Archive for December 30, 2012

2012 King County Domestic Violence Initiative Contact Document

Having trouble calling and getting a call answered by a Court? This document is the answer for you, contains many, many unpublished phone numbers to directly contact the court. I say unpublished only because these are normally only available to petitioners in family law matters.


Domestic Violence 2012 Reference Guide

Domestic Violence Related Studies and Research

When dealing with any DV related issue it is important to understand what baseline the DV Industry relies upon. DV Industry includes Judges, Lawyers, Advocates, Parenting Evaluators, DV Treatment Providers, GAL’s, Family Court Services, and to a certain degree Law Enforcement.

At some point I will go through this list and add brief descriptions about each document.


2012 Equality Wheel Duluth Model garbage, but most if not all private practitioners and Judicial Officer treat this as part two of the DV Bible (Part one is the Power and Control Wheel)

2012 Power and Control Wheel This is the pinnacle of a garbage study conducted in the ’80’s which has become the standard of the DV Industry, notice the use of Male only perpetrator identification, know and understand this document because they all rely on it.




TomGeorge (2012) DV Sentencing Conditions Recidivism_FINAL_042412 The final word on efficacy of DVPT in Washington State. After completion of DVPT you will be MORE likely of being charged with a criminal act of DV than if you do not attend!

1-2010 WSIPP Recidivism Report

3-14-11 IPV on Men APA

3-14-11 IVP Men PTSD

05. KCCADV Victim-Defendant Report[1] If you are asking what a Victim-Defendant is, she is any and all women charged (or in the highly unlikely case convicted) of Domestic Violence related crime.

7-2008 Batterers_Intervention WSCADV Advocate handbook

8-2–8 WoodwaedBechtel DVPT Effiacacy

9-2009 DVPT Efficacy Taylor Maxwell

2003 USDOJ DVPT Study

2004 Broward BIP

2006 DVPT Efficacy viewcontent

2006 Judges Handbook DV Appendix A Part of the FAMOUS 2006 Judges Handbook, read it and know it because the Commissioner you are in front of has it memorized. Gender and Justice put this together.

2006 Recidivism SMCStudy-BattererIntervention-Part2[1]

2006 Ricidivism SMCStudy-BattererIntervention-Part1[1]

2007 DOH DVPT Not effective IV-DV2007

2008 City of Seattle Report

2008 GAL Guidebook Title 26 GAL

2008 WSCADV Media_Guide_2008

2008 Zegree Batterers_Intervention Guide DV Advocates

2009 SKCCM BIP Study AuditFinal

2010 KCSO SOP Manual Chapter 12 DV

2010 Utah evaluating domestic violence court

2010 Zegree Walker, D. Evaluating the impact of IPV


2011 Dale Todd Quote about DV Treatment

An Evaluation of Gender

Batterer Intervention Meeting Report






Dutton and Corvo[1]



Erin Pizzey Family Terrorist The gospel spoken from the Feminist Side of the fence, Ms. Pizzey is a stand out in the fight to end abuse. Must read for any Father.

Experiments_in_Torture[1] Think your exposure to the King County Family Law system feels like torture? Look at the similarities you are right.

Final_2010_2012_DV_Strat_Plan_10_28_09 City of Seattle 2010 Strategic Plan for DV

MHFA Study



Social_Workers_Practice_Guide_to_DV_Feb_2010 Published by the Washington State DSHS, look for the mention of males victims of DV (well you can look but you will not find any)

Sunrise report 1992 DV providers[1]

Tracee Parker Fathering After Violence Parker ran the Safe and Sound Supervised Visitation center in Kent.


12-2003 KCCADV Victim Defendant Paper This is somewhat dated but still in use today, this paper gives a clear idea of the DV Industry definition of who a victim is and what gender SHE is, even is she is the abuser she is simply the victim, pure rubbish.

2011-2012PROPOSEDBUDGETFINAL Seattle page 13 Mayor McGinn suggests to eliminate funding for DV Perpetrator Treatment citing a no efficacy rating.


2013-15 City of Seattle DV Strategic Plan The City of Seattle releases this strategic plan every couple years, worth notice is the inclusion of the 2012 DVPT recidivism study (Dr. Tom George 2012 AOC study) and who does Seattle look to to determine if DVPT is effective? The private DVPT providers.

6-08-12 NBCC Code of Ethics National Board of Certified Counselors Code of Ethics

6-1999 Washington State Parenting Plan Study What the DV Insiders think of “shared parenting” must read for anyone going into a Custody dispute

6-2012 Accounting For DV In Custody Evaluations Fresh DV Industry study, well not really because the sample was 18 cases (hum, sounds like the Duluth study size) and contained within this paper is every reason why crazy abuser mommy is really just a victim, and dad? well he’s just a perp. This document is from the Washington Supreme Court’s Gender and Justice website.

Missing Sky Metalwala Case

2-01-11 Metalwala Declaration

3-03-11 Full DVPO Metalwala Respondent

3-03-11 Temp Orders CS and Maintenance

6-04-10 DVPO Metalwala Petitioner

6-09-10 DVPO Metalwala Petitioner

6-30-10 DVPO Biryukova Petitioner

7-14-10 DVPO Response Biryukova

7-14-10 DVPO Response Metalwala

9-13-10 Declaration of Stan Biryukova

9-13-10 Nadia Biryukova Declaration

9-23-10 DVPO Strict Reply Julia Biryukova

9-27-10 DVPO Metalwala Respondent

11-23-11 Notice_of_Association[1]

12-06-11 Declaration_of_Leslie_Clay_Terry[1]

12-06-11 Declaration_of_Service[1]

12-06-11 Declaration_of_Solomon_Metalwala[1]

12-06-11 Order_Terminating_Order_for_Protection[1]

12-14-10 DVPO Children

12-14-10 DVPO Metalwala Respondent

12-28-10 DVPO Hearing Notice


Supreme Court General Rule GR31A and GR31.1

Over the last year or so the Supreme Court has been working on revisions to General Rule 31A and presently GR31.1, the latter the public comment phase is about to expire and likely will be a public meeting or two before the Justices rule on this. Both of the General Rules deal with how the court discloses public records if not public then administrative court records (non case file documents).

Having minimal faith in our Judiciary to become more clear and transparent than a rock I have somewhat ignored the process, while it is a great importance I made the personal decision to more or less sit out GR31A and had planned on doing the same with GR31.1. However a couple months ago a met a man who was very passionate about this new rule and the positive aspects it could bring to his issue, we talked and later spoke on the phone at length. His provided me some insight and opinions which I having been embroiled in the Domestic Violence arena have not been exposed to, I must say it was quite refreshing on many levels.

The one thing I have come to realize is just how closed and opposed to disclosure our Judicial branch of Government is and I suspect there is a great deal for them to be ashamed of is full disclosure were to happen.

GR31 (1)

GR31.1 (1)

As normal course, even when time constraints do not allow I committed to reviewing GR31.1 and offering at least one public comment on the proposal.

After digging my brain into 31.1 I started drafting a Public Comment for submission, after completing what felt like seventy or eighty percent of my comment I took a break and came back to it an hour or so later when I noticed my word count was over 3800 words, better check to see if AOC has a word count limit, and yes the do it was 1500 words. After spending more time editing down my comment than writing it I was done and it was submitted

12-29-12 GR31_1 Chief Justice Barbara Madsen Comment 1

Fresh in my head are the countless defects with GR31.1 not the least of which is the simple fact a disgruntled requestor could all but bring the accountability arm CJC of the Judiciary to its knees from a title wave of complaints.

I could offer more on this but suffice to say a ill conceived proposal by our highest Judicial officers, again. All this could be avoided by accepting governance under the existing Public Records Act and following the Judicial Cannons.

Here are a few additional public comments made, most speak the same hollow words “We support Transparency in the Court, but…”

11-30-12 GR31_1 DMCJA Judge Durr Comment

On Behalf of Spokane County Superior Court

On Behalf of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for the County of King

Superior Court Judges’ Association-12-31-12

Superior Court of the State of Washington for Thurston County

Superior Court of Washington for Pierce County

Some comments from other agencies-

On Behalf of Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington

On Behalf of Association of Washington Cities – Washington State Association of Municipal Attorneys

On Behalf of Disability Rights Washington – David Lord

On Behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington

On Behalf of the Washington State Office of Public Defense

Justices denial of the public’s right to access is always more costly in the end.

Hupy v. Jacqueline Jeske

On September 12th, 2011 Seattle Lawyer Karma Zaike brought forth a petition for a Civil Domestic Violence Protection Order on behalf of her client Saiyin Phasavath in cause number 04-3-00375-3 SEA, normal business at KCSC, almost.

The problem on this petition is that her client Phasavath was facing a Domestic Violence Assault Charge for chocking her 14 year old son and Zaike would shortly become the subject of a criminal investigation for witness tampering by the Renton Police Department.

The petition was presented to KCSC Commissioner Carlos Velategui who denied the motion

9-12-11 DVPO Denial ExParte Signed Vealtegui

9-12-11 Phasavath DVPO ExParte Denial


Zaike then went “forum shopping” she left the 6th floor of the KCSC Courthouse and went down to the 2nd floor and was able to note this motion for a second time on the family law calendar in front of Commissioner Jackie Jeske.

By any stretch of the imagination this action could only be described as a revision the petitions were identical, no declaration as why the same motion should be reconsidered (even though this would no have been appropriate as a Commissioner has no power of review/revision).

The real problem for me is that I was included as a restrained party in this civil Domestic Violence Protection Order, a action I have never been Joined into.


10-3-11 Complaint Exhibits

10-06-11 Amended Admissions

10-06-11 Amended Complaint

10-06-11 Amended Summons

10-10-11 KCSO Return of Service KCPAO

10-24-11 Certificate of Service[1]

10-24-11 Demand for Plaintiff to File[1]

ammended return dated 10-13-11[1]

2012 Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys Domestic Violence Manual

This was release in November 2012 provides insights into as least how KCPAO David Martin feels about protecting “HER” from Domestic Violence. As you read this document you may ask what is a Victim-Defendant” simply put it is a woman, any woman regardless of how violent or abusive, Jennifer Kolone comes to mind, Martin did not prosecute her.

More Gender Biased crap from the DV Industry.

2012 WAPA KCPAODV Manual 12.11.14

Who Picks the Judges

For the average citizen this question may never be asked, for those who have gone into a Courtroom it is like a neon light flashing in their face “Who the hell pick this person?”

I will examine King County BAR Association here but most if not all local BAR Associations have similar committees so check your local BAR for specifics in your area.

Members of the KCBA select a committee for Judicial screening, information can be found here KCBA Judicial Screening process, applicants fill out evaluation forms and the process starts.

2012 Governor’s Judicial Evaluation Questionnaire

2012 KCBA Judicial Evaluation Supplemental Questionnaire


Every year the KCBA conducts a survey of their members concerning the performance of the King County Superior Court Judges, they then compile this data into a annual report, here is a example.

2012 KCSC Judicial Evaluation Survey Results


2012 Assistant Chief Criminal Judge Theresa Doyle

Coming soon.

2012 Chief Civil Judge Laura Inveen

Coming soon.

2012 Chief Presiding Judge Richard McDermott

Coming soon.

2006 Judges Domestic Violence Manual

This manual was created as a bench book or bench guide, in Family Law every Judge and Lawyer will rely on it. It was created by the Judges and DV Industry insiders for the use of every Judge who may rule on DV related or influenced cases

The relationship between the Judges, the DV Industry (both Advocate side and Professional Providers) is one of exclusion, they exclude any other opinion or position other than ones which serve their agenda.

This is a MUST read manual.


2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 1 Scope

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 2 What is DV

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 3 Legislative Response

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 4 Criminal Pre-Trial

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 5 Criminal Trial

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 6 Evidence

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 7 Criminal Dispositions

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 8 Civil DVPO

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 9 DV Database

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 10 Parenting Plans

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 11 Child Abuse

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 12 Dissolution

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 13 DV Rural Courts

2006 Judges DV Manual Ch 14 DV Tribal Courts

2006 Judges Manual Appendix A DVPT

2006 Judges Manual Appendix B Children

2006 Judges Manual Appendix C Federal DV Laws

2006 Judges Manual Appendix D LGBT

2006 Judges Manual Appendix E

2006 Judges Manual Appendix F Immigration

2006 Judges Manual Appendix G Child Abduction

2006 Judges Manual Appendix H DV Links

2006 Judges Manual Appendix I History and Authorship

2006 Judges Manual Appendix J Guidelines DVPO

A Conversation about Violence

This is a email exchange between King County Prosecuting Attorney Senior Deputy David Martin and Domestic Violence Treatment Provider Doug Bartholomew.


From: Martin, David

Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 10:51 PM

To:   Doug Bartholomew

Subject:    RE: Gary Ruffcorn

Gary is the poster child for sentencing reform.  Unfortunately, I dealt with this son as well (also with a troubling history of DV) before his passing.  With each of them law enforcement had serious safety concerns (not surprising given how Gary’s son passed).  I would not spend too much time contemplating Gary.   We can help make people safer, we dont make them safe. 

I know there are many areas of agreement in how to move forward in DV.  Its not easy but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts and ideas.  I dont have all or even some of the answers, but I feel as though things have changed.  I guess we will see what the legislative session brings.


David D. Martin

Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney

Chair, Domestic Violence Unit

(w) 206-296-9503

(c) 206-898-9416




—–Original Message—–

From: Doug Bartholomew []

Sent: Wed 12/2/2009 10:38 PM

To: Martin, David

Subject: Gary Ruffcorn


Well, crow is a meal best eaten cold.  And karma is a …

I was looking something up this evening and stumbled upon your article about tougher sentencing guidelines.  I would like to say I have an excuse for what Gary did.  The pictures were horrible.  He was one of mine in 2006.  He did what he was supposed to do and I truely believe he was sincere.  I don’t know what I would have done differently.  He was an old dog.  But it still is a failure, and one in which someone got horribly hurt. 

 At the same time as he was in group I had a cop in the group which met right before his.   One day the early group was late and Gary was already in the waiting room.  The cop took one look at Gary and came back into the therapy room and said “you’re in over your head, and I want to be on a different night because I don’t even want to be in the same building as him.”

I’m going to be doing a lot of soul searching on this one.

On a happier note the meetings that are going on are the most exciting I’ve seen since the WAC’s were passed in 1992.  You are giving me hope!  We have a chance here to make history and prove  that if we all work together asnd we all take responsibilty for our role in stopping violence (and keep good statistics) we can show the world that it can be done right and it is worth still trying.  Thank you.


Doug Bartholomew MS, LMHC

1750 112th Ave. NE # B-218

Bellevue, WA 98004

Phone: 425-635-0188


FAX 425-451-8184



So, who is Gary Ruffcorn? He is a convicted serial abuser, he had SIX prior convictions for Assault in the 4th Degree Domestic Violence and THREE Convictions for violation of a No Contact Order, details and pictures of the aftermath of his violence can be found here.

The system placed this clearly troubled man in the same program as countless fathers who have merely been accused of the most petty offences, and I may add accused by only one person in a 10 minute long DVPO hearing with no rules of evidence allowed.

Bartholomew ever so casually comments about how bad he feels, how he wishes it were different, implying how he was duped by this person. This is not the case DB and Martin have been involved in DVPT for far to many years, The 2012 Washington State Recidivism study TomGeorge (2012) DV Sentencing Conditions Recidivism_FINAL_042412 paints the picture black and white, Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment as it exists today in Washington State is a failure, it does not work. If the average person who completes DVPT is slightly more likely to commit and get charged with a act of Domestic Violence what are the percentages going to look like for someone who fits this profile?

Violence and accountability, every single person who failed should have a place at that table include private profiteers like Mr. Bartholomew.

Doug Bartholomew Complete Unabridged History – New Documents Added

Doug Bartholomew has been providing Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment services in the Seattle area for over 20 years. During most of that time he was the darling of the Courts, his assessments and evaluations while virtually devoid of any clinical legitimacy are typically over compensated for in volume, conjecture, hearsay, biased, and fantasy based conclusions.

Bartholomew over the last couple of years has faced a heightened level of scrutiny a ruling by now retired KCSC Judge Michael Fox, a deposition in which Bartholomew admits to never evaluating a man who does not need DV Treatment, and several professional complaints both to the DOH and the DSHS.

This is likely the most comprehensive single database complied on this provider available anywhere-

Douglas J. W. Bartholomew
DOB – January 13th, 1950
SSN – xxx-xx-xx84

Home Address:

84x Garden Green Place
Sultan, WA 98294-9509

Business Address:

13606 NE 20th Street Suite 200
Bellevue, WA 98005

DOH Healthcare Provider License LH00003582

Doug Bartholomew is not the only abuser in his house, Kathy Benardout-Bartholomew (his wife) has been gotten into the act as well. This recently released document from the Washington State Attorney Generals Office indicates Bartholomew sought to have the AG’s office intervene on their behalf, answer was NO THANKS.

Kathy Bartholomew AG Request

Here is another just released document from the Washington Attorney Generals Office, the first document is the redacted version previously posted, the second document is in it’s native form. It is a professional evaluation called “EXPERT REVIEW” conducted by a well respected Health care provider in Seattle named Harriet Cannon M.C., LMFT, LMHC she was retained by the legal team at the Washington Department of Health during the investigation of Misconduct by Doug Bartholomew. 

This report is nothing more than scathing indictment of the horrors in dealing with Bartholomew.

Bartholomew Report DOH Redacted

Bartholomew Report DOH


Doug Bartholomew agreed to a stipulated finding of breaches in his professional conduct, massive monetary fine and heightened Department of Health Supervision and lifetime ban on ever conducting another Domestic Violence Evaluation.

3-01-13 DOH Informal Disposition

3-01-13 DOH Statement of Allegations

Doug Bartholomew petitioned for protection under Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. According to the documents it appears that he did this to evade accountability from the Washington State Department of Health and is using the legal system to “RE-VICTIMIZE”.

As part of the stipulated agreement with DOH Bartholomew agreed to a $5000 professional fine (to be paid over several years) refund of his professional services fee to the victim in the amount of $2900, and restitution to the victim for the defense of the professional misconduct- a STAGGERING AMOUNT OF $69,000!!!!

But as a expected tactic of avoiding accountability Bartholomew has filed BK, “always the abuser and always somebody else’s fault” I have not been able to find one single instance where Doug Bartholomew accepted personal or professional accountability for his actions, if you know of one please let me know I will post it upon receipt. 

Here are his recent BK filings and also those from 2002 and 2003 (yes he is a habitual filer, but within his constitutional rights however)-

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Petition – This petition provides all the debts and assets declared in the Bankruptcy.

6-03-13 Bartholomew Ammended Income Filing – Income has changed as well as the addition of a $19,000 IRS Tax lien from 2010 and 2011 Federal Taxes

6-03-13 Bartholomew BK Ammended Schedule D-F

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Filing Douglas

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Docket

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Attorney

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Case Summary

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Deadlines and Hearing Schedule

12-12-02 Kathy Bartholomew BK Filing

10-26-03 Bartholomew Chapter 7 BK Filing

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Parties

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Preferred Mailing List

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK Notice of BK Filing

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK List of Creditors

4-30-13 Bartholomew BK History

One more little tidbit worth mentioning, it appears that Kathy Bartholomew had enough money on April 1st to start a new business, but she must have forgot to mention that on her Federal Sworn Under Penalty of Perjury Bankruptcy Petition, just like Doug never let a little detail like BK Fraud stand in your way…

2013 DOR Business License for Kathy Bartholomew

Washington Dept of Health Public Records Response

5-06-13 DOH Public Records Response Bartholomew Complaint LH2011-154410NMR

This Document contains the actual complaint which resulted in the misconduct finding against Bartholomew as well as other complaints from the past.

250 pages of quality reading about the abuser Doug Bartholomew


Washington Dept of Health Public Records Response Part Two-

6-06-13 DOH Doug Bartholomew PDR Response

This set contains the report completed by Bartholomew which resulted in the Professional Misconduct finding as well as a transcript of a older deposition.


Starting with some of the most sought after Documents over the last few years. If Doug Bartholomew is actively involved in your case at a MINIMUM these documents should be mentioned in your case. DB is a toxic force against any man, to let your guard down thinking he will help you is nothing but a Kool-Aid induced delusion.  

10-15-03 Weden Petition for Protection Order This is the Protection Order Doug   claims is NOT Domestic Violence, Ms. Weden is the former Mrs. Bartholomew

10-15-03 Weden Signed Protection Order Order Signed by a Judge

Weden Bartholomew DV RO Docket Y3 034385 Interestingly KCDC no longer has any of these documents on file somehow they have been misplaced in a relocation from Redmond to Issaquah, or a “friend” maybe threw them away.

12-15-10 Bartholomew Response to Complaint Doug Bartholomew Responds to the Protection Order to the DSHS

Full Transcript Bartholomew Deposition This is was taken as part of cause number 04-3-00375-3 SEA on March 25th, 2008. While partials of this transcript appear elsewhere this is the full deposition.

Judge Fox Comments[1] This is a partial document from cause number 08-3-08507-8 SEA, it is a closing argument brief which contains transcripts from a oral ruling made by Judge Fox.

6-27-11 Mothers Brief 662139 The KCSC ruling was appealed by the mother in cause 08-3-08507-8 SEA this is the brief in support of overturning that ruling.

9-27-11 Fathers Brief 662139 This is the fathers response to the above Appeal.

2-13-12 COA Div I Ruling 66213-9 This is Court of Appeals Division I ruling upholding the lower Court findings, this however is a non published opinion so while it can be cited the Judge has discretion as to it’s legal weight.

Bartholomew also conducts a “Sight unseen” Evaluation which he will sometimes calls a Assessment, he admits under oath that he has never conducted one which he did not recommend 12 Months of Mental Health Psychotherapy in the form of DVPT. Here is an example of the likely 100’s he has conducted over his career.

2-20-08 Bartholomew Report Exhibits This is a 9 page report, Bartholomew clearly identifies himself as a Health Care Provider, he draws mental health conclusions if not a full blown diagnosis, he admits the only information he relies on has been provided by the Petitioner as part of a DVPO case which by Court Rule forbids the application of any Evidence Rule.

Bartholomew testimony in legal proceedings has very damaging results, even when the Court is provided with contradicting expert testimony many Judges will still give more weight to Bartholomew. Here is a transcript of a oral KCSC ruling.

8-07-12 Dean Lum Oral Ruling Transcript This is a transcript of the Oral Ruling made in cause number 08-3-05355-9 SEA, it is long but it clearly depicts the bias KCSC Judge Dean Lum has.

Although based on the degree or public exposure over the last couple years and the publication of relevant case documents, Bartholomew’s actual in Court testimony has been reduced, he simply does not like to be questioned on his professional ability.

Previously compiled document which contains many emails, complaints, and other relevant matter.

2011 Doug Bartholomew Handbook Chapter 1

The Civil high conflict dissolution cases are the real gravy train for DB but he does mix it up with some serious criminals one notable Bartholomew client made his way to become the poster abuser for sentencing reform.

Gary Ruffcorn at the Washington Attorney General Website

2007 Kanouse Ruffcorn Tort

Gary Ruffcorn Part A

Gary Ruffcorn Part B

Doug Bartholomew to David Martin Gary Ruffcorn This speaks volumes, the total disregard for his role, DB should be ashamed of himself.

Department of Health Complaint history through the beginning of 2010. This is every complaint and every investigation on file at the DOH for Bartholomew, except for a couple that were still being investigated into 2010. Active Investigations are not subject to disclosure under the PRA. At some point I will update this when records become available.







2009 Bartholomew Investigation PRR Part 1

2009 Bartholomew Investigation PRR Part 2

2009 Bartholomew Investigation PRR Part 3

2009 Bartholomew Investigation PRR Part 4

This one is the COMPLETE history of a DOH complaint, including everything from start to finish, this complaint took the DOH a year to complete and in the end Bartholomew was not sanctioned

BARTHOLOMEW, DOUG 2009-137532LH_tif-r_pdf-r

8-31-10 DOH Bartholomew Findings

Bartholomew Responds to complaints-

01-12-11 Bartholomew Response to DVPO Complaint

01-14-11 Susan Alexander Letter to DSHS

01-31-11 Bartholomew to DSHS Email Documenting Clock hours

02-08-11 DSHS to Alexander Bartholomew Letter

2-08-11 DSHS Maureen Kelly Bartholomew Investigation Findings

2-08-11 DSHS Maureen Kelly Response

4-27-11 DSHS Bartholomew Complaint Findings

12-09-10 DSHS MK Response to Clarification request

12-15-10 Bartholomew Response to Complaint

Bartholomew resume and professional license applications.

2007 Bartholomew Resume

Doug Bartholomew Resume

4135_001[1] DOH License Applications

4136_001[1] DOH License Applications

4137_001[1] DOH License Applications

4149_001[1] DOH License History

2010 Bartholomew Certification Recommendation letters Recommendation Letters written by Leslie Savina, Dale Todd, Jay Williamson, and Tracee Parker. Remember any friend of Doug’s will likely not be friendly to you.

2010 Bartholomew DSHS Cert Application Letter part2

2010 Bartholomew DSHS Cert Application Letter

4-21-10 DSHS PDR Part A

4-21-10 DSHS PDR Part B

4-21-10 DSHS PDR Special Mention 1

4-21-10 DSHS PDR Special Mention 2

9-07-10 Bartholomew Applications[1] This Document contains most all of his DSHS DVPT Certification Applications, interesting comparison year by year as his previous work hours grows, and his denial of involvement in any civil DV matters, what about the Protection Order his ex wife was granted?

12-26-12 DOR Business License DBAA. Inc Master Business License or UBI

12-26-12 SOS Corporation License DBAA. Inc DBAA, Inc. Corporation Information

Bartholomew Divorce Documents from KCSC cause 96-3-00935-4 SEA these are somewhat dated but it provides more of a long term pattern of this man.

2-01-96 Doug Bartholomew Declaration

2-15-96 Judith Bartholomew Declaration

Bartholomew article from a Oregon DVPT Providers Website


Doug Bartholomew and/or Doug Bartholomew and Associates, Inc.(DBAA) contracts for services. These are a couple years old now so he may have revised them, give him a call for a updated copy (425) 688-0188 or (425) 830-0188. These are some of the most offensive contracts for health care possible, well almost Wellspring is pretty bad as well.

8-2009 db Admission

9-2008 DB Contract Part A

9-2008 DB Contract Part B

9-2008 DB Contract Part C

Bartholomew – Evaluation contract[1]

Bartholomew – Evaluation list of acts of abuse[1]

Bartholomew Home Ownership- It appears to have ended this year, as many American are facing a struggle to hold on to their homes myself included I will not comment except to say based on other financials this loss may be more of a financial decision because of negative equity than that of financial inability to repay, just my .02.

1-09-09 Notice of Trustee Sale Ingraham Road

1-03-11 Notice of Trustee Sale Ingraham Road

7-24-12 Trustee Deed Ingraham Road

12-26-12 SnoCo Ingraham Road Property Detail

Bartholomew interaction with others-

bartholomew letter to Federal Way[1] Think Doug only rubs you the wrong way?

4-06-10 Batholomew email – DB saying please don’t believe everything you read

4-07-10 Batholomew Pooley email – DB Pal King County Probation Officer (CCO) Annette Pooley, nice to have Court employee’s proofread your emails before you send them out

4-07-10 Batholomew Pooley O’shersky email Pooley talking about another DB Pal Jim O’Shersky also a King County Probation Officer aka Community Correction Officer (CCO)

Statute, Rules and the Effect of Common Law

The main focus of this site is to offer a omnipresent view of our Judiciary, but there will be a great deal of information concerning the area of Family Law because it comprises such a large percentage of the average user of the Court.

Family Law in Washington is governed by a combination of Statute, Supreme Court Rules, Local Court Rules, and Common Law or sometimes called Case Law, and the Constitution (both Federal and State).

Each is unique, each is relevant, as a litigant you should have a basic understanding of all.



The most straight forward of them all, the Legislature passes bills which then become laws and are codified by the Office of the Code Reviser and find their way into the Revised Code of Washington. These are for the most part easy to read and understand because they are written in clear and plain language. For the most part Family Law is located in Title 26.

To the lay person going to court and reviewing a RCW dealing with the specific issue at hand and think “I have this in the bag Statute is black and white and there is no way I cannot prevail” only to have the Judicial Officer rule in the opposing parties favor at the hearing. Remember Judges have the power of Discretion and what that means is that if the Judge thinks it is in the best interest of Justice he/she can ignore Statute and barring a Constitutional violation the higher Appeal Courts can or will uphold that ruling.

Think of Statute as a guide, not something carved in stone.



There are several set of Rules to be familiar with, the Supreme Court Rules which there are many but as for most everything in this site is geared towards Civil matters I will try and stay on that line, so Superior Court Civil Rules commonly called “CR” followed by a number (CR60 for example), these are a must know for going into Court. There are Supreme Court General Rules of Application, again many subsections but generally speaking the General Rules GR followed by a number and the Evidence Rules ER followed by a number are ones you should study. Then you will be expected by the Judge to know the Local Court Rules or LCR’s each Court is unique, most if not all Courts will have them published online, find yours and study them, a Local Judge won’t think twice about levying a $500 fine for mistakenly noting a hearing in front of the wrong Judge. Spend as much time as you can learning the rules because- The Judiciary has ruled that Court Rules trump Statute so if there is a conflict between the two Court Rule will prevail, but again the Judge has the power of “Discretion” if it is in the best interest of Justice to veer from them (and yes the pursuit of Justice may be ruling against you).

Think of Court Rules as being written in Ink.


Common Law or Case Law-

Common Law is sometimes called Case Law is it the culmination of previously entered Court ruling on cases which have similarities like subject matter, jurisdiction, or application (interpretation) of Statute or Law. Finding applicable case law for a pro se litigant is much harder, most attorney’s and the Judges have access to fee based services like West Law or Versus Law, but for most the financial commitments required are just not possible, one great fee resource for case law is Google Scholar takes some hunting around but it is a good tool. Some Superior Courts have Law Libraries which are open to the public and you can access the fee based services (computer time and/or copying charges may apply) I find that I do not like spending additional time in Courthouse to be pleasant, other than trolling the halls of the second floor. The power of Common Law can be found in RCW 4.04.010 and BTW this is one of the few Statutes the Judges hold dear to their heart. Chances are that if opposing counsel is raising solid case law arguments you may not prevail.

Common Law is Written in Ink although sometimes invisible Ink


The Constitution-

Both US Constitution and the Washington State Constitution apply always, but generally speaking for Civil matters in Washington rely on the local Constitution, the Federal Courts really go out of their way to defer Family Law Matters back down to State Court, so remember if you think you are going to file a Federal lawsuit against all the people who screwed you in State Family Law case you will scare nobody, the threat of a well publicized CJC complaint or starting your own website has more teeth than threat of Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit, my opinion.

The Washington Constitution is broken up into several Articles, generally I, IV are the ones to really know, and by know I mean you should be able to stand up at a moments notice during court and make the objection with the correct cite “I object your honor Debtors Prison was abolished Article I section 17 Washington State Constitution”.

Constitution is written in Stone.


A well written Motion or Brief will contain elements of all of the above as cited authorities, and typically in a family law case even a pro se litigant can write and argue on par with most lawyers. Family law lawyers really are not very good as a whole, they are successful for many reasons and usually gender of the litigants is the predetermination factor, sorry men.

If you have a lawyer representing you before you just blindly sign the response to OC (Opposing Counsel) motion and email it back take a few minutes and review it, look for case law cites make sure they included at least one Constitutional cite, and make sure what made it onto the declaration are your words.

One of the reasons Family Law has a reputation for defects and poor rulings is because the lawyers who argued similar cases years before you made shit arguments and never were successful at the Appeal Court level and case law evolved from there. Where are those lousy lawyers from 10 years ago now? Chances are today they are the same person sitting in front of you wearing a Black Robe, lousy lawyers make lousy Judges and guess who picks the Judges? Your local BAR Association Judicial Selection Committee (KCBA is here).

After getting clobbered in Court try and focus your frustration at the responsible party, it is not your child’s other parent, it is not your lawyer (well maybe it is in part), it is not opposing Counsel (well maybe it is in part) it is the Black Robe, the system is created by design not happen-chance and the Judges are the architects.

Finally remember a Black Robe does not make a Judge, address all Commissioners as Commissioner they have not earned the right to be addressed as Judge.

City of Seattle Public Disclosure Officer Directory

2012 City of Seattle Public Disclosure Officer (PDO) Directory


2012 City of Seattle PDO List


What do Washingtonians think of their Courts?

Released in 2009 by Washington State University “Public Attitudes Regarding the Selection of Judges in Washington State” this is a great read document. I always appreciate others opinions of the Judiciary, mine has become fact based over the last few years but I still look for opposing views in hopes I am wrong.

1-2009 WSU Judicial Approval Study

While there is plenty of Glass half full insights from likely Lawyers or Law Students, the statistics are revealing the public feels there is lots of room for improvement.


For example on page 21-

“It is clear from the results set forth in Table 14 that registered voters in Washington tend to view their judges favorably. Washingtonians tend to believe that their judges are somewhat accountable to the public, they are fair and impartial in their judgments, they can be relied upon to be honest and trustworthy, and they get high marks for being qualified to serve. With respect to negative traits, there is limited sentiment that special interests exercise undue influence and that justice can be bought. However, among the negative traits, the criticism that Washington’s courts are overly “political” tends to strike a chord with Washington’s registered voters. As noted above, a common theme identified in the comments recorded on the current system of nonpartisan elections related to the “excessive political influence” present in the timing of resignations from the bench and the making of interim appointments.”


Well I guess you could look at the percentages in the above light, or I offer this:

When asked if their Judges were qualified? 45% surveyed responded NO

When Asked if Their Judges were Honest and Trustworthy? 41% responded NO

When asked if they were Fair and Impartial? 42% responded NO

When asked if they were Accountable to the Public? 49% responded NO

Are your Judges Controlled by Special Interest? 22% said YES

Are your Judges “For Sale”? 16% said YES

Are your Judges “Political”? 41% Said YES

I know if I take the BAR exam and score a 65% I have failed, if a person only provides truthful responses on 59% of their IRS 1040 they will get audited and maybe prosecuted, and a quarter of the people think you are controlled by someone or some other group in your job performance, you get fired.

My take on this study is that the Registered Washington State Voters who participated gave the Judges a FAILING grade.

The topic of RETENTION VOTING for Judges seems popular, most people do not know what this is, simply on every election every Judge would face a YES or NO vote regardless of a opponent “SHOULD THIS PERSON REMAIN BEING A JUDGE? YES OR NO.” I am a huge supporter of this, this would allow the people to clean house on some bad apples or bad orchards.

At a recent meeting Supreme Court Justice Susan Owens inquired (pleasantly and certainly no offence meant or taken) as to why I attend Judicial meetings or if I was looking for evidence of the evil empire, at the time I really did not have a substantive answer, having mulled it over I conclude the reason I attend such meetings is not to look for BAD Behavior from Judges it is to look for evidence of GOOD behavior because I have plenty of fact based material covering the abuse of office, misconduct under the color of law, and all around out of control actions of Judges from the Superior Court to the highest Supreme Court Judicial Officers.

I already know the BAD Justice Owens I am looking for the Good, still looking however.



The Battle of the Name

On December 20th, 2012 the following notice was delivered to many Judges in Washington State.


Judges and Justices,

This letter shall serve as a formal notice and the only informal official notice you will receive concerning this matter.
For some time now there has been a group who has been calling themselves the Superior Court Judges Association functioning in Washington State in excess of their function and usurping their authority, this illegal behavior has been suborned by some of the highest Judicial Officers in this state, Chief Justice Barbara Madsen, KCSC Judge Laura Inveen, KCSC Judge Deb Fleck KCSC Chief Judge Richard McDermott, Justice Mary Fairhurst, Justice Susan Owens, most all sitting Court of Appeals Judges, and all sitting Superior Court Judges. Many of these Judges have engaged in a concerted effort to extort monies from all 39 Counties in the state all under the color of law, claiming these fees/dues were somehow legitimate.
The law setting forth the association of Superior Court Judges in this state was enacted in 1933 (see attachment) it allowed the Judges to associate and provided for a specific name “THE ASSOCIATION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON” .  
As I have elected to exercise my right to engage in commerce and having selected a legal name I am henceforth stating at no point today or the future will I allow the use of my business name by any third party(s), all entities who are using this name or any name registered to me shall cease and desist any and all use upon receipt of this notice.
As the list of potential litigants and witnesses includes all sitting Superior Court Judges, most Court of Appeals Judges from all Divisions, most if not all Supreme Court Justices, and the highest ranking Judicial Officer in the State Chief Justice Barbara Madsen it is safe to say the actions of this group who is illegally using and interfering with my rights has conflicted the entire Washington State Judiciary.
Following this formal notice I will be informing the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission of the possible illegal past behavior by this group, the following Washington State agencies DOL, DOR, SOS will be notified. Response will be swift and positive to any attempt of continued use or any State officer using their position to influence any other agency or officer to their personal benefit (influence pedaling or abuse of office for personal gain). A long and protracted trip to a building located on Stewart Street downtown Seattle and interrogatories, admissions, subpoena’s for production of likely 1000’s of pages of documents, depositions discovery of 300-500 or so Judicial officers, AOC staff, BJA members, CJC members, WBAR directors, Lobbyists, legislators, and not to leave out a woman named Barbara Jo Erricson.
Please take heed of this notice, to ignore it will be at your own professional peril from this point forward.
Happy holidays.
With all respect due,

Christopher J. Hupy, Principal

Superior Court Judges Association
PO Box 12655
Everett, Washington 98206
I will update this once their official response comes.

Michael La Rosa Murders Another Case of King County Judicial Failure

Shortly after arriving in Seattle Michael La Rosa got into trouble with the law, a Domestic Violence case, his girlfriend whom he met online, was the reason he had relocated to Seattle from Florida. From the very first interaction with Law Enforcement and the Judiciary the warning signs were blindingly clear, but he was simply passed through the system as just another person needing mental health care.

2-02-09 Seattle Muli MLR case 532087 Charges

2-02-09 Seattle Muli MLR case 532087 docket hearings

2-02-09 Seattle Muli MLR case 532087 docket

10-31-08 Seattle Muni MLR Case 529259 Charges

10-31-08 Seattle Muni MLR Case 529259 docket hearings

10-31-08 Seattle Muni MLR Case 529259 docket


Here are the Seattle Police Departments Incident Reports concerning La Rosa, these leave little doubt that La Rosa needed help.

Hupy PDR item _2[1]

Hupy PDR item _3[1]


In October 2010 he was sent to Wellspring Family Services ordered to attend and complete the DSHS Certified Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment program offered. Gary Sarozek LMHC conducted a required Clinical Intake as required by WAC 388-60-0165. Sarozek was under the supervision of Wellspring DVPT director Mark Adams LMHC at the time.

2-09-10 Wellsprings Confidentiality Wavier

Gary Sarozek was previously sanctioned by the Washington DOH for misconduct-




As part of a Petition for Protection via a Domestic Violence Protection Order the following note was included in support of the petition

*I will offer caution in reading this as it is very graphic and disturbing*

2-10-10 Exhibit Attachment for Petition DVPO

On February 24th, 2010 KCSC Commissioner Megan Sassaman signed and entered a order in cause number 10-2-00459-9 SEA.

2-24-10 DVPO LaRosa Meg Sassaman

Commissioner Sassaman on her own volition made some medical determinations for the clearly troubled La Rosa (who did not appear at this hearing) Ssassaman diagnosed La Rosa with some type of disorder which would benefit from DVPT Counseling she deemed the program at Wellspring was his only choice, Sassaman has a long history with WS and thought a Social Worker qualified professional would be appropriate for a AXIS I suffering litigant would be the best, she further diagnosed La Rosa would benefit from “remaining on all prescribed medications” taking his “medications.

The record now indicates Wellspring FS provided treatment to La Rosa from October 2010 until Mach of 2011 when he was discharged for “threats to harm others”, not clear if La Rosa or the demons who told him to commit these bad acts were responsible.

Moving forward to November 2011 and La Rosa was in front of a grocery store on capital hill area of Seattle when he pulled out a camp hatchet and struck Joseph LaMagna in the head approximately 10 times killing him almost instantly. A group of small school children witnessed this attack. Seattle Police Department was on scene within minutes finding La Rosa nearby and confused stating LaMagna had given his sister a STD.

SPD arrested him and also began to investigate him for another Hatchet killing from the night before, Dale Holmes, he was charged with both murders.

Charging Document

La Rosa was moved into DSHS Western State Hospital when it became clear to the staff at King County Jail he was a danger to himself and/or others. Michael was diagnosed in youth as suffering from at least one DSM IV AXIS I disorder, Schizophrenia.

Back to King County Superior Court case 10-1-10060-8 SEA it has been dragging through the court between KCSC Judges Theresa Doyle and Judge Ronald Kessler acquiescence to the repeated motions by King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg’s Deputies to make a finding of competency, when in the face of each and every PhD level professional diagnosing AXIS I disorders.

02-02-11 Findings of Fact La Rosa Competency

02-02-11 Michael La Rosa Psych Evaluation


December 2012 Judge Ronald Kessler signs a Motion for Acquittal, included in the Exhibits in support of Acquittal is a full and complete picture of the past and present mental health state painting a clear picture of the misconduct of Sassaman, Sarozek, and Adams to name only three.

12-13-12 Clerks Minutes

12-13-12 Exhibits to Motion for Acquittal

12-13-12 Motion for Acquittal

12-13-12 Notice Ineligibility to Possess Firearms

12-13-12 Signed Order Motion for Acquittal

12-14-12 Clerks Minutes

12-14-12 Right to Appeal


What the system, King County Superior Court, Department of Corrections, King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg knew about Dangerous Mentally Ill Offenders

DMIO -WorkgroupFinalReport


Here is a King County Television Story about Mental Health Court


KCSC Judge James Doerty Lawsuit

In our legal system there is a doctrine called the Appearance of Fairness, it is spelled out in statute several places and Judicial Cannons require it. but it is by implication included in every single one, it is fundamental in application. Case law on this can be found in the 1972 case of State v. Madry, in which the following decision was offered by the Washington Supreme Court:

“—at 70: The appearance of bias or prejudice can be as damaging to public confidence in the administration of justice as would be the actual presence of bias or prejudice”

“Next in importance to rendering a righteous judgment, is that it be accomplished in such a manner that no reasonable question as to impartiality or fairness can be raised”

So in following this doctrine (or NOT), Judge Jim Doerty filed a lawsuit in and through his legal counsel (Mark Leemon 12-25-12 WBAR Lawyer Directory Mark Leemon and Craig Vernon 12-25-12 WBAR Lawyer Directory Craig Vernon) in King County Superior Court, cause number 12-2-25288-2 SEA 12-25-12 KCSC Doerty Docket. The case has been assigned by Presiding Judge Richard McDermott to be ruled on by Judge Julie Spector.

9-04-12 KCSC Complaint Exhibit A

9-04-12 KCSC Exhibit B

9-04-12 Exhibit C

9-04-12 Defendants Notice of Removal

9-05-12 Letter from US District Court Clerk

9-11-12 Defendants Anwser to Complaint

9-12-12 US District Court Cover Page


To illustrate this defect an examination of the hierarchy at KCSC:

12-25-12 KCSC McDermott Employee Detail

12-25-12 KCSC Inveen Employee Detail

12-25-12 KCSC Doerty Employee Detail

12-25-12 KCSC Spector Employee Detail

Judge Dick McDermott is the Chief Presiding Judge and according to the employee detail he is the only Judge in King County who reports to the People who elected them, Judge Laura Inveen Chief Civil Judge reports to Dick, Judge James Doerty reports to Dick, Judge Julie Spector also reports to Dick.

One big happy family down there and clearly the defendants in this action stand little chance at equal protection under the law.

Judge Doerty had options as the documents indicate, he could have simply filed this action in Federal Court (about three blocks from the King County Courthouse) he could have filed it in Snohomish County or Pierce County as the Court Rules allow, but he didn’t he used his position of authority to send a clear message to the defendants “pay up because me and my friends will take care of this case”. Threats and Intimidation, sounds like the Doerty I know.

Now moving off the massive procedural defects present we examine the substance of Doerty’s lawsuit; He was so physically and mentally damaged he feels entitled to some (large) financial settlement, he states he was on constant medication (assuming pain relief medication like OxyContin – Street name Oxy or OC which is best described as synthetic Heroin) for the pain, Found it hard to function at his Job (he still ruled on years and years worth of cases) many Seattle Lawyers I have spoke to about Doerty call him “unpredictable at best” even stating “He is the most overturned Judge in the State at the Court of Appeals”.

So we have a sitting Judge admittedly on constant drugs, perpetual pain to the degree he found it hard to function at his job, and suffering from ongoing and serious emotional damage.

I have first hand experience with Doerty and not as a litigant as he has never ruled on any case which I was a party, if I were to describe him I would say out of control, biased and unaware of his professional responsibilities, criminal, totally devoid of any personal acceptance of accountability, just an angry man.

The good news is that Doerty is set to retire from the bench within the next couple weeks, the bad is that he will do so getting a full judicial retirement salary.

Another example why the Judiciary should not be self governing nor self policing.

2012 Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment Recidivism Study

In late April 2012 Dr. Tom George who works for the Washington State AOC as a researcher completed a study on recidivism rates and Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment (DVPT). His study had a large pool to work from, he had seemingly unlimited access to the AOC JIS and/or SCOMIS databases and likely the WSP database as well. All in all not a bad study.

TomGeorge (2012) DV Sentencing Conditions Recidivism_FINAL_042412

Dr. George concludes that after completing Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment, the average participant has a higher risk of committing a future act of Domestic Violence than a person who was NOT subjected to 12 months of DVPT Psychotherapy. I spoke to a world renowned expert on Domestic Violence shortly after this report was uncovered asking his opinion, his response “this is nothing new, we (DV Industry) know this already and have for years, the fundamental way society has addressed DV treatment is flawed…”

Interesting background as to how this report came to be, the Washington State Office of Financial Management applied for a Federal grant to study DVPT recidivism, oddly enough money from the Feds came through but the OFM had no means to carry out such a study (one could question why they applied for funding when A: OFM staff could not carry out the study B: Office of Financial Management seems a little removed from DV Perpetrator Treatment recidivism and efficacy rates) so after taking a Agency Administrative cut of the VAWA Gravy money they shipped it off to the Washington Courts for completion of the study, not to question every decision made here but why did Department of Health not get this study?, Dr. Tomas George was assigned the task.

In all fairness the study went to a Supreme Court created arm of the AOC, the Washington State Center for Court Research , fancy name but all of them are on AOC payroll and all serve at the pleasure of Chief Justice Barbara Madsen.

I would like to mention that as of December 2012 this study no longer appears at the WASCCR website of publications.



Superior Court Commissioners

Many who have gone to Superior Court have found themselves in front of what is called a Court Commissioner, many mistakenly think this person is a Judge but that is not the case.

A Superior Court Judge is a elected position in this state and must run for office every four years, after each election must affirm a Oath of Office which is Constitutionally required to be filed at the Secretary of State Digital Archives  and generally available for online public inspection, but always is available for inspection in person. A Commissioner is Appointed by a Judge and serves at the pleasure of the appointing Judge.

A Commissioner is Constitutionally allowed under Article IV Section 23-

SECTION 23 COURT COMMISSIONERS. There may be appointed in each county, by the judge of the superior court having jurisdiction therein, one or more court commissioners, not exceeding three in number, who shall have authority to perform like duties as a judge of the superior court at chambers, subject to revision by such judge, to take depositions and to perform such other business connected with the administration of justice as may be prescribed by law.

The Washington Supreme Court in many case has ruled that any position set forth in the Constitution is dictated by those terms, ie that no authority (the legislature/executive/Judiciary) has the power to change the conditions spelled out in the Constitution, as it is both the maximum and minimum qualifications/standards. There exists a mechanism to modify the founding document via Public Vote for a Constitutional Amendment (which by design is a difficult process) or a super majority vote of the legislature. No Legislative act like a RCW, executive decree, or say a judicial Court Rule can override the specifics set forth in the Constitution.

Given the above statement on the power of the Constitution the lay person may say “Section 23 does not mention anything about a Oath of Office requirement, so the Commissioners are not required to subscribe one” this would not be the case because the appointing power (a Superior Court Judge of that County) is required to take a Oath and not requiring the appointed position would in fact give the appointee more power than the Judge, so while this fundamental requirement is not mentioned it is by application required.

Section 23 is quite specific in a very important area “not exceeding three in number”. Three Superior Court Commissioners per County is the maximum allowed, in writing this I visited King County Superior Court Employee Directory Page  and found 11 active Commissioners listed and two additional vacant positions, one could deduct from this that because it is impossible to know which of the 11 are the allowed 3 that all of them would be disqualified for total lack of Jurisdiction.

In a recent Public Records Request (11-29-12 KCSC PRR email to 10-26 Request), to KCSC Chief Presiding Judge Richard McDermott seeking ALL appointments of all active Court Commissioners in response I was provided the following, Oaths of Office and Appointments

Oath of Office – Commissioners001.pdf

Commissioner Appointments

In reviewing the Commissioner appointments the following is revealed-

Commissioner Leonid (Les) Ponomarchuk was appointed by Judge Bobbe Bridge in August of 1998, he has never been reappointed since then. Problem here is that in 1999 Judge Bridge was appointed to the Supreme Court by then Gov. Gary Locke, Commissioner Ponomarchuk could not have served at her pleasure after that date.

The same scenario plays out over and over with all of the KCSC Commissioners listed, they serve at no Judges pleasure, and all but one have expired appointments.

Still remaining is the use of a Pro Tempore Commissioner, what the hell these are I don’t know, absolutely no mention in the Constitution for pro tems, Judges yes Commissioners no.


More to come on this story….

Washington State Constitution

Washington State Constitution in a handy PDF format, this is a must read for anyone going into a Courtroom, Objections based on statute/RCW are fine but the real winning arguments are those based on Constitutional Objections.

Article I – Declaration of Rights


Article IV – The Judiciary



Contact Information for All Courts in the State of Washington

The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) Publishes a Statewide Judicial Directory it is a decent resource to locate that hard to find email address of most Judges in the State of Washington-


2012 AOC Court Directory

2014 AOC Court Directory

Public Records Act and The Association of the Superior Court Judges of the State of Washington

Early in 2012 a series of Public Record Requests were submitted to a group calling themselves the SCJA, so please don’t get confused I did not send these to myself. Their response goes from “A PDR what is this? We have never received a Public Disclosure Request” to “Yea we will have to look into that” to “Your request is onerous and we have been flooded with requests from other parties so you do not get anything”.

This group, who technically and legally does not exist, claimed Judicial Immunity from the Public Records Act, while I sought a administrative appeal no response was made by them.

A group who has charged $1000 fee to each county for every Judge and $500 for every Commissioner ($275,000 to $350,000 total each year), that maintains no business licenses, no address other than that of the AOC in Olympia, can produce no record of ever having purchased even basic office supplies, makes rules which affect the public, holds countless secret meetings (in violation of the Open Meetings Act), claims as a whole Judicial Immunity from the PRA even though Washington State Constitution does not provide for a Unified Judiciary, accepts public funds in the form of full time staffing provided by the AOC/Chief Justice Barbara Madsen, does not pay taxes or even report income to the IRS as required via a Form 990, and finally hires a $100,000 a year Lobbyist Tom Parker to lobby against the will of the people at the legislature.


2-12-12 Email PDR SCJA Number One

2-12-12 Email PDR SCJA Number Two

2-16-12 Email Response Judge Inveen PDR

2-16-12 Judge Inveen 5 day PDR Response

2-17-12 Email Response from Greg Howard

3-08-12 Email PDR SCJA Number Four

3-08-12 Email PDR SCJA Number Three

3-09-12 Email PDR SCJA Number Five

3-09-12 Limited Response to SCJA Letter

3-09-12 PRR SCJA Email

3-09-12 PRR SCJA Inveen Letter

3-20-12 PRR SCJA Email

3-20-12 PRR SCJA Inveen Letter

7-02-12 SCJA Matheson Letter


It appears that my path of redress has been cut off here, as it would be unlikely that my fate would be any different than Barbara Jo Fulton’s seeking relief in any Superior Court in this State.

Just another example of civil rights being denied by our out-of-control Judiciary.

Helpful Links-

Here is a list of websites I use almost everyday, pro se litigants should take note of all of these you will need them-

Google Scholar -Research Case Law, try searching by RCW number or specific phrase “elder abuse” “Domestic Violence” “Protection Order” etc. Not as good as West Law or a paid service but it is free.

Washington State Constitution – Old but relevant, remember that when considering a appeal of a Superior Court ruling the COA has discretion and is not required to hear a case involving only Statutory (RCW) violations, but as with the Supreme Court Constitutional Violation reviews are mandatory.

RCW Specifically Title 26 Domestic Relations, Title 42.56 Public Records Act, Title 2 Courts and the Judiciary, Title 42.20 Misconduct of Public Officers.

Washington Courts – Specifically the Docket search function, on the left side of the page click “Search Case Records” on the next page click “Name Search” I find the case number search function to be hit or miss. Court Rules section is a must use for anyone who is in Court, if you don’t know the rules life can be hard. Generally the CR (Civil Rules) rules for Superior Court will be the one you need to know and to a lesser degree for everyday Courtroom visits the GR (General Rules) apply.

WBAR Lawyer Directory Look up your favorite lawyer, get business address, contact information, email address, also can be used to look up Judges and often the Judges Bailiff is a BAR member. Always a good idea if you are talking to some State or Local employee to check and see if they are a lawyer.

RPCRules of Professional Conduct, these are the rules which govern the conduct of lawyers. If you deal with a lawyer either as a client or face opposing counsel in Court matter you need to know these rules well, can’t hold any professional accountable if you do not know the rules. 

CJC – Think your Judge violated a Judicial Cannon or two these are the people who you need to report it to. Once you report the complaint there likely will be no more information from them as there is confidentiality built in for the Judges and CJC is immune from the PRA. That being said if you file your initial CJC correspondence (Complaint) on your family law case it is always in a handy place to reference it.

Judicial Cannons – These are the only rules of conduct a Judge must adhere to, and to answer the question “My Judge made a shit ruling can I file a complaint against him?” you can but it is a waste of time, bad rulings are just that and you would need to seek redress from a higher court. A good CJC complaint is a clear violation of a Cannon so you need to know what they are, read them.

DOH – Department of Health Provider Credential Search, it seems like the Family Law Commissioners and Judges have a overactive desire to Order specific personal health care services, DVTP for example is Mental Health Psychotherapy it is Health Care and it is governed by HIPPA. Make sure your provider is licensed by DOH, many GAL’s and Parenting Plan Evaluators are not licensed, if they are not regulated then they cannot make mistakes, insist on at a minimum of a DOH license and a PhD level is highly preferred.

RCW Title 18 – This is the section that covers Health Care providers and/or misconduct. Several sections RCW 18.19 covers counselors, RCW 18.120 covers regulation, RCW 18.122 Uniform Administrative Provisions (this is the nuts and bolts of how your provider can appeal any complaint findings), RCW 18.130 this is the one you should pay close attention to because this spells out what actionable health care provider misconduct is. A complaint saying “My Health care provider is a hack..” is not is a non starter, but “my DVPT provider subjected me to Mental Health Psychotherapy without a diagnosis I suffer from a medical condition which would benefit from said treatment regimen” has teeth under Standard of Care and Ineffective and Unnecessary Treatment. Remember DV Perpetrator is not recognized by the DSM IV as a “condition” as such no legitimate cure exists.

RCW Title 19.86 – Unfair Business Practices – Consumer Protection Act, the CPA does subject Health care worker and Social Workers as long as they are licensed by the DOH, RCW 18.320.020 spells it out. Another great reason to demand any and all so called “professionals” Court Ordered onto your case be properly qualified and licensed. Demand it as a minimum settle for nothing less, you and your family deserve it.

Washington State Court Pattern Forms If you are still running on the Hamster Wheel and litigating your case the Courts generally require the use of their specific forms, all (or most all) required forms are listed at the AOC in a downloadable format so you can populate the form on your computer.

WAC 388-60 – The only rules which apply to Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment Programs, weak and unenforced by the DSHS. DSHS DVPT program Manager is Maureen Kelly her emails are and, her phone number is 360-902-7901 she rarely answers her phone so expect to leave a message. DSHS devotes 1/2 of one employee per month to the management of the DVPT programs. She is under supported, under qualified, and generally a worthless resource but I do not want to predispose anyone’s opinion so judge for yourself.

King County Recorders Office – Great resource for looking up property transactions, typically in a dissolution case everything for the last 7-10 years will be brought up, and if you were removed from the house via a DVPO you can bet opposing counsel will be sending you 75 pages of interrogatories to frustrate you because you can’t get back into the house to get the document to satisfy the discovery request, and if you don’t produce likely a contempt finding or abusive use of conflict both are terrible and will haunt you for years. Also can be used to identify title real property assets, foreclosure information and marriage licenses. Most documents are online and can be downloaded for free, Hum makes you wonder why the Court Clerk Documents are all fee based.

Snohomish County Recorders Office – Same as King County above, just for SnoCo.

Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys – This Association has some useful information, this link provides some information on utilization of search engines, this Link has a somewhat small listing of Manuals including the 2012 Prosecutors’ DV Manual, 2012 WAPA KCPAODV Manual 12.11.14.

Acronyms and Links- Lots of Letters in the Judicial World

It can be confusing keeping track of all the acronyms used by the Judiciary so here is a list, I am sure this will be a ongoing updated post, so check back.


10.99 – RCW Criminal Domestic Violence

26.50 – RCW Title 26.50 Family Law Domestic Violence

191’s – RCW 26.09.191 Restrictions in Permanent Parenting Plans

388-60 – WAC Which applies to the DV Perpetrator Treatment

1983 – Subsection 1983 Title 42 United States Code / Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights

1985 –Subsection 1985 of Title 42 United States Code / Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights


ABA – American BAR Association

ACLU – American Civil Liberties Union

ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act

AG – Washington State Attorney General

AOC – Administrative Office of the Courts

Assessment – A quasi clinical evaluation absent measurable forensic protocols and normally conducted by a Social Worker level Professional

ATJ – Access to Justice Board

BJA – Board of Judicial Administration

BPD – Borderline Personality Disorder

CA – DSHS Children’s Administration

Cannons – Judicial Cannons (Codes of Conduct)

CJC – Commission on Judicial Conduct

COA – Washington State Court of Appeals

CPA – Consumer Protection Act (Yes DOH Licensed Health Care Workers are Subject to the CPA

CPS – DSHS Department of Child Protection Services

CR – Washington State Supreme Court Civil Court Rules

DAWN – Domestic Abuse Women’s Network

DJA – Department of Judicial Administration

DMCJA – District and Municipal Court Judges Association

DOC – Washington Department of Corrections

DOH –  Washington State Department of Health

DOJ – United States Department of Justice

DOL – Washington State Department of License

DOR – Washington State Department of Revenue

DSHS – Washington State Department of Social and Health Services

DSM – DSM IV TR Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

Duluth – Duluth Model of Domestic Violence

DV –  Domestic Violence as defined by RCW 26.50.010

DVPO – Domestic Violence Protection Order 

DVPT – Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment

EDVP – Eastside Domestic Violence Program

ER – Washington State Supreme Court Evidence Rules

Evaluation – A clinical Evaluation with measurable Forensic Protocols normally conducted by a PhD level Professional

FBI – Federal Bureau of Investigation

FCS – Family Court Services

General Fund – Refers to Washington State Government General Revenue Fund

GJC – Gender and Justice Commission

HHS – US Department of Health and Human Services

HIPAA – Health Insurance and Portability Accountability Act of 1996

JIS –  Judicial Information System

KCBA – King County BAR Association

KCBA FLS – KCBA Family Law Section

KCCADV – King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence

KCSC – King County Superior Court

KingCo – King County Washington

Kool-Aid – Term referring to blindly following instructions to your own personal detriment sometimes called “drinking Kool-aid” or “Kool-Aid drinkers” when referring to others.

LCR – Local Court Rules

LMHC – Licensed Mental Health Counselor 

MD – Medical Doctorate Degree / Physician

Meretricious – A Term Created by the Court referring to a Stable and Committed long term relationship, recently has been replaced by the term “Loving and Committed Relationship” in essence “Common Law Marriage”  

MSW – Masters Degree in Social Work

NBCC- National Board of Certified Counselors

NCO – Criminal No Contact Order

NWADVTP – Northwest Association of Domestic Violence Treatment Professionals 

OCLA – Washington Office of Civil Legal Aid

OCVA – Washington Department of Commerce- Office of Crime Victim Advocacy 

OFM – Washington State Office of Financial Management

OJA – Office of Judicial Administration

OVW – US Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women

PAS – Parental Alienation Syndrome

PD – Police Department

PDC – Public Disclosure Commission

PDO – Agency Public Disclosure Officer

PDR – Public Disclosure Request

PhD – Doctorate Degree Level

PLB – Washington BAR Practice of Law Board

Power and Control Wheel – Part of the Duluth Model

PRA – Washington State Public Records Act

PRR – Public Records Request Agency Response

RCW – Revised Code of Washington State

RO – Restraining Order non DV related

RPC – Lawyer Rules of Professional Conduct

SCOMIS – Superior Court Management Information System

SLL – Washington State Law Library

SnoCo – Snohomish County Washington

SOS – Washington State Secretary of State

STOP Grant – Federal Domestic Violence Monetary Grant – VAWA Funds 

SW – Social Worker

TCSC – Thurston County Superior Court

Temp Order – Temporary Court Orders put in place at initial filing of legal action. Generally Civil Actions Dissolution, Custody, DVPO, Meretricious

Triangulation – Also Called Parental Alienation Syndrome  

UCCJEA – Uniform Child Custody and Jurisdiction Enforcement Act

VAWA – Violence Against Women Act

WA-AFCC – Washington Association of Family and Conciliation Courts

WAC – Washington Administrative Code

WADOC – Washington Department of Commerce

WADVC – Washington Domestic Violence Commission

WCSAP – Washington Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs

WSCCR – Washington State Center for Court Research

WSIPP – Washington State Institute for Public Policy

WSCADV – Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence

WBAR – Washington State BAR Association

WSSC – Washington State Supreme Court

WSP – Washington State Patrol

Board of Judicial Administration Meetings

The Washington Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) finances monthly BJA meetings, below are the supporting documents for the monthly meeting discussions, previous meeting minutes, and lists of who attended the meeting. Some of these are fairly large (200 pages or so) but there is good reading in them, banking, lobbying this background helps paint the picture of the attempted “unification” of our courts. Questionable lobbying activities.

The Board of Judicial Administration is comprised of members from the Superior Court Level, the District and Municipal Court Level, all three Divisions of the Court of Appeals, the Washington State BAR Association, AOC (Administrative Office of the Courts), ATJ (Access to Justice), the Supreme Court.

These meeting materials provide a seldom seen inside look into what these Judicial Actors are up to-


2-17-12 BJA Meeting Materials

3-16-12 BJA Meeting Materials

4-20-12 BJA Meeting Materials

5-18-12 BJA Meeting Materials

6-15-12 BJA Meeting Materials

7-20-12 BJA Meeting Materials

9-21-12 BJA Meeting Materials

10-19-12 BJA Meeting Materials

11-16-12 BJA Meeting Materials

12-14-12 BJA Meeting Materials

1-23-13 BJA Meeting Materials

3-15-13 BJA Meeting Materials

4-19-13 BJA Meeting Materials

5-17-13 BJA Meeting Materials

7-19-13 BJA Meeting Materials

8-16-13 Meeting Materials

9-20-13 BJA Meeting Material

10-18-13 BJA Meeting Materials

11-15-13 BJA Meeting Minutes

12-13-13 BJA Meeting Materials

1-17-14 BJA Meeting Materials

2-21-14 BJA Meeting Materials

3-21-14 BJA Meeting Materials

5-16-14 BJA Meeting Materials

6-20-14 BJA Meeting Materials

7-18-14 BJA Meeting Materials

9-19-14 BJA Meeting Materials

10-17-14 BJA Meeting Materials

11-21-14 BJA Meeting Materials

12-12-14 BJA Meeting Materials

1-16-15 BJA Meeting Materials

2-20-15 BJA Meeting Materials

3-20-15 BJA Meeting Materials

5-15-15 BJA Meeting Materials

6-19-2015 BJA Meeting Materials

8-21-15 BJA Meeting Materials

9-18-15 BJA Meeting Materials

Board of Judicial Administration – the BJA

The Board of Judicial Administration was created in 1987 to provide direction to the Administrative Office of the Courts.

2012 BJA Bylaws

2012 BJA Members

2012 BJA Rules

Mission Statement BJA

2014 BJA Members


The BJA holds public (for now anyway) meetings once a month, they also hold “secret meetings” after the public one and then the following day, requests for records pertaining to these secret meetings have gone unanswered by the AOC.

2-17-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

3-16-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

4-20-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

5-18-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

6-15-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

7-20-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

9-21-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

10-19-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

11-16-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

12-14-12 BJA Meeting Agenda

1-23-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

3-15-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

4-19-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

5-17-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

7-19-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

8-16-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

9-20-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

10-18-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

11-15-13 BJA Meeting Agenda

12-13-13 BJA meeting Agenda

1-17-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

2-21-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

3-21-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

5-16-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

6-20-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

7-18-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

9-19-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

10-17-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

11-21-14 BJA meeting Agenda

12-12-14 BJA Meeting Agenda

1-16-15 BJA Meeting Agenda

2-20-15 BJA Meeting Agenda

3-20-15 BJA Meeting Agenda

5-15-15 BJA Meeting Agenda

AOC Lobbying

Disclosures made by the AOC to the PDC concerning their lobbying efforts-

1-25-07 AOC L5

1-26-11 AOC L5

1-29-08 AOC L5

1-29-10 AOC L5

1-30-09 AOC L5

1-31-06 AOC L5

1-31-12 AOC L5

4-19-07 AOC L5

4-25-11 AOC L5

4-27-06 AOC L5

4-28-08 AOC L5

4-29-09 AOC L5

4-30-10 AOC L5

7-25-08 AOC L5

7-27-10 AOC L5

7-29-07 AOC L5

10-13-06 AOC L5

10-13-09 AOC L5

10-25-11 AOC L5

10-28-10 AOC L5

10-30-08 AOC L5

7-26-11 AOC L5


Notice the term “private funds” is disclosed, what is this private funds? it is a secret bank account controlled by the BJA members without any of their names on the account however.

Superior Court Judicial Lobbying

Here are some of the required forms as filed by “The Association of the Superior Court Judges of the State of Washington” on record with the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC)

2-14-08 PDC SCJA L3

2-17-12 PDC SCJA L3

2-22-10 PDC SCJA L3

2-23-11 PDC SCJA L3

2-25-99 PDC SCJA L3

2-26-03 PDC SCJA L3

2-26-04 PDC SCJA L3

2-27-00 PDC SCJA L3

2-27-98 PDC SCJA L3

2-28-01 PDC SCJA L3

2-28-02 PDC SCJA L3

2-28-05 PDC SCJA L3

2-28-06 PDC SCJA L3

2-28-07 PDC SCJA L3

3-01-97 PDC SCJA L3

3-02-09 PDC SCJA L3

3-06-09 PDC Email 1 SCJA L3

3-06-09 PDC Email 2 SCJA L3

3-10-09 PDC SCJA L3


Notice on many of these official filings that address listed is the address of the AOC building in Olympia and the group “SCJA” did not legally exist until June of 2012.

What this means is that these lobbying efforts were conducted in contrast to many State laws, and where did the money come from?


DMCJA – District and Municipal Court Judges Association

The DMCJA was authorized by the Legislature as was their older brother the Superior Court Judges but the lawmakers gave them no description as to what the purpose was or mission was. To a large degree the DMCJA has played by the rules, they incorporated, they maintain a UBI license and they pay their taxes (or at least report to the IRS on Form 990).


DMCJA Bylaws

DMCJA Registered Agent Hinchcliffe AOC Lawyer Lookup

DMCJA Statistics

DMJCA SOS Corporation

2004 DMCJA IRS Form 990

2005 DMCJA IRS Form 990

2006 DMCJA IRS Form 990

2007 DMCJA IRS Form 990

2008 DMCJA IRS Form 990

2009 DMCJA IRS Form 990

2010 DMCJA IRS Form 990

Some history on the Lobbying efforts the DMCJA has engaged in over the years-

1997 DMCJA L3

1998 DMCJA L3

1999 DMCJA L3 Amended

1999 DMCJA L3

2000 DMCJA L3

2001 DMCJA L3

2002 DMCJA L3

2003 DMCJA L3.

2004 DMCJA L3

2005 DMCJA L3

2006 DMCJA L3

2007 DMCJA L3

2008 DMCJA L3

2009 DMCJA L3

2010 DMCJA L3

2011 DMCJA L3

2012 DMCJA L3

2012 Melanie Stewart and Associates L2

DMCJA still however is provided at least one full time AOC staff member (public funds diverted for private cause). The AOC claimed authority to violate the Constitution is the legislation creating the AOC-

1957 Legislative Session Chapter 259 Creation of AOC


The Association of the Superior Court Judges of the State of Washington History

Legislative History of the Association of Superior Court Judges-

1933 Legislative Session Chapter 58 SCJA Created

1951 Legislative Session RCW

1955 Legislative Session Chapter 38

1957 Legislative Session Chapter 259 Creation of AOC

1973 Legislative Session Chapter 106

1981 Legislative Sessions Chapter 331

1987 Legislatiive Session Chapter 202 SS 102

1996 Legislative Session Chapter 82

2005 Legislative Session Chapter 182

2005 Legislative Session Chapter 282

All of these sessions are mentioned in Washington RCW Title 2.16 which is the Code Reviser publication.

There are a few mentions of some earlier Legislative Sessions in 2.16 as well-

1889-1890 Legislative Session Pg 344 Section 13. Rules

1925 Legislative Session Chapter 118


The Association was authorized in a very limited manner, unlike the District and Municipal Court Judges Association, providing for the relief from the overcrowded court conditions of 1933 and a mechanism for meetings to conduct the Constitutionally mandated Uniform Court Rules. Each Judge is sworn a oath to the Constitution prior to taking office and upon each re-election to office, these are maintained by the Washington Secretary of State.


Barbara Jo Fulton and the US Department of Justice

In 2010 Judge Steve Warning of Cowlitz County began to suspect something was not adding up in the Check book maintained by the non entity “SCJA” at Key Bank, he suspected maybe $30,000 or so was missing. A Thurston County CPA firm was retained to examine this account and the initial amount of cash missing began to gown into the low/mid six figures, at some point some unknown person reported this crime to the Thurston County Sheriff 3-09-12 PRR Thurston County Sheriff, who referred the case to the WSP, the records for this transfer have been lost both by the WSP and TCSO 3-07-12 PRR WSP 2-25-12 PDR WSP SCJA Ericsson Investigation. The WSP investigated and contacted the FBI who took the case over.

Fulton attempted to conceal her activity by producing a false check register and attempted to explain away the missing cash. The FBI arrested her and the US DOJ filed bank fraud charges against her 5-19-11 Charging Document.

The complete Federal Case documents-

5-26-11 Government Sentencing Memorandum 5-26-11 Memo Exhibit A 5-26-11 Plea Agreement 9-12-11 Barbara Jo Ericsson US District Court Docket

Jenny Durkan DOJ issued a small press release shortly thereafter 9-16-11 US DOJ Durkan Barbara Ericsson.

Bank fraud happened here, no question but how can a non entity be a victim? How can the acquisition of this money be explained?

It is like the CPA who steals his drug dealer clients money and gets caught and convicted but the drug dealer goes right along selling his poison to school children.

Barbara Jo Fulton and Thurston County Superior Court

In 2011 the Superior Court Judges of this State brought a civil action against Fulton, 5-26-11 SCJA Complaint the Thurston County Chief Presiding Judge Carol Murphy assigned the case to herself 5-26-11 TCSC Notice of Assignment, even though she was one of the plaintiff’s (notice on this assignment the parties names have been left off the document), Judicial Cannon 2.11 is crystal clear on this issue, Judge Murphy apparently feeling fairness could not be provided proceeded to assign Thurston County Chief District Court Judge Brett Buckley to the case, she relied upon a CR (Court Rule) to accomplish this likely drawing into question her decision not to have all parties in the action agree in writing to such substitution. No order assigning Judge Buckley appears in the public record of this case. Thurston County Superior Court Administer Marti Maxwell provided this excuse and also acknowledged the actors of TCSC were aware of the violations prior.

9-02-12 TCSC Clerk Betty Gould PRR Response 1 Fulton

9-04-12 TCSC Clerk Betty Gould PRR Response 2 Fulton

8-29-12 TCSC Marti Maxwell Response for Thurston County Commissioners

8-29-12 TCSC Marti Maxwell Response Number 2

8-29-12 TCSC Marti Maxwell Response

8-29-12 TCSC Public Records Response – Thurston County Board of Commissioners

9-04-12 TCSC Clerk Betty Gould PRR Email response

9-14-12 TCSC Clerk PRR SCJA Payments 1009’s

9-14-12 TCSC Marti Maxwell Response for Thurston County


Fulton responded 6-20-11 Fulton Answer after service was perfected 6-03-11 Declaration of Service she clearly appreciated her situation and offed little if any defense. Buckley entered a Judgement 9-16-11 Judgement and Fulton was free to continue her 24 month Federal Prison Sentence.

The only other additional documents which appear on the case file at TCSC-

5-26-11 SCJA Summons 5-26-11 SCJA Filing Fee Reciept 5-26-11 TCSC Case Cover Sheet

The case was short lived by any standard no doubt because Ms. Fulton knew if ALL 279 or so Judges were suing her in their house little defense or protections of her rights could brought.

Some serious questions arise out of this case; Who is the group claiming to be the SCJA? Here are business license searches 2-22-12 DOL SCJA License Search 2-22-12 DOR SCJA Search 2-22-12 SOS SCJA Corporation Search showing no such Association or Business by that name Existed in the State. The Association of Superior Court Judges was in 1933 created by a Legislative act with a specific name “The Association of the Superior Court Judges of the State of Washington” 1933 Legislative Session Chapter 58 SCJA Created. How was a non entity allowed to bring a lawsuit against a common citizen? When it is brought by the Judge hearing the case in the Court which was home to this Judicial actor.

The questions do not stop there, how was it that this non existent group came into possession of such large sums of money? Why did some of the most powerful Judges in the State like Richard McDermott, Laura Inveen, Teri Eitzen, Steve Warning, Deb Fleck not bother to occasionally balance the single checkbook maintained by non existent group? How did they even open a Bank Account? Whose names are on that Bank Account?

Simply put Ms. Fulton made poor and criminal decisions to divert these funds but to hold her accountable by abusing everything the Judicial system stands for in the process is the real crime.

Administrative Office of the Courts

Creation of the Administrative Office of Courts


1957 Legislative Session Chapter 259 Creation of AOC