To learn about our experiences with Littler-Mendelson (lawfirm, Seattle, Washington), Dart Entities, Dart International Trucking, T-L Leasing, Leigh Ann Collings Tift, Mark Steven McFarland, Delann Todd Lamb, Judge Helen L. Halpert, Judge John Lawson, Paul Martin, Colleen Butler, go to the HOME PAGE of this website. You'll be amazed. Google is now shadow-banning some listings in this website.


HOME     Formatted for Easier Printing


Question: Is it "OKAY" to Lie to the Court in King County, Washington State?

Answer: YES!

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. To.
The. Court. In. Washington. State.

Governor Gary Locke's Office Says Perjury in Washington State:
" 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



This document 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 as well.

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.

              The 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:

Delann Lamb

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:

Mark Mcfarland

26308 184th Pl. SE

Covington, Wa. 98042


#2 Last known employment:

Dart Trucking

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 more ex-employees.

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 followed up.

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 witnesses.

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 defame me.

  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.



POB 3718
            Kent, WA.
         98032                                     (residence in Seattle proper)



Update, 7-13-02:

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

Dear Sirs,

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.

Yours truly,

POB 3718
Kent, Wa.




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

Dear Sirs,

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. 

Yours truly,


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.

Governor Gary Locke's Office Says Perjury in Washington State:
" not an activity worthy of a law enforcement investigation."

Washington State Governor’s Office
Attorney General’s Office
Ron Sims (county executive)
Seattle Mayor
State Patrol
Kent Police
Seattle Police
King County Sheriff
Unnamed Agencies

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 half earlier.

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 knows.

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. Why.



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
POB 40002
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 law enforcement?

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 their jobs.

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 investigation."

Are you insane?

9A.72.010 Definitions.
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.


CC: Attorney; Senate; Attorney General
Posted online

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 this time.

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 in quotes:

"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 cloaked anarchy.

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, Seattle.

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 ask.

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 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 jobs.

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 believe, felonies:

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:

FBI 1110
Third Ave Seattle
Wa. 98101-2904

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 country.

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


Update 11-05-04:

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 date:

King County Sheriff’s Office
516 Third Ave. W-116
Seattle, Wa., 98104-2312

Registered: 2103855574912412xxxx

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 angry.

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 of weeks.

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 laws.

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 in handling.

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 attorney.

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 investigation”.

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 be true.

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 job. SN

Encl; Check #2018 $35.95
CC: Posted online;
Kent PD (2103 8555 7491 5558 6627)

Elena Garella:

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.



The conclusion of this case may be read here