You're Reading...
Corruption in Washington State, Our case

City Codes that Violate Constitutional LAW

Here is what I found for Everett so far… Since I am not an attorney I am sure there must be more, but this let’s you see just how egotistical these people are that they honestly believe they can over ride all state codes & Constitutional Law. They have gotten away with it up til now so why not continue? Well cause now I know about it, my animals have been the victims of it… They left me standing, alone, without them, & took everything from me.

EMC’s are in BLUE & RCW’s are in RED. My points are in bold letter & I have tried to underline all of the conflicts for comparison. Normally in a case like this you would only confront maybe one or two violations  but because of the fact that they got an illegal warrant, and have written their laws to over ride all RCW’s, they disregard any & all due process, & forfeiture laws, they defer any questions about their codes to RCW 16.52 but DON’T allow you to use state statutes to defend yourself. It is a clusterfrick of violations of laws, codes, & ethics  leaving common sense outside the City limits.

What I have here is a rough draft & it doesn’t have all the points in Washington State Statutes or in Constitutional Law yet, this will be part of a separate lawsuit & part of my criminal appeal. again this is a rough draft & merely the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Once I file my suit against the City of Everett I will post the full brief. It is important to note that this is in layman’s terms, it is the language of the brief that will define the actual laws, & how they are breaking them, or even make the difference of whether the Supreme Court hears them. There is another case that parallels this case which I will post later as well.

So what does this all mean? That they took my animals illegally that they had no authority to kill my dog without notifying me, that they had a duty to provide me with due process & did not,  that they are on the hook for my entire fee schedule & for 2 separate Tort Claims.

Constitutional & Statutory Error Side by side analysis of EMC and RCW

1) The only place for hearing in EMC 6.04 is for denial of kennel license, EMC 6.04.060 otherwise noted there is no provision for a fair hearing to be held at a meaningful time regarding impound or destruction of animals.
Chapter 6.04 ANIMAL CONTROL 6.04.020 Definitions.
“Personal service” means: handing it to the owner’s attorney or to the owner; or leaving it at their office with their clerk or other person in charge thereof, or, if there is no one in charge, leaving it in a conspicuous place therein; or, if the office is closed or the owner has no office, leaving it at their dwelling, house or usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein.
6.04.060 Facilities—Denial and revocation of license—Appeals.
A. A license required by Sections 6.04.040 and 6.04.050 of this chapter may be denied or revoked for any of the following reasons:
C. If an application for licensing is denied, or approved subject to conditions, the applicant may appeal such denial or conditional approval upon filing a written request with the manager of animal control within ten days of the date such denial or conditional approval was served upon him/her by certified mail or personal service.
D. Hearing upon such duly requested appeal shall be conducted before the animal control advisory board within thirty days of such request, with notice to the applicant by certified mail or personal service, no later than ten days prior to the hearing.
E. The manager shall investigate any complaint concerning licensed facilities and, upon determining that a license should be revoked, he/she shall provide written notice to the licensee of such determination by certified mail or personal service. The licensee may appeal the revocation by filing a written appeal within ten days of notification to the following address: Manager, Everett Animal Shelter, 2732 36th Street, Everett, WA 98201. Hearing upon such duly requested appeal shall be conducted before the animal control advisory board within thirty days of such request, with notice to the appellant by certified mail or personal service, no later than ten days prior to the hearing; failure to file a timely request shall terminate any appeal right, and the manager’s decision revoking the license shall not be reviewable otherwise.

2) EMC 6.04.070(C)(10) provides for notice ONLY when the animal has been abandoned, and gives no clear time limit, where as RCW 16.52 gives the time limit of 36 hours and provides for Notice of Legal Remedies 16.52.085(3)
6.04.070 Prohibited conduct.
C. Offenses Relating to Cruelty. It shall be unlawful for any person to:
10) Under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty as defined in RCW 16.52.205, confine an animal within or on a motor vehicle at any location under such conditions as may endanger the health or well-being of the animal, including but not limited to extreme temperatures, lack of food or water, or confinement with a dangerous animal. Any animal control or peace officer is authorized to remove any animal from a motor vehicle, at any location, when he/she reasonably believes it is confined in such conditions as described above. Any animal so removed shall be delivered to the animal control shelter after the removing officer leaves written notice of such removal and delivery, including the officer’s name, in a conspicuous, secure location on or within the vehicle; PERHAPS THE MOST SINISTER IS THE ABOVE CODE SEEMS TO BE DIRECTLY AIMED AT HOMELESS PEOPLE & IT PRESCRIBES TO TAKING WITHOUT NOTICE

16.52.085 Removal of animals for feeding and care — Examination — Notice — Euthanasia.
(3) Any owner whose domestic animal is removed pursuant to this chapter shall be given written notice of the circumstances of the removal and notice of legal remedies available to the owner. The notice shall be given by posting at the place of seizure, by delivery to a person residing at the place of seizure, or by registered mail if the owner is known. In making the decision to remove an animal pursuant to this chapter, the officer shall make a good faith effort to contact the animal’s owner before removal.

3) RCW 16.52.011(K) clearly states an animal is to have “Necessary” water, EMC 6.04.00(C)(2) states the animal must have “Constant” water. In direct conflict with Washington state Codes
16.52.011 Definitions — Principles of liability.
(k) “Necessary water” means water that is in sufficient quantity and of appropriate quality for the species for which it is intended and that is accessible to the animal.
6.04.070 Prohibited conduct.
C. Offenses Relating to Cruelty. It shall be unlawful for any person to:
(2) Under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty as defined in RCW 16.52.205, fail to provide an animal with sufficient good and wholesome food and a constant source of clear potable water, proper shelter and protection from the weather, veterinary care when needed to prevent suffering, and with humane care and treatment;

4) RCW 16.52.207 Offers an affirmative defense EMC 6.04 Offers none in these times of economic hardships. When one reads and prescribes to state codes (RCW’s), and believe that they are following the law these types of codes do nothing more than confound honest citizens and criminalize them. The Washington State Constitution clearly states the purpose of laws in harmony is to make sure they dont make criminals of honest citizens
16.52.207 Animal cruelty in the second degree — Penalty.
(a) Fails to provide the animal with necessary shelter, rest, sanitation, space, or medical attention and the animal suffers unnecessary or unjustifiable physical pain as a result of the failure;
(4) In any prosecution of animal cruelty in the second degree under subsection (1) or (2)(a) of this section, it shall be an affirmative defense, if established by the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant’s failure was due to economic distress beyond the defendant’s control.

5) RCW 16.52.085(4) Clearly provides remedies of Permanent deprivation or taking of the Govt, forfeiture is never favored by the law, and no where in EMC does it give any owner a time or place or way to be heard in a meaningful manner, the remedy implied is so vague that it can’t be surmised what it actually means and then to add to the confusion the shelter manager has supreme discretion over the whole matter, giving her absolute power

6) RCW 16.52.085(5) Offers remedies for a hearing on forfeiture, and gives time to be heard in a meaningful manner. EMC 6.04 offers no such protection on due process
16.52.085 Removal of animals for feeding and care — Examination — Notice — Euthanasia.
(4) The agency having custody of the animal may euthanize the animal or may find a responsible person to adopt the animal not less than fifteen business days after the animal is taken into custody. A custodial agency may euthanize severely injured, diseased, or suffering animals at any time. An owner may prevent the animal’s destruction or adoption by: (a) Petitioning the district court of the county where the animal was seized for the animal’s immediate return subject to court-imposed conditions, or (b) posting a bond or security in an amount sufficient to provide for the animal’s care for a minimum of thirty days from the seizure date. If the custodial agency still has custody of the animal when the bond or security expires, the animal shall become the agency’s property unless the court orders an alternative disposition. If a court order prevents the agency from assuming ownership and the agency continues to care for the animal, the court shall order the owner to renew a bond or security for the agency’s continuing costs for the animal’s care. When a court has prohibited the owner from owning, caring for, or residing with a similar animal under RCW 16.52.200(4), the agency having custody of the animal may assume ownership upon seizure and the owner may not prevent the animal’s destruction or adoption by petitioning the court or posting a bond. THIS IS WHERE  THE LEGALITY OF THE SEIZURE COMES INTO PLAY. THEY REFUSED TO PROSECUTE ME UNDER THE RCW’S BECAUSE THEIR CODE DOES NOT CONTAIN THE LANGUAGE OF THE RCW’S. THEY ORDERED FORFEITURE WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OR NOTICE, FORFEITURE IS A CIVIL MATTER, THEY NEEDED TO HAVE A HEARING TO ORDER THE FORFEITURE
(5) If no criminal case is filed within fourteen business days of the animal’s removal, the owner may petition the district court of the county where the animal was removed for the animal’s return. The petition shall be filed with the court, with copies served to the law enforcement or animal care and control agency responsible for removing the animal and to the prosecuting attorney. If the court grants the petition, the agency which seized the animal must deliver the animal to the owner at no cost to the owner. If a criminal action is filed after the petition is filed but before the animal is returned, the petition shall be joined with the criminal matter.
(6) In a motion or petition for the animal’s return before a trial, the burden is on the owner to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the animal will not suffer future neglect or abuse and is not in need of being restored to health.

7) EMC 6.04.090 Gives Constitutional and Statutory powers to a shelter manager to be used under their own discretion, thereby creating a very dangerous precedent for the destruction, permanent deprivation of property and rights, furthermore the administrative decisions can not super cede the RCW’s of Washington State. They can chose to release an animal or destroy an animal at their whim, not according to law. RCW 16.52.210 provides at the very least notification of destruction of an animal so the owner is afforded an opportunity to contest. The shelter manager has discretion in a criminal case to “decide” if they will let a veterinarian come in to examine the animals thereby destroying any meaningful defense an accused person may have when the taking of one’s property automatically triggers due process.
6.04.090 Shelter operation—Impoundment procedures—Release and disposal.
G. Impoundment and Disposition of Animals.
1. Any impounded animal shall be released to the owner upon payment of impoundment, care and license fees unless in the discretion of the manager or his/her designee there is an ongoing investigation of a violation of this chapter or state law. The manager or his/her designee may release the animal to the owner’s authorized representative; full identification of the owner and their authorized representative must be provided to animal control prior to release.
6. The owner of any animal retained at the shelter pending legal action pertaining to violations of this chapter and/or other judicial actions or hearings, pertaining to his/her ownership/responsibilities regarding the animal, shall be liable for all fees prescribed by fee schedule, upon conviction.
7. The manager shall dispose of animals held for the prescribed period without redemption or adoption only by means of euthanasia; provided, however, that irrespective of any prescribed holding period the manager, upon advice of a licensed veterinarian, may immediately dispose of any sick or injured impounded animal by euthanasia.
16.52.210 Destruction of animal by law enforcement officer — Immunity from liability.
This chapter shall not limit the right of a law enforcement officer to destroy an animal that has been seriously injured and would otherwise continue to suffer. Such action shall be undertaken with reasonable prudence and, whenever possible, in consultation with a licensed veterinarian and the owner of the animal. Law enforcement officers and licensed veterinarians shall be immune from civil and criminal liability for actions taken under this chapter if reasonable prudence is exercised in carrying out the provisions of this chapter.
6.04.110 Administration and enforcement by manager.
C The manager shall be empowered to exercise the authority of peace officers to extent necessary to enforce this chapter, which powers shall include issuance of citations, seizure and impoundment of animals subject to this chapter, including pursuit onto city-owned property, vacant property and unenclosed private property and subsequent impoundment.

8) RCW 16.52.200 Specifically states an animal may only be ordered forfeited by the courts at the time of trial IF an animal has died because of the mistreatment or upon a second conviction. EMC 6.04 remains silent on this stating only in EMC 6.04.090 that an owner shall be responsible for shelter fees upon conviction.
16.52.200 Sentences Forfeiture of animals Liability for costs Penalty Education, counseling.
(3) In addition to the penalties imposed by the court, the court shall order the forfeiture of all animals held by law enforcement or animal care and control authorities under the provisions of this chapter if any one of the animals involved dies as a result of a violation of this chapter or if the defendant has a prior conviction under this chapter. In other cases the court may enter an order requiring the owner to forfeit the animal if the court deems the animal’s treatment to have been severe and likely to reoccur. The court may delay its decision on forfeiture under subsection (3) of this section until the end of the probationary period.
6.04.090 Shelter operation—Impoundment procedures—Release and disposal.
G. Impoundment and Disposition of Animals.
6. The owner of any animal retained at the shelter pending legal action pertaining to violations of this chapter and/or other judicial actions or hearings, pertaining to his/her ownership/responsibilities regarding the animal, shall be liable for all fees prescribed by fee schedule, upon conviction.
For statutory provisions concerning animals generally, see RCW Title 16; for statutory provisions concerning prevention of cruelty to animals, see Ch. 16.52 RCW; for provisions on the animal shelter advisory committee, see Ch. 2.99 of this code.

wordpress visitor
Advertisements

About animallawnewsandabuse

I am an animals rescuer, a mother, a grandmother, a minister, & a human being who is tired of all the corruption going on in our state.

Discussion

2 thoughts on “City Codes that Violate Constitutional LAW

  1. I also forgot to add that since the City of Everett saw fit to contact Petfinders to have my rescue removed from their website, they have left themselves open to yet another slander suit & until I am acquitted I can not get my account back, 6 yrs of my life was on those pages, animals stories, updates, & my blood sweat & tears, so they will have to pay for that as well. Not to mention their looney toon nut job is mass emailing everyone further slandering me with information they are giving her, they are responsible for her actions since we have proof via the removal & permanent deprivation of her parental rights that she is chemically & organically imbalanced. There are THREE different mental evaluations showing she is absolutely freakin nuts, the intersting thing is that the prosecutor tried to say I was everything she was diagnosed to be, so it means they have read her mental evaluations & are well aware of them.

    Like

    Posted by finallyhomerescue | February 3, 2012, 6:25 am

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Please Consider a Donation

We couldn't do this without you!
wordpress visitors
Trump Tracker

Keeping Track of the 45th's Alternative Facts

Missing and Murdered of Snohomish County

Because all life matters and none should be forgotten

Washington Activist

Private Information Sharing for Washington Activists

Real Estate Scams

Broken Dreams... Broken Lives

Political Fails

When politics, government and Social Media collide

Snohomish County campus News

The back story you don't get from mainstream news

Clark County Conservative

An Independent Conservative Voice for Clark County

WA Social Justice Initiative

A grassroots community to help attain "Justice" for those unable to go it alone.

JONATHAN TURLEY

Res ipsa loquitur ("The thing itself speaks")

John Wills Lloyd

These are some personal views about living, loving, hoping, and such.

Fighting Corruption In Stevens County

The struggle for freedom lives here

Rose Marie Adams

The Evil That Lurks Within

Corrupt Washington

Fighting For Change

Did You Check First?

It's fine to have an opinion. It's better to know the facts.

Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America and our Children who Want to Come Home

FAMILY COURT FRAUD AND CPS CORRUPTION, MATERNAL DEPRIVATION, GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION, WAR ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN, ATTACK ON AMERICAN FAMILY

The Lizard Farmer

"You can't starve us out and you can't make us run 'cause we're them old boys raised on shotguns" -Bocephus

www.TheReaganWing.com

“Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”~ Ronald Reagan, Jan. 20, 1981

cultiv8hopedianawinslowmsw

Call for compliance with 2010 UN Human Rights Sexual Assault Response

Protecting Peoples Rights

The sworn duty of all public servants

wjr5006's Blog

Police Accountability

Rcooley123's Blog

Rick Cooley's Blog

plsef

Social Justice

No Loss for Words

Thoughts from a Back Bencher!

moviejoltz

The website where movies count

We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident

that all men are created equal

Boomerang Zone

the score is oogy to boogy

Corrigan's Cookday

Economic Gourmet Meal Experiences

Free Obituaries & Memorials

In Loving Memory of Those We Have Loved & Those We Have Loved

The Unraveling

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Spokane Police Abuses: Past to Present

The People of Spokane vs. Law Enforcement Abuse, Impunity, Corruption, and Cover-up

Spiritual Man

The Journey to a Spiritual Life

bmr250

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Katzenworld

Welcome to the world of cats!

Tuck The Law Dog

TuckTheLawDogWordPress.com site

Corrupt WA

"At the core of the rotten onion is a corrupt lawyer"

Snohomish County Reporter

Standing for those who cannot stand for themselves

Stop Corrupt DSS

Corruption in the Department of Social Services System

lsnewsspot

Lake Stevens news source. Your community news source by choice. On Twitter @LSNewsSpot. Send news tips to: Lsnewstips@gmail.com

Roger Goodman - Not A Good Man

The truth has finally come out... and it's not pretty.

Straight from the Horse's Heart

A Spiritual Ride through Love, Loss and Hope

Animal Law News & Abuse

Animal Rescuer & Owner resource site: news, views, civil rights, & politics

Dairy Carrie

Live, Love, Eat Cheese

Don Charisma

because anything is possible with Charisma

%d bloggers like this: