10 thoughts on “Criminal Complaint filed against David Ponzoha, Clerk, Court of Appeals Division II – Notice of Hearing”

1. 

   Ponzoha is a criminal and serf for the WSBA. Don’t expect any justice from Judge Holman as he is a WSBA lacky also. I had to force Holman to hold a hearing that he avoided for months. He then screwed me even though I had the law on my side. There is only one way the judicial system will change and that as the Declaration of Independence says and the serfs in America have do their “DUTY.”

   LikeLike

   Posted by William D. Webster | November 21, 2014, 6:01 pm
   Reply to this comment
   • 

     Bill,

     You raise the larger issue in that all judges are members of the WSBA and also are “regulated” by the Supreme Court…. clearly all judges have a direct interest in their jobs and how ruling against one of their own will potentially jeopardize their job when the Supreme Court criminals retaliate against any judge who makes them look bad. Because we have a law, RCW 2.28.030, that “requires” disqualification when a judge has a direct interest in the case — that interest is his job security due to the ‘connection’ the defendant involved has with the Supreme Court, we’ll see how Holman addresses this conflict.

     That aside, I have observed hearings conducted by Judge Stephen Holman and I like the way he handled those cases … but those were cases in which his “job” wasn’t on the line… so the bottom line is …. can a good and honorable judge (from my observations) who is now being placed in a “conflict and potentially fatal position in that his career may be on the line if the SC chooses to retaliate, have the courage to be a “true judge”?

     It is a case that embodies the problems in having the “legal enterprise” be the arbiter of their own members and conduct … it removes any trust in an “impartial decision maker.” But that is all OK as this case will be another “example” in our ‘RICO complaint against the Bar and negligence action against WA.

     I hope Judge Holman, and I trust that he is, a man of principle and knows he will be supported if he shows courage and does the right thing based in the law and constitution.

     LikeLike

     Posted by Chief Activist | November 21, 2014, 6:49 pm
     Reply to this comment
2. 

   File a Claim Against his Bond. All city, county and state officials are required, under RCW, to record their bonds with record’s offices , and
   or, county court houses. Call and “demand” either the certified copy of the bond and his sworn oath of office, or simply the bond number and the name of the surety company where the bond originates. Screw with his job.

   LikeLike

   Posted by Earl | November 21, 2014, 6:23 pm
   Reply to this comment
3. 

   Interesting. My experience (not rectified even after I talked with a very embarassed clerk on the phone and walked her through it) of highly inappropriate and erroneous filing/handling of papers at the courthouse in South Bend when Mr. Penoyar was the Superior Court judge there seems perhaps to have been a way of handling such matters in which the judge evidently was enormously prejudiced about which subsequently traveled with the guy when he was moved on by the Governor to the appeals court. I have to wonder whether this clerk consequently was encouraged/permitted to behave like this by his former boss there and the extent to which that has actually caused this present problem where they just do whatever they want regardless of the law and what the public expects.

   LikeLike

   Posted by Hugh Whinfrey | November 21, 2014, 9:17 pm
   Reply to this comment
   • 

     Hugh, Ponzoha had “motive” to obstruct justice. Within my “opening brief” are facts that show exactly what you say about the criminals who have taken over our courts… for example, within the brief is the fact that Ponzoha awarded attorney fees when the justices, in their ruling, denied attorney fees, and facts that Penoyar “created a false case” upon which to make his ruling in favor of his WA State Bar Associate. None of this, if “filed” and became part of the “public record” would instill confidence in our justice system. The “motive” was to ‘silence’ unfavorable material. They just keep digging a bigger hole when all they need to do is ‘clean up their act’!

     LikeLike

     Posted by Chief Activist | November 22, 2014, 5:13 am
     Reply to this comment
4. 

   Good for you Bill. I have my own files on Mr. Ponzoah that I can send you. My allegations include 18 USC 4 Misprision of a Felony; 18 USC 73 Obstruction of Justice; Subornation of Perjury; RCW 42.20 Misconduct of a Public Employee; 18 USC 241 Conspiracy Against Rights and 242 Under Color of Law; Civil Conspiracy; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Also I have heard of others with similar experiences and allegations against him. What we also need is what law enforcement is supposed to be doing: network, pattern, communications and frequency analyses of the networks that these creatures run, inhabit, recruit from and place into public employment though backdoor fixes, crony and political patronage networks, family dynasties, backroom party hacks. etc. Because they are doing crimes they are vulnerable not only to being infiltrated (they have been) but to some of their weaker members rolling over on them and one going down can take down the rest.

   Also local law enforcement is in on all of this for sure. It is important to make sober, law and reason based submissions to law enforcement witnessed, deal only with them on paper, and then document their refusals to act. Then collectively file federal complaints under 18 USC 4 and 73 along with 28 USC 1361 (Action to Compel Duty of a Federal Officer) which is enough that they know have also acquired knowledge of the commission of felony crimes (not rants and allegations but hard direct physical evidence in the form of documents, tapes, covert emails etc) and if FBI refuses to act, force them to put it on paper why not and then take it further up the chair to OPR, IOG and to Director Comey himself.http://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2014/05/04/hush-money-and-sealed-settlements-to-cover-up-crimes-are-crimes-not-torts-no-need-to-cover-up-what-is-clean-only-what-is-dirty/ http://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/attempts-to-report-felony-crimes-per-18-usc-4-28-usc-1361-exchanges-with-clark-county-sheriff-gary-lucas/ and http://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/attempts-to-report-felony-crimes-to-the-vancouver-police-department/ and http://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/an-open-letter-to-washington-state-attorney-general-ferguson-and-governor-inslee-on-allegations-of-a-climate-of-corruption-and-repression-at-clark-college-and-in-clark-county/ and http://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2014/10/30/a-thought-experiment-and-vantucky-clark-county-corruption/ and http://jimcraven10.wordpress.com/2014/05/31/lessons-from-the-animals-similies-metaphors-and-allegories-of-irregular-and-asymmetric-warfare-also-useful-for-whistle-blowers-and-anti-imperialists/

   These creatures like vampires they are, fear sunlight, transparency and the law. They do not fear the unions because the unions refuse to go criminal and also they are corporate and run by the same corporate types that hate unions and made them necessary and inevitable from their abuses of labor and the law. Find out who they are, what associations do they have, where do they meet, how are they connected with other agencies of government, are they political patronage appointments, get their resumes, awards ett and show the connections just as in a RICO case.

   Jim/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii

   LikeLike

   Posted by jimcraven10 | November 22, 2014, 11:20 am
   Reply to this comment
5. 

   RCW 2.32.050

   (4) To file all papers delivered to him or her for that purpose in any action or proceeding in the court as directed by court rule or statute;

   —————————————————————————————————————————————————-

   Who I am asking created the court rules or statute?
   As –Ayn Rand states– They found ways that the Law “they created” protect them against you.
   Who (ask yourself) likes to be exposed of their corruption?

   LikeLike

   Posted by Vera | November 22, 2014, 2:20 pm
   Reply to this comment
6. 

   I think Snohomsh County Washington is the most corrupt place in the world, All Government offices, and the Denny Juvinile Justice Center is as well.If I hadn’t witnessed first hand all the illigal and inhumane services they are not providing to their clients as well as violating their civil rights on every single level I may have not believed it but like I said I have watched my friends go through hell because of a corrupt Police Department and all government offices in this city.And a full investigation is long over due Snohomish County Sherrifs Dept. is the biggest gang of all and it is shameful that people who speak out get black balled and punished and then harrassed for the rest of their lives if we speak our minds,well this is my right as a united states citizen and I will excersize it to the fullest.CPS has failed my friends miserably their daughter was taken on June 20th and it is nowNovember 23,2014 and CPS has yet to inform them as to where their daughter is my mother worked for CPS 13 years and says clearly CPS has only 72 hours after removing the child from the home to notify the parents by certified mail as to where their child is they have never even been told why she was taken.Somebodys pockets are getting lined if you know what I mean this State makes me ashamed to be an american, an imigrant gets better treatment and more help than they have.Shame on Washington and Congress for allowing such illigal actions to take place CPS and the Denny Juvinile justice system are running the children in washington like a puppy mill.Most states try everything possible to keep families together not Washington they do everything to tear families apart.I pray they are all held accountable for what they have done to this family.How corrupt is this system I strongly believe it all stems from the Cathcart Landfill closure due to extreme contaminationin the well water in which my friends live and own property and have drinken the water for years because they were never informed by anyone of these conditions and all of their 3 children were born with somne form of learning disability and the mother is now suffering from they say its MS but we believe whole heartedly its due to this contaminated well water and thats why this state has removed all their children and harrassed this family beyond measure,they are just trying o coveer up their mistakes and if it takes a lifetime I PERSONALLY WILL SEEK EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO TELL THEIR STORY AND SEE THEY GET JUSTICE AND COHMPENSATION FOR BEING WRONGED BY THESE SYSTEMS.

   LikeLike

   Posted by Sondra Johnson | November 23, 2014, 7:59 am
   Reply to this comment
7. 

   Kidnapping, human trafficing. Some things never change. And to think, CPS is licensed to commit these crimes against humanity, destroying families, and terrorizing children, everyday all over the US. CPS is being
   sued all over the country. I know of a lady whose two year old child is on psychotropic drugs, after CPS kidnapped the child from her mother at the hospital, shortly after the child was born. The native Americans and African
   Americans, have been put through this for years.

   LikeLike

   Posted by Earl | November 24, 2014, 4:22 pm
   Reply to this comment
8. 

   Please forgive the length of this posting of my interactions with my illustrious union Washington Education Association but there are lessons and names that keep showing up in various postings. I have files with hard direct physical evidence of crimes including misprision of a felony, subornation of perjury, criminal solicitation for fraudulently obtain medical and other public employee benefits, obstruction of justice, on David Penzoha, local FBI, Clark County Sheriff, Vancouver police, Clark County Prosecutor, Clark County Clerk, various judges in Division II of WA Court of Appeals, WA employment security, U.S. attorney’s office , AG’s office (AG, Bonnie Terada, Colleen Warren, Dionne Padilla-Huddleston, James Tuttle, AG Ferguson, AG Gregoire, Washington Human Rights and WEA and I believe can also show coordination and collusion between some of them. For my files please write to omahkohkiaayo@hotmai,com Also, when dealing with FBI, there are individual special agents who are honorable, do a tough and dirty job honorably. But remember always whose name still remains on the FBI (part of the “Justice” Department) HQ building in Washington DC a vile, vicious, petty mobbed-up criminal and despot, a creature who along with his spouse Clyde Tolson trashed the U.S. constitution and destroyed many lives–“J. Edna” Hoover. This I like having a shelter for battered women named after Ted Bundy or a B/nai Brith building named after Himmler. Director Comey promises a new FBI and even gives training to new FBI on past criminality of FBI as with MLK bugging and blackmail (see 60 minutes interview with James Comey) but the problem is, for my union or any law enforcement that has been given hard evidence not just rants and allegations is that the more they do a proper investigation now, the more they wind up also exposing and indicting themselves for serial derelictions of duty and worse in the past. “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.” Sir Walter Scott. Dear WEA: I am unable to come to Olympia for my allocated 15 minute presentation for Stage II appeal due to the fact that I am suffering an extreme flu and I was hoping to be over it to be able to come tomorrow for my submission; even as Stage I has not been completed with a proper record that can be used in future venues. Because of my known and documented to you medical disabilities, and because I do not want to pass flu on to others, I simply cannot make the trip to Olympia. Further, I have asked over and over for documentation that this had been passed to NEA as there are serious issues of precedents being allowed that will be used against other union members and indeed to attempt to smash the union with apparent scabs and snitches hired through non-standardized, non-transparent and non-accountable hiring and promotions as has occurred in this case. Finally, WEA has the submissions of Ms Terada and others for Clark College and knows or should know that the submissions contain sworn submissions, statements and representations that are in direct contradiction to the sworn submissions, statements and representations of WEA, AHE and their officers and thus has direct knowledge and evidence of the commission of several different felony crimes that still have not been reported per your duty under law 18 USC 4. It was not I but WEA and AHE officers whose sworn testimonies, followed by other supporting evidence and serial non-rebuttals by Mr. Knight, that exposed perjury and other felonies from the predicate crime of perjury in the context of public employment and quasi-judicial hearings, that exposed felonies that continue to be covered-up, not reported and suborned thus emboldening the Clark College admin to go after me and my family as they have and defraud the students as they have. I have made no secret that I am documenting all stages and interactions with all those who have been given solid evidence of crimes and the law on duty to report and have failed to do so; that includes law enforcement. Two men were just released from 40 years in prison for murder they did not commit convicted on the basis of perjury, police and prosecutorial misconduct, subornation of perjury, serial cover-ups of perjury; this is not some joke and it is WEA and AHE officers who have exposed it and yes must own up to why it has not been reported even to date. The same goes for law enforcement in Clark County who have been given direct evidence of perjury by Bob Knight (and others during the hearing as Jace Borba, like Dean Lookinghawk, was a direct witness to the “investigation” by Joseph Vance and thus knows that the statements by Vance on how he conducted his investigation and my responses were perjury. Please arrange another Stage II hearing, please give me the names of those present at the Stage I hearing you did not manage to properly provide a record of (that burden is on you for chain of custody and evidence reasons in future venues) and please do your duty under law that has been cited to you over and over. There is also the issue that was exposed in the hearing of concrete attempts to get me to sign off on fraudulent submissions for medical benefits for John Fite while on unpaid leave as his first submission was made without knowing he would lose the benefits while on unpaid leave. These were all exposed during the hearing along with the perjury, again, this time in the same hearing, by Bob Knight who hired the hearing examiner, who made the last minute $100,000 hush money offer (signed off by the Clark Board of Trustees and the AG) to prevent the hearing where he knew he would either have to expose and repudiate his previous perjury in the ESD appeal hearing or commit perjury once again but this time opposed by the sworn testimonies of Dr. Roi and Ms Davidson (who courageously testified against interest) in the same hearing. These are facts and this is some of the law that will not go away. Sincerely, Jim Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii 18 U.S. Code § 4 – Misprision of felony Current through Pub. L. 113-163. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · 18 USC 4 US Code · Notes Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. Please forward this to NEA and please give me the mailing addresses (for legal service) of all those at WEA involved in the appeal process. Sincerely Jim Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii (signed electronically) RCW 10.37.140 Perjury — Subornation of perjury — Description of matter. In an indictment or information for perjury, or subornation of perjury, it is sufficient to set forth the substance of the controversy or matter in respect to which the crime was committed, and in what court or before whom the oath alleged to be false was taken, and that the court or person before whom it was taken had authority to administer it, with proper allegations of the falsity of the matter on which the perjury is assigned; but the indictment or information need not set forth the pleadings, record or proceedings with which the oath is connected, nor the commission or authority of the court or person before whom the perjury was committed. [1891 c 28 § 36; Code 1881 § 1021; 1873 p 228 § 204; 1869 p 243 § 199; 1854 p 112 § 67; RRS § 2072.] Notes: Print Version | [No disponible en español] 9A.72.010 <> 9A.72.030 RCW 9A.72.020 Perjury in the first degree. (1) A person is guilty of perjury in the first degree if in any official proceeding he or she makes a materially false statement which he or she knows to be false under an oath required or authorized by law. (2) Knowledge of the materiality of the statement is not an element of this crime, and the actor’s mistaken belief that his or her statement was not material is not a defense to a prosecution under this section. (3) Perjury in the first degree is a class B felony. [2011 c 336 § 391; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.72.020.] Print Version | [No disponible en español] 9A.72.020 <> 9A.72.040 RCW 9A.72.030 Perjury in the second degree. (1) A person is guilty of perjury in the second degree if, in an examination under oath under the terms of a contract of insurance, or with intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his or her duty, he or she makes a materially false statement, which he or she knows to be false under an oath required or authorized by law. (2) Perjury in the second degree is a class C felony. [2001 c 171 § 3. Prior: 1995 c 285 § 31; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.72.030.] Notes: Purpose — Effective date — 2001 c 171: See notes following RCW 9A.72.010. Effective date — 1995 c 285: See RCW 48.30A.900. 18 U.S. Code Chapter 79 – PERJURY Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next •§ 1621. Perjury generally •§ 1622. Subornation of perjury •§ 1623. False declarations before grand jury or court 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress— Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII. 18 U.S. Code § 1510 – Obstruction of criminal investigations Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next (a) Whoever willfully endeavors by means of bribery to obstruct, delay, or prevent the communication of information relating to a violation of any criminal statute of the United States by any person to a criminal investigator shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (b) (1) Whoever, being an officer of a financial institution, with the intent to obstruct a judicial proceeding, directly or indirectly notifies any other person about the existence or contents of a subpoena for records of that financial institution, or information that has been furnished in response to that subpoena, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (2) Whoever, being an officer of a financial institution, directly or indirectly notifies— (A) a customer of that financial institution whose records are sought by a subpoena for records; or (B) any other person named in that subpoena; about the existence or contents of that subpoena or information that has been furnished in response to that subpoena, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. (3) As used in this subsection— (A) the term “an officer of a financial institution” means an officer, director, partner, employee, agent, or attorney of or for a financial institution; and (B) the term “subpoena for records” means a Federal grand jury subpoena or a Department of Justice subpoena (issued under section 3486 of title 18), for customer records that has been served relating to a violation of, or a conspiracy to violate— (i) section 215, 656, 657, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1014, 1344, 1956, 1957, orchapter 53 of title 31; or (ii) section 1341 or 1343 affecting a financial institution. (c) As used in this section, the term “criminal investigator” means any individual duly authorized by a department, agency, or armed force of the United States to conduct or engage in investigations of or prosecutions for violations of the criminal laws of the United States. (d) (1) Whoever— (A) acting as, or being, an officer, director, agent or employee of a person engaged in the business of insurance whose activities affect interstate commerce, or (B) is engaged in the business of insurance whose activities affect interstate commerce or is involved (other than as an insured or beneficiary under a policy of insurance) in a transaction relating to the conduct of affairs of such a business, with intent to obstruct a judicial proceeding, directly or indirectly notifies any other person about the existence or contents of a subpoena for records of that person engaged in such business or information that has been furnished to a Federal grand jury in response to that subpoena, shall be fined as provided by this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (2) As used in paragraph (1), the term “subpoena for records” means a Federal grand jury subpoena for records that has been served relating to a violation of, or a conspiracy to violate, section 1033 of this title. (e) Whoever, having been notified of the applicable disclosure prohibitions or confidentiality requirements of section 2709(c)(1) of this title, section 626(d)(1) or 627(c)(1) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681u (d)(1) or 1681v (c)(1)),section 1114(a)(3)(A) or 1114(a)(5)(D)(i) of the Right to Financial Privacy Act [1] (12 U.S.C. 3414 (a)(3)(A) or 3414(a)(5)(D)(i)), orsection 802(b)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 436 (b)(1)), [2] knowingly and with the intent to obstruct an investigation or judicial proceeding violates such prohibitions or requirements applicable by law to such person shall be imprisoned for not more than five years, fined under this title, or both. ——————————————————————————– [1] So in original. Probably should be followed by “of 1978”. [2] See References in Text note below. LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII. 18 U.S. Code § 1511 – Obstruction of State or local law enforcement Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next (a) It shall be unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to obstruct the enforcement of the criminal laws of a State or political subdivision thereof, with the intent to facilitate an illegal gambling business if— (1) one or more of such persons does any act to effect the object of such a conspiracy; (2) one or more of such persons is an official or employee, elected, appointed, or otherwise, of such State or political subdivision; and (3) one or more of such persons conducts, finances, manages, supervises, directs, or owns all or part of an illegal gambling business. (b) As used in this section— (1) “illegal gambling business” means a gambling business which— (i) is a violation of the law of a State or political subdivision in which it is conducted; (ii) involves five or more persons who conduct, finance, manage, supervise, direct, or own all or part of such business; and (iii) has been or remains in substantially continuous operation for a period in excess of thirty days or has a gross revenue of $2,000 in any single day. (2) “gambling” includes but is not limited to pool-selling, bookmaking, maintaining slot machines, roulette wheels, or dice tables, and conducting lotteries, policy, bolita or numbers games, or selling chances therein. (3) “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possession of the United States. (c) This section shall not apply to any bingo game, lottery, or similar game of chance conducted by an organization exempt from tax under paragraph (3) of subsection (c) ofsection 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if no part of the gross receipts derived from such activity inures to the benefit of any private shareholder, member, or employee of such organization, except as compensation for actual expenses incurred by him in the conduct of such activity. (d) Whoever violates this section shall be punished by a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both. LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII. U.S. Code Toolbox Wex: Criminal Law: Overview Download the PDF (2 pgs) Title 18 USC, RSS Feed Table of Popular Names Parallel Table of Authorities Share on emailShare on facebookShare on twitter More Sharing Services Stay Involved •LII Announce Blog •LII Supreme Court Bulletin •MAKE A DONATION •CONTRIBUTE CONTENT •BECOME A SPONSOR •GIVE FEEDBACK 18 U.S. Code § 1512 – Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes · Authorities (CFR) prev | next (a) (1) Whoever kills or attempts to kill another person, with intent to— (A) prevent the attendance or testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (B) prevent the production of a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or (C) prevent the communication by any person to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; shall be punished as provided in paragraph (3). (2) Whoever uses physical force or the threat of physical force against any person, or attempts to do so, with intent to— (A) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (B) cause or induce any person to— (i) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (ii) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the integrity or availability of the object for use in an official proceeding; (iii) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or (iv) be absent from an official proceeding to which that person has been summoned by legal process; or (C) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, supervised release, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; shall be punished as provided in paragraph (3). (3) The punishment for an offense under this subsection is— (A) in the case of a killing, the punishment provided in sections 1111 and 1112; (B) in the case of— (i) an attempt to murder; or (ii) the use or attempted use of physical force against any person; imprisonment for not more than 30 years; and (C) in the case of the threat of use of physical force against any person, imprisonment for not more than 20 years. (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to— (1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to— (A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; (C) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or (D) be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process; or (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation [1] supervised release,, [1] parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. (c) Whoever corruptly— (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. (d) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from— (1) attending or testifying in an official proceeding; (2) reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation [1] supervised release,, [1] parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; (3) arresting or seeking the arrest of another person in connection with a Federal offense; or (4) causing a criminal prosecution, or a parole or probation revocation proceeding, to be sought or instituted, or assisting in such prosecution or proceeding; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both. (e) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, it is an affirmative defense, as to which the defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, that the conduct consisted solely of lawful conduct and that the defendant’s sole intention was to encourage, induce, or cause the other person to testify truthfully. (f) For the purposes of this section— (1) an official proceeding need not be pending or about to be instituted at the time of the offense; and (2) the testimony, or the record, document, or other object need not be admissible in evidence or free of a claim of privilege. (g) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, no state of mind need be proved with respect to the circumstance— (1) that the official proceeding before a judge, court, magistrate judge, grand jury, or government agency is before a judge or court of the United States, a United States magistrate judge, a bankruptcy judge, a Federal grand jury, or a Federal Government agency; or (2) that the judge is a judge of the United States or that the law enforcement officer is an officer or employee of the Federal Government or a person authorized to act for or on behalf of the Federal Government or serving the Federal Government as an adviser or consultant. (h) There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section. (i) A prosecution under this section or section 1503 may be brought in the district in which the official proceeding (whether or not pending or about to be instituted) was intended to be affected or in the district in which the conduct constituting the alleged offense occurred. (j) If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case. (k) Whoever conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties as those 18 U.S. Code § 1513 – Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next (a) (1) Whoever kills or attempts to kill another person with intent to retaliate against any person for— (A) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (B) providing to a law enforcement officer any information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, supervised release, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings, shall be punished as provided in paragraph (2). (2) The punishment for an offense under this subsection is— (A) in the case of a killing, the punishment provided in sections 1111 and 1112; and (B) in the case of an attempt, imprisonment for not more than 30 years. (b) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for— (1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, supervised release, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings given by a person to a law enforcement officer; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. (c) If the retaliation occurred because of attendance at or testimony in a criminal case, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense under this section shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case. (d) There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section. (e) Whoever knowingly, with the intent to retaliate, takes any action harmful to any person, including interference with the lawful employment or livelihood of any person, for providing to a law enforcement officer any truthful information relating to the commission or possible commission of any Federal offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. (f) Whoever conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy. (g) A prosecution under this section may be brought in the district in which the official proceeding (whether pending, about to be instituted, or completed) was intended to be affected, or in which the conduct constituting the alleged offense occurred. LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII. 18 U.S. Code § 1518 – Obstruction of criminal investigations of health care offenses Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next (a) Whoever willfully prevents, obstructs, misleads, delays or attempts to prevent, obstruct, mislead, or delay the communication of information or records relating to a violation of a Federal health care offense to a criminal investigator shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (b) As used in this section the term “criminal investigator” means any individual duly authorized by a department, agency, or armed force of the United States to conduct or engage in investigations for prosecutions for violations of health care offenses. LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII. 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States Current through Pub. L. 113-185. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor. LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII. UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I – CRIMES CHAPTER 13 – CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. Conspiracy against rights If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured – They shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results, they shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life. § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life. ——————————————————————————– From: CBonnell@WashingtonEA.org To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com CC: KMead@WashingtonEA.org; ATiberio@WashingtonEA.org Subject: RE: Response to Your Step II Appeal Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 22:43:50 +0000 Hello Mr. Craven, This email is being sent to you on behalf of Kim Mead. Cindy Dear Mr. Craven, I will ask for the Hearing and Appeals Committee to schedule another hearing for you. You will be contacted shortly with a meeting date. Sincerely, Kim Mead Washington Education Association President From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 4, 2014 6:34 AM To: Kim Mead [WA]; Armand Tiberio [WA]; Jay Inslee; Info PERC; Jace Borba [WA]; Lisa Lewison [WA]; Aimee Iverson [WA]; Dean Lookinghawk; dean.hurst@hum.wa.gov; Cindy Bonnell [WA] Subject: FW: Response to Your Step II Appea ——————————————————————————– From: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com Subject: RE: Your Step II Appeal Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 06:06:50 -0800 Dear Ms or Mr. Mead The promises made and witnessed by Dean Lookinghawk (working tape or new hearing) are clear, the reasons for the imperative of a hearing with a full record are clear, the law is clear on duty to report knowledge of commission of felony crimes (18 USC 4, 73, 241, 242) especially when the AG’s office is involved, my requests, allegations and submissions along with supporting evidence for them have been clear and still unacknowleged or rebutted, the issues and dangerous precedents for WEA and its membership are clear, and my reasons under law for refusing the $100,000 hush money offer that could have shut this whole farce down are clear, and my requests below are very clear. You have had control of the scheduling and timing of the hearings all along relative to the timeline for getting “rid of professor Craven’ so this newfound concern and protestations of my intent or requests being unclear (see below one more time) are pure disingenuousness. New Stage 1 hearing immediately, no going to an insulting and sandbagging 15 minutes before the Executive yet. We will play this all out because I have not committed perjury or lied, I have not conspired in backrooms against anyone, thus I have no lies to remember and which ones covered which other ones, I have no tangled webs of deceit coming unraveled, I have no cover-ups coming unraveled. Look at what I just got today AFTER my termination on Oct 22, 2014: they are trying to clean house and only making it worse “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.” Sir Walter Scott. I have a long trail of obstructed public records requests and this is pure evidence of more. They claim they just got this request from me AFTER my termination? I have made all my submissions and will continue to do so to law enforcement and I have the whole paper trail, and now thanks to the union finally, I have six boxes of very revealing documents, the subjects of repeated obstructed public records requests, only through subpoena. I will be releasing them to the public because they show pattern, mens rea, networks and connections, timings of emails and other facts that paint a portrait of massive sums of public monies, coordination and collusion among various state agencies, all that the hush money offer and last minute motion to limit, along with serial WEA/AHE refusals to document and come clean on allowing past serial denials of due process and protect the contract under previous stages of progressive discipline were intended never to be discovered and examined closely. Finally, why is WEA so intent on front loading the hearing with time limits and more narrowing of the issues presented? Your duty is to seek the truth as your decisions affect the whole membership as well as WEA and AHE as institutions that may be sued as whole institutions independent of lawsuits against named individuals as individuals within them. And by the way, the documents submitted on the thumb drive and others I presented are still part of the official record of documents submitted as evidence in support of my allegations and basis for appeal for new union legal representation. Also I have not seen one formal complaint from Margaret Olney of any allegations of my not having supported her as a client or taken her advice; no specific allegations and supporting evidence for me to respond to (as has been allowed all along by WEA and AHE). Please also give me the names of those present at the Stage I hearing and their mailing addresses for purposes of legal service. Please also give me the name of the man who was outside the hearing room and with whom one of the members of the hearing left the room several times to confer and his mailing address. I was slandered by the attorney from the general counsels office who characterized me as merely waving around some documents and texts of laws with no substance (I noted also that the tape would be going to law enforcement prior to being told that there was a problem with the tape and being handed the unusable copy thank you and I trust this makes my requests, intentions and evidence and law for my requests clear. This is being sent to law enforcement. sincerely, James M. Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii RE: BW717 Public Records Request – Dated October 29, 2014‏ RE: BW717 Public Records Request – Dated October 29, 2014 kimberly Baker Attachment 11/03/14 From: CBonnell@WashingtonEA.org To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com CC: KMead@WashingtonEA.org; ATiberio@WashingtonEA.org Subject: RE: Your Step II Appeal Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 00:17:04 +0000 Hello Mr. Craven, This email is being sent to you on behalf of Kim Mead. Cindy Mr. Craven, It was my understanding that after the Step 1 hearing on September 26, 2014 when you were notified that we were unable to produce a recording of the hearing, the Committee Chair offered you the option of holding the hearing again where it would hopefully have been possible to fix the recording issues. You did not wish to pursue that option at that time. I would like to extend you the option of scheduling another Step 1 hearing before the Hearing and Appeals Committee where we will be sure to have a functional recording of the proceedings. Please note that it may not be possible to schedule another Step 1 hearing before the date of the next WEA Board of Directors meeting. In the alternative, you may proceed instead with a Step 2 hearing before the full WEA Board of Directors on November 22, 2014 in the absence of a recording of the proceedings from the Step 1 hearing held on September 26, 2014. Please let me know which option you would like to pursue. Sincerely, Kim Mead From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 2:46 PM To: Cindy Bonnell [WA]; Dean Lookinghawk; dean.hurst@hum.wa.gov; Info PERC; Jay Inslee; Lisa Lewison [WA]; Jace Borba [WA]; Mike McNett [WA]; Kevin Saito Subject: FW: Your Step II Appeal ——————————————————————————– From: CBonnell@WashingtonEA.org To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com Subject: Your Step II Appeal Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:34:02 +0000 Good morning Mr. Craven, Please find attached a courtesy copy of the letter from Kim Mead that is being sent to you today via certified mail. Also included is a copy of the Hearing and Appeals Procedure. Thank you. Cindy Cindy Bonnell Secretary to the President and Board of Directors Washington Education Association v. 253-765-7035 Dear Mr or Ms Mead: First of all if we are to argue only from what was presented at the hearing, then WEA has a responsibility to provide me a working tape or a new hearing producing a working tape, along with the written record of the hearing, as I have requested from Mr. McNett over and over with no response. WEA’s contempt for basic due process, the importance of the precedents being allowed and that will be used against other members, the contempt for my own service including to the union is breathtaking and will be brought to account in other venues. Meanwhile, again, you play games with timing, I have been terminated and with the clear and open active coordination and collusion of the union charged with supposed to be protecting my rights, those of the membership, the contract and the law (again see 18 USC 4, 73, 241, 242, RCW 42.20, RCW 42.30 etc) All this has done is send a green light and enabled as well as covered-up the serial denials of due process that have taken place, the felony crimes that your own officers exposed that you continue to refuse to report as under your duty under 18 USC 4; this will not go away and it is why I would and could never take that $100,000 hush money offer that itself was a crime of criminal solicitation for me to repudiate and or neutralize and obstruct previous whistle-blower and other submissions to law enforcement about which the union, AG’s office and college were well aware; submissions made under penalty of perjury and for which I can be held and should be held accountable for their veracity, supporting evidence, law and my own motives and intentions. So please provide me the written record of that hearing or a new hearing, as was agreed with witnesses, that will produce an official record for future use and venues, and also, as I requested, please provide proof that these issues and my submissions have been sent to NEA. Please also acknowledge and address if refusing to answer, the legitimate questions posed to WEA and AHE below. No answer to legitimate questions, especially serial non responses become tacit non-rebuttal and legal verities later. This is for the record and continued intransigence, sandbagging, contrivances with timelines and the rest is all being kept for a record and only causes me and my family more and more distress and damages as well as suborns and covers-up perjury and other felonies that WEA and AHE sworn testimonies have exposed. Sincerely, James Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii (signed electronically) Please address these issues as they have been sent and will be sent to law enforcement per 18 USC 4, 73, 241, 242, 28 USC 455, 28 USC 1361 Mr McNett: First of all you keep avoiding the fact that WEA and AHE have knowledge of a felony crime exposed twice in the sworn testimonies of WEA and AHE officers plus you have direct knowledge, or should have, of serial falsehoods and false representations in the submissions of Ms Terada and others that directly contradict the sworn submissions by WEA and AHE officers. Further, I have asked that Jace Borba be interviewed as he, along with Dean Lookinghawk, are direct witnesses that expose perjury in the submissions and testimony of Joseph Nash and others. WEA also has direct knowledge as to why my arbitration on one year off was not funded and it had nothing to do with my proved guilt; it had to do, and still has to do with any serious defense by WEA now exposes the serial denials of due process, lack of predicate Laudermills in earlier stages, and lack of effective representation that I and the membership (via precedents set) suffered at the hands of some treacherous individuals in both WEA and AHE–acquired “mutuality of interests”. the proof of that is what is missing in all the submissions by WEA and AHE: the previous reprimand, 7 days off, 8 days off all with no hearings, no union representation, no appeals, all summarily imposed while I was on medical leave and critically ill and/or off contract and all for protected conversations on an intra-union list that management is not supposed to have access to let alone control over. Plus the fact that none of my statements when looked in totality and not by a perjurer with malicious intent, it is clear that I was and am guilty of nothing other than caring deeply about the students and proper hiring and vetting for all teachers. Then take this to NEA as these delays smell of coordination and collusion with Clark College and the AG’s office that you are supposed to be representing me and the membership against when these kinds of issues are at stake. This will not go away and this is why I do not take phone calls. In any case, your duty under law is clear and you folks continue to ignore 18 USC 4 and your duty under law to report felony crimes especially when it was your own officers, acting in the course of their duties, dealing with public employment, and when the consequences of your failure to act are irreversible; plus real people are being defrauded right now by individuals hired through backdoor hiring and no vetting that the union has opposed and must oppose to protect the membership interest against anti-union snitches and scabs undermining the very union-won conditions and contracts they take for themselves and their own protection. This will go to law enforcement and I need the names and mailing addresses of all persons involved in the appeal hearing and am still waiting for a usable copy of the tape of that hearing because as Dean Lookinghawk noted there were provably false statements made by the representative from the general counsel of WEA made and this intransigence and refusal to do even your basic duties under law and as WEA employees will be played back to you and you will answer in other venues. The facts are clear, the law is clear, your duty under law is clear; that is why I did not take the $100,000, even as I have a professorship of economics offered to me in China at Tsinghua University, even as my name and credentials have been trashed by those whose own resumes in economics and education I am told would not make a footnote on my own resume, because I cannot walk way from crimes and see them not reported; Knight’s perjury, obstruction of justice and conspiracy against rights at a minimum stand independent of my case in a fundamental sense Either the appeal process is already fixed, just like all that has transpired up to this point, that going further in appeal is pointless, or if the appeal process is valid, then your decision to let this go on knowing that felony crimes have been committed and are at the heart of the whole process and those administrating it, refusing to challenge and expose it, then this is pure criminal conduct and cover-up, as well as aiding and abetting and emboldening an unjust and felony tainted process according to WEA and AHE own sworn testimonies and submissions not my supposed rants and allegations. All of this will be played out in future venues and I am doing all I can not to damage WEA as an institution due to the apparent derelictions of duty and worse by some of its officers now in an inherent conflict of interest position in any involvement in the appeal process. I have given this union every chance to act like a union before having to go to PERC. I waived conflict with Margaret Olney even as she had been the attorney on the Watson case on which I was one of two whistle-blowers. To say that I did not assist her is a lie and a contemptible one as well. Why would FBI immediately ask me if that hush money offer was in writing when they heard the terms? Why did they ask for me to bring Margaret Olney and the offer down to their office? Why did Margaret not accompany me and how could I keep her on as a my attorney if she would not come down to report felony crimes that she had knowledge of and as requested by FBI as well as per 18 USC 4 and also concern for me and my family? Was she worried that she might also expose crimes by WEA employees as well and was in conflict as she was representing me but through WEA? These are but some of the questions ahead for all of you. 18 U.S. Code § 4 – Misprision of felony Current through Pub. L. 113-163. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.) · US Code · Notes prev | next Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. Please forward this to NEA and please give me the mailing addresses (for legal service) of all those at WEA involved in the appeal process. Sincerely, Jim Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii (signed electronically) ——————————————————————————– From: MMcNett@WashingtonEA.org To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com CC: KWishkoski@WashingtonEA.org; JHardie@WashingtonEA.org Subject: RE: Clark College Board of Trustees Final Order Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:51:10 +0000 Professor Craven: Your appeal concerning the denial of WEA legal services funding is still pending at the WEA Board of Directors level. Notice regarding that appeal is forthcoming. However, WEA will not be providing you with legal representation until such time, if any, that the WEA Board or NEA determine on the basis of your appeal to reverse the decision of the WEA General Counsel and restore funding of legal services to you. WEA will not be taking any action to appeal the Clark College Board of Trustees Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Final Order issued on October 21, 2014 within the related time frame. Thus, you should not expect, nor rely upon, WEA to do so. Mike McNett Hearing and Appeals Board Staff Consultant Washington Education Association (253) 765-7098 office mmcnett@washingtonea.org From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 8:57 PM To: Dean Lookinghawk; dean.hurst@hum.wa.gov; Kevin Saito; Jay Inslee; dereke@atg.wa.gov; Bonnie Terada; Lisa Lewison [WA]; Jace Borba [WA]; Aimee Iverson [WA]; Info PERC; Mike McNett [WA] Subject: FW: Clark College Board of Trustees Final Order Mr. McNett Please see the attached termination order for October 22, 2014. This is despite my having a valid appeal for legal assistance pending and my legal reasons for demanding that this corrupted process be terminated. This is the order from the same Board of Trustees and AG’s office that authorized the last minute $100,000 hush money offer that the FBI wanted to see in writing and the last minute motion to limit and hide the serial denials of due process and the failure of the union to document and stop it, as well as the perjury, obstruction of justice and serial violations of duty under law to report knowledge of felonies having been committed on the part of union officers, lawyers and members of the AG’s office. I will be taking this to FBI tomorrow to file formal criminal complaint. We now have the final brief of Ms Terada that is riddled with falsehoods and misrepresentations directly contradicted by the sworn submissions of WEA/AHE briefs as well as in a hearing with conflicting sworn and very material testimonies in the same hearing as well as previously in separate venues. This will not go away no matter what anyone thinks of the charges against me; the perjury and other crimes stand unexposed and unacknowledged and even suborned by WEA and AHE refusal to do your duty under law as well as fiduciary as well for individual members as well as for the membership in not allowing these kinds of serial railroading of people out of public employment for doing their duty under law which is all I am guilty of as WEA itself once asserted and with the authorization of legal representation in this case. I expect the union to file for an immediate injunction against the imposition of this order, I have due process and stages of appeal pending, this act also serves to cover-up crimes that were exposed not by me but by sworn and unrebutted testimonies of Dr. Roi and Mr. Davidson acting for WEA and AHE. I expect the union to take this to PERC as I will be taking it there as well. Over and over I have given this union every chance to act like a union and have made good-faith notice and evidence of and chances to mitigate, real and ongoing damages to me, my family and to the students and institution. Please regard this as the same This will be sent to law enforcement as real time crimes going on. ——————————————————————————– From: lkent@clark.edu To: omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com; BonnieT@ATG.WA.GOV CC: SWilliams@clark.edu; DerekE@ATG.WA.GOV Subject: Clark College Board of Trustees Final Order Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:08:29 +0000 Good morning, Please see the attached Final Order from the Clark College Board of Trustees. Hard copies will be sent to you via USPS today. Leigh Kent Executive Assistant to the President Clark College 1933 Fort Vancouver Way Vancouver, WA 98663 P: 360-992-2101 F: 360-992-2871 Mr. Mc Nett: Please see the above sent to me today. I am terminated as of October 22,, 2014 Professor Craven, I am not in a position to advise you regarding the matter below, nor am I able to access the linked files. Your appeal regarding the denial of continued legal services is now pending at level of the WEA Board of Directors. In accordance with the appeal policy and procedures, the WEA Board should hear the appeal at their next scheduled meeting. The next meeting of the WEA Board is slated for November 21st and 22nd at the WEA headquarters building in Federal Way. I have been in communication with the WEA President’s assistant regarding the specific time and date and hope to be able to give you that information soon. The information will be sent to you via certified mail and, per your request, by email. Mike McNett Hearing and Appeals Board Staff Consultant Washington Education Association (253) 765-7098 office mmcnett@washingtonea.org From: James Craven [mailto:omahkohkiaayo@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 8:09 AM To: Dean Lookinghawk; Mike McNett [WA]; dean.hurst@hum.wa.gov; Kevin Saito; Jay Inslee; Aimee Iverson [WA]; Lisa Lewison [WA]; dereke@atg.wa.gov; Bonnie Terada Subject: RE: Response to Redux: RE: 18 USC 4, 73, 241, 242 Formal Appeals and Requests Still Unaddressed Dear Mr. Mc Nett: I just got received this sent to me today (see AG motion against termination or postponement) on legal representation pending. That this was not apparently sent to the union, is indicative of contempt for it and/or coordination and collusion between the union and administration. But the fact is that the serial falsehoods, omissions, in this brief and motion the union is in a position to know and has in past sworn submissions provided the evidence of some of the falsehoods in the brief. Further, some of the representations conflict directly with those made by WEA and AHE under oath thus there are implications here in terms of possible future criminal and civil complaints against the union and named persons acted on behalf of the union. Further, refusal to address my pending appeal (and as far as I know I still have a valid pending appeal with WHR and my complaint was supposed to be sent to EEOC by WHR as well) as well as formal criminal complaints against those who had knowledge of the evidence of perjury by Bob Knight and not only refused to report it per 18 USC 4, but continue, as with this motion, to try to conceal from legal scrutiny and accountability, evidence of serial perjury and obstruction of justice by the very person who appointed the investigators to deliver the cover-ups he sought; the very person who acted as “judge” his (words), assessor of discipline on complaints he initiated; the very person who initiated and/or recruited complainants and rewarded them with unprecedented course loads for which they were not qualified and vetted; the very person who even acted as appeal authority on his own charges, investigations, findings, and assessments of discipline through recruited proxies that the WEA and AHE produced evidence of and asked to be reported on the intra-union list. The very evidence they say was not provided was in fact provided even with attempts to prevent a record for future use with the last minute hush money offer followed by the motion to limit any rebuttal or evidence against allegations repeated over and over as either supposed evidence of themselves and or properly adjudicated “findings” of “facts.” And in no cases were the original and complete documents considered from which partial and shaped quotes were taken as somehow self-evidently indicative of charges and conclusions never made in any formal complaints when there were any formal complaints. The specifics of my criminal complaint, which includes the Board of Trustees for signing off on the hush money offer based on only one-sided representations of the issues and without one word from me, along with their own refusal to act on their acquired knowledge of perjury and obstruction of justice evident on the part of Knight or on the part of Dr. Roi and Ms Davidson, make them unfit, and in direct and material conflicts of interest to continue this corrupted process and act on the issue of my termination. This will be sent to law enforcement as they are being allowed and enabled with union non-responses to all of this, to stack-up and pile on all the allegations of the past as somehow proved and stipulated to by the union with non-arbitration, the very stuff the hush money off and motion to limit were designed to prevent any rebuttal of–more serial denials of basic due process. But this process has been corrupted from the beginning and this will not go away not matter what happens. Please read this motion and just look even at the brief written by Lisa Lewison to see some of the outright falsehoods and misrepresentations in this motion. Further, I would ask both Dean Lookinghawk and Jace Borba to review the transcripts of the hearing on termination with particular reference to the testimony of Joseph Vance as they were witnesses to my repeated objections to only two hours allotted for three complaints and cross-complaints and they are witnesses that none of my ADA and cross-complaints were ever addressed by Sievert or by Nash and thus witnesses to possible perjury in the testimonies of Joseph Vance and others as well Please get back to me on this as I just received this today and I know they are intent on a Oct 22 deadline for their own agenda. There is no way this process can be saved or the body of corrupted “findings” accepted to be argued from. This is fruit of a highly, serially and intentionally poisoned tree that can yield no usable legal fruit except as evidence of conspiracy to obstruct justice, suborn and cover-up perjury, conspiracy to pervert, corrupt and engineer the course, outcomes and potential future precedents of justice The sworn submissions of WEA and AHE portions of which are in my petition in Appendix 4, directly refute, with supporting evidence and transcripts, many representations and assertions of fact in this and other motions submitted on behalf of Clark College and WEA and AHE are well aware of it and have been made well aware of falsehoods exposed by their own sworn submissions and evidence. Failure to report these contradictions in sworn testimonies, as in the most recent case of conflicting sworn testimonies in the same hearing, constitutes at least two major felonies (18 USC 4 and 73) with each act of willful disregard for petitions such as this one to do your duty under law a separate act of contempt for the law and the union’s duty. I expect WEA and AHE to act on my valid appeal for legal representation immediately. Anyone who questions my medical status without taking the due diligence to check with my physicians who have been given release to discuss my health, is engaging in reckless and depraved disregard for my health condition and showing reckless disregard for facts available but not sought. Sincerely, Jim Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii James has files to share with you on OneDrive. To view them, click the links below. AG Motion Against Termination or Postponement WEA Notice of Com.pdf AG Motion Against Termination or Postponement WEA Notice of Com.pdf ——————————————————————————– To Jim and Mr. McNett: What is this about? I was standing right there when they brought the tape of the hearing that they said they could not get to play with audio, I said we would try to see if we could do something, I recommended a wide codec package called K-Lite free to download from the internet website, in an attempt to try to recover the audio, and it was the chairwoman who said if they and we could not get a working copy of the tape the meeting had to be redone and would be redone as to get a audio copy for the record. She stated and agreed that audio recording is critical to have a full record. Including my own reporting within the hearing of the many things I have seen personally witnessed; Including terms of cover-ups and more, plus there were several false statements made by the lawyer opposing your petition there that I know to be false directly. They need to be repeated or captured on tape. I cannot restore it and they now ask us to send them a copy of their own tape that they were responsible to making sure was properly made and usable. As for the charge that you did not fully assist your attorney, I am a direct witness to all your interactions, I have read all your exchanges with her and that is a flat-out untruth and there is not one piece of evidence to support such statements as you failed to support your attorney. I have also, received all correspondence between you and your attorney as not only you CC myself as a CC: recipient , but so did your attorney. You definitely gave an unquestionable warning that if she did not come with you to FBI as I did, and as she was requested by them, to bring the hush money offer and discuss it and the perjury by Bob Knight, you would have no choice, as a matter of your understanding of the law (continuing a legal defense that involves cover-up and subornation of perjury and other felonies and refusal to report felony perjury that has occurred the second time an on her watch?) to terminate her representation. And I was present the first time you met her, and again in her office when you stated emphatically… No settlements, sealed or otherwise, no hush money because there are crimes and others involved not just you. Perhaps it takes a special kind of fool to ignore or not even question the many things the many things i have witnessed at your many “Hearings” that were later called and referred to just “Meetings” I have also been to Law Enforcement with you to report such crimes of perjury, interfering with witnesses, abuse of power, etc.. And yet not once have I been interviewed or questioned within any kind of investigation or inquiry to determine all possible facts. Dean Lookinghawk To: mmcnett@washingtonea.org; lookinghawk@hotmail.com; dean.hurst@hum.wa.gov; kevin.saito@ic.fbi.gov; info@jayinslee.com;aiverson@washingtonea.org; llewison@washingtonea.org; dereke@atg.wa.gov; bonniet@atg.wa.gov Subject: RE: Response to Redux: RE: 18 USC 4, 73, 241, 242 Formal Appeals and Requests Still Unaddressed Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 17:47:59 -0700 Mr. McNett Thanks for your response and also for your clarification as to the identity of the attorney as from the general counsel for WEA not the AG but the effect was the same as having the AG’s argument represented. If you have a working copy of the tape I asked for it to be sent. There was not agreement to proceed without it; in fact it was the chairperson of this hearing that suggested that without the record which I had insisted on waiting for, there was no basis for me to appeal and I indicated I would be appealing as that hearing had all the spontaneity and impartiality of a bad Gilbert and Sullivan. And I did not get a copy of any written submissions by that person. Why was Ms Iverson not present? I have asked over and over for proof that this has been sent to NEA because of the issues involved and that WEA is up to its neck in material conflicts of interest just as Bob Knight was in acting as investigator, judge, jury, assessor of punishment and even appeal authority on his own charges or those through proxies But you still refuse to mention the word perjury and the fact that it was the sworn testimonies of two union officers, in two different venues, that exposed the statement “There is no morale problem. There will be no morale problem when we get rid of professor Craven.” (not reported to me for over a year while his plan was being carried out and I–and the membership via precedents being set–was serially being denied due process and union representation, all of which has been covered-up and is still being cov LikeLike

   Posted by jimcraven10 | November 29, 2014, 12:49 pm
   Reply to this comment