DRAFT: Class complaint against WA Bar Association for RICO. Want your ideas and arguments

The WA State Bar is a racketeering organization cloaked as WA State’s Judicial Branch — WE ARE ALL IN PERIL

This is a “live web page” which means it will be updated as fast as I’m able to write, program, and publish content.

UPDATE: Scheidler has filed his lawsuit with another planned. Read about them at http://corruptwash.com/2015/05/09/activist-scheidler-files-claim-against-wa-state-bar-rico-damages-and-other-civil-rights-violations/ and at http://corruptwash.com/2016/08/31/ethics-complaint-filed-against-legislators-jesse-young-michelle-caldier-and-jan-angel-also-judge-kevin-hull/

In drafting this Class Action Complaint against WA State, all your ideas and recommendations are needed to make it the best pleading ever filed against WA State for the misconduct by the “legal establishment” — i.e., The WA State Bar Association and how their members have commandeered our government.

As the illustration shows, when the legislature, circa 1933, decided to create an agency of the state in the WA State Bar, the legislature failed to institute the critical controls required for an agency as powerful as the WA State Bar. This oversight not only renders the WA State Bar unconstitutional, but provides a breeding ground for mass delusional behavior inherent in entities being a power without accountability. Their only ‘reference point’ by which to judge their ideals is themselves. If Bar Associates believe themselves ‘superior beings’ who can tell them otherwise?

WA State Government Structure PRE WA State Gov chart

You can submit your suggestions, criticisms, ideas, … either publicly as ‘comments’ or to me privately at billscheidler@outlook.com

This complaint must be so well written and tight, WE MAKE HISTORY! I’d like to get this filed within 3-years.

Superior [Federal District(?)] Court of Washington for Kitsap County

William Scheidler, individually; et al.
State of Washington, and
WA State Bar Associations and its associates Jane and John Doe’s with Bar numbers 1-50,000 in their individual and official capacities

Case No.



The issues raised herein concern the unlawful conduct of WA State, its officers, agencies and agents. The statutory term "Conduct," and what ‘conduct’ is consistent with WA governments’ "just powers," See WA Art. 1, sec 1, constitute factual questions; and this claim seeks monetary damages in addition to other remedies. A Jury is Demanded. In WA, the right to a jury is a constitutional right, see Art 1, sec 21, and by statute, RCW 9A.82.100(15) in matters of corrupt influence, a jury is by right. Furthermore, issues of FACT and for monetary damages are for a JURY to determine. See RCW 4.40.060-070 , and RCW 4.44.090 (full citations incorporated by reference)

Furthermore, Article 4, SECTION 16 CHARGING JURIES. Judges shall not charge juries with respect to matters of fact, nor comment thereon, but shall declare the law. Clearly, when read together, Article 1, Section 1 by its words, Article 1, Section 21 by its words, Article 4, Section 16, by its words, and statutes RCW 4.40.060-070, RCW 4.44.090, and RCW 9A.82.100(15) unambiguously state a JURY is an essential element in this complaint and a due process right in seeking an impartial remedy.


The Plaintiffs for their Complaint against the Defendants state as follows:

  • Plaintiffs: [omitted]

  • Defendants:[omitted]

    This Court has jurisdiction over this claims for relief under 18 U.S.C. sec. 1964(a) and 1964(c); and 28 U.S.C. sec. 1331.


    Personal jurisdiction and venue are predicated upon 18 U.S.C. sec. 1965(a) and (b) and 28 U.S.C. sec. 1391(b) since the Defendants are residents of, have an agent or agents, or transact their affairs in the District of Washington, and the acts and occurrences in furtherance of the claims alleged herein arose in the District of Washington, and because the ends of justice require that other parties residing in other districts be brought before the court.


    This action is brought by plaintiffs as a class action, on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, under the provisions of Rules 23(a) and Rule 23(b)(2) and/or 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for damages, injunctive and declaratory relief, and relief incident and subordinate thereto, including costs and attorneys’ fees. This action is divided into six counts, as follows:

    [paragraphs relating to technical class action allegations, omitted]

    COUNT I is brought by all plaintiffs as a class action against all defendants.

    CLASS ACTION UNDER THE RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT (18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1962(a),(b),(c), and (d))/and or under RCW 9A.82.100(15); ……….. For the routine, pervasive, and blatant violation of the following laws and constitutional provisions:

      RCW 4.04.010 – The Common law shall be the rule in the courts or as modified by the people;
      RCW 2.28.030 – Disqualification of Judge for direct interest;
      RCW 2.04.180 to 190 – failure of Supreme court to establish rules conducive to the administration of justice;
      RCW 2.06.030 – failure of Appellate courts to establish rules conducive to the administration of justice;
      RCW 2.08.230 – failure of superior courts to establish rules conducive to the administration of justice;
      RCW 2.32.050 – Powers and Duties of Clerks;
      RCW 2.48.210 – Lawyers Oath of Office – never seek to mislead, take cases of the oppressed, uphold the highest standards of truth and honor.
      RCW 2.48.180 – Misconduct by a lawyer is any violation of his duties as noted in RCW 18.130.180 Unprofessional Conduct.
      RCW 2.48.230 – Code of Ethics
      RCW 42.20 – Official Misconduct
      RCW 9A.72 – Perjury and Interference with Official proceedings
      RCW 9A.80 – Abuse of office
      Article 1, Section 1 – “just powers”
      Article 1, Section 4 – Right of Petition
      Article 1, Section 10 – Administration of justice
      Article 1, Section 21 – Trial by Jury
      RCW 4.40 – Trial by Jury
      RCW 4.44 – Trial by Jury
      Article 1, Section 25 – Prosecution by information
      RCW 7.56 – Who may prosecute by information and against whom.
      Article 2, Section 1 – The “legislature is vested with law making” or “the people”.
      Article 2, Section 28 – The prohibition in enacting special laws “limiting civil or criminal” cases and “legalizing the unauthorized or invalid act of any officer”
      Article 4, Section 28 – Oath of Judges; etc.


    This is an extremely complicated case to unwind how WA State Bar Associates (lawyers and or the “Enterprise”), by occupying various positions and offices within government, both elected and appointed – such as:

  • legislative elective office;
  • judicial office
  • executive elective office;
  • attorney general and prosecutorial office,
  • on committees, for example, the

  • Senate committee of Law and Justice;
  • House Judiciary committee,
  • and on various boards, for example the

  • Board of Tax Appeals;
  • WSBA Disciplinary Board,
  • and on various commissions such as the

  • Commission on Judicial Conduct;
  • and in agencies such as the

  • Office of Risk Management, etc.,
  • use their government positions, and with the aid of their associates outside government, the purposes of profiting the ‘enterprise’. Furthermore, their government positions assure the enterprise maintains and increases their power and wealth for the benefit of all their willing associates. This commandeering of our government by this racketeering enterprise provides them a clear pathway to ‘exempt’ themselves from a citizen oversight. For example these “enterprise public servants” despite the people’s initiative establishing the WA State Public Records act, give themselves “absolute immunity” from citizen lawsuits, notwithstanding WA constitutional prohibition, Art. 2, sec 28, limiting ‘civil and criminal actions; and declared themselves out of reach of WA State’s Auditor. See respectively Nast v. Michels, 107 Wn.2d 300, 730 P.2d 54 (1986), Scheidler v CJC and Bar 14-2-00042-3; and GRAHAM v. BAR ASSOCIATION 86 Wn.2d 624, 548 P.2d 310

    Legislative history: The Washington State Bar Association existed as a voluntary professional association between 1888 and 1933. [GRAHAM at 626] When, circa 1933, the WA State Bar Act and the Association of Superior Court Judges were passed by the legislature, codified as RCW 2.48 and RCW 2.16 respectively, and considered in relation to Article 2, Sect 17 that limits eligibility for judgeship’s to those admitted to practice – it becomes clear, only Bar members may be judges and thereby only Bar members will compose the Superior Court Judges Association. Before the 1933 legislation, judges could come from outside the Bar’s control.

    To read more click here


    How “INSURANCE COMPANYS” and WA State Bar Associates bribe people with Government Contracts and Government jobs to protect insurance company profits and keep insurance “premiums low”. These “insurance premiums” are paid by the following government entitites:

    • Police Dept
    • Sheriff Dept
    • Prosecutors
    • CPS Workers
    • Guardians Ad Litem
    • County officials
    • State officials
    • Judges
    • Lawyers
    • Gov. Contractors
    • Gov. Agencies
    • Cities
    • Towns
    • etc… (you get the idea)

    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to read and add content under this SCHEME.

    • Oath if Office scheme:

    While all non-enterprise government officials and or office holders subscribe to and take an oath to uphold the laws of the US and WA, their “go to” person is generally a member of the “Enterprise – a lawyer.” This lawyer often misdirects, intimidates, or otherwise influences the official to either disregard, ignore or do such other act so as to protect the “Enterprise” and not perform the officials duties as prescribed or proscribed by the laws they have sworn to uphold.

    Furthermore, the government enterprise lawyers all sit in judgement of their oath of office. This ‘conflict in being both bound by law and adjudicators of fact and law by which they are bound, is contrary to RCW 2.28.030, Rules of Professional Conduct 1.7 through 1.13 and Canon 2.

    Violations of statutory and regulatory duties established for the profession is a misdemeanor. See RCW 2.48.180(6), RCW 18.130.180(7) and RCW 42.20.080.

    Offer of proof: See Appendix A.

    Click above link to see content under this SCHEME.
    Click above link to see content under this SCHEME.

  • All of the predicate acts of racketeering activity are directly related to the WSBA’s schemes to become a defacto government.
  • All of the predicate acts of racketeering activity are part of the nexus of the affairs and functions of the racketeering enterprise.
  • The defendants were enabled to commit the predicate offenses by virtue of their position in the enterprise or involvement in or control over the affairs of the enterprise.
  • All of the predicate acts of racketeering activity occurred after the effective date of 18 U.S.C. Section 1961 et. seq.
  • The predicate acts of racketeering activity began on or about 1933.
  • The pattern of racketeering activity is currently ongoing and open ended, and threatens to continue indefinitely unless this Court enjoins the racketeering activity.
  • Numerous schemes have been completed involving repeated criminal conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition.
  • The predicate acts have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, and methods of commission.

    In defiance of the law, RCW 2.04.190, that mandates courts to establishes rules of procedure for the simplification of the system of pleading, practice and procedure in said courts to promote the speedy determination of litigation on the merits, these courts, through their judges have established rules that delay, frustrate, deny and manipulate the process for the benefit and profit of the ‘enterprise.’ Said another way, the longer and more difficult it is to resolve case, the more money the enterprise extracts in fees and penalties.

    This scheme is based in the quid pro quo the Enterprise has with agencies and individuals within government. As each corrupt act adds to the ultimate liability of the state for each other’s corrupt acts, the Enterprise establishes a house of cards that cannot be dismantled without the total collapse of the entire government — they protect themselves by the “too big to fail” concept first instituted by the Federal Government with respect to the housing bubble caused by faulty loan procedures in the quest of ever increasing ‘profits’ and the ultimate collapse in home prices when the chickens came home to roost.

    (M) SANCTIONS SCHEME – an illegal tax.

    As declared by the WA State Supreme Court, the Bar received no money from the state, is not a state agency. (GAHRAM) Yet provides service to the “judicial branch”. Bar members, who serve as judges reward the Bar members for the services they provide to the judicial branch by imposing “sanctions” under their own determinations, based in their own created court rule authority.


  • Scheidler’s case
    1. FACTS





  • Negligence: The justices of the WA State Supreme Court failed to establish procedural safeguards to protect citizens from a corrupt Bar. The WA State Supreme Court justices themselves claim the following authority and obligations.

    “When a lawyer discipline decision by the Board is appealed, this court has “plenary authority” on review. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Whitt, 149 Wn.2d 707, 716, 72 P.3d 173 (2003). While we “do[ ] not lightly depart from the Board’s recommendation,” we are “not bound by it.” In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Tasker, 141 Wn.2d 557, 565, 9 P.3d 822 (2000). The court reviews conclusions of law de novo. Whitt, 149 Wn.2d at 716-17. We have “the inherent power to promulgate rules of discipline, to interpret them, and to enforce them.” In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Stroh, 97 Wn.2d 289, 294, 644 P.2d 1161 (1982) (emphasis added); see also ELC 2.1 (recognizing this court’s “inherent power to maintain appropriate standards of professional conduct”). Jan. 2006 In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haley 333
    156 Wn.2d 324

    The Court has negligently failed to establish rules to review “dismissed cases” by the same logic it established rules to review prosecuted cases by the WA State Bar. This one-sided scheme allows the enterprise to run without regulation.



    a. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations contained in COUNTS 1 to 5 of this complaint as fully as if set forth here.


    WHEREFORE the Plaintiffs pray on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated persons for judgment against defendant as follows, in general:

    1. Issuing an Order certifying the Classes as set forth herein and designating the plaintiffs and their counsel as the representatives thereof;
    2. Compensatory damages against WSBA Associates with Bar numbers 1-40000, for a sum duly trebled, plus interest;
    3. Restitution to Taxpayers against the WSBA;
    4. Punitive damages
    5. Declaratory and injunctive relief;
    6. Reasonable attorney’s fees;
    7. Together with all costs and expenses, and such other further relief as the court deems proper.


    1. Could not this complaint be filed with the request of a thorough but speedy decision due in large that many of the victims have suffered substantial and same mind set employed by this club. financial losses that have been fruitlessly attempting to have corrected by the same club

      [edited, truncated, for excessive length and repetition-admin]

    2. We can file as soon as the AG gives us his decision on our class claim…. but I will sacrifice a quick filing for a ‘bullet proof’ filing… and yes, there will be a coincident filing for an “impartial judge” as the law requires. RCW 2.28.030. What is clear, the WA STATE Bar has muddied all chances of getting a fair trial due to it ‘associates in all facets of the decision making process’ … the case makes itself given the inability to have fair hearing due to the Bar’s commandeering of our judicial branch and more.

      • Would it make any difference if filed in Federal Court? Read your report, just a little on evidence which you could argue that the defendants have the necessary doc’s for discovery but you’ll know they will bury you with tons. Gonna have to be specific. Also argue that the check and balances afforded in the Constitution have over the years become intertwined and political. Then the lobbyists, argue that elected representatives must be seen in their LOCAL office for greviences to be heard because the majority of their constituents cannot travel to DC. THUS eliminating lobbying at the federal level. I’m rooting for you kid, I thought the boomers would be the last generation to know what it was like to fight for change. Just remember Veitman, Watergate & a President’s resignation before he was going to get impeach and face jail time. But I have my faith to contend with non-violence and how precious human life is which means even a repentive thief can be forgiven at the moment of death. Good luck

        • Yep… all that you are suggesting is being “digested” and will be presented in a “Federal Complaint” within the next two weeks. If, by the grace of God, I can do a sufficiently good job at drafting the complaint at least the case may get to a jury or give the 9th circuit a lot to chew on. I know that these scum are crooks but as a “pro se” putting it all on paper is a big job. The pleading will be published once it is ready to be filed. Thanks for adding to the cause with your comment.

    3. Things of mention include that judges MUST put their bar membership on hold, while in public office (i.e., The Office of __________ County Superior/District Court). This supports the violation of separation of powers complaint. Why do not those in other elected positions do so?

      Then, there is the matter of the prosecutor. His is an executive branch agency, even as he holds membership in the Bar, which claims to be part of the judiciary

      Consider too, who is it that investigates and, administratively, pursues complaints of “practicing law,” before handing it over to their bretherin, which claims to be part of the judicial branch, to prosecute? Obviously, it is the Bar. However, the Bar claims to be of the judiciary, so how does it perform those executive (investigative and other) functions?

      It is well established in law due process commences at the administrative level. However, the Bar actively pursues unlawful practice of law complaints, but does so without the benefit of providing administrative hearings, let alone administrative appeals. In fact, you cannot find policies and procedures regarding the Bar’s administrative prosecution of citizens.

      Jump to the Public Records Act [PRA] (chpt. 42.56 RCW). The Bar claims to be exempt from it, under the premise it is part of the judiciary.

      How can an entity both file complaints with the courts, as executive agents, such as the State Patrol, Town Clowns, County Mounties do, and still be of another branch. Is it some kind of bastard sua spontae trick?

      Jump to the PRA again and consider Nast vs Michaels. From that case, the judiciary and, subsequently, the Bar exempted the entire branch from government scrutiny (remember, WE are The State of Washington all all those others merely our representatives).

      The claim for exemption was out of the matter of access to case files [NOT ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS], which was a higher, common law right. HOWEVER, following that logic and the conclusion of numerous case law decisions that denial of access to case files was denial of access to the courts, thus a violation of the Washington Constitution, then it follows administrative record access is ALSO a common law right and refusal to allow access it a denial of access to the courts.

      Blah, blah, blah.

      Take a year and do it right, or you are guaranteed to lose. After all, it’s their court.

      • Good stuff…. and yes, it must be done right.

        Question, if you know or want to speculate. RCW 4.04.010 is the legislatures expression re the application of common law doctrine; it states, “The common law, so far as it is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, or of the state of Washington nor incompatible with the institutions and condition of society in this state, shall be the rule of decision in all the courts of this state.

        The last part of this statute, if you interpret it in light of Art 1, Sec 1, would seem to mean the common law is subject to challenge before a jury? Otherwise it would mean “judges” determine the ‘conditions of society’. Judges don’t have authority to establish substantive law– it is a legislative function, or by initiative or **by the challenge of the common law**

        your thoughts.




    5. Hmmm…..this is a monumental task and kudos, once again, Bill. I think it’s a GREAT idea, and you will set precedent across the nation if you win at a Federal level, no? I tweeted it, and going to send out to my “crew” in New York for ideas, at least….State to State fraud is probably pretty similar. Just posted a recent article about a Christine Anderson, in NY, who is fighting back after being fired as a Whistleblower while working as a staff attorney for the State…..there’s proof of fraud everywhere, yet it’s an uphill climb….what is wrong with this picture?



    6. If your not in a hurry to file Bill… Maybe waiting for James Jr. to get out of prison in the next month or so.. we could sure use his “expertise” in this area.. and he would enjoy it.. 🙂 . He lives for this type of stuffing .. and he is a great stuffer.

    7. James, absolutely, this must be done right and every angle needs to be discussed and analyzed. This isn’t something that can be done in a few months… it will take a year or more… hopefully less than 3 years.

    8. think that here is a Law someplace that states when it is the Government at fault, intentional fault, that there is a responsibility to prioritize the remedy . So point being that this situation that we have is the responsibility of the corrupt Government that must address it as a main priority to lessen the injury and effect on the victims ASAP. I just do not think that this point has been totally focused on by other’s in the past , possibly so conditioned to being slow walked, felt that there was absolutely no other format.

      Food for thought, I would think that it would fall under professional conduct and the course of remedy for the intentional lack there of.

      Here is my latest love note to the AGO Tort Div. Below



      Today at 12:49 AM

      The following message has been submitted to staff at the Attorney General’s Office. While we make every effort to respond promptly, depending on the complexity of your request and the volume of messages received, it may take more time for our staff to respond. We appreciate your patience. Please do not respond directly to this message the as ATG WWW Email AGO mailbox is unmonitored. If you need to reach us again, please return to this form: https://fortress.wa.gov/atg/formhandler/ago/ContactForm.aspx

      From: Gambill, Bruce Everett
      Email Address: fourcam89@yahoo.com
      Address: 8513 123rd. St. E.
      Puyallup WA 98373
      Address Type: Home
      Phone: 253-212-7242 Phone Type: Home
      Subject: Torts
      I do not feel comfortable with the course of action taken by Risk Management for the Claim No. ORM No. 10070143/04870011/05070005/04570022 assigning it to the Wa. State Att. Gen. Off. I feel that it is already a predetermined scenario as I have witnessed personally the mind set and unethical conduct of the AGO. I have witnessed a Miss Schimp vigorously assault a jury Demand Filed by Bill Schiedler and a motion to intervene filed by myself for that specific Case. A normal logical rational thinking person would be compelled to ask oneself why would the AGO be so aggressive and objective to the thought of a jury deciding the outcome of this case? Because if fair unbiased Justice is what is truly desired by the AGO, why would the AGO insist that Statute that requires an unbiased /non affiliated with the WSBA , jury be ordered for a case that clearly has established possibility of Bias. Is the AGO making an open Statement that yes, the justice regarding this case produced by a single Judge would be very different than the Justice produced by an unbiased Jury? That can be the only logical answer. Normally a filed jury demand is honored , a jury is provided. But if in fact that the case has anything to do with a member of the judiciary, the WSBA or a member of the Legislative Branch, or Executive Branch of Government, then a jury is out of the question. Miss Schimp was not satisfied until Judge Harper agreed to ignore the Law, violate his Oath to Office and violate Schiedler’s Right to Due Process and a fair unbiased proceeding according to Wa. State law RCW. Then RICO Corrupt Judge Harper openly ask Miss Schimp if everything was ok or if there was anything else he needed to illegally do to appease the wishes of the illegal unethical wishes of the AGO!! Just like in my case involving the Organized Crime Felony Fraudulent Conversion of the title To my Home & property so as to Retaliate, Obstruct Justice and profit from the criminal Felony assault to me and my family involving the felony criminal/ theft of my home and property of the last 32 years, . All accomplished by the pathological liars in the Superior Court Clerks Office Criminally managed by Kevin Stock. Who at first failed to stop and prevent the multiple Unlicensed practice of Law fraudulent appearances in the Superior Court by Attorney Gregory E. Grahn. Now in this Rit of restitution case of mine, the clerk refuses to file my properly prepared Wa. State Jury Demand. lies to me telling me that it has to be a special Pierce Co. only Jury Demand form, which do not exist and is a blatant lie and refusal to provide honest legal services and Fraud. For something like this that warrants arrest, incarceration and fines. Finally the following day files my Jury demand , accepts my payment for the 6person Jury for which I have specific receipt for. Then ignores my filed jury demand, just steals my money I prepaid for the Jury, ignores Wa. State RCW that legally requires a jury for all real estate proceedings such as this. Then intentionally maliciously improperly assigns the case to Corrupt court Commissioner Johnson. Fraud, intentional malicious violation of RCW, my rights, obstruction of Justice, Conspiracy to deprive me of my rights and commit felony Grand theft, fraudulent conversion. Improper Venue, producing all Null & Void Orders having no legal right, no Jurisdiction, no legal ground, no legal effect on anything. But my home , property and everything I own is stolen , gangland style enforced on known Null& Void Orders by the Grunts in the RICO Corrupt P.C. Sheriff’s Dept. I am illegally evicted by Force, threat of arrest, physical force and potential injury, after illegal forced entry to private property, then my locked home, shop, Office building, locked storage boxes and out buildings, then forced entry to all of my locked vehicles, then the illegal theft of all vehicles, boats trailers , tractor etc. to be held for extortion Ransom at a secret location for approx. $3000.00 cash only after they are all damaged, major parts to stolen and destroyed intentionally by this criminal scum working with the organized Crime criminal scum within the Judiciary
      Previous Contact: Yes Date:

      Declared By Name and Date:
      Name: Bruce Gambill Date: 9/09/2014
      Submitted on: 9/9/2014 12:49:19 AM

    9. James J. O’Hagan
      2298 Cranberry Rd
      Grayland WA 98547
      (360) 267-7911
      Washington State Department of Agriculture
      Attn: Joel Kangiser c/o WSDA and Kristen Mitchell c/o AGO’s Office
      RE: Recap of meeting with you on 9/15 2014

      This document is intended to be an accurate recap of the meeting we had from 10:15 to 12:03 on September 15, 2014. If you have any disagreement with this recap of our meeting you should document your disagreement in writing, and send it to me. I brought My I pad to the meeting to record the entire meeting and when I tried to record the meeting Kristen said if I would not agree to have the meeting without it being recorded the meeting would be canceled, so by force I was unable to record the meeting. I intentionally took a witness to the meeting because I was afraid of being accused of doing something or saying something. My witness was Eric Russell.
      The meeting was held because I was reluctant to give my consent to have the Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) enter my farm to conduct an inspection, because all of the information I was provided by WSDA and WDOE that had anything to do with conducting the private property inspections was mostly fraud. If the individuals involved in instigating the inspections stoop to lying, cheating and deceiving then I have no reason to believe the individuals involved in conduction the inspection will not be lyre’s cheaters and fraudsters or will be honest, respectable and honorable.
      I asked Kristen and Joel why the Grayland cranberry growers were being singled out and pointed out to them that the Longbeach cranberry growers had the exact same situation the Grayland growers had and that none of their ditches were covered and no restrictions were being placed on them and WSDA knew it. Kristen and Joel refused to address the reason and issue, and essentially agreed that the Grayland cranberry growers were being singled out. I asked Kristen why the individuals involved developing the best management practices were being punished and other individuals within the industry who were not implementing the best management practices were not even in the picture she stated that it had nothing to do with the inspection.
      When I stated they were singling out and targeting a small group of individuals and not providing equal protections of the laws equally and preventing equal opportunities Kristen stated that she was not going to go there at all. Kristen was fully aware she could use her position of power to ignore equal protections of the laws and single out any individual she wanted to and destroy their life, and that WSDA was acting in the same manner. I expressed to Kristen that this was exactly what the Washington State Bar Association needed to do with me because I am claiming that the entire Washington State Bar Association is a corrupted and that the jury trial I have been guaranteed in Pacific County Superior Court would expose the magnitude of corruption within the Washington State Bar Association. I explained to her that because I was being refused access to the jury in Pacific County Superior Court I was in a position where the Washington State Bar Association has to have assistance to single me out and destroy me so they can conceal the magnitude of corruption occurring within the Washington State Bar Association and the Judicial branches of our governments, to maintain a legal industry that has nothing to do with justice. I explained to them the jury was established to prevent this corruption from occurring and expose it whenever it got out of hand. I asked Kristin to resolve this situation in a civil manner and submit an amicus curie brief to the supreme court in accordance with Article 4 section 2(a) and request an independent judge be assigned to my Pacific County case to address the magnitude of criminal activity by Washington State Bar members and public officials she said that she would not do that because she was there to protect Washington State. I told her assisting in criminal activity is engaging in criminal activity. I cited special privileges and immunities prohibited.
      I showed Kristen and Joel RCW 9.05.030 Assemblages of Saboteurs and RCW 9.05.060 Criminal Sabotage she read the first few sentences and stated clearly that those laws did not pertain to either of them. Kristin clearly indicated to Eric and I that the laws of Washington State that requires her and her agencies to act in a lawful manner did not pertain to her or any members of WSDA. I told her the last time I looked the laws pertain to all of us equally and no one is above the laws, and that it was clearly apparent that our constitutions were established to protect us from the kind of oppressive governmental tactics that WSDA was attempting to engage in.
      When I indicated to Kristin that I was there to get assurance that WSDA was not on an attack or criminal sabotage mission, was not there just to attack me that they were there with open minds and were going to document the damages my farm occurred because of the fraud involved with the original 303 “d” listing and the fraud, threats and harassment involved in singling out the Grayland growers and placing restriction on them only, she indicated to me that WSDA was not going to document any damages and that they were just going to be there gathering information. I then indicated to her that because of the magnitude of fraud used to justify the intrusion on my farm I had no reason to believe their intention was not to create a fraudulent situation that could be used to seize my property in the names of fines.
      I then presented the evidence I brought with me that WSDA was using to justify the intrusion of private property and stated that very few cranberry growers had actual knowledge of the physical make-up of the Grayland Drainage Ditch and without my personal knowledge I would not have questioned the result from the sampling chart given to the Grayland cranberry growers and used to justify the reason to conduct the inspections. The fact is that the chart shows that there were no prior detections of diazion in the immediate vicinity of the cranberry growing area the drainage ditch passes through and the 1.4 detection found at the north tide gate was and is 5 miles downstream from the nearest cranberry bog. There is no way this could have been possible or related to the cranberry industry in Grayland because the ditch had virtually no flow at the county line crossing (in the middle of the cranberry growing area) during the time of the testing. The amount of flow should be documented in the sampler’s notes.
      When confronted with the evidence that there was no detection in the vicinity of the cranberry bogs and a detection 5 miles downstream and discussing it, Kristen indicated to me that the timber industry may have a diazion registered use. When I then questioned her as to how that would justify singling out a small group of an industry, placing restrictions on them and invading the privacy of a cranberry grower she had no answers for me was offended by my question and stated it was not going to change anything about the inspection. Without a doubt Kristen could care less if fraud was the motivation behind the invasion of private property, all that mattered to her was that she was in a position of power and could flex her power muscles.
      When I showed them the document that was labeled “Pesticides No Longer Registered for Cranberry (Bearing & Non Bearing) and indicated to them that the document was total fraud and slander to make the industry look bad, Kristen indicated the fraud involved in the document was an acceptable practice by WSDA employees and stated that several individuals routinely make that kind of mistakes. Kristen clearly stated that slander and fraud was an acceptable practice for WSDA, WDOE and the AGO’s office. She was offended when I indicated to her that WSDA, WDOE and the AGO’s office were using fraud and slander to justify placing restrictions on a small group of individuals, interfere with commerce, engage in criminal sabotage and justify an invasion of private property. When I indicated to Kristen that all of the documents WSDA was using to justify invading individuals private property were fraud she asked me why would they do that, and I indicated to her it was intended to threaten and intimidate all of the cranberry growers who were damaged by the criminal activity involved in the May 23, 1999 WDOE arson fires, to discourage them from testifying and litigating the situation. Kristen then indicated to me the WDOE arson fires and any criminal activity involved them had nothing to do with WSDA’s actions, nor was it their responsibility to investigate them. I told her that the remains of the document of the May 23, 1999 WDOE arson fires would reveal that the 303 “d “ listening was a fraud and was directed at singling out and attacking the Grayland cranberry growers to keep them from testifying and no one else.
      I told Joel and Kristen that every bit of it was an interference with commerce as described in 18 USC section 1951, and harassing, threatening and intimidating victims, witnesses and informants as described in 18 USC sections 1512 and 1513. I told Kristen that if WSDA was using fraud to justify their actions, they were engaging in a civil conspiracy using illegal actions. Kristen indicated to me that she was there to protect Washington State interests and nothing more. When I asked Kristen if I was Washington State she refused to answer me and indicated to me that certain individuals of Washington State were part of her interest. I took it as, she was not required to protect all individual of Washington State, only individuals she choose to protect and abide by. This was a direct attack on our constitutions and her oath of office. I asked Kristen if she took an oath of office to uphold our constitution and she indicated that she had. I indicated to her that she had knowledge of a misprision of felony and she was obligated to investigate it.
      I indicated to both of them that I have not violated any crimes and I believe a search of my farm will result in no felony violation. I indicated to them I am protected from unreasonable searches and seizures by our state and federal constitutions. I indicated to them that I am and have been threatened, harassed and intimidated by Washington State Bar members ever since I have attempted to obtain the remains of the documents salvaged from the May 23, 1999 Washington State Department Of Ecology arson fires. I indicated to them it is the criminal activity of WDOE employees that resulted in the Grayland Drainage Ditch getting on the 303 D list in the first place and the remains of the documents that were set on fire on May, 23 1999 at WDOE headquarters will reveal the criminal attack as described in Criminal Sabotage (RCW 9.05.060) on the Grayland Cranberry industry.
      I then started to raise Constitutional issues and mentioned that domestic tranquility was documented in the preamble of our constitutions. Kristin said she was fully aware of our constitutions and she was not violating them. I went onto discuss the problem I was having reaching a jury in Pacific County and both she and Joel said they were fully aware of the problems I was having and this was not their problem I stated then they were aware of a misprision of felony and by law were required to do something to prevent it and they were both stunned and said they were not going to do anything that was going to assist my litigation in any way shape or form I stated to Kristin that she could follow the intent of the constitution and provide an amicus curie brief to the Supreme Court addressing our Washington State Constitution Article IV section 2(a) asking them to appoint a special judge to the case to allow the jury to resolve the issues in a civil manner instead of using unwarranted force.
      When Kristin refused to do this I asked her how she intended to get a warrant. I told her that according to RCW title 15 the warrant had to be obtained from the county in which I reside and that there was no judge in the county that would sit on any of my cases, and that she lawfully was required to address this very serious problem. I told her the reason that no judge would sit on any of my cases was because several of them were directly involved in assisting in criminal activities of Washington State Bar members of which she was one and that it appeared to me through her actions she was determined to ignore all of protections I have in the laws and use her position as an officer of the court to illegally use fraud to obtain a warrant. Kristen smugly remarked top me that “she had ways around the law that required her to go to Pacific County Superior Court”. Her remark to me was a clear indication that I had no equal protections of the laws and she knew it. I indicated to them the entire situation could be handled in a civil manner with the jury trial in Pacific County Superior court but instead they were determined to use force to conceal the criminal activities of Washington State public officials and Washington State Bar Members. I indicated to them obtaining and enforcing the warrant is a show of force that excites that is a direct attack on our constitutions and our domestic tranquility, of which I would be forced to be in a position to have to defend myself from. Kristin them came extremely aggressive with me and asked me if I was threatening her I said that I was not threatening her and that she was threatening me. She aggressively and loudly stated that I was threatening her and I again said no that she was threatening me. Both Eric and I felt threatened, harassed and intimidated by her and her actions and I immediately understood that all of her actions and WSDA”s actions were as I suspected designed to threaten harass and intimidate me and justify preventing me from reaching the jury in Pacific County Superior Court case no 94-2-00298-0. When I told her that she needed to act according to the law and not use fraudulent documentation to justify requesting a warrant she said the meeting was over and done.
      As our constitution’s guarantee us this situation should be handled in a civil manner instead of a strong arm show of force, but the only thing preventing it is the corruption our constitutions were established to prevent. All of it is a direct attack on our constitutions and our domestic tranquility, and I am asking for the WSDA directors bond and Kristen Mitchell’s bond for ignoring their oath of office and attacking our constitutions.

      James J. O’Hagan

    10. Look up “Attorney License Fraud”. WA bar association is running “a closed union shop” which violates the
      “Taft Hartley Act”. It is a must to add this act. Additionally, lawyers and judges have taken an oath to uphold
      whatever they dictate from Europe, and the Bar is under the Crown, which is why lawyers have a title of nobility
      (esquire), it is a federal criminal. offense to have a title of nobility in the US. Every business practice in the US
      are required to obtain a license in order to conduct business. However, not one Bar member is licensed to
      practice law in WA or anywhere else. They are only issued certificates by other Bar members, to practice law.
      The law merchant society are essentially foreign nationals, or foreign enemies, who have been given authority
      to traffic in human beings using their fake court/legal systems, when none of us have consented allow these enemies of humanity to have any say in our lives, whatsoever.
      I would love to help in the class action, and I am desperately seeking help with a few actions of my own. I just spent 30+ days in custody based on an action that was dismissed (false imprisonment). See, Tresvant v. The City of Tampa; I am willing to split the damages with whomever helps me with this one. I have all the documentary evidence to prove this one.

    11. Earl, once again, great stuff. If there is anything I can do as a lay-citizen in your case, let me know. The web site is at your disposal. Also, all that you contribute to this site will be included in the class complaint… as will all that others contribute too. Just off the top of my head, can you merge your case with the class complaint… OR, in the alternative, file grievances with the bar and cjc (which will surely be dismissed) and then join with us and offer your case as evidence??? Just spit balling at this point.

      • Give me a call at your convenience. I can better explain details then. After hearing details, then, perhaps you can find a way to help. Right now, I am trying to resolve the latest installment of attacks from county employees and their agents. 425-513-8968, or leave message at: 425-493-7621

    12. I used 18 USC Sec.241 in my appeal to the Ninth Circuit for when the BR. Judges just passed my case around between the 2 of them and then back and forth with Judge Settle in the U.S. District Court. Like it was a toy ball. Harboring justice, maliciously steering the case, Obstructing justice , violating my jury demands in each and every case. Judicially engineering and maliciously grooming me and the case for destruction/dismissal. Practically setting up tents and camping on Emergency Motions for weeks at a time. Then at the last minute right before a scheduled sale date of the home if it were not protected by bankruptcy, they would either deny my motion or dismiss the case right at the end of the day with the previously scheduled sale date looming within 1-2 days at the most. Conspiring to violate my rights and setting me up like a human bowling pin.

      [edited, truncated, for length and repetition, Admin.]

    13. Romano v. Bible, 169 F. 3d 1182 – Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1999

      ….See Hirsh v. Justices of Supreme Court of Cal., 67 F.3d 708, 715 (9th Cir.1995) (concluding that the California Attorney General was entitled to absolute immunity for his limited role in the Bar disciplinary system).

    14. State of Washington, its Judicial Agencies, Boards, Commissions, Associations and its Judicial Officers
      COUNT I is brought by all plaintiffs as a class action against all defendants.


      READ- e.g., Boulware v. Department of Insurance, Dist. Court, CD California 2009


      Count 1 just got tossed out, and if appealed, you get sanctioned ! We all know what that means.. If not.. refer to Bill..

      I wonder how this would sound, and work.. the state of washington supreme court dba the state of washington.. can you say, 11th amendment absolute immunity, judicial immunity, etc. immunity..

      Geez, not us ..

      Back to the drawing board.. hut hut hike..

      • Well, as I said, this complaint is in its early draft stages…. however, unless I read RCW 9A.82, noted in Count 1, incorrectly, it states

        (8) “Enterprise” includes any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, business trust, or other profit or nonprofit legal entity, and includes any union, association, or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity, and both illicit and licit enterprises and governmental and nongovernmental entities.

        and then there is this …

        (h) To take wrongful action as an official against anyone or anything, or wrongfully withhold official action, or cause such action or withholding;

        and then there is this Article 2 … especially at 12 and 17..

        SECTION 28 SPECIAL LEGISLATION. The legislature is prohibited from enacting any private or special laws in the following cases:
        1. For changing the names of persons, or constituting one person the heir at law of another.
        2. For laying out, opening or altering highways, except in cases of state roads extending into more than one county, and military roads to aid in the construction of which lands shall have been or may be granted by congress.
        3. For authorizing persons to keep ferries wholly within this state.
        4. For authorizing the sale or mortgage of real or personal property of minors, or others under disability.
        5. For assessment or collection of taxes, or for extending the time for collection thereof.
        6. For granting corporate powers or privileges.
        7. For authorizing the apportionment of any part of the school fund.
        8. For incorporating any town or village or to amend the charter thereof.
        9. From giving effect to invalid deeds, wills or other instruments.
        10. Releasing or extinguishing in whole or in part, the indebtedness, liability or other obligation, of any person, or corporation to this state, or to any municipal corporation therein.
        11. Declaring any person of age or authorizing any minor to sell, lease, or encumber his or her property.
        12. Legalizing, except as against the state, the unauthorized or invalid act of any officer.
        13. Regulating the rates of interest on money.
        14. Remitting fines, penalties or forfeitures.
        15. Providing for the management of common schools.
        16. Authorizing the adoption of children.
        17. For limitation of civil or criminal actions.
        18. Changing county lines, locating or changing county seats, provided, this shall not be construed to apply to the creation of new counties.

        So I’m not ready to toss Count 1, just yet.

    15. Most certainly never thought you should toss it. But as you better than most already know, they will just look at us and flagrantly ignore the Law and everything in Count1.

      Then smugly & juvenile spitefully smile at you, practically openly laughing at innocent victims as they dismiss the entire matter.

      That is why without the force of outside authority, cows will fly and the entire country will convert to eating our meals with chop sticks before they ever provide Due Process and non corrupt honest legal services.

      Because no one with authority from the Legislative or Executive Branch will honor their Oath to Office or stop defrauding the public. They misprision criminal felony Organized Crime RICO and Aid & Abet these criminal Felony Crimes & criminals knowing that we have no where else to turn.

      Its practically impossible to pressure the U.S. Attorney or any Judge to do the right thing without the DOJ killing you first. But you can pressure the Governor , Senators and Congressmen to provide honest legal services and actually represent us.

      Then they might still kill you but not nearly as quick.


      • First, the Bottom line… if you want to successfully defraud people you need to defraud them without them knowing it and have all the right players in the right offices to protect the fraud by whatever means required.

        WE KNOW, RIGHT NOW, those who are in the right places are “LAWYERS” but we don’t know who devised the fraud. WE also know that our “legislature” is populated by lawyers… same is true of Congress, Govs and Chief Executives.

        If you look at RCW 43.19, the legislature established the “office of Risk Management” with the “PURPOSE” to devise programs and strategies to manage RISK. What better way to Manage Risk than by putting “criminals” in charge … especially in the judicial branch (all lawyers) and then by seeking office in the legislature and executive branches, which is now heavily filled with lawyers!

        This is why I’ve been submitting “public records request” to the Office of Risk Management … which they have refused to provided with one excuse after another — I was sick, too many request, you’ll have to wait your turn… Within this office are all the “contracts, schemes, people, tactics, bribes,…” showing who is orchestrating these crimes against us.

        Once we have “evidence” and the names of people involved in the “planning, contracting, bribing…” THEN the light of day will do its work.

        There are two ways to get this information… by public records requests (so far I’ve been thwarted in that avenue) and by subpoena… but we need to file a lawsuit to accomplish the latter …

        So, with all of this… and I’m still unsure about things… the most efficient way to pressure our legislators is by “public records requests or subpoenas” — finding the evidence that explains the corruption. If you see merit in this assumption then we can better utilize our time and energy in ganging together in seeking Public Records or as a CLASS in a lawsuit to get subpoena power.

        This is how Anne Block got the goods for her planned lawsuit. She worked smart — getting information through PR requests — she got emails, phone logs …. and she did it all by herself! Now, with the evidence of who orchestrated the crimes, dozens of others have joined Anne … see http://www.goldbarreporter.org

        Until we can expose the planners – who may be congressmen, representatives and chief executives, we are shooting in the dark and spinning our wheels by going to them, without knowing if they are involved, at this point in time. Better to let them all see us digging for information – one way or another.

        Your thoughts?

        • First, the Bottom line… if you want to successfully defraud people you need to defraud them without them knowing it and have all the right players in the right offices to protect the fraud by whatever means required. WE KNOW, RIGHT NOW, those who are in the right places are “LAWYERS” but we don’t know who devised the fraud. WE also know that our “legislature” is populated by lawyers… same is true of Congress, Govs and Chief Executives – See more at: http://www.corruptwa.com/corrupt/government-officials/draft-class-complaint-against-wa-bar-association-for-rico-want-your-ideas-and-arguments/#sthash.jAY92GMi.dpuf


          You are so right on about this. If you ask yourself “who is really running the state of Washington”
          You will find all the answers. It is a puzzle that took me a long time to put together. This state is so corrupt beyond your understanding. It goes from Olympia (Capital) straight into the Bar Association. Yes, and most of them are lawyers. Example:

          When Robert Wallace (Bellevue Real Estate) did not like a bill that Jane Hague Metropolitan City Council and (wife of Edward Springman, also Real Estate), was supporting, He RW, sent an Email to all “his friends to oust her.”

          From here you can find your own truth.

          Ps….Nobody in the media wants to rock the boat …”that goes from the Seattle Times to the TV stations”. I tried and they are scared. If they would this would become the biggest scandal in Wash. State.

    16. Interpretation of a statute is also a question of law that we review de novo. Dep’t of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C., 146 Wn.2d 1, 9, 43 P.3d 4 (2002). Our objective is to carry out the legislature’s intent. Arborwood Idaho, L.L.C. v. City of Kennewick, 151 Wn.2d 359, 367, 89 P.3d 217 (2004). “The `plain meaning’ of a statutory provision is to be discerned from the ordinary meaning of the language at issue, as well as from the context of the statute in which that provision is found, the related provisions, and the statutory scheme as a whole.” City of Spokane v. Rothwell, 166 Wn.2d 872, 876-77, 215 P.3d 162 (2009). “In general, words are given their ordinary meaning, but when technical terms and terms of art are used, we give these terms their technical meaning.” Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. Dep’t of Ecology, 178 Wn.2d 571, 581-82, 311 P.3d 6 (2013). ( Weed- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uLQOYtpZsA )

      Winchester v. Stein, 959 P. 2d 1077 – Wash: Supreme Court 1998

      There is very little Washington law generally discussing the Criminal Profiteering Act.[2] This Court has characterized our Criminal Profiteering Act as a “little RICO” statute. Rice v. Janovich, 109 Wash.2d 48, 55, 742 P.2d 1230 (1987). Our statute is similar in many ways to the federal RICO act.[3] Because of the similarities, it is helpful to look to federal RICO cases. See City of Bellevue v. Cashier’s Check for $51,000 & $1,130 in U.S. Currency, 70 Wash.App. 697, 701, 855 P.2d 330 (1993); Rozner v. City of Bellevue, 116 Wash.2d 342, 351, 804 P.2d 24 (1991). The Court of Appeals recently noted that law construing the federal RICO act is of assistance in construing our state profiteering act. State v. Barnes, 85 Wash.App. 638, 667, 932 P.2d 669, review denied, 133 Wash.2d 1021, 948 P.2d 389 (1997). Other states have looked to the federal RICO act when construing their state “little RICO” acts. E.g., State v. Huynh, 519 N.W.2d 191, 194 Minn.1994); Boyd v. State, 578 So.2d 718, 720 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1991);

      The federal RICO act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, was enacted in 1970. Congress enacted RICO to combat organized crime, but although it had organized crime as its focus, the act was not limited in application to organized crime. National Org. for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249, 260, 114 S.Ct. 798, 127 L.Ed.2d 99 (1994). The Supreme Court has explained that the federal RICO act is to be read broadly and that it is to be “liberally construed to effectuate its remedial purposes.” Sedima, 473 U.S. at 497-98, 105 S.Ct. 3275. RICO provides for both civil and criminal remedies to redress violations of the act, as does the Washington Criminal Profiteering Act. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968; RCW 9A.82. The Senate report regarding the federal RICO statute recognized a difference between criminal and civil enforcement in describing proposed civil remedies that would have been available to the government. The report emphasized that although those proposed remedies were intended to place additional pressure on organized crime, they were intended to reach essentially an economic, not a punitive goal. The Senate report explained:

      However remedies may be fashioned, it is necessary to free the channels of commerce from predatory activities, but there is no intent to visit punishment on any individual; the purpose is civil. Punishment as such is limited to the criminal remedies….

      S. REP. No. 91-617, at 81 (1969), quoted in Sedima, 473 U.S. at 529, 105 S.Ct. 3275 (Powell, J., dissenting).

      In an effort to combat organized crime, a number of states, including Washington, have enacted their own versions of RICO. See Michael P. Sullivan, Annotation, Civil Action for Damages under State Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Acts (RICO) for Losses from Racketeering Activity, 62 A.L.R.4th 654, 657 (1988). In 1985, the Washington Legislature passed the Criminal Profiteering Act (formerly Racketeering Act[4]). The act created several new crimes and also provided for a variety of civil penalties and remedies. “Criminal profiteering” includes the commission, or attempted commission, for financial gain, of any one of a number of crimes listed in the statute. Among the crimes which may constitute profiteering are many violent felonies and felonies relating to gambling, drugs, pornography, prostitution, extortion, and securities fraud. The act provides that a “pattern of criminal profiteering activity” means engaging in at least three acts of criminal profiteering within a five-year period. To constitute a “pattern,” the three acts must have the same or similar intent, results, accomplices, principals, victims or methods of commission, or be otherwise interrelated by distinguishing characteristics including a nexus to the same enterprise, and must not be isolated events. A “pattern” of profiteering is usually required before any of the special civil remedies apply. RCW 9A.82.010(14), (15); 9A.82.100; FINAL LEGISLATIVE REPORT, 49TH Legis., 1st Reg. Sess. 139-40 (1985). RCW 9A.82.100 is the remedies and procedures section of the Criminal Profiteering Act and provides in relevant part:

      (1)(a) A person who sustains injury to his or her person, business, or property by an act of criminal profiteering that is part of a pattern of criminal profiteering activity or by a violation of RCW 9A.82.060 [involving leading organized crime] or 9A.82.080 [involving using proceeds of a pattern of criminal profiteering for investing in property] may file an action in superior court for the recovery of damages and costs of the suit, including reasonable investigative and attorney’s fees.

      (b) The attorney general or county prosecuting attorney may file an action: (i) On behalf of those persons injured or, respectively, on behalf of the state or county if the entity has sustained damages, or (ii) to prevent, restrain, or remedy a pattern of criminal profiteering activity or a violation of RCW 9A.82.060 or 9A.82.080.

      (c) An action for damages filed by or on behalf of an injured person, the state, or the county shall be for the recovery of damages and the costs of the suit, including reasonable investigative and attorney’s fees.

      (d) In an action filed to prevent, restrain, or remedy a pattern of criminal profiteering activity or a violation of RCW 9A.82.060 or 9A.82.080, the court, upon proof of the violation, may impose a civil penalty not exceeding two hundred fifty thousand dollars, in addition to awarding the cost of the suit, including reasonable investigative and attorney’s fees.

      . . . .

      (4) Following a determination of liability, orders may include, but are not limited to:

      . . . .

      (d) Ordering the payment of actual damages sustained to those persons injured by a violation of RCW 9A.82.060 or 9A.82.080 or an act of criminal profiteering that is part of a pattern of criminal profiteering, and in the court’s discretion, increasing the payment to an amount not exceeding three times the actual damages sustained.

      (e) Ordering the payment of all costs and expenses of the prosecution and investigation of a pattern of criminal profiteering activity or a violation of RCW 9A.82.060 or 9A.82.080, civil and criminal, incurred by the state or county, including any costs of defense provided at public expense, as appropriate to the state general fund or the antiprofiteering revolving fund of the county.

      . . . .

      (6) A defendant convicted in any criminal proceeding is precluded in any civil proceeding from denying the essential allegations of the criminal offense proven in the criminal trial in which the defendant was convicted. For the purposes of this subsection, a conviction shall be deemed to have occurred upon a verdict, finding, or plea of guilty, notwithstanding the fact that appellate review of the conviction and sentence has been or may be sought. If a subsequent reversal of the conviction occurs, any judgment that was based upon that conviction may be reopened upon motion of the defendant.

      (7) The initiation of civil proceedings under this section shall be commenced within three years after discovery of the pattern of criminal profiteering activity or after the pattern should reasonably have been discovered.

      (8) The attorney general or county prosecuting attorney may, in a civil action brought pursuant to this section, file with the clerk of the superior court a certificate stating that the case is of special public importance….

      (9) The standard of proof in actions brought pursuant to this section is the preponderance of the evidence test.

      The act itself indicates that the Legislature intended the remedies in RCW 9A.82.100 to be civil. The act calls the $250,000 penalty a “civil penalty.” RCW 9A.82.100(1)(d). The act creates a civil burden of proof. RCW 9A.82.100(9). The act refers to the “civil proceedings under this section” in the statute of limitations section. RCW 9A.82.100(7). The final legislative report explains that a person injured by racketeering activity may file a “civil action for treble damages” and a “civil penalty of up to $250,000” may be imposed. FINAL LEGISLATIVE REPORT at 140. We conclude the Legislature intended the sanctions contained in RCW 9A.82.100, which include the civil penalty, the treble damages to the victim and reimbursement for the costs of investigation and prosecution, to be civil in nature.

      Any relationship to you Bill ?

      National Org. for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249, 260, 114 S.Ct. 798, 127 L.Ed.2d 99 (1994).

      In Thomas, we held that the title “[an act] [r]elating to insurance fraud” did not sufficiently notify voters of the act’s substantive effect on the Criminal Profiteering Act. Thomas, 103 Wash.App. at 809, 14 P.3d 854. Accordingly, we found that the act’s title violated article II, section 19’s subject-in-title rule. Thomas, 103 Wash.App. at 809, 14 P.3d 854. Part of the act repealed a sunset provision in the Criminal Profiteering Act, which made it a crime to lead organized crime. Thomas, 103 Wash.App. at 809-10, 14 P.3d 854. We reasoned that the title, “[an act] [r]elating to insurance fraud,” gave no notice that the initiative affected the Criminal Profiteering Act. Thomas, 103 Wash.App. at 809-10, 14 P.3d 854.
      WESTERN CARTAGE, INC. v. Yin, Wash: Court of Appeals, 1st Div. 2010


      The companies claim they are entitled to attorney fees under RAP 18.1(a) and RCW 9A.82.100(1)(a). We agree.

      A party may recover attorney fees when authorized by a private agreement, statute, or recognized ground of equity.[11] RCW 9A.82.100(1)(a) provides: “A person who sustains injury . . . by an act of criminal profiteering . . . may file an action in superior court for the recovery of damages and the costs of the suit, including reasonable investigative and attorney’s fees.” The trial court granted the companies’ motion for attorney fees under this statute. The companies are also entitled to an award of fees on appeal, subject to compliance with RAP 18.1.

      We affirm the trial court’s order and award the companies their attorney fees on appeal, subject to compliance with RAP 18.1(d).

      SCHINDLER and GROSSE, JJ., Concur.

    17. What is the threshold standard of evidence under burdens of proof in finding a governmental enterprise/entity “illicit” ? that seems it would be the $64 million dollar question..

      (8) “Enterprise” includes any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, business trust, or other profit or nonprofit legal entity, and includes any union, association, or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity, and both illicit and licit enterprises and governmental and nongovernmental entities.

    18. James, right off the top of my head, I seriously doubt that I could provide you with the actual technical definition you are asking me for . But I do know for a fact that if you are offering to provide it, I would be interested to hear it.

    19. James, thank you for the direction and specific address for it. I understood this concept and what had taken place/ what had been done to me by the Judicial Engineering performed by the corrupt Government actors involved in my case.

      Although I tried my best to point this out in some of my documents sent to the Ninth Circuit, I merely tried to explain it the best that I could without using the exact Phrase/terminology as State or a Judicially Engineered/Created Danger .

      Although just like you with your Legal mind and expertise, they surely recognized what I was attempting to explain to them. But rather than to uphold my rights and the Law too, they chose to quickly ignore it all.

      I would have responded to you sooner but have spent the time to fully read all related posts concerning this.

      What you have just done for me, is something I have been trying to get others who are involved in this fight across the Nation to recognize that must be done. Meaning to help others involved in this who are current victims. Because with a little help and guidance from others that have the legal minds and expertise to know these facts, it might very well be possible to achieve success.

      But outside of George McDermott, no one else has been willing to even provide those of us who are in the dark about so much of this even so much as a tip, or suggestion for them to review.

      Possibly fueled by the endless hours of research they themselves have had to do to become aware of these legal terms/statutes/doctrines etc. Thinking that they have had to earn what they know and therefore others can do the same for themselves.

      The only problem with that mind set is, by the time a person is able to educate themselves, pay their bills and some how survive the attacks and injuries inflicted upon them by the judiciary, the statute of limitations prohibits them from using what they have finally managed to learn on their own.

      Which pleases the corruption immensely and provides a way & means for it to continue to create more and more victims, and them to continually get away with doing so.

      Point being , the corrupt judiciary and judicial system sticks together and helps each other. Even willing to breech their Oath to office and violate statute for each other to make sure we remain defeated. But the public does not and as a result, we remain victims and constantly trying to figure out how to defeat them and purge from our Judiciary these criminal felony Organized Crime Corrupt Judicial actors.

      • Bruce, this “state created danger” issue is why our case is against “the WA STATE Bar” and the Commission on Judicial Conduct” and why I’ve been stressing filing grievances with these state agencies… When these “agencies’ abandon their duty to save use, the “private” interest element that removes state liability is eliminated as a defense.

        • Bill, I most certainly realize that to exhaust all available resources regarding righting so many wrongs must be addressed. But to continue filing grievances with the WSBA,& the CJC, rather than just note the instances in the class claim for reference. But to keep beating our heads against the wall doing something that there already is an over abundance of proof that does not work , and they intentionally see to it that it does not work. Which is exactly what they want us to do. To waste our time, energy , thought and resources doing something that they already have made sure that will not work, no matter how out right they must cheat and defraud you.

          [edited, truncated, for excessive length and repetition – admin]

          • Bruce, a “Tort Claim” has been filed! Has it not? You filed your “Tort Claim”, and others filed their “Tort Claim”… The legislative, Executive and judicial branches are fully aware of the “Tort Claim” as the WA Attorney General is “investigating”. Also, I provided a copy of the “Tort Claim” to the Governor, the FBI, the DOJ … Have I not?

            The AG has sent me a letter that it will take 60-90 days to investigate. Have they not?

            Bottom line, I am doing something and that something has started an “investigation”! Has it not?

            I’m also preparing a draft “class complaint” should the AG decide not to resolve these issues after they have “investigated” …. Am I not?

            I’ve also filed to intervene in two cases. Have I not?

            I’ve also attended court hearings as a “court watcher” in 3 other’s lawsuit. If you don’t know.

            I’m also in litigation in WA courts and the Federal 9th Circuit. If you don’t remember.

            I also ran for elective office. Have I not?

            I also file PR request seeking email, phone records, contracts, cancelled checks… from the WSBA, Office of Risk Management, and legislators. … if you don’t know.

            I’ve also filed, with the WA Secretary of State, as well as the WA State Bar a complaint that Dr. Nathan Schlicher, Esq., has committed voter fraud. Have I not?

            I’ve also met with Senators and Representatives … and I’m encouraged…. if you don’t know.

            Do you remember the night you called us, unexpectedly, that your car broke down on your way to come to our house, uninvited, and we had to pick you up, spend hours listening to your story, then drive you all the way to Tacoma… do you recall that incident you imposed upon me and my family?

            I’ve also drove to your house when you were being questioned by the US Marshall’s service – a 4 hour event. Did I not?

            I also wrote a letter to Congressman Heck on your behalf, based on information you told me, which information was inaccurate and rendered the time I spent writing this letter on your behalf a complete waste of time… do you recall?

            … and of course you wanted me to rewrite the letter as you felt it was my duty to you to be accurate and study the boxes of documents so i’d have all the information needed to write this letter on your behalf … do you remember?

            I’ve also developed three web sites to publish stories, and for civilized comments, so others in WA can read for themselves what goes on in government. Did I not?

            I’ve also appeared on 3 blogtalk radio shows, more than once. Did I not?

            I’ve also appeared and offered my ‘testimony’ in a Bill Windsor documentary? Did I not?

            I’ve also traveled to Portland to be interviewed by Bruce Broussard, TV host, Did I not?

            I also write on a few “discussion boards” for various causes, such as the National Liberty Alliance, Tea Party, and others…. if you don’t know

            I respond to dozens of emails, phone calls and comments from others besides you, who are seeking help from me. If you don’t know.

            …. if all that I’m doing still displeases you or doesn’t meet your standards or isn’t producing results quick enough for you, there is nothing more I can do as I don’t have a staff, any help, no money, no more time, or any more energy to do anything more… so while I’d like all of this resolved right NOW, it’s out of my control and I’m doing everything I can 24/7 12 months a year to help as many people as I can and expose and correct the unlawful way our governments treat citizens.

            So thanks for your constructive criticism but there is no more blood for you to squeeze out of me as I’m all empty.

    20. Bruce, when I filed suit against the city of vancouver in clark county superior court,( http://thclist.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=9777 ) this judge (whom was my wife’s 1st divorce lawyer) http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/feb/04/clark-county-superior-court-judge-woolard-will-ret/ sat on the bench in front of me, drunker than a skunk (going into a murder trial after denying me access to the court without paying a $20 surcharge).

      The city of vancouver risk management “team” of 4 lawyers filed a federal question to the federal courts (same judge as bill had, as matter of fact, bill called me and asked me to join his fight to clock this federal judge) claiming I had no case, and requested dismissal.. Upon doing so, I filed with the court my affidavit of said clark county judge was drunker than a skunk going into a murder trial after denying a person on federal assistance access to the courts, and committed theft of federal assistance program funds, putting me below poverty level.. Judge woolard stopped hearing cases, went to portland,oregon to seek legal counsel .. her legal counsel advised here to make claim here “anti-seizure meds” had affected her ability to continue, as it interfered with her judgment.. funniest shit I ever read … because I knew her patterns in court, not my 1st rodeo watching her..

      Moral of story, more than one way to skin a stinky feral cat.. the city ended up seeing things my way.. and we settled with me dismissing my case, and the city dismissed their complete bans on cannabis within the city limits.. WIN, WIN for us all.. (I had filed a $60 million tort claim against the city, and it’s agents)

      (–abusive comment deleted by admin.–)

      Just so you understand, “corrupt” judges are not UNTOUCHABLE .. you just need to right tools .. themselves!! 🙂

      James Sr., has his hands in “purging” 2 corrupt clark county superior court judges, within a 2 yr time span.. the other was Judge John Wulle, aka Wulle the bully.. http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/aug/28/several-support-judge-wulle-at-disciplinary-hearin/

      I honestly don’t play well with others.. as you see above..

      I also had a hand in getting rid of Chris Gregoire.. my main objective !!

      • I really want to have your help getting a Benton county judge booted he has been on the bench far too long and done many way wrong so please lets clean up the covens of azazel and do it for One…

    21. Gregoire, what a prime example of what we are attempting to purge from this criminally ran judicial System. When I called her Office twice, and ask for assistance, the person I talked to apparently was a parrot. All she would say was contact the CJC, over and over. I felt compelled to offer her a cracker.

      But Inslee is no different. He has refused to discuss this matter, refused t investigate it and refused to meet with me. This being after I sent to his Office via certified USPS return receipt proof. Verifiable documented proof of organized Crime Corruption within the judiciary, Fraudulent conversion of the title to my home & property. Verifiable documented proof of the WSBA defrauding me of 288k on their own letterhead with Elizabeth Turner’s own signature on this document generated to defraud me of the 288k , all from her own Office at the LFCP at the WSBA

      • So your plan only requires 200 million signatures (50% of the US population)? Seems ‘pie in the sky’ and snake oil BS to me. “Peopleisim” another “relabeling of “voters”. Good luck.

        My view is we don’t need another “constitution”. The one we have is just fine. What we need is “public servants who obey” the existing constitution and the laws we, the people, have already passed via our elected representatives. If you cannot get “public servants to obey the existing laws” what makes you think a ‘new constitutional’ will have any more success?

    22. Question: How many lawyers are involved in and work on this class action suit? I believe that the more the better. I hope this suit gets so big that the news media has no choice but to cover it. I know they are protecting their friends. I also hope that John Scannel will work on this. He is so good at class action suits. For me the best revenge is paying them back for all the scum they put out on the public. I am so excited that the tables are turned. Isn’t this interesting: John Scannel was disbarred. They are working on Anne Block next. And when we have a complaint about the criminals that are running this state whom elect and select their friends for positions, the corrupt WSBA does nothing. I am asking what is the Bar there for ?….to protect their corrupt friends? I know once everything is out on the table, this will be the biggest scandal in Washington State.

      In the mean time, Strichartz and his friend David Fennell of NW Foreclosure Service keep up and make huge income by kicking people out of their homes. By the way, it is not only Forclosures but alot of Bankruptcies too.
      See these people do not pay for anything. They drive new cars, get alot of credit cards, open businesses, that later go under. You guys can check yourself. Kevin Wallace Friends, Mary Jo Pfohl Bennett (McCue, Bellevue) Friends, Aaron Reardon (relative) and the list goes on. Friends of Friends of Friends. I checked at Pacer Court Records.

    23. Seattle Times Dec’4 2014

      Bellevue council approves $1.36B Budget over 2 years.
      The budget commits $30 Million to design and build part of Spring Boulevard. It is to connect a new arterial from downtown B to developer Wright Runstad 2.3 billion Spring District project in the Bel-Red Corridor.

      It must be great to be Kevin Wallace. Money is taken and the taxpayer is paying for this. No wonder he sits on the council. Their friends are building and we pay for it. They Build and get things for free.


      Judith Runstad (wife of Jon)…..Foster Pepper Pllc…same place Kevin W worked.
      Co-Chair, Governor Gregoire’s Global Competitiveness Council, 2005-2006

      Washington State Bar Association
      Board of Directors, Environmental and Land Use Law Section, 1979-1980
      Board of Directors, Continuing Legal Education, 1978-1979
      Board of Directors, Young Lawyers, 1975-1977.

      And how many Judges in Wash. State do they know? And how many friends will they hire to do this work?
      No wonder that the WSBA dismissed my claim.

    24. From Seattle Times about Tunnell 99
      Someone Wrote:

      “This project needs to be frozen for good and put under the jurisdiction of a Special Prosecutor until all blame and liability can be decided and the decision making of previous administrators can be reviewed for possible criminal misconduct”

      How right this statement is. Gregoire and her friends that got Seattle in this mess (that we have to pay for)
      should pay for this. All this is happening because they wanted to keep their Friends busy and pay them lots of money for Construction. They are all criminals.

    25. Heidi Ann Gandy (Engle) March 29, 1978 to March 16, 2017, my wife, passed in the midst of a corrupt county and corrupt cps office “dependency case” out of Pend Oreille County Washington state. Stress in relation her lifelong Epilepsy illness is what took her life, termed as SUDEP (sudden unexplained death in epilepsy patients).

      I filed civil rights complaint in Eastern Washington Federal/District court…only to get snowballed. SEPTEMBER 2013!

      Under Color of Law!!!

      Crooked judges, crooked defense lawyers with obvious crookedness from the attorney generals office and the cps department.


      Fuck Washington and Fuck Washington State Government (with their 80% supreme court reversals and that my fellow Americans, is proof, of corruption).

      Jail them all…take their homes, bank accounts, retirements, insurance settlements and the like…this state makes their own laws outside of the U.S. Constitution above and beyond any common decency and respect for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness with the American Family being a major stakeholder and the fabric of the American Identity.


      May “God” bless America, our families and our Leadership of men (Im a Trump supporter).


      JAMES E. GANDY MARCH 1, 2017

    26. We’re still here advocating… Drain the swamp and lock them up!

      We don’t forgive, we don’t forget and were idly standing by awaiting revenge!

    2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

    1. Class complaint against WA Bar Association for RICO| CORRUPT WA | The Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America
    2. Anne Giroux seeks Article 4, Sec 9 REMOVAL of Judges James Orlando; Elizabeth Martin; Kitty- Ann van Doorninck | anne setsuko giroux 2016 Democratic candidate for Dist.28a of the Washington State House of Representatives

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.