often questioned their honesty as well. We'll research the matter
further to make sure that corruption within a local S.O. would fall within
the FBI's jurisdiction. If it does, as obviously suggested by this KCSO
employee, then we'll forward the mess on to them. We don't believe for one
minute the FBI will so much as flick a finger to solve this mess, even if it
does fall within their jurisdiction. But if it proves to be the proper thing
to do, we'll send them the case, just to document that we tried all possible
law enforcement remedies before exploring other remedies.
It should go without saying that we lost all hope of finding help within
the law enforcement community several years ago. Basically, we declare the
law enforcement community, at least in Washington State, and the Washington
court system, null and void. The stupidity, incompetence and dishonesty are
so rampant, so well entrenched, that neither the law enforcement community
or the judicial system are a viable option in seeking relief from criminals.
The legitimate cases solved in Washington State seem to be happenstance, or
luck. Run enough cases through a system, and you're bound to accidentally
get a few of them right. You will, of course, get many more of them wrong.
The purpose of this site has changed from trying to show how difficult it is
to find relief within the system, to demonstrating the lengths law
enforcement will go to, to ignore the law entirely. We've said it before:
These people will spend ten times the money, exhaust ten times the
man-hours, to keep from doing their jobs, as they would have been required
to expend in simply doing their jobs in the first place. This is true partly
due to stupidity, partly due to laziness, but mostly due to the misguided
practice of acting like a gang -- and that's exactly the word
we chose to use. Law enforcement communities in much of America have become
a gang which enforces laws, or ignores them, at their whim,
depending on their mood, and based on whether or not they "like" someone, or
don't. In this case, we've documented that Mark Mcfarland boasted of friends
within the Kent PD who were happy to "fix" tickets for him, and grant other
favors. Since Mcfarland is a dedicated pot-head, and since pot-heads rarely
associate with straights, we must assume that Mcfarland's contact(s) within
Kent PD are probably pot-heads as well. Pot-heads stick together. It seems
clear to us that Mcfarland's pot-head friends within Kent PD didn't want to
investigate and prosecute a pot-heat friend for perjury. So they simply
didn't do it. Over a period of years the Kent PD refused to
even acknowledge our complaints. They did not respond to us even one
time. We're guessing that when the KCSO's office contacted Kent PD
about our continuing complaints, Kent PD either made up some story about how
"we" must be the bad guys in the case, or Kent PD found another sympathetic
pot-head ear in the KCSO, and convinced them to stone-wall the case.
The statutes will run out on these cases soon -- all Kent PD and the KCSO
need do is stall and pretend they don't know what's going on, and soon the
entire matter will become moot, as the statutes run out. Then the KCSO can
pipe up and say, "Oh, gee, we're really sorry. Someone must have dropped the
ball on this. Oh well -- nothing we can do about it now. Have a nice day."
Mark our words---this is precisely what will happen.
Because we know the routine, we're going to serve King County Sheriff
David G. Reichert with a copy of this case and complaint (and maybe this
website as well). In that way, the KCSO won't be able to say "someone"
dropped the ball. We'll be able to say, specifically, that "King
County Sheriff David G. Reichert" dropped the ball.
But even if someone (the FBI, let's say) were to light a fire under the
KCSO's office and force them to investigate this case, they'll
muff the investigation. It's a foregone conclusion. The KCSO's office has,
by their actions, made it clear they don't want to investigate
this case. And they've decided they won't. Neither will they even present
the simple human courtesy or professionalism to state why they
won't investigate the case--certainly because they have no legitimate
reason for refusing to investigate. But if forced by some outside
agency or pressure (TV ads, for instance), the KCSO will bungle the case,
and report back that they were "unable to find sufficient evidence to
warrant criminal charges", or something to that effect. It's guaranteed. Law
enforcement and the judicial system in Washington State does what it
wants. No more, no less.
Take, for example, the case of the Seattle Prosecutor's office employee,
Scott Peterson (no relation to Scott Peterson the accused wife-killer). This
is a guy who, if you're not familiar with the story, simply bashed a woman
out of the way when he wanted a parking spot she was standing in. He did it
deliberately, repeatedly, in front of numerous witnesses, even while the
woman was pounding on the trunk of his car! Yet Scott Peterson kept right on
hitting her with his car. Why? Because he's a smart-ass, and because he
knew, he knew he would never be prosecuted. Why? Because he's
part of a corrupt judicial system which acts like a gang, with total
and absolute impunity. This case elicited a local media-storm which
documented (documented) outrageous corruption within the
prosecutor's office. For instance, the prosecutor's office swore it
interviewed every witness. Yet local news stations uncovered that it had
interviewed none. Because of that high-profile media attention, and only
because of that, the prosecutor decided to "take another look" at the case.
He didn't promise even to prosecute it---he simply said he would take
another look at it. No doubt he hoped that one insignificant concession
would appease the media. And it seemed to work! The law enforcement
community and Washington's judicial system play the media and the public
like a fiddle. Will the crime be prosecuted properly? Of course not. It will
be whitewashed, Peterson will be given every benefit of the doubt, and will
either slither away unscathed, or will receive a token, cursory slap on the
hand for some mitigated charge whose penalties have no teeth. The public
will sigh (or groan), knowing again their system is utterly corrupt and
unreliable, and will continue on with their lives, disgusted by and
embarrassed for and in fear of the Washington State system, but knowing they
can do absolutely nothing to change it -- and in fact, if they try, as this
website has tried, they'll become victims themselves. Bear in mind the
victim's boyfriend, who showed up after the incident, pushed Scott Peterson
down (as he should have -- he should have thoroughly kicked Peterson's ass,
actually, but he probably would have gotten the Death Sentence for that),
inflicting upon Peterson injuries far less severe than what Peterson
inflicted upon the man's girlfriend with his car (legally deemed a deadly
weapon, by the way) and was instantly and successfully prosecuted for that "crime", while, of course scum-bag Peterson was never charged with anything.
Hasn't anyone in this government read Animal Farm?
Had anyone we know come across the Scott Peterson incident while it was
in progress, the resulting crime-scene statement might have gone something like this:
"We noticed a commotion across the street and saw a woman pounding on the
trunk of a car, which was ramming its bumper into her legs. She was yelling
repeatedly and loudly for the driver to stop, but he continued to bump her
over a period of perhaps 30-45 seconds. The action was obviously deliberate.
The driver did not appear to be experiencing mechanical difficulty with the
vehicle. We crossed the street and pounded on the driver's side window for
the driver to stop. Our warnings were unheeded. At this point, surmising
that the driver was either consciously trying to hurt or kill the woman, or
that he was mentally incapacitated and might unintentionally hurt or kill
the woman, we attempted to disable his vehicle by shooting out his tires.
The driver, however, continued to back up and strike the woman, even on
flattened tires. At this point we fired several rounds into the engine
compartment of the vehicle, hoping to disable the engine. Unfortunately, we
were unable to accomplish this, and the driver continued backing up,
obviously injuring the woman. Attempts to move the woman from the path of
the vehicle were unsuccessful. We surmised that in any given instant the
driver could, for whatever reason, abruptly accelerate and crush the woman
under the car before we were able to react and stop him. At this point,
fearing the imminent serious injury to or death of the woman, we felt we had
no choice but to use deadly force to stop the driver. The driver was
pronounced dead at the scene due to multiple gunshot wounds to the head."
Chances are very, very good that had this scenario played out in reality,
the shooting would be ruled justified -- at least that is to say that had
Peterson been a "regular" citizen, and not a member of the "government
elite", the shooting would have been ruled justifiable. It's not acceptable,
however, that any citizen stop any member of
Washington's elite, special and protected people from committing any
crime, so the shooting of Scott Peterson would have therefore been ruled a
homicide and the perpetrators would be on their ways to the gallows post
haste. In other words, Scott Peterson's
belligerent, outrageous, Felony actions would, in all likelihood, had he
been a regular lowly peon, have justified the use
of deadly force to stop him. Yet the Prosecutor's office deemed that Scott Peterson's
actions warranted no action at all. Is this corruption or insanity, or a
peculiar mixture of the two? One might submit that corruption can only exist
as a by-product of insanity.
This is, unfortunately, only one of tens of thousands of absolutely
outrageous examples that have occurred over the years and which continue to
occur every single day in Washington State, and are under-reported, or
un-reported. How does Washington rank with other states for this kind of
nonsense? Depressingly, it's about in the middle of the scale. We know of
states that are far more corrupt, and also states in which the law
enforcement communities and judicial systems almost seem to work---at least
the players understand the basic concepts and actually strive to make things
work as they should. They succeed most of the time. Washington succeeds only
sometimes, and then, seemingly only by luck. Washington State's approach to
law enforcement and judicial proceedings reminds us of the joke about the
woman who pulled into the gas station to fill up her European sports car for
the first time. Unable to find the fuel tank, she decided to just "pour it
all over the car", figuring that some of it would get in somehow.
Incidentally, Scott Peterson's total justification for his actions are
(quote): "I was having a bad day."
That this man is the quintessential Piece of American Shit is not at
issue. What's telling, and terrifying---and again terrifying
is the word we chose to use---is that (1) a human being of
this ilk could find steady employment anywhere, let alone in a
position of authority in a prosecutor's office in a large American city, and
(2) his co-workers and/or superiors would crawl so far out on a limb to
protect him from rightful and appropriate prosecution, and (3) Scott
Peterson will never, ever be properly punished (if punished at all) for his
outrageously anti-social behavior. We seem to live in an age of
Isolated incident, you say? We say Nyet.
I vividly remember the time a punk on a dirt bike came racing through our
driveway, clipped my wife who was washing her car, knocked her into a patch of blackberry bushes,
sprayed her with gravel from his rear tire, and sped off, laughing. When I caught up to him a few blocks down the street
and started to approach him, he said, "What do you want, you F***ing
asshole." At this point he didn't even know who I was. He started to get off
his bike and I pushed him back down into the seat, using the heel of my hand
on the top of his full-face helmet. Then we had a talk. An hour later, as
the officers responded to MY complaint of a reckless driver and a
hit-and-run, I was
arrested for assault. The kid never claimed that I had touched him except to
push him back onto his seat with my open hand on the top of his helmet, and
the charge was dismissed months later, after I'd spent thousands in
attorney's fees. And what of the punk on the dirt bike? We fought for many
more months to file charges. We were ignored. Repeatedly. Steadfastly.
Resolutely. We delivered 23 registered letters to the prosecutor's office
and to the city PD. Only the 23rd was answered. It came from an obscure
employee in the prosecutor's office, advising us to back off, as the kid had
been related to someone high-up in that office. We did back off. In fact we
left the area in disgust. That was Pierce County, Washington, one of the
more corrupt little bergs in these here backwoods.
There was the time a drunk raced passed us on a dark and lonely highway
late at night, weaving and careening. Up ahead, we saw him stop in the road,
burn a couple of donuts, and then, apparently disoriented, he came barreling
back at us. We veered for the ditch and flicked our headlights from low to
hi to low to get his attention, but not quickly enough apparently, and he
hit us head-on. His excuse to the State Trooper who finally arrived on-scene
was, "I was having a bad day." Amazingly, I was charged with using my
hi-beams at night in the face of oncoming traffic. Of course it was later dismissed,
but only after my legal insurance spent hundreds on an attorney. We pushed hard, for
many months, even taking out ads in the local paper, to have the driver
charged with reckless driving. The prosecutor's office refused, in writing,
in no uncertain terms, saying it was his decision whether or not to charge
the driver, and he wasn't about to let us "tell him what to do". We later learned the punk was related to someone in
the prosecutor's office, and he taunted us with that fact for months
afterward whenever we saw him on the street. Why didn't we kick his ass?
Well, that would be illegal.....
In Seattle a few years ago, we followed another car into our underground
parking garage---and right into our reserved parking space. When we advised
him the space was reserved, he ran at us, enraged, and asked if we wanted to fight
over it. We said sure. Then he didn't want to fight anymore. SPD responded
and took statements from us, from independent witnesses, and from the punk
himself, who, amazingly, admitted to exactly what had transpired. He was
cited and released. Word came to us a few days later, via a third party, as
a message from the tough-guy, that we'd "better watch our step". Why?
Because his sister worked in the prosecutor's office. We later learned he
was never prosecuted. It was made clear to us that if we tried to pursue the
case, "something might happen". --To us. Thanks again,
After a few dozen such experiences, one tends to get testy, and one might
adopt the notion that some government official, somewhere---just one, mind
you---just one of these lazy, incompetent, corrupt officials
in a position of authority is going to do their job, come hell or high
water. Just one. Just one time. Please. Just once. That's not too much to
If folks are beginning to form the idea that to have a friend or relative
in law enforcement or the prosecutor's office is like having a
get-out-of-jail-free card, they'd be right. It's documented. It's not a
suspicion, it's not conspiracy-fodder, it's not the ravings of the paranoid.
It's documented fact. But if having friends in high
places is good, having co-workers in high places is even better. Many people
remember the Snohomish County assistant prosecutor who was arrested for DUI
near Everett. The prosecutor shrugged it off saying, "He's only human."
More people remember Judge Bobbe Bridge, another sterling example of
Washington State morality and honor---she got slobbering drunk and pulled a
hit and run in Seattle. She agreed to go through substance abuse counseling,
so, well, that's punishment enough!, says the prosecutor. She refused to
step down from her cushy, prestigious job, saying she "had good judgment" on
the bench. Justice Bridge is married to Jonathan J. Bridge, co-CEO of Ben
Bridge Jeweler. We wonder if folks who buy jewelry from this outfit realize
they're pouring yet another pint of Mad Dog 20-20 down this woman's gullet.
This site airs the outrageous, shocking incompetence of one Judge John
Lawson; it describes the criminality of Judge Bobbe Bridge; it details the
staggering bias and unprofessionalism of Judge Doerty; the staggering
dishonesty and incompetence of Judge Helen L. Halpert (who sat on the bench
and announced for the record that she had not read the case but was ready to
render her decision). We're confident that no sane human being would deny
these judges have to go. But how did they come to power in the first place?
Take a wild guess. Three of the four weren't even
elected---they were appointed .....by Governor Gary Locke
personally. Indeed, shit slides downhill. With friends like Gary
Locke, the state needs no enemies.
The point is this: Prosecutors and law enforcement personnel are the most
powerful people in the country. Checks and balances exist for most
politicians, and to a far lesser degree for judges. But no meaningful
recourse exists for prosecutors and police who simply refuse to do their
Since we have received NO REPLY from the Ombudsman's office, and since
time is running out on the statutes, we have delivered the following
complaint to the Seattle Office of the FBI:
Federal Bureau-Investigation 1110 3rd Ave, Seattle, WA 98101
This will be considered a formal complaint against the King County
Sheriff’s Office. Background: Approximately four years ago two individuals,
Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland, both residents of Kent, Washington, became
angry when I posted my opinions about them on the Internet. They attempted
to find a legal means of having the website shut down, but were
unsuccessful. They then decided to simply make up stories out of thin air.
Approx four years ago Lamb and Mcfarland went to a judge in King County and
committed numerous perjuries in order to obtain an emergency restraining
order which served to remove the site from the Internet. They then sought a
permanent restraining order in another court. In order to obtain a permanent
restraining order they committed another dozen or so blatant perjuries in a
King County courthouse. I subsequently appealed the order and won. The
website was re-posted. l
Since these two individuals had committed so many perjuries, in such a
blatant manner, I assumed it would be a simple matter to file a complaint,
have the investigating agency (Kent P.D.) consider the documentation, and
send the cases along to the prosecutor. In early 2001 I began sending
complaints to the Kent P.D. I received no reply. I sent many complaints by
registered mail; Kent P.D. signed for each and every letter. I continued to
send complaints to Kent P.D. for approximately two years. In no instance did
I receive a reply of any kind, by any method of communication. This was not
overly surprising, as I had posted a derogatory website concerning unrelated
activities of the Kent P.D. in years past, and also because Mark Mcfarland
had boasted on numerous occasions that he had friends in higher positions
within Kent P.D. who routinely fixed tickets for him and granted other
favors (see polygraph(s) posted on above-referenced website). I finally
began to appeal to the King County Sheriff’s office regarding Kent P.D.’s
steadfast refusal to do their jobs. Two years of registered-mail complaints
to the KCSO brought NO RESPONSE either. While I was not overly surprised at
Kent P.D.’s refusal to follow procedure, I was slightly surprised to find
the same nonsense in the KCSO. In 2004 I filed a complaint against KCSO with
their Ombudsman. The Ombudsman’s office has also refused to reply. This does
not surprise me greatly. In mid-2004 I was contacted by a KCSO employee in
what I considered to be an unofficial capacity and advised to “contact the
FBI”. It seems clear to me that Kent P.D. refused to investigate the case
because (1) I had posted their dirty laundry on a previous occasion, and (2)
one or more persons in the chief’s office maintain a personal relationship
with Mark Mcfarland and are willing to perform illegal services for him.
That would seem to include protecting him (and his girlfriend) from
prosecution. It seems clear to me that the KCSO has refused to investigate
Kent P.D. because they have friends in Kent P.D. who have asked them “as a
favor” to stonewall this case. I submit that the Ombudsman’s office was
simply asked by KCSO to also stonewall any investigation they might be
considering. I’ve seen corruption on this level, and greater, along the
Mexican border. I did not previously believe Washington state was this
backwards. I have now reassessed my belief system. It’s clear to me and to
my attorney that if this were simply a matter of accidental incompetence,
both the Kent P.D. and the KCSO would have replied with something over the
course of four years. The fact that they both steadfastly, resolutely refuse
to respond to registered letter after registered letter after registered
letter is sufficient for me to conclude that their actions are a result of
willful corruption. Both agencies have, I believe, colluded and conspired to
stonewall this case. I do not at this late date believe this case will ever
be properly investigated. I have come to the heartfelt conclusion that no
law exists in Washington state except in cases where the law enforcement
and/or judicial communities desire, for reasons of their own, for law
enforcement remedies to exist. I believe that if your office forces the
issue with either agency, Kent P.D. or KCSO, they will purposefully and
willfully botch the investigation in order to report back that they are
unable to find sufficient grounds to recommend charges. This will be pretty
hard for them to justify, since one instance of perjury has Mark Mcfarland
stating under oath that he doesn’t do and has never done illegal drugs, yet
a simple subpoena will produce his failed drug screens from one or several
clinics, in one or two states, dating back eight years or more. Still, I
believe either agency will find a way to make that, and other documentation
like it, irrelevant---because they want to. Still, I will ask that the final
dispensation of this complaint include a directive to “an appropriate law
enforcement agency” to investigate the original complaints of perjury
against Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland. Why? Because I know any such
investigation will be white-washed, and I want to be able to document the
fact that law enforcement in Washington state does not exist as the public
believes it exists or should exist. In other words, I’ve long since given up
any hope of attaining justice through traditional means. All I hope for at
this point is to prove my assertion: Washington state law enforcement is
corrupt, through and through. The crimes committed by Lamb and Mcfarland
include but are not limited to the following, one or more of which are, I
9A.72.020 Perjury in the first degree.
9A.72.030 Perjury in the second degree.
9A.72.040 False swearing.
9A.72.050 Perjury and false swearing -- Inconsistent statements -- Degree of
crime. 9A.72.060 Perjury and false swearing -- Retraction.
9A.72.070 Perjury and false swearing -- Irregularities no defense.
9A.72.080 Statement of what one does not know to be true.
I do understand it is not the FBI’s job or jurisdiction to investigate
the perjury complaints. It is, however, your job and within your
jurisdiction to investigate and remedy corruption within the KCSO. The FBI
is the last agency to which a citizen may appeal for help in cases such as
this. If you don’t perform your job either, then it will be conclusive proof
that no law exists in Washington state. What do I “expect” from the FBI? I
expect you will leave no stone unturned in your quest to find a way to keep
from handling this complaint. I expect the FBI will expend, in the end, more
man-hours and effort to investigate ways and technicalities to keep from
doing your jobs, than would have been required to do your jobs. I expect to
receive a letter from you in 30-60 days explaining very apologetically why
your hands are tied, or why you do not have jurisdiction, or why you will do
nothing. After all, per the attached documents, the Governor’s Office of the
state of Washington states on their own letterhead that perjury “is not a
matter worthy of a law enforcement investigation.” That pretty-well tells
the story. Please prove me wrong.
Encl: pertinent section of the website for additional background CC:
Elena Garella, attorney; Internet posting BCC:
Reply from the FBI (as predicted above):
Reply back to the above:
Third Ave Seattle
Attached please find your reply to our formal complaint of criminal
corruption within the KCSO.
Note that you have suggested we contact an attorney as your
recommendation for a remedy to long-standing and well-documented corruption.
We are sorry you do not understand the difference between civil and
criminal matters. FYI, a private attorney cannot file criminal
charges---only a law enforcement agency may do that. It frankly frightens us
that you do not understand that concept.
If it is your intention to stick to this reply (attached), then by all
means you should do so and we’ll be happy to report that fact publicly. We
submit, however, that you may wish to save the Bureau more embarrassment
than it already endures, and review your position.
Again, for the record, our complaint to which you replied so
lackadaisically responded is of criminal corruption within the KCSO (King
County Sheriff’s Office). This falls squarely, securely within the Bureau’s
jurisdiction and mandate.
In any case, we do have an attorney---several of them, in fact. And this
is the only course of action any of them can suggest. All are shocked and
saddened at the utter, complete and total lack of professionalism on the
part of all law enforcement agencies involved in this case. They are
saddened to see the Bureau added to the list of slackers and incompetents.
The KCSO is corrupt in this matter. That corruption is long-standing and,
we believe, completely provable. It is the FBI’s responsibility to
investigate complaints of a criminal nature regarding county sheriff’s
offices. We suggest that just this once, the Bureau follow the laws of this
We await your reply. Failure to reply will result in further requests,
routed through higher offices.
In (continued) disgust,
9-26-04: Since, as we predicted, we received no reply from the KC
Ombudsman's office, we sent the following letter by registered mail. We
won't receive a reply to it either, but at least we will be able to offer
proof, not just "opinion" that the Ombudsman's office is in the
KCSO's pocket, and as an overseeing agency to the KCSO should be considered
null and void.
Office of Citizen Complaints Ombudsman
400 Yesler Way, Room 240
Seattle, WA 98104
We've received no reply to our complaint to you from way back
in July of 2004. We've publicly predicted that your office is in
the KCSO's pocket, and your steadfast refusal to even reply, let
alone to honor a very legitimate complaint, offers proof of our
assertion. To further cement our assertion that your office is
corrupt, we're asking you one last time to investigate what is
clearly, documentably corruption in the King County Sheriff's
office. Again, we predict you will not reply at all, or will
reply with nonsense and rhetoric. Every Seattle attorney we've
spoken with laughed and threw up their hands when we suggested
routing our complaint through your office. Now more than a few
people know why.
Why do you exist?
CC: Internet post
A few weeks ago we sent out Public Disclosure demands for all documents
related directly or indirectly to this case. Formal, legal requests went to
Seattle PD, Kent PD, King County Sheriff's Office, and the Seattle Office of
the FBI. Kent PD has responded by saying they have no (not a single one)
documents related either directly or indirectly to this case. That is a lie
and may subject Kent PD to criminal action (assuming, of course, Washington
had laws that were enforced). Some of the registered receipts, signed by
Kent PD are posted on this site; we will supply to the court a stack nearly
half an inch high. The FBI responded by saying, basically, they didn't know
what we were talking about. This is a typical ploy, designed to try and
frustrate folks into giving up. The King County Sheriff's office replied
with a bill for $35.95 for copy-fees; they admitted to having 208 documents
related to this case. Of course it would be silly to ask them why they
didn't feel compelled to respond even one time in a case that generated 208
documents. The answer is because they are corrupt, and they are attempting
to "show us" that they are above the law. It's just that simple.
Therefore, the following letter was sent out to
KCSO and Kent PD on 11-5-04. This letter pretty-well sums up the case to
King County Sheriff’s Office
516 Third Ave. W-116
Seattle, Wa., 98104-2312
Re: yours of 10-21
Let’s recap this situation briefly for the sake of clarity, and to bring
web readers up to date:
Facts: Way back in 2001 I quit my job with a company called T&L Leasing
out of Kent, Washington; my “superiors” being one Delann Lamb and one Mark
McFarland. T&L Leasing procures Class-A drivers for Dart International
Trucking; for the purposes of this discussion they may be considered one and
the same entity. During this period I received every raise allowable, was
never reprimanded once, and was complimented, in writing, on my job
performance., even after I quit.
Facts: Lamb and Mcfarland are both daily or near-daily users of illegal
drugs. I turned a blind eye to their drug use for several years, but when
their illogical thought processes, dishonesty and incompetence caused my job
to become far more difficult than it needed to be, I quit. Unbeknownst to me
at the time, Lamb and Mcfarland marked my rehire status in the corporate
office as “excellent”. I also received letters from Lamb stating that she
was sorry I had quit, and that she wanted to be my “friend”.
Unfortunately I wanted no part of these people after I quit (I quit to
get them out of my life), and they soon figured this out. This made them
Over the course of the next few weeks Lamb and Mcfarland conspired to
make it difficult or impossible for me to find new employment. This is a
fact. Lamb had made it known throughout the office for several years that
she had “many ways” of making sure an ex-employee would not be able to find
new employment if she so desired (see polygraphs).
Lamb had also stated that she was “stalking” one or more ex-employees who
had voluntarily quit for similar reasons (she hadn’t wanted them to quit and
was seeking ways of “punishing” them for having quit) (see polygraphs).
Shortly after I quit I began receiving hang-up calls which traced to T&L
Leasing’s office phone. Lamb later admitted to making these calls. A formal
complaint was filed with SPD. They did not process the complaint (surprise).
I tried several times, in writing, to extract a simple reference from T&L
Leasing so as to have something in writing to present to prospective new
employers. I got the proverbial runaround. For instance, I was told by Lamb
that my faxed request for a written reference had been ruined by spilled
coffee, and would I send another. Then, I was told that the fax machine had
mysteriously lost my request (then how did they know it had been faxed?). I
was told my mailed request had been lost, etc. etc. ad nauseam over a period
Finally, realizing that no reference (good or bad) was to be forthcoming,
I posted a website detailing only a few of the highlights regarding my poor
experiences with T&L Leasing. I did not mention illegal drug use at that
time out of a misguided sense of courtesy to Lamb and Mcfarland.
The posting of the website made Lamb and Mcfarland even angrier. They
immediately began contacting attorneys to see if there was some way to get
the website forcibly removed. Unfortunately for them, no untruths were
posted, and they were told again and again there was no way to have the
website removed. --Until, that is, they happened upon a sleazy, amoral
attorney named Leigh Anne Tift (Leigh Ann Tift)
(Seattle). This woman, we believe, saw an
opportunity to land a largish client for her firm if only she could take
care of this one pesky little problem for them, namely my website. Of course
there was no legal way for Tift to get the website removed, so we believe
she encouraged and steered and manipulated Lamb and Mcfarland into simply
making up a story of harassment. The false allegation of harassment was a
legal trick Tift felt she could use to get the website removed.
I was served with no less than four (4) anti-harassment orders, all
asking the court to shut down the website. In these complaints, Lamb and
Mcfarland simply made up stories. This is not to say they “embellished”
actual events, or “told white lies”, or “stretched existing truths”; they
simply lied. They maintained that I had harassed them for many months before
I quit. They maintained that I had harassed them with photo-shopped photos
which portrayed them as nude or in compromising situations for three years
(so why hadn’t they fired me?). They stated under oath that I had been
harassing them even before they granted me raises, even before Lamb
expressed in writing her disappointment in my quitting, even as Lamb wrote
to me and told me she wanted to remain friends. Their tall tales were so
outrageous and easily disproved that I didn’t even bother to hire an
attorney to accompany me to the hearing.
Two of the orders were overturned in the first few minutes of the
hearing, seeing as I had never met or heard of two of the people (Lamb and
Mcfarland’s bosses) who claimed I was somehow harassing them too.
Lamb’s and Mcfarland’s orders were, however, upheld. Why? Because they
were willing to simply lie, and because the hearing drew a judge who
believed them despite documentation which showed they were lying. I was
forbidden by this judge to bring witnesses into court; at one point this
judge took a packet of documents which proved beyond all doubt that Lamb and
Mcfarland were committing perjury, and physically tossed them off the bench
without reading them. It came out later through an accidental release of a
document by Tift’s office that the photos Lamb and Mcfarland had submitted
to the judge as evidence of my harassment were not even of Lamb or Mcfarland
or anyone they knew. I had been prevented from examining these photos at the
hearing. Welcome to America’s judicial system.
Unfortunately, this judge (John Lawson) died of a heart attack within
minutes of being informed that his outrageous decisions had been overturned
on appeal. –Too bad, as we had enough on the man to get him removed from the
bench; his untimely demise cheated us of that satisfaction. Still, we bear
the man good riddance. He was yet another Gary Locke political appointee,
and quite insane. Anyone, attorney or law enforcement personnel, who ever
sat in this man’s court knows precisely the insanity of which we speak.
Lawson was out there circling Neptune. Thanks again, Gary Locke.
It was a straightforward matter to appeal and win. Lawson was roundly
chastised by the appeals court judge, herself more than a little out of
touch with reality (Helen Halpert). As a result of the anti-harassment
orders being largely overturned on appeal, the website featuring the antics
of Lamb, Mcfarland, T&L Leasing and Dart International Trucking grew to
encompass all aspects of my experiences with them. Arrangements have been
made to fund the posting of the site (where this letter to you also
resides), for at least 60 years, subject to the changing costs of web
hosting in the future.
I had won. Sort of.
There was still the matter, however, of the $1700 I had been forced to
expend on attorney’s fees to overturn Judge Lawson’s idiotic decision (T&L
Leasing spent roughly $20,000). There was still the matter of the horrendous
damage to my reputation. There was still the matter of my inability to find
a new job, and also the fact that Lamb and Mcfarland had perjured themselves
a dozen or more times each in this half-baked little conspiracy against me.
So this was a simple problem to correct, right? For instance, Mcfarland
stated under oath several times that he was not a user of illegal drugs and
never had been. Why he brought this up in court is anyone’s guess, as no
such allegation had been leveled at him at that time. Still, Mcfarland
maintained both in written sworn testimony and verbal that he had never
taken illegal drugs---yet clinics from California to Washington state still
hold in their files Mcfarland’s failed drug screens. –That’s why the company
took him off the road and placed him behind a desk---because he could not,
could not pass a drug screen. That this constitutes perjury is not an
“opinion”. It is a fact. It’s so easily provable a child could do it.
Witnesses to Mcfarland’s copious and on-going illegal drug use abound. Many
other instances of perjury by Lamb and Mcfarland are just as easily, or
almost as easily proven.
So. Again. The resolution is simple: Send a complaint to the Kent Police
Department, where Lamb and Mcfarland live, supplying facts and instructing
them where to find documents to prove perjury, and that would be that. Kent
PD would presumably do its job (why wouldn’t it? Here was a slam-dunk for
God’s sake!), and I could then go back to court against Lamb and Mcfarland,
T&L Leasing and Dart Trucking, and straighten the rest of this mess out.
What could be simpler. What could be more logical and straightforward.
What could be more just. This is why we are (presumed to be) a society of
Unfortunately, Kent PD could not be enticed to respond to my complaint.
So I sent it again by registered mail. They signed for it, but again
declined to reply. So I sent it again and again. No reply in any instance.
Hmm…..what could be the problem? Could it be that since I had posted another
website detailing some petty corruption within Kent PD years before, that
Kent PD was willfully stonewalling this case? Could it be that Kent PD was
willing to actually break the law and ignore their mandate, simply to “show
me” that they didn’t like my old website which had been purged off the web
years before? --Hard to believe any department anywhere could be that petty,
that backward, that dishonest and immoral, but what other reason could there
be for Kent PD’s absolute and steadfast refusal to even reply to a
legitimate complaint? It’s common knowledge that Kent is nearly as backward
and corrupt as Tacoma, but this was stretching the limits of believability.
I recalled that Mark Mcfarland had often boasted of having “friends” and
“connections” within Kent PD, or even within the chief’s office in the Kent
Police department (see polygraphs), who were willing to fix
tickets and take care of other matters for him. Since I had worked narcotics
enforcement in the ‘70’s (see polygraphs) I knew that non-druggies
seldom hung out with druggies---therefore it seemed reasonable that whoever
Mcfarland’s “connections” where inside Kent PD, they were probably
like-minded druggies. The Kent government is an ugly little slice of
Dogpatch, USA, and you know it.. It began to be obvious: Kent PD was
purposely ignoring this complaint because employees of that department were
willfully, purposefully protecting their druggie friends, Lamb and
Mcfarland, and that they were (are) doubly compelled to protect their
druggie friends from me, specifically, because of my years-old website about
them. It’s either corruption or incompetence---circle one. There is
absolutely no question in my mind, or in the minds of the handful of
attorneys who’ve worked on this case, that this is a fact.
Realizing that no relief would be forthcoming through Kent PD, I appealed
to the King County Prosecutor. -For a year and a half. I received no reply
whatsoever until that office was advised that it’s failure to respond was
being documented on the WWW. I then received an immediate response stating
that the matter must be referred to the prosecutor’s office through a law
enforcement agency. I do not believe that’s strictly true, nor do my
attorneys, however it was clear that no further relief was to be forthcoming
from that office.
I then filed the complaint with SPD – who promptly declared it out of
their jurisdiction. My attorneys found this curious, since many of the
perjuries had been committed within the city limits of Seattle, and I lived
in the city at that time. I questioned this stance; SPD resolutely refused
to respond further. In fact, SPD tried to arrange matters so that I would be
legally prevented from disseminating their decision. Why? Well, it’s been
disseminated, and SPD can shove it up their collective asses.
I consulted another attorney who researched the matter and discovered
that when a city PD refuses to do its job, as both Kent PD and Seattle PD
had done, the next agency up the chain was the SO. I therefore sent a
complaint to the King County Sheriff’s office. I received a quick response,
stating that the problem was out of their jurisdiction. Obviously, this is a
pat response, sent out as a boilerplate letter to any complainant who has
submitted a case which the agency has no particular or compelling interest
Another attorney then suggested I appeal to the State Police. I did so.
That office did take a keen interest in the case, and performed substantial
research on my behalf, and for that I thank them. Their conclusion, which
they documented fully, was that, indeed, the King County Sheriff’s office
did, in fact, have jurisdiction over cases which the lower agencies failed
to address, or in cases where corruption was suspected in the lower
agencies, as in the case of Kent PD. This documentation was sent along to
KCSO in 2003, along with yet another copy of the complaint, via registered
mail, as always.
Surprise again: The King County Sheriff’s Office refused to respond. At
all. Not in any way, shape or form. In fact, the King County Sheriff’s
office has refused to respond to letter after letter, complaint after
complaint, over a period of years now.
Not willing to waste even more years trying to entice a Washington State
Law Enforcement agency to DO ITs JOB, we forwarded the matter to the Seattle
office of the FBI. We hold that agency in about the same regard we hold Kent
PD or the Keystone Kops, but it was the next logical step up the ladder, and
we figured, “What the heck—let’s document this apathy and incompetence as
fully as we can.” So we complained to the FBI. We received a form letter in
return, stating that it was a civil matter and that we should contact an
My attorneys laughed out loud.
Perjury is a civil matter? Well smack my bottom and call me Sally--- all
this time I thought perjury was a crime. How stupid of me---and of all of my
attorneys, who erroneously believed that perjury was against the law. Dang.
Where could we have gotten such an idea? Oh wait! I know! Perhaps we got it
from READING THE STATUTES.
We appealed to the FBI again with a copy of the statutes. Surprise: we
received NO REPLY.
We appealed repeatedly to the Ombudsman’s office; to date, despite
repeated requests, we’ve received NO REPLY. We must now conclude that even
that oversight office is in the Sheriff’s back pocket.
We appealed to Governor Gary Locke’s office. We received a letter from
him stating that perjury, in Washington state, “is not a matter worthy of a
law enforcement investigation.” Note the quotes. We’ve posted that
masterpiece on our website. See above for the link.
All attorneys have told us from day-one that, “You will never get any
agency to investigate perjury unless the investigating agency has a personal
beef with the accused; it simply will not happen.” We didn’t believe them at
the time; now we do.
One of our attorneys related an instance in which she had documentation
even better than ours proving perjury against someone who had testified
against one of her clients. She pushed, and pushed, and pushed, for months,
then years, trying to force some agency, any agency, to simply DO ITS JOB.
In the end she gave up after receiving a communication from the prosecutor’s
office which said this: “We just aren’t going to move on perjuries right
now. You know, we’re handling these drug cases; that’s what we’re focused on
right now. We’re not going to do perjury.”
Still, perjury cases occasionally do get investigated and prosecuted. We
submit that the only time this occurs is when someone in law enforcement or
the judicial system in a position to promote the case, has a personal grudge
against the perjurer, and rams the case through the system by calling in
favors and making deals. Indeed, law enforcement in Washington state acts
like any other street gang: biased and corrupt.
What does this mean for America’s judicial system? It means that if there
is no penalty for perjury, then anyone, be it witness, accused, whomever,
may simply walk up and sit at the stand, and gush forth any damned story
they want. If they are witnesses who have a personal grudge against the
accused, they may take the fate of the accused personally in their hands and
convict them through the mere telling of stories. If the stories are false,
who cares? Judges are often (read: usually) dumb enough to believe
absolutely anything (see the website for documented examples), and if it is
later documented that the accuser has lied, too bad---the victim has no
recourse whatsoever, because perjury, according to the highest authority in
the state, “is not a matter worthy of a law enforcement
Given that this is true, and it obviously is---your office has seen to
it—then what reason is there to ever go to court in the first place? What
can any court accomplish if it makes no effort whatsoever to get at the
truth of anything? Why should the taxpayers continue to fund the courts when
the courts are little more than a badly played Saturday Night Live skit,
played out in real time with real consequences to the victims? If perjury
“is not a matter worthy of a law enforcement investigation,” then we
herewith proclaim the judicial system of this state null and void. If ever
there was an argument for vigilantism, this is it: the courts and law
enforcement in Washington don’t work; they won’t TRY to work; in fact they
will stubbornly punish and ostracize those who demand that they work!
Our attorneys have unfailingly advised us to simply drop this matter
because, in their words, the Washington state judicial system is corrupt,
incompetent, and utterly ineffective. They tell us to forget bringing a
civil suit against anyone, as it’s a crap-shoot, overseen by drunks and
idiots and fools pretending to be judges. They make the same claims about
all law enforcement agencies in the state. We’ve lived on both sides of the
Mexican border, where corruption is the staple of life, where incompetence
is all-encompassing. We now see Washington state as being at that same
level. When no agency in the state will follow the law, or uphold the law,
or even make the slightest attempt to adhere to its own mandate, the people
must consider that they are on their own with no logical recourse available
to them through the system. Some may argue that if we are to enjoy the
benefits of law at all, we must enforce it independently of those agencies
who so steadfastly refuse to do their jobs. What alternative do we have?
Anarchy? Hell, we’re almost at that point now! How much worse can it get?
When every single attorney, each of whom having a vested interest in seeing
matters go to court, tells us honestly and from the heart that the best we
can expect in any court in Washington state, be it civil or criminal, is a
fecking crap shoot, then we must realize and finally admit that we’re simply
on our own.
You’ve requested $35.95 for copies of all documents in your possession
pertaining to this case. As you know, we demanded them through the Public
Disclosure act. We intend to study those documents, with the help of our
attorney(s), in order to pin down some particular individual(s) within your
department responsible for failing to uphold your mandate, and the law.
Assuming we can pinpoint the blame, we’ll go public with TV spots directing
the curious to our website. Be forewarned: We have a partial list of
documents your office has generated in this mess. If you fail to forward a
single one, if you withhold a single intra or inter-department memo, we’ll
initiate a Public Lawsuit and you can explain to the taxpayers why you’re
costing them so much money.
Let’s assume for a moment that we can identify the culprit in your
department who’s personally responsible for this mess. To whom would we
complain? To what agency would we appeal in order to force that individual
to DO HIS/HER JOB. No one else in your agency will do their jobs---so what
point would there be in complaining to people who refuse to do their jobs,
about someone who refuses to do their job? It would be like complaining to
the fox that the coons were raiding the hen house. Still, your dirty laundry
can be aired, and we’re committed to that task.
It’s ironic to note that, all in all, the legislature has drafted a
fairly useable set of laws. They sought to protect the dignity and the
validity of the court system, for instance, by imposing laws against lying
in court. The structure is there. The hard work of setting up the system has
already been done for you; all you need do is follow the rules. But you will
not do that. You simply, steadfastly, stubbornly, illegally, will. not. do.
it. A growing number of Washington residents want to know why.
At this time we’re going to concentrate our efforts on making this letter
the most public document in the state of Washington. We’re going to forward
copies to every politician, to every employee of every agency we can find
addresses for, to every Senator, to every Congressman, to every office of
the FBI, and to every news agency we can afford to mail out to. Our budget
for this venture is $1000. That buys more than a handful of stamps. Our hope
is that someone, somewhere will know of a recourse against your stupefying
apathy. Our attorneys are stumped.
Your office could have avoided this by the following actions:
(1) You could have DONE YOUR JOB, for one, and investigated exactly WHY
Kent PD so resolutely refused to do theirs! –And as an aside consider this:
We have been sending complaints to Kent PD for nearly four years now, all by
registered mail. We have a stack of signed receipts nearly half an inch
tall, yet today we’ve received a communication from Kent PD in response to
our Public Disclosure demand, stating, in writing, for the record, that they
have no (zero, nada) documents related directly or indirectly to this case.
So, documentably, provably, Kent PD is a G—amned gaggle of liars, and we
will initiate a Public Lawsuit against them without delay. And KCSO still
refuses to investigate our complaints against Kent PD! Do you people all
sleep in the very same bed?
(2) Then you could have investigated our complaint(s) of perjury. Perjury
IS a crime---look it up! Crimes are YOUR jurisdiction, NOT the domain of
private attorneys, as the FBI and Governor Gary Locke so stupidly suggest.
In investigating this complaint in even a slipshod, mediocre manner, you
would have discovered that it was a slam-dunk. Lamb and Mcfarland ain’t
smart---they left a trail a mile wide for any investigator to zero in on. My
God Corky Thatcher could solve these crimes! With a minimum of effort you
could have gleaned a couple of tidy convictions, which would have bolstered
the credibility of the Washington judicial system, and God knows it needs
bolstering. If you investigated the cases and were unable to send the
matters up for prosecution, you could have drafted a simple letter to us
which stated something to the effect: “We have investigated your complaints,
and we regret that we are unable to recommend that charges be filed FOR THE
FOLLOWING REASONS: ____” If your reasons were logical and/or believable, the
matter would have been dropped until and unless we could come up with new
evidence. But you couldn’t even be bothered to do that! You won’t get off
your fat, lazy asses and do ANYTHING AT ALL except cost the taxpayers money
because you’re being sued because you haven’t done your jobs!
Law enforcement agencies across the country whine and bemoan the fact
that they do all the hard work of catching and building a case against a
crook, only to have the courts set them free, and those complaints are
justified, to a point. Now stop and think about this for a
moment: Don't your complaints about the inefficiency of the courts mean that
you have a vested interest in helping the courts uphold your cases to the
best of their abilities? The courts can't make competent or balanced
decisions if they're working on bogus data (GIGO). If folks are free to lie
to the courts, and they sure as hell are free to do so in
Washington state, it naturally follows that the courts, because of
that alone -- forget for a moment the inherent incompetence and
stupidity of so many judges -- need more than ever before to be presented
the best and most reliable and accurate possible data (testimony) to enable
them to make the best and most accurate judgments. This isn't
rocket-science, right? Surely you can grasp this concept. Right? This is not
a rhetorical question! Consider that the most effective way that law
enforcement can help the courts obtain true and accurate data upon which to
base life-altering decisions is to follow its own mandate, and the law, and
do its best to stop people from presenting bogus data to the courts in the
form of perjury. It's in your domain to
investigate complaints of perjury. So either do your jobs and
investigate perjury complaints, or stop whining that the courts
won't do theirs. KCSO employs a few good and honest officers, but their jobs
are likened to pushing peanuts up a hill with their noses when they aren't
given the tools with which to make solid cases. If the King County Sheriff's
office is going to, as a matter of policy and course, turn a blind eye to
slam-dunk perjury cases, then why should your few good officers be out there
in the field building cases at all? You can continue to argue that the
courts are responsible for making stupid decisions and letting the crooks
go, but the argument is exactly as valid that if you won't get off your
asses and see to it that there's at least a hint of punishment for those who
lie to the courts, then you're exactly as guilty as the courts for the
situation we see in America today. You bitch at the courts for not doing
their jobs. We say: DO YOURS FIRST.
Why couldn’t the King County Sheriff’s office muster the basic
professionalism, the simple human courtesy, the everyday manners that we
were all taught as five year olds, to simply respond to our repeated
complaints of perjury and of Kent PD's documentable refusal to even respond
to the case? Answer: Because you
are corrupt; because Kent PD asked you not to process the case; because Kent
PD and KCSO are “buds” and they watch each other’s backs; because Kent PD
gave KCSO the “secret pinky” or the “knowing nod” or the “brotherhood
handshake” which meant, “Hey---we don’t like these people because they
embarrassed us on the WWW a few years ago and we DO like Lamb and Mcfarland
(because, you know, we like to get together and smoke a little dope from
time to time), and we’re asking you to do nothing in this case.” And KCSO
simply shrugged and said, “OK”.
That’s not correct, you say? Then state your reasons for steadfastly,
resolutely refusing, over a period of years, to follow your own mandate and
address this issue? Fact: You don’t have a legitimate reason to refuse to do
your jobs; this case has gone farther than you ever dreamed, far more people
are watching this case than you ever dreamed possible (650 visitors per day
to our website and growing), and because now it’s gotten so big you simply
don’t know what to do. So you continue to do the thing that got you into
this in the first place: nothing. What are you going to do when a mainstream
media source finally picks this up and asks you, “Hey, why didn’t you simply
address this case?” What will be your response? Best start formulating it
now, as that day will come.
At this point you have made it absolutely crystal clear that you will NOT
adhere to your own mandate, that you will NOT uphold the laws of Washington
state, that you are arrogant and corrupt and incompetent---dishonest and
petty and amoral. You are not persons we, or any other even remotely moral
folks would invite into our homes. You would never be eligible to be our
friends. If we were to see you in trouble alongside the road, we would not
stop. If we were to witness some criminal gaining the upper hand over you,
we would not help. If you needed a lifejacket, we would not toss you one. If
your homes were ablaze, we would not turn on the water hose. You have made a
mockery of “the system”; you’ve rendered the system null and void; you’ve
made your department suspect of all the dirty, petty, seamy things it’s
accused of. We’re frankly scared of terrorists. But you people, the law
enforcement and judicial agencies of Washington State, are a force of chaos
and illogic far more fearsome, far more terrifying, far more relevant
because you are destroying the very fabric of America from the inside out
like a cancer.
Law enforcement agencies around the world are subjected to virtually
constant hatred and derision; mostly this comes from the scumbags of the
world, the criminals, the rapists, druggies, the robbers and bullies.
They’re an illogical crowd which tends to blame their own stupid decisions
and life-mistakes on others, usually you. Increasingly, however, we are
seeing law enforcement agencies and judicial entities earning the disrespect
of decent citizens. They accomplish this through a litany of outrageous,
amoral, uninformed, illegal, block-headed, incompetent, mean-spirited
acts---like the campaign you’re directing toward us in this matter. You have
the hatred of the criminal element, which is undeserved. But you’re also
carrying an increasing load of deserved disgust from those very people you
are sworn to protect, who, in decades past, had supported you and given you
the benefit of the doubt and looked to you as examples of decency and strong
character; you were, largely, looked up to by the people who are productive
and honest and who simply want to get through life without being victims of
people like Mark Mcfarland and Delann Lamb. Of late, however, you’re seen AS
the druggies and the idiots and the bullies and the trouble-makers and the
pieces of sh*t of society, and by actions like those described in this
letter you’ve earned it! You’ve earned it but you still don’t get it! Maybe
there’s a ground water problem in King County. Maybe there’s a high
incidence of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome in your departments—who knows! You make
constant withdrawals from your bank account of goodwill by acting precisely
as you’ve done in the case detailed in this letter. And your account of
goodwill is nearly bankrupt.
You are seldom, these days, the solution to society’s problems; rather,
you are too often the cause. You are petty and dishonest and powerful. We
have personally come to fear you far more than we fear any idiotic,
misguided terrorist. Against the terrorist there is at least the hope of
defense. Against a corrupt law enforcement agency, such as yours, we can see
no hope of recourse whatsoever, and our experiences with you prove that to
You, the administration and legal department of the King County Sheriff's
office are, in our view, for lack of any more eloquently descriptive phrase,
the scum of the earth.
All you were ever asked to do was your job. One way or another, sooner or
later, we intend to find out why you won’t.
In disgust and contempt,
PS: All interaction with or from you will be conducted in writing. You
will not contact me or any of my attorneys except in writing. Why? Because
we don’t trust you; because you lie; because you will say things in verbal
conversations and then deny them later. Our attorney has been instructed to
simply hang up on you should you bother her with nonsense again. SN
PPS: We will shortly begin sending process servers out to certain
higher-level officials within your department with copies of this or a
similar document; the purpose being to enable us to state publicly, as a
fact, that this person, or that person, was formally served with a document
describing this case, and that that person has still refused to do their
Encl; Check #2018 $35.95
CC: Posted online;
Kent PD (2103 8555 7491 5558 6627)
As you know I filed a Public Disclosure request to Kent PD, asking for
any and all records related directly or indirectly to my complaints against
Mark Mcfarland and Delann Lamb. I know they have at least a hundred or so
pages that I, personally, have sent them by registered mail over four years
related to the cases, and undoubtedly they have generated more documents of
their own, internally. They signed for each and every delivery they received
from me. Yet in writing they are now stating that they have NO records AT
ALL. They are lying. This is typical of the Kent Police Department. They may
indeed be the most corrupt PD in Washington state. Why they would go to such
incredible lengths to protect Lamb and Mcfarland is beyond me, but it seems
provable at this point that's exactly what they are doing---purposely and
systematically protecting Lamb and Mcfarland from prosecution. At this time
I am ready to pay you to initiate a public lawsuit against Kent PD for
failing to turn over documents that we can prove they have (I have a stack
of registered mail receipts). To be doubly safe, and to be absolutely sure
we can recoup fees and costs from them, I would like to pay you to write one
last letter to them requesting their documents in the case(s). If they still
ignore us or refuse to comply, I can afford to go ahead and file the suit at
any time, and that's what I want to do. Kent PD can then explain to their
taxpayers exactly why they have to pay taxes to finance such utter
incompetence and dishonesty by that department.
of this case may be read here