This website contains and includes our
opinions regarding the
This web page has now been stolen and a complaint of copyright infringement has been lodge and will work itself through the system until the matter is corrected. To read more about this issue, go here
King County Sheriff's Office, Seattle,
And the City of Kent Police Department, Kent, Washington:
Corruption, Malfeasance, Dishonesty and Incompetence.
With Law Enforcement of this Caliber, Who Needs Crooks?
This is how the King County Sheriff's Office was run under Dave Reichert,
one of the dumbest, most adolescent punks ever to work in law enforcement in Washington State.
You have not
reached the official King County Sheriff's or Kent PD's website(s).
After reading this site you may decide you don't want
to contact those agencies.
The King County Sheriff's office employs a few decent, honest, professional, capable officers. It also employs many hair-bags. Word has come back to us that those good officers are as disgusted with their administration as are we. Some officers work hard to establish and maintain a relationship of trust and honor with their community. It's unconscionable that their administrations so often undo all their hard work.
The parts played by the King County Sheriff's Office administration
and the Kent, Washington police department in this on-going fiasco have
become so odious that we felt they deserved their own domains, hence:
www.kingcountysheriff.com and www.kent-police.com. The content below
brings the reader up to speed at a point roughly four years
after the initial problem began. The first four years are documented
at the above-referenced website.
Why does this website exist? It exists, and will for
at least 60 years (private funding guarantees it), because law enforcement
in Washington State has devolved to a degree that would shock and demoralize
most citizens if they were aware of how these agencies operate. Many
citizens, ourselves included, state categorically they are more afraid of current
Washington state law enforcement and judicial agencies than they are of terrorists, and that is in no way an exageration. Why? This
page exists to reveal how some (read: most) law enforcement agencies
today "do business".
This page is formatted for convenient printing. This
website is copyright (c) 2004 All Rights Reserved
When a crook steals something from you or otherwise commits a crime
of which you are a victim, you have a reasonable expectation that you
can call some appropriate law enforcement agency and that agency will
respond, and at least make a cursory effort to set the wrong(s) right.
That's how we think as Americans. That's the basic concept of law and
order in this country and, indeed, most of the civilized world. It's
not a complicated concept. It ain't rocket science. It's just common
sense. Furthermore, it's the law.
So what's this case about? Exactly what is our beef? It is this:
Way back in 2001 I worked for a company called T&L Leasing. It's
a company on paper-only whose sole purpose is to procure qualified Class-A
drivers for it's "sister" company, Dart International Trucking,
operating in Kent, Washington.
Over a period of three years I had become increasingly disgusted by
the illegal drug use of my two "superiors", namely Delann
Lamb and Mark Mcfarland. They were, in my view, utterly incompetent,
dishonest, and inherently criminal. I had been a valued employee, earning
every raise available over three years. Mcfarland had asked me to go fishing with him---I declined. Delann Lamb had showed me her breasts---I was disgusted (see polygraph). Delann Lamb had asked me to "run away" with her to Oregon---I declined as politely as I could. Delann Lamb had made more sexual advances toward me than I could count, most in plain sight, in front of witnesses. In every single case I gently and politely deflected those advances. Delann Lamb asked if she could email me pornography. These points are all documented by polygraphs at the links provided in this document. I had received every kind of praise any company could heap upon an employee for three years. But the drugs and dishonesty and incompetence simply became too much to deal with, and in 2001 I quit.
Even though Mark Mcfarland had failed so many drug screens that he no longer held a Class-A license, he still drove these trucks almost daily, at least up until the date I quit.
to me at the time, Lamb and Mcfarland noted in my file after I quit: "Rehire
Potential: Excellent". I obtained this document accidentally two
years later when Dart's attorney left it in a batch of papers that were
turned over to my attorney. Additionally, I received a letter from Delann
Lamb just after I quit expressing her sadness that I had quit, and asking
if we could still be friends. I didn't want to be friends, so I didn't
reply. Delann Lamb also expressed, in writing, that she was sorry that
I would not give her the opportunity to talk me out of quitting (she
had talked me out of quitting about a month prior).
Both Lamb and Mcfarland were documentably angry that I had quit. Delann Lamb refused to utter one word to her secretary for three full days after I quit, stating that she felt the secretary might have had something to do with my quitting. It is well documented that many of the duties I performed were
not performed again for at least the following 18 months, as the company
could find no other driver to competently perform them.
As a vent for this anger, when it finally became clear to them that our relationship was finished, Lamb and Mcfarland began a smear campaign
against me, in a successful effort to keep me from finding a new job.
At one point Delann Lamb even began crank-calling my home phone. This was
documented and a complaint was filed with Seattle Police. SPD did not
follow-up on the complaint and nothing was done. What a surprise.
Finally, in an attempt to get something in writing describing my work history
for Dart International / T&L Leasing, I began sending registered letters and faxes
both to the Kent office of Dart and T&L Leasing, and to the Los
Angeles and Sacramento offices as well, asking for a written referral.
In response I was told that either the fax machine had accidentally
destroyed my request, or that coffee had spilled on it, or that it was
never received, or that it had gotten wet and would I send another,
etc. etc. ad nauseam. After several exchanges like this I received no
reply whatsoever, and was convinced I would have to seek a court order
to force Lamb and Mcfarland to submit a written appraisal of my work
history. This nonsense came to a head in late 2001 or early 2002 when I met with a
friend who was still driving for the company, but who wanted out himself for the same reasons,
and was asking if I could steer him toward a new employer. After several
minutes of pleasant conversation, which took place at a location perhaps
six or eight miles from the Dart/T&L office, as we were preparing to part, I told [the friend] to say
hello to an uninvolved party at the office next time he was there, as
that person was the only one in the office I cared to extend courtesies
to. Steve laughed and agreed to do so, and we parted.
Less than a week later I was served with four (4) anti-harassment orders
from Lamb, Mcfarland, and two Los Angeles employees I had never heard
of, a Paul Martin, and a Colleen Butler. The incident above was included in the anti-harassment document submitted
to the court as the major or most important instance of harassment I
had committed against them (Lamb and Mcfarland).
So what's up with these people, Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland? Are they just vindictive nut-cases? In a word, yes. Delann Lamb had often referred to her efforts to "harass" and to "stalk" well-liked employees who had quit (see polygraphs).
Insane? Of course. But the insanity deepens.
The matter came to court about two weeks later. Since the claims of
harassment by this jar of nuts was so outrageous, so transparent and so easily proven
false, I didn't even bother to hire an attorney. I simply showed up
at the hearing with all the appropriate documentation I needed, and
promises from a number of witnesses to testify if it became necessary
for some reason..
The cases of the two Los Angeles employees were thrown out immediately
when the judge discovered that I had never heard of the two individuals involved. Their claim
was simply that they were afraid I was going to talk about my experiences
with their company on the Internet, and they wanted the judge to block
me from doing so. They claimed that my requests for a written referral
Lamb and Mcfarland must have sensed things weren't going in their favor
when their company cohorts lost their cases against me, for they then
testified that I had been criminally harassing them for months before
I quit. --Actually, both Lamb and Mcfarland told the judge I had been harassing them for three years. Lamb stood in front of the judge and told him I had been asking
her out on dates and that she was tired of "refusing my advances".
This was a blatant and clear-cut instance of perjury (see polygraphs).
Mcfarland testified in writing and verbally that he did not use illegal
drugs, yet his failed drug screens are available in the files of clinics
from California to Washington. Lamb and Mcfarland testified that I had
posted some sort of pictures of them on the Internet, although they
told the court they didn't know where those pictures were located on
the Internet. A number of images were submitted to the court, but I
was not allowed to study them. I finally received copies of them some
two years later, and discovered there were pictures of people Lamb
and Mcfarland didn't know and had never met. The pictures below were
submitted by Lamb and Mcfarland to the court. Lamb and Mcfarland said
these pictures were examples of my criminal harassment of them over
a three year period.
From left to right: #1: A friend who lives in Romania,
#2: My wife, #3: A friend who lives in Olympia, Washington. Neither
Lamb or Mcfarland had ever met any of these individuals, nor had any
of these individuals, except my wife, heard of Lamb or Mcfarland. The
composites were made for fun long before I ever heard of or went to
work for Dart International or T&L Leasing. God only knows where
Lamb and Mcfarland even got these. Note: The appeals court judge wrote
in the record, in her finding of fact, that these images constituted
part of a long-standing history of criminal harassment against Lamb
and Mcfarland. This is a tiny glimpse into just how backwards and insane
our court system has become. My attorneys would love to get Lamb and
Mcfarland on the stand to explain why they lied about these images.
In the end, a nut-case judge, one "John Lawson" (almost every lawyer in King County was painfully aware of this man's insanity for many years before his death), believed
Lamb and Mcfarland hook, line and sinker. He (1) refused to allow my
witnesses to testify unless I paid everyone in the courtroom the cash
sum of $1500 per day for each day my witnesses testified (it's in the
transcript). Lawson (2) refused to read my written defense and never
did(!) read my defense. Lawson (3) accepted a second copy of my written
defense during the hearing (when it became clear he hadn't and wouldn't read the first copy submitted to him), then without reading those documents, threw
them off the bench stating, "Well I think this is just silly"
(it's in the transcript!). Lawson (4) then stated in the record that I had submitted no defense whatever and had not refuted the allegations of Lamb and Mcfarland. As a result, as the direct
result of Lamb and Mcfarland's lies, perjuries and conspiracy to commit
perjuries, and as a direct result of Judge Lawson's probably documentable
insanity (before his timely demise), two of the anti-harassment orders
were upheld and I was by law prevented from telling this story in any
venue, including the Internet.
Welcome to Washington State, America's own Third World Country.
Outrage and terror are adjectives far too weak to describe my reaction
to this "Planet of the Apes" court proceeding. In years since
I've learned of a court method used in the outback of Afghanistan. In
the particular case I studied, a man was accused of murder. The tribal
leader made the accused walk through a bed of hot coals --this was to
determine the man's guilt or innocence. The criterion used was this:
If the man's feet blistered after walking through the hot coals, he
was deemed guilty and would be put to death. If his feet did not blister,
he would be found innocent. Imagine any intelligent being's terror.
Consequently, the man's feet blistered and he was found guilty and executed.
The logic that runs through Washington state's court system is often
not far removed from the logic of that tribal leader in the outback
of Afghanistan, and any intelligent being should be terrified that he/she
may almost randomly be subjected to such insanity.
In the end I appealed Lawson's wacko decision and won, mostly. But
The next logical step was to file complaints of perjury with the Kent
Police (where Lamb and Mcfarland work and live). Once perjury convictions
were gained, it would be a simple matter to go back to court and get
the rest of the orders overturned.
Of course it would... Logic and Truth must ultimately prevail, right?
Over a period of years I and my attorneys tried every legal method
we could find for enticing some agency, any agency, to file perjury
charges against Lamb and Mcfarland. I went into this thinking it was
a simple matter---little more than a technicality, considering the cut-and-dried,
black-and-white evidence we had against Lamb and Mcfarland. We were
perplexed, then, when most agencies wouldn't even reply to our repeated
complaints, sent over and over and over by registered mail. These agencies,
such as the Kent, Washington Police department, signed for every letter, but not once could be bothered
to even reply, let alone to issue a case number or investigate the cases.
Below is just one registered mail receipt signed for by Kent PD. Most
were addressed to Ed Crawford, "chief" of police for the city
of Kent. This is just one example of dozens upon dozens:
I haven't counted how many perjury complaints about Lamb and Mcfarland
we've sent to the Kent, Washington Police department; suffice it to
say there's a "stack" of copies and a "stack" of
registered-mail receipts from these efforts. In no case, not once in
nearly four years, despite our most adamant insistence, had we received
one reply or acknowledgement from any representative of the Kent, Washington
One might ask the question "Why?!"
The answer is as simple as it is disgusting. It is this:
During my three years working for Mark Mcfarland, Mcfarland boasted
often of his "connections" within the Kent PD. He often stated
that he "played golf" with "those people", the context
of which was people or officers in the chief's office (see polygraphs). Mcfarland offered
to have his connections "fix tickets" for me. I declined.
Mcfarland did not hide his glee at having connections in the chief's
office who would perform little illegal favors for him. In my experience
working for the Federal Government in a narcotics capacity, dopers don't
hang out with non-dopers, and vice versa. That meant, to me, that Mcfarland
"hung out" with his doper buddies who were employed by the
city of Kent working in the chief of police's office. Having experienced
other situations of petty corruption and dishonesty within the Kent
police department, I didn't consider this news extraordinary. Still,
it explains Kent PD's absolute, illegal, steadfast refusal to even acknowledge
a complaint against one of their own druggie buddies, Mark Mcfarland.
If you're not familiar with Kent, Washington and its hillbilly government,
suffice it to say it's nearly world renowned for corruption and backwardness.
It's a regular "Dogpatch USA", and we liken the Kent Chief
of police to "L'il Abner". It's the only small town I've ever known of which merited its own TV comedy show. The antics of the local government in Kent, Washington actually sustained a television comedy show for several years. That ain't something to be proud of.
We finally decided in 2004 that we needed to legally obtain all documents and records Kent PD had amassed in this case. Our thought was that in obtaining those documents, we might glean an insight into who, specifically, was stonewalling our complaints, and armed with that knowledge, we might be able to go around that person and entice the Kent Police Department to DO ITS JOB (what a novel concept). In October of 2004 we did submit a Public Disclosure demand to the Kent, Washington, Police Department.
On 10-21-04, David Santo, the recipient of the registered letter whose
registered receipt is shown above, delivered to one of my attorneys
this letter in response to our Public Disclosure demand:
Let's look at this again. Let's put both the registered mail receipt from above
and Mr. Santos' assertion that no such documents exist, right next to
each other so there can be no misunderstanding:
We can prove three dozen times over that Kent PD accepted and signed for our complaints regarding Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland, yet Mr. David Santos states, in writing, that no such documents exist. Is this corruption? Yes folks, this is corruption.
Accepting the "good ol' boy" explanation for Kent PD's refusal
to follow the law and their own mandate as fact, I began to research
other methods of lodging perjury complaints against Lamb and Mcfarland,
and to ultimately have them charged and prosecuted. I appealed to every
agency in Washington which was even remotely related to law enforcement.
I received almost no replies. Governor Gary Locke's office was kind
enough to reply---and to state that perjury "is not a matter worthy
of a law enforcement investigation". Gary Locke's office didn't seem to grasp that even though perjury is a "real crime", perjury was now our secondary
concern; our main complaint was the documented corruption within the Kent,
Washington police department! Still, even perjury is a crime "worthy
of a law enforcement investigation", as demonstrated by any one
of the following statutes, most or all of which Lamb and Mcfarland have
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
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.
We also wrote to many other agencies, including:
Attorney Generalís Office
Ron Sims (county executive)
King County Sheriff
King County Ombudsman's Office
We received a reply from the Washington State Attorney General saying they could
not offer us "legal advice". We replied and stated that we weren't seeking legal advice at all! --we were simply asking what agency had control over (1) the Kent Police Department, and (2) The King County Sheriff's Office. AGAIN the Attorney General wrote back and said they couldn't offer legal advice! --Kind of like trying to do business with someone in a mental institution, isn't it? Thanks for nothing, Washington's Attorney General!
And we received
the aforementioned reply from our illustrious Gov. And that's it! No
other agency could be bothered to respond in any manner.
So, thinking the state police was the controlling office for all other in-state
police agencies, we appealed to WSP. That office was professional
and responded in a timely manner with the information we needed. It
was the first fleck, the first molecule of simple professionalism we
had encountered in all our dealings and transactions in this matter over a period of years.
WSP did considerable research on our behalf and documented the fact
that when a local PD goes bad, it's the county sheriff's jurisdiction
to straighten matters out, as shown below:
Well then. That was simple enough, we thought. We appealed to the King County Sheriff's
department with a formal complaint of corruption within the Kent, Washington
police department, and with a formal request for the King County Sheriff's
department to take over the investigation of our complaints of perjury
against Mark Mcfarland and Delann Lamb. It was nice to be finally on the right track. We expected to receive an acknowledgement
letter, and we asked for a case number for future reference.
When we'd received no response several months later, we wrote again---as
always by registered mail. When we still received no response we wrote
again, and again, and again. In nearly four years, we'd received NO
RESPONSE from the King County Sheriff's office.
In the Fall of 2004 we decided to try another tack. We submitted a
formal Public Disclosure demand to KCSO, asking for ALL documents related
directly or indirectly to our repeated complaints of corruption and
perjury. We figured we might glean an insight into who was responsible
for stonewalling our complaints. For a "photocopy" cost of $38 the KCSO actually
complied with the law and sent back 238 pages of documents, all of which---every
page of which-- were letters we had sent to them in the form of perjury
and corruption complaints. The Sheriff's office did not include any
letter of their own in this pile, because they had generated no documents of their own--- what they sent back consisted merely of copies of
the complaints we had made to them repeatedly over the years.
Pile of complaint documents we had delivered to the King
County Sheriff's office by registered mail over nearly four years. They
received every complaint, but to this day have not replied once, nor
have they issued a case number, nor will they explain why they refuse
to do either. Question: Why is the Kent Police Department breaking the
law to protect Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland? Question: Why is the
King County Sheriff's office breaking the law to protect the Kent Police
department and Delann Lamb and Mark Mcfarland?
We have verified in two distinct manners that the KCSO has received
complaint after complaint after complaint over a period of years, related
to the perjuries of Lamb and Mcfarland, and to the corruption within
the Kent Police department. Our registered receipts demonstrate this,
and 238 pages of our complaints stamped "RECEIVED" by the
King County Sheriff's office demonstrates this. Yet the King County
Sheriff's office will not issue a case number either in the case of
our complaints against Kent PD, or perjuries by Delann Lamb, or perjuries
by Mark Mcfarland.
We are left to conclude, in disgust, that the King County Sheriff's office is exactly
as corrupt as Kent PD. We now regard this revelation not as
a "possibility", not as a "probability", but as
a hard, cold fact, regardless of how distasteful that is to choke down
and accept. When a law enforcement agency breaks the law, repeatedly,
arrogantly, steadfastly, again and again over a period of YEARS, it
is called corruption. There's no prettier or more gentle term that applies.
In the Fall of 2004 we received a somewhat cryptic communication from
a law enforcement employee regarding the situation with Kent PD and
the King County Sheriff's office. It said, simply: "You should
contact the FBI". So we did.
Our letter to the Seattle office of the FBI detailed the entire mess
from start to finish, including all pertinent documents. It detailed
steps my attorneys had taken, maneuvers they had tried. It begged for
help with what had now become two separate complaints of corruption---one
against the King County Sheriff's office, and one against the Kent PD.
We immediately received back a form letter from the FBI stating that
the FBI did not handle civil cases, and that we should contact an attorney.
Accustomed to this level of (un)professionalism from the FBI, we wrote
again, explaining the problem in clearer terms, and demanding at least
a semi-intelligent reply. None was forthcoming (no reply whatsoever).
In the fall of 2004 we finally hit the FBI with a Public Disclosure demand, requesting all
documents, whether of internal origin or that had been received by the
FBI from us or any other agency, regarding our complaints of corruption.
The FBI responded by stating it had no such documents.
De Ja Vue...
Of course we
can prove it most certainly DOES have such documents---at least it has
the documents we delivered to the Seattle office by registered mail
and which it responded to, and it had copies of the documents it sent
back to us, worthless as they were. But the FBI now insists it has NO
documents even indirectly related to our complaints.
So. Do we merely conclude that the FBI is corrupt as well?
Here's an example of how the FBI often operates:
I once was friends with an Undersheriff and a Deputy, both employed
by the same local sheriff's department. Over the course of years both men became increasingly
disgusted with local corruption. Finally they began to document it.
In a six-seven month period they documented names, times, dates, places,
transactions.....showing, among other things, that two of the three judges in their town operated
a theft ring and had done so with impunity for many years. Local Chicanos worked under the direct supervision of these
two judges, doing B&Es---breaking and entries. They ransacked local
homes, sold the goods, and gave the judges a cut of the loot and also
their choice of the spoils. In return, the judges guaranteed the crooks
would never do hard time. If and when the crooks were caught, the judges
either found technicalities to dismiss the cases, or let them off easy.
My own restaurant was robbed 11 times by these little shits, and they
were never convicted. Witnesses identified them, yet they were never
convicted. They beat one of our employees into a permanent
vegetative state, in front of witnesses, all of whom testified in court, yet the
crooks were never convicted. There was much more going on in this town,
but the theft ring run by the two judges was the biggest gripe by the
Undersheriff and the deputy.
When these two felt they had enough documentation, they physically
drove to the FBI HQ office and submitted their records. They spoke at
length with an agent, who assured them they had submitted quite
a bombshell. The two officers went back to work and waited for the fireworks.
Six months later nothing had happened, so they physically drove
across the state again, back to the FBI office, and inquired about the
case. They were told flatly that the FBI had no record of any such case,
and that they had never heard of the two men before.
I personally watched this scenario play out. I personally watched the
two men drive back to their town and resign on the spot in utter and
complete disgust. One of the two died of a heart attack shortly thereafter.
I lost track of the other.
I can quote six or eight personal experiences with the FBI nearly this
revolting. But still, we haven't answered the question: Is the FBI corrupt?
I don't want to say it is. I am loathe to say it is. I don't want it
to be corrupt. I want Ozzie and Harriet to live happily ever after.
I want "SOMETHING, SOMEWHERE" to be credible and right and honorable and upfront and decent..... If
the FBI is as lackadaisical and dishonest as every other law enforcement
agency, we're in even bigger trouble than I thought---and I think we're
in pretty big trouble already.
There's the old story about the
elephant and the refrigerator. If you open your refrigerator. and there's
an elephant in it, you might be tempted to say, "Dang---I thought
I saw an elephant in the refrigerator; but since, of course, that doesn't seem
possible, there cannot be an elephant in the refrigerator. Therefore, there is no elephant in the refridgerator."
But the bottom line is: if there's an elephant in your refrigerator, and everyone else sees it as well, and you have pictures of it, and sworn statements attesting to its existence, and your chocolate cake is all mashed to Hell, and the shelves have been destroyed, and Elephant dung coats the inside of the box, then at some point, as impossible and absurd as it seems, as unpleasant as it may be, you must finally admit there's an
elephant in your refrigerator, and no amount of wishing or denial will
make it otherwise. We seem to be on the brink of having to admit that
in the case of the FBI, there's an elephant in the refrigerator. No
agency could accidentally be this stupid, this incompetent, this unprofessional, this counter-productive. Their actions MUST be on purpose.
Where does this leave us?
It leaves us HERE:
Lamb and Mcfarland lied repeatedly and blatantly to the court. This
cost me $1700 to defend (it cost their company nearly $20,000 to try
(and fail) to block this website). It caused me UNTOLD grief. It continues to cause me grief. It damaged
my reputation. It continues to damage my reputation (and will for the rest of my life). What can be done about all this? Sue the company from here to Costa Rica, you say? We
say NAY! Every attorney I've brought on to this case tells me not to
bother with civil court, saying flatly that it's a crap-shoot. It's
a roll of the dice. It's a looney-bin of incompetence and chaos, and
my own experiences with the courts tell me this is good advice. My attorneys tell me that to bring suit against scum-bags and liars is a losing proposition BECAUSE those scum-bags and liars will drain your resources disproving their lies and misrepresentations. After all, they have ZERO incentive not to lie! They have everything to gain by lying to the court, and absolutely nothing to lose (remember, even the Washington State Governor says, in writing, that perjury is not a crime). This means
that if Lamb and Mcfarland are to receive any punishment at all (under
the law), then it must be left to law enforcement and the criminal justice
system. Unfortunately, that system won't work when the defendants are
buddies of the investigating officers and those officers are corrupt,
nor will it work when the agency that's supposed to make sure corruption
in the local PDs is rooted out is itself exactly as corrupt. So when
all else fails, and the FBI will only act like idiots and jack-asses,
in what direction does a citizen turn? Seriously---this is not a rhetorical
question. What are we supposed to do now?
For me, the bottom line is simple enough: Most American law enforcement
is corrupt. Period. I have overcome my gross aversion to the acceptance
of this truth, but at some point even the most loyal and faithful among
us must admit there's an elephant in the refrigerator.
Is there any point in interacting with law enforcement at all, for
any reason? After all, can they be expected to do ANYTHING competently,
correctly or lawfully? Answer: Not much--unless they have a personal vested interest in doing so. They do respond reasonably
well in emergencies---although I personally watched a case unfold in
which an elderly man was the victim of a break-in to his home. As the
three crooks were fleeing in their Caddy the man opened up on the vehicle
with a 12 gauge shotgun, killing all three. The car coasted to a stop
against a telephone pole and the police were called. 41 minutes later
they arrived. And cases worse than this can be counted in the tens of thousands. Still, in most cases, law enforcement will make an effort
to arrive at emergency scenes, and will try to one degree or another
to help you.
But not always!
I personally had a friend who worked for the WSP who admitted freely
that he didn't "like" gory accident scenes and so would pretend
to get lost so as to not be one of the first responding units. I ended
up suing the man for non-payment after I sold him a car. And I see that
Florida has just indicted fourteen (14) officers for this same "getting
lost" malady on the way to difficult calls. It's far more common
than folks would like to believe, and it's because the moral fiber of
many officers is sub-standard.
But, you say, we still haven't answered the question: Can or will law enforcement serve the people in any meaningful manner, and should you even waste the time to report crimes to them?
You should also call the cops when you've lost something that will
be replaced by insurance. You'll need a copy of a police report to collect
on the claim.
And you should also report crimes to them when it's likely that the criminal is not (a) related to someone on the force, or (b) works in local government, or (c) is friends with anyone on the force or employed in local government or is related to anyone who is friends with someone on the force or working in local government. In these cases, and many others, you'll likely find that (1) your complaint goes nowhere and you'll receive no relief whatsoever, and (2) "the system" will find tricky, sleazy little ways of causing YOU grief over the next few years, because you had the audacity to ask for some relief from the illegal antics of one of their friends. Does it sound like we're living in the Stone Age? We are! The only difference is that "the system" has taken on the appearance of fair play. In reality, it doesn't begin to grasp the concept, and not you, or I, or any website, or any activist no matter how gifted, no news story no matter how well documented, will ever convince these people to do the right thing simply because it is the right thing. You may as well talk to them in Swahili. They just don't get it..
Law enforcement in Washington state will likely handle your complaint
with vigor if it's a case in which they can sense some political advantage
for winning. And law enforcement in Washington state will most certainly
handle your complaint tirelessly if the subject of your complaint is
a person or business which some employee or employees of the department
in question don't personally "like". Law enforcement in this
state OFTEN uses the law and their powers to enforce it as any cheap
mobster would use his gang, to bully, to intimidate, to silence and
to punish for transgressions other than crimes..
If you need the services of law enforcement in any other context, you
must consider that law enforcement DOES WHAT IT WANTS. No more, no less.
If a given law enforcement agency doesn't like you, or does like the
person(s) you're complaining about, then calling them or filing complaints
is a complete and total waste of time. Save your strength---find some
other way of making things right. That's the explicit point this website
exits to prove.
If you find you're unwilling to live under these conditions, leave.
We often hear the rant: "Change the system!" But we've seen, and this site demonstrates clearly,
that the system can't be changed. The laws are already in place to prevent
exactly the situation detailed in this website! But if one agency ignores
those laws, and then its overseeing agency ignores those laws, and then
the next agency up the chain does the same, and the next agency still
ignores the laws---at some point you run out of agencies. When there
is no deterrent to stop criminals---and make no mistake, the people
pulling these stunts within Kent PD and the King County Sheriff's office
are criminals---then the criminals rule. And that's exactly what we're
seeing in Washington state.
Are all areas of the country as bad as this?
There are areas of the U.S. in which law enforcement mostly works.
People are human, however, so there are lapses and weaknesses in their behavior, and that means lapses and weaknesses in the system, but by and large,
where people will even TRY to make their system work, it works as well
as it can, and that's better than having no system---which is basically what we have in Washington State---no system. But there are also
areas of the country where law enforcement is worse than in Washington
state. I've lived in many states west of the Mississippi and two countries.
I've seen more worthless law enforcement in only one state besides Washington,
and in Mexico. Washington is very near the bottom of the barrel. Law
enforcement here works about as well as a car running with four flat
tires. Is that still better than having no system at all? That's a philosophical
question. I'm no longer sure of the answer.
What's the solution to this mess? What is a person who prefers to live under at least some semblance of law supposed to DO?
Nothing. This site proves there is NO RECOURSE when law enforcement
simply "decides" not to do its job. Listen carefully: THERE
IS NO RECOURSE. Read it again: THERE IS NO RECOURSE. The Timothy McVeigh
remedy is the exact wrong approach---I'd be happy to plug the guy myself
if he wasn't already dead. The notion of "changing the system from
within" doesn't work either. It only works in cases where rules
are made and there's a consequence for not following those rules. We have
seen that in Washington state there is NO consequence to any law enforcement
agencies who break the law, no matter how blatantly and consistently they do so. The penalties are on the books, but aren't
implemented or enforced. The law enforcement agencies won't let YOU enforce the laws---but neither will they do it themselves.
"But there must be SOMEONE in charge!?", you lament!
There's not. Get used to it. Grow up, seek counseling, do whatever you must do to see reality clearly: THERE IS NO RECOURSE for corrupt law enforcement in Washington state.
Washington state is a rudderless ship. Sure, there's a wheel in the
wheelhouse, and lots of politicians are busy up there fighting for control,
spinning that big brass wheel back and forth as fast and as hard as
they can. What they don't seem to realize is that there's no connection
between the wheel and the rudder, and the ship that is Washington state
heads evermore for the rocks. The politicians will all jump to safety
on impact---but the citizenry (you and us), for the most part aren't
given that chance. It's the citizenry that suffers for the dishonesty and incompetence of its government. Still, it is said that "every country has the government it deserves". To a degree that's true. But this website demonstrates that even when the citizenry is absolutely fed up with corruption, and when the citizenry tirelessly exhausts every single option available to it under the law, there is STILL no change. Washington's law enforcement agencies and its judicial system have become SO arrogant, and SO accustomed to operating like a school full of unsupervised first graders, that we do not believe it can ever be brought back into line. We believe it is a lost cause.
But....but....but...., you say. STILL! There must be SOMETHING we can do! Can't we hire really good attorneys and get satisfaction privately?
There is no recourse in civil court unless you're willing to commit
your case to a toss of the dice. Our advice is to save your money and
get your adversary to flip a coin with you to decide the outcome of
your beef. Any HONEST attorney will advise you NOT to go to civil court,
except as a means of punishing your adversary by making him hire an
attorney and by making him step into the dogshit pile that is the civil
court system--but that means you're similarly punished as well, and
once you get that stink stuck to your shoe it's awfully hard to get
it off. Of course dishonorable attorneys will happily accept any money
you'd like to throw their way, should you decide to sue in the civil
We have seen that crooked/stupid judges have legally exempted themselves
from being sued for their stupid, incompetent, often illegal decisions.
Indeed, judges aren't expected to make "good" decisions to
keep their jobs---only to make ....decisions... No recourse there.
We've seen that crooked and/or incompetent law enforcement agencies,
officers, and judges are incapable of being embarrassed into doing their
jobs. They simply do not care. After all, who's going to punish them?
The public? The public is already outraged. So what? The public's outrage has no effect on a criminal law enforcement community. The media? Hell, Washington's media knows far better than you or I the power weilded by law enforcement and the judicial system in this state, and they're more afraid of the system than you are. Beyond that, the media is swamped with stories as unpleasant as this one, or worse. They can't print them all, even if they wished to. But can't the voters effect some change, even if it's slow in coming? Consider, first, that the only political candidates who make it far enough up the ladder to be in a position to make changes for the good, are people who were ALLOWED to make it that far---allowed by the corrupt folks already in position. Even then, many if not most judges run unopposed, and even if opposed,
their election has little or nothing to do with their record or their
competence. It hinges on the strengths or weaknesses of their social
connections. Bellevue socialites choose your goverment leaders, not you. But you have the power to VOTE, you say? Of course you do. Your choices of candidates are presented to you by Bellevue socialites! You're welcome to vote for crook "A', or loser "B", or shyster "C", or drunk "D", or pedophile "E" to your heart's content. But aren't there penalties for bad judges? No. There's
nothing meaningful available unless and until the judge gets to the
point where he/she is literally bouncing off the walls naked and frothing
at the mouth. Consider the case of Washington's "Judge"
Bobbie Bridge, sloppy drunk and scum-bag extraordinaire. She'll
be in that seat forever, no matter what she does. Anything less than
child molestation---several counts---televised Nationally in real-time---is considered acceptable
behavior for judges, politicians, sheriffs, chief's of police and the like. After all, they make up their own rules as they go along. Research the "Washington State Bar Association"
in Google for a small sampling of that particular area of insanity.
But the reader keeps asking the question and we're not answering it:
WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO!!??
Our advice: Leave. If you can afford to do so, simply leave the country.
Are there better counties? Sure. Quite a few. We suggest Scandinavia, Japan, the
South Pacific, New Zealand, etc. Most countries are, however, far worse
than the US. Our own solution is to retreat to an area SO remote that the
government dementia simply does not pervade there. We'd much rather deal and contend with outright threats of violence from wild animals, or wild human animals, than with the sneaky, underhanded, snake-in-the-grass antics of most governmental systems in place in America today.
I lived in another country some years ago. The region was "remote".
From my cabin it was 450 miles to the nearest dirt road. The population
density was about one family per county, based on American standards.
The community took care of itself. I remember a case in which a visitor, an Irish lad, as it happened,
was caught stealing about $8US from a local girl's purse. He was held
by the community, and a "trial" was effected late that night
in an abandon barn. He was found guilty. I watched as heated five gallon
tins of tar were spread across his mostly naked body. His jailors were
careful not to heat the tar too much, and as a consequence there was
some trouble getting it to stick. Some of the local women contributed
several feather pillows, and the young man was summarily coated (tarred and feathered) and
pointed toward a neighboring village, 33 miles distant by trail. I ran
into the guy four months later. His body hair was beginning to grow
back (even his scalp). He was a changed kid, and said that one incident
had turned his life around. I believe it did. Had this incident occurred
in the US, the court system would have generated a pile of documents
costing the taxpayer (you) a hundred thousand dollars, that looked like
PART of the stack of documents generated by the Washington
legal system in the Lamb and Mcfarland case. --Pretty amazing when only two pieces of
paper, a polygraph from Lamb and one from Mcfarland, would have circumvented
this whole ridiculous charade.
Washington state has become a haven for criminals, including the kind that roam the streets stealing and raping, and the kind who have taken over the state's law enforcement and judicial systems, using that power with absolute impunity for their own whims and illogical fancies.
As far as I'm concerned, the dirty little criminals running Washington
state law enforcement can go fuck themselves. They are, by and large,
of the poorest possible quality as human beings. They are dishonest,
incompetent even at the business of dishonesty; they are petty, mean-spirited,
and they seem to have less than no grasp of the basic concepts of right
and wrong. Even if a basic concept of right and wrong isn't required
to do law enforcement work in Washington state, these valueless dweebs
should at least follow their own mandates and the laws they themselves
have helped legislate. But even in that endeavor they fail utterly.
I am now one of the relatively few people who can afford to leave this
country. I can make a good living from any quiet corner of the world. As long as there's a communication satellite overhead, I'm in business. I say goodbye with no regret or sadness whatsoever. And
Washington state law enforcement can shove it up their asses.
Our final letter to the King County Sheriff's office may be read HERE.
This case may be studied in detail HERE,
complete with court documents and polygraphs tests I took at my own
We caution the reader in this way: If Lamb and Mcfarland and people
like them, and all of the law enforcement agencies of Washington state,
can do these kinds of things to me, then they can do exactly this, or
far, far worse, to any one of you. Given the right set or combination
of circumstances, they will.
Is a case like this "rare"?
No. It's become nearly the norm in Washington state.
If you would personally like to ask either the Kent, Washington police
department, or the King County Sheriff's office specifically and exactly
WHY they refuse to follow the law and do their jobs in this or any other
case, you may contact them at the following addresses:
Kent Police Department
Ed Crawford, Chief
220 Fourth Ave. S.
Kent, Wa., 98032-5895
King County Sheriff's Office
516 3rd Avenue, W-116
Seattle, Wa., 98104-2312
There exists the "Office of Citizen Complaints" which supposedly
investigates complaints against the Sheriff's office. Like every other
agency in this state, we were never able to entice them to respond to
our complaints. Write them if you enjoy wasting time, at this address:
400 Yesler Way, Room 240
Seattle, WA 98104
We suggest you send your inquiry via REGISTERED MAIL. --Although, even
then, as we have seen in the case of Kent PD, they are likely to lie
and claim they didn't receive it.
Is this website the final word in this matter? That depends partly
on any future shenannigans by Lamb or Mcfarland, Kent PD or the King
County Sheriff's office. Further trouble from any of this group will
be reported, but I plan no further updates or action at this time. If I'm ever
diagnosed with a terminal disease I might view things differently. In fact, it's a Goddamed certainty.
To date, neither Lamb nor McFarland were ever questioned, investigated or charged with any crime. To date, no agency has replied to us regarding our criminal complaints of theft, drug use, drug trafficing, perjury or documented corruption in the Kent, Washington police department. No case numbers were ever issued. Not one. We conclude that there is no competent law enforcement at work in Washington State. None. Period. And that's the end of THAT story. We suggest that if you have a problem with the criminal element in Washington state, you find a way to handle it outside the system.
Like to read another evolving fiasco just about like this, concerning corruption within Washington State law enforcement agencies? Go here.