Ethics Complaint Mike Fisher

8/3/2019 Ethics Complaint Mike Fisher

1/41

MIKE FISHER EVERETT CITY PROSECUTOR:WASHINGTON STATE EXECUTIVEETHICS BOARD

ETHICS COMPLAINT FORM Case No. ___________________(Assigned by Board)

1. Please name the person alleged to have violated one or more provisions of the states ethics law(Chapter 42.52 RCW), and provide the following information, if known. If you are alleging that morethan one person may have violated the states ethics law, file a separate complaint form for eachindividual.

Name: Mike Fisher Work Phone: (425) 257-8700 Position or Title:Everett City Prosecutor Employing Agency: City of EverettWork Address: 3002 Wetmore Ave Everett Wa 98201

2. Explain why you believe that the individual name above may have violated the states ethics law.Be as specific as possible as to dates, times, places, and actions. Attach additional sheets of paper if thespace provided below is not sufficient.

A) Mr Fisher is prosecuting a case that has an affirmative action & has tricked me into presenting my

whole criminal case when I was filing a motion for the return of my dogs in Superior Court he &

Commissioner Wagonner both let me present my entire case without notifying me that I had 5thAmendment rights to not incriminate myself. I went through the WHOLE case then Comm Wagonner

said that she was going to deny my motion because I had not filed a Motion for Petition but I did,

actually there was 3 or 4 of them I had to give a copy to Everett AC, the prosecutor & drop one in abox for the Commissioner in the Snohomish County Clerks office, trust me I remember it because there

was an attorney there who asked me if I had done all of the above & I said no so he helped me to tell

me where who & when they were supposed to go. Now I know why he was grinning ear to ear.

B) My Fisher is filing absolutely ridiculous Motions in Limine, saying on my blog I had 169 witnesses& was "bragging" about it but then he also attaches my actual witness list of the 23 people I had

narrowed it down to, so... I am not a lawyer but the whole motion seemed frivolous in the fact that he

already had my witness list unless somewhere in there I can sneak in 146 more somewhere somehowthat i am not aware of.

C) he is not providing any where near all of the discovery that has been requested all we arereceiving is badly cut copied 7 pasted records, no lab results & only copies of black & white

photos, most of which are missing & none of them are date stamped

D) he is making statements on his motions like "A cycnical person might have to wonder ifdefendant was keeping her dog alive to garner donations" (I had a terminally ill dog they took

from me & killed) no where does he have proof, of any such thing but he put that on his answer

to petition & after Commissioner Wagonner just looked at me like I was the scum of the earth


2/41

E) Mr Fisher is saying that I can not contact him directly but yet he responds to me in emails,

which is what I used to send out most of my discovery, & other discovery they have asked for,but he won't give me or my attorney the addtl. discovery. ( I am trying to represent myself pro

se but the judge won't let me but that is another complaint)

F) Mr Fisher knows this case has an affirmative defense, he did not file charges against me

until 23days after they took my animals, & once I proved to him his "star" witness was a fraud,

a forger, & mentally unbalanced, & that it was ME not her who fed all the Snohomish Countyprosecutors all of the info to close down the Rene Roske puppy mill because I was also working

on the Kennewick puppy mill at the time. He also knows that I used to rescue dogs from the

Everett Shelter who were all coming out injured, yet he remarks on his motions "Defendantfancies herself some kind of a dog rescuer" evidently the Everett shelter did too for a while until

I made a stink about the injuries on all of the dogs. I have to wonder why I have been to court

over 15 times, the court case has not even commenced yet & again I have an affirmativedefense, numerous professional & character witnesses, so how is that the City of Everett can

afford to prosecute a woman for sleeping in her car with her dogs & cat temporarally, who is

trying to hang on to the last few precious moments of life with her dog at any cost, who hadmedication, who was not suffering, I understand why I am taking this so personally but I am not

sure why the prosecutor is as well. This is malicious prosecution at it's core, I have buttedheads with Everett AC for well over 9 years now, (Explanation included in the complaintagainst Officer Lorelie Trask) Please also note: I am not trying to be fresh by supplying rules

you already know about I am trying to illustrate my reasoning for believing I have a reason to

even file a complaint & which of those rules I believe were violated.

G) I think that Mr Fisher & the entire Everett Judiciary HONESTLY believe they are above the law &have made several statements that they are a 1st classs city & they are not accountable to the

Washington state constitution or it's RCW's when I pointed out that the Everett Municipal Code on

animals is in direct conflict with Washington state RCW's & that Wa Constitutional law states

explicetely that they can not make laws in conflict & he stated they are not bound by those laws, & toprove his point he offered RCW 35.01.010 RCW 35.22.010 RCW 35.22.280 & Everett Municipal Code

6.04.070 to prove his point when I presented the Everett Municipal Code, the Snohomish County Codeof Ordinances, Washington State Ordinance 16.52 & the WAC Title 35... then he charged me with thewhole ENTIRE NEGLECT & ABUSE CODE, So for standing up for myself I am punished even more?

H) It has come to my attention that the City of Everett dropped 3 gross misdemeanor charges against

the lady who is starting all this in exchange for her testimony against me for 1 misdemeanor. It can

now be established that she filed the false complaint against me the day she got the 6 infractions totake the focus off of her.

I) The city has spent well over 100,000.00 so far to prosecute me for a misdemeanor, for which I have

been to court over 30 times now, I filed a Tort Claim against them & they immediately offered me a

plea deal & the only part of the POD that was in bolded letters was the demand that I drop my Tort

Claim. I am including a copy of the Tort Claim I filed with the understanding that I still had many morepoints to make in regards to things they had done wrong, laws they had broken & rules they ignored.

TABLE OF AUTHORITY1)RULE 3.8 SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PROSECUTOR

The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:


3/41

(a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;(b) make reasonable efforts to assure that the accused has been advised of the right to, and the

procedure for obtaining, counsel and has been given reasonable opportunity to obtain counsel;

(c) not seek to obtain from an unrepresented accused a waiver of importantpretrial rights, such as the

right to a preliminary hearing;

(d) make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that

tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense and, in connection with sentencing,disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all mitigating information known to theprosecutor, except

when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by a protective order of the tribunal; (1)theinformation sought is not protected from disclosure by an applicable privilege;

(2) the evidence sought is essential to the successful completion of an ongoing investigation orprosecution; and

(3)there is no other feasible alternative to obtain the information; (f)except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of theprosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from makingextrajudicial comments that have a

substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care

to prevent investigators, law enforcementpersonnel, employees or other persons assisting or

associated with theprosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that theprosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this Rule.Comment

[1] A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate. Thisresponsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendant is accorded procedural

justice and that guilt is decided upon the basis of sufficient evidence. Precisely howfar the prosecutoris required to go in this direction is a matter of debateand varies in different jurisdictions. Manyjurisdictions have adopted the ABA Standards of Criminal Justice Relating to the Prosecution

Function, which in turn are the product of prolonged and careful deliberation by lawyers experienced

in both criminal prosecution and defense. Applicable law may require other measures by the

prosecutor and knowing disregard of those obligations or a systematic abuse of prosecutorialdiscretion could constitute a violation of Rule 8.4.

[2] In some jurisdictions, a defendant may waive a preliminary hearing andthereby lose a valuableopportunity to challenge probable cause.Accordingly, prosecutors should not seek to obtain waivers ofpreliminary hearings or other important pretrial rights from unrepresented accusedpersons.

Paragraph (c) does not apply, however, to an accused appearing prose with the approval of the

tribunal. Nor does it forbid the lawful questioning of an uncharged suspect who has knowingly waivedthe rights to counsel and silence.

[5] Paragraph (f) supplements Rule 3.6, which prohibits extrajudicial statements that have a

substantial likelihood of prejudicing an adjudicatoryproceeding. In the context of a criminalprosecution, a prosecutor's extrajudicial statement can create the additional problem of increasing

public condemnation of the accused. Although the announcement of an

indictment, for example, will necessarily have severe consequences for theaccused, a prosecutor can,and should, avoid comments which have no legitimate law enforcement purpose and have a substantiallikelihood of increasing public opprobrium of the accused. Nothing in this Comment isintended torestrict the statements which a prosecutor may make which comply with Rule 3.6(b) or 3.6(c). [6] Like other lawyers, prosecutors are subject to Rules 5.1 and 5.3, which relate toresponsibilities regarding lawyers and nonlawyers who work for or are associated with the lawyer's

office. Paragraph (f) reminds the

prosecutor of the importance of these obligations in connection with the unique dangers of improperextrajudicial statements in a criminal case. In addition, paragraph (f) requires a prosecutor to


4/41

exercise reasonable care to

prevent persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor from making improper extrajudicial statements, even when such persons are not under the direct supervision of the prosecutor.

Ordinarily, the reasonable care

standard will be satisfied if the prosecutor issues the appropriate cautions to law-enforcement

personnel and other relevant individuals.[Amended effective September 1, 2006.]2) 16.52.207 Animal

cruelty in the second degree. (1) A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amountingto first degree animal cruelty, the person knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence inflictsunnecessary suffering or pain upon an animal.

(4) In any prosecution of animal cruelty in the second degree under subsection (1) or (2)(a) of thissection, it shall be an affirmative defense, if established by the defendant by a preponderance of theevidence, that the defendant's failure was due to economic distress beyond the defendant's

control.RCW 16.52.085 Removal of animals for feeding Examination Notice Euthanasia.(3) Any owner whose domestic animal is removed pursuant to this chapter shall be given written noticeof the circumstances of the removal and notice of legal remedies available to the owner. The notice

shall be given by posting at the place of seizure, by delivery to a person residing at the place of seizure,

or by registered mail if the owner is known. In making the decision to remove an animal pursuant to

this chapter, the officer shall make a good faith effort to contact the animal's owner before removal.

***I was NEVER given any notice of any legal remedies available to me, I had to read pretty much theentire state's RCW's WAC's & Everett Municipal Codes on my own to find out(4) The agency having custody of the animal may euthanize the animal or may find a responsibleperson to adopt the animal not less than fifteen business days after the animal is taken into custody. A

custodial agency may euthanize severely injured, diseased, or suffering animals at any time. An owner

may prevent the animal's destruction or adoptionby: (a) Petitioning the district court of the county where the animal was seized for the animal's

immediate return subject to court-imposed conditions, or

(5) If no criminal case is filed within fourteen business days of the animal's removal, the owner may

petition the district court of the county where the animal was removed for the animal's return. Thepetition shall be filed with the court, with copies served to the law enforcement or animal care and

control agency responsible for removing the animal and to the prosecuting attorney. if the court grants

the petition, the agency which seized the animal must deliver the animal to the owner at no cost to theowner. If a criminal action is filed after the petition is filed but before the animal is returned, the

petition shall be joined with the criminal matter.

(6) In a motion or petition for the animal's return before a trial, the burden is on the owner to prove bya preponderance of the evidence that the animal will not suffer future neglect or abuse and is not in

need of being restored to health.

RCW 16.52.207 Animal cruelty in the second degree.

(1) A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amounting to

first degree animal cruelty, the person knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence inflicts

unnecessary suffering or pain upon an animal.(2) An owner of an animal is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not

amounting to first degree animal cruelty, the owner knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence:

(a) Fails to provide the animal with necessary shelter, rest, sanitation, space, or medical attention andthe animal suffers unnecessary or unjustifiable physical pain as a result of the failure;

(4) In any prosecution of animal cruelty in the second degree under subsection (1) or (2)(a) of this

section, it shall be an affirmative defense, if established by the defendant by a preponderance of theevidence, that the defendant's failure was due to economic distress beyond the defendant's control.


5/41

Everett Municipal Codes 6.04.070 Prohibited conduct.

C. Offenses Relating to Cruelty. It shall be unlawful for any person to:

2. Under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty as defined in RCW 16.52.205, fail

to provide an animal with sufficient good and wholesome food and a constant source of clear potable

water, proper shelter and protection from the weather, veterinary care when needed to prevent

suffering, and with humane care and treatment;RCW 16.52.310 Definition

(d) Provide dogs with easy and convenient access to adequate amounts of clean food and water. Foodand water receptacles must be regularly cleaned and sanitized. All enclosures must contain potable

water that is not frozen, is substantially free from debris, and is readily accessible to all dogs in the

enclosure at all times.

Snohomish County, Washington, Code of Ordinances >> Title 9 - ANIMALS Chapter 9.12 -

9.12.080 - Cruelty to animals.

The following, singly or together, are deemed to constitute cruel treatment to animals. Therefore, itshall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to:

(3) Neglect to provide adequate daily rations of food or water to any animal within his care, custody or

control;

West's Revised Code of Washington Annotated Currentness. Title 35. Cities and Towns. Chapter

35.27. Towns. 35.27.370.Specific powers enumerated Citation: WA ST 35.27.370Citation: West's RCWA 35.27.370 Last Checked by Web Center Staff: 09/2010

Summary:This Washington statute provides that the council of said town shall have power to pass ordinances

NOT IN CONFLICT with the Constitution and laws of this state, or of the United States. Specifically,

the council may regulate, restrain, or prohibit the running at large of any and all domestic animalswithin the city limits, or any part or parts thereof, and to regulate the keeping of such animals within

any part of the city; to establish, maintain and regulate a common pound for estrays, and to appoint a

poundkeeper, who shall be paid out of the fines and fees imposed on, and collected from, the owners of

any impounded stock.Statute in Full:

The council of said town shall have power:

(1) To pass ordinances NOT IN CONFLICT with the Constitution and laws of this state, or of theUnited States;

(7) To impose and collect an annual license on every dog within the limits of the town, to prohibit dogs

running at large, and to provide for the killing of all dogs found at large and not duly licensed;(16) To make all such ordinances, bylaws, rules, regulations and resolutions not inconsistent with the

Constitution and laws of the state of Washington, as may be deemed expedient to maintain the peace,

good government and welfare of the town and its trade, commerce and manufacturers, and to do andperform any and all other acts and things necessary or proper to carry out the provisions of this

chapter.

3. Disclosure. Pursuant to RCW 42.17.310(1)(e), information revealing the identity of persons whofile complaints with investigative agencies other than the public disclosure commission, may indicate adesire for disclosure or nondisclosure if the complainant believes that disclosure would endanger his orher life, physical safety or property. The desires of the complainant govern disclosure. Please indicateyour desire for disclosure or nondisclosure by checking the appropriate box and initialing.

I indicate a desire for disclosure. Initials: B.T.


6/41


7/41


8/41


9/41


10/41


11/41


12/41


13/41


14/41

12. Names, address and telephone numbers of all persons involved in or witness to thisincident:

1) City of Everett Prosecutor Mike Fisher 425- 257- 84062930 Wetmore Ave. Ste. 10-C Everett, WA 98201

2) Commissioner Tracy Waggoner 425-388-3778

3000 Rockerfeller Ave Everett Wa 98201

3) Animal Control Agent Shannon Delgado 425-257-6000333 Smith Island Rd Everett, WA 98201

4) Animal Control Agent Lori Trask 425-257-6000333 Smith Island Rd Everett, WA 98201

5) Animal Control Agent Ingrid Weaver 425-257-6000333 Smith Island Rd Everett, WA 98201

6) City of Everett Vet Lisa Thompson 425-257-6000

333 Smith Island Rd Everett, WA 98201

7) Counseleman Gipson 425-257-87032930 Wetmore Ave. Ste. 9-A Everett, WA 98201

Mayor Ray Stephanson 425-257-71152930 Wetmore Ave. Ste. 10-A Everett, WA 98201

9) James Iles 425- 257- 84062930 Wetmore Ave. Ste. 10-C Everett, WA 98201

13. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of all CITY OF EVERETT employees &

Officials having knowledge about this incident:

AC Officer Delgado (Contact info above)AC Officer Trask (Contact info above)AC Officer Weaver (Contact info above)AC Officer HarnerEverett Police Officer SutherlandCounselman GipsonMayor Ray StephensonCity of Everett Attorney James Iles

14. Names, address and telephone numbers of all individuals not already identified in#12 and #13 above that have knowledge regarding the liability issues involved in thisincident, or knowledge of the Claimants resulting damages. Please include a briefdescription as to the nature and extent of each persons knowledge. Attach additionalsheets if necessary.

15. Describe the cause of the injury or damages. Explain the extent of property loss ormedical, physical or mental injuries. Attach additional sheets if necessary.


15/41

IN LEGAL TERMSUnlawful taking conversion & destrustion as well as forfeiture of personal propertywithout due process of law, and without compensation, by the City of Everett and itsagents under the Color of Law; violation of state and federal laws including 42 USC 1983 by the City of Everett and its agents; violations under Washington state and U.S.

constitutions; race, gender and age discrimination under state and federal laws by theCity of Everett and its agents; discrimination under the federal ADA and parallel statelaw by City of Everett and its agents. Claimaint has suffered unlawful racialdiscrimination and intimidation, as indicated in the attached reports by agents of the Cityof Everett in enforcement of its municipal ordinances. Claimant has suffered severeemotional distress, physical injury and financial damage in the market value and herinvestment in the sentient personalty seized and/or destroyed, transferred or otherwisedisposed of by defendants. The claimant has suffered damages in intrinsic value in a sumto be determined at trial. Claimant/guardian/owner of the animals has suffered severeimpact regarding events leading up to, and since, the animals were detained, injured, or

killed by the wrongful and grievous intentional acts of the City of Everett and its agentsincluding loss of companionship, and emotional distress including mental anguish.Claimant has suffered as a result of unlawful, discriminatory, and intentional policiesand enforcement actions of the wrongdoers in the intrinsic value of the pets. Claimanthas been damaged in that the City of Everett has a standard policy and practice whichviolates the rights of taxpayers and citizens, and others similarly situated, throughunconstitutional and unlawful actions, errors and omissions, which result in theintentional and improper enforcement of its municipal codes and other state and federallaws. As well as outrageous violations of most of our states court rules & codes of

ethics.IN LAYMANS TERMSIn 2002 I moved into the City of Everett with a pit bull terrier & an AC agent harrassedus mercilessly, so much so that I gave my dogs away because I feared for their lives,

because this woman had actually WALKED INTO OUR HOUSE on several occasions

In 2009 I was rescuing terriers from the Everett Shelter that were ALL coming outinjured or maced, just because your city has BSL doesnt give you or any of your agentsthe rights to abuse them, so I complained & surprise they stopped me from pulling aftercomplaints from Ms Trask

In 1/4/2011 Ms Trask came to a residence where I was temporarily residing part time &we had a confrontation once again, on 1/6/2011 she showed up with a warrant & took allof my animals without giving me a citation or giving me a chance to rectify any situationshe saw unfit. She did not leave the warrant or a list of my legal options as required bylaw, because evidently YOU DONT HAVE any such forms. At which point theydisallowed me from coming into see my animals or letting my vet come & check themout further destroying any defense I had as to their health. On 1/11/2011 in violation ofmy cultural & religious beliefs your city vet disemboweled my terminally ill dog after


16/41

killing him they cut out all of his internal organs & PUT STICKY NOTES ALL OVERTHEM. They have also refused to give me back his body, & didnt inform of his deathuntil the next month. They are still withholding the dogs or any visitations with them,they have them farmed out all over the county & wont give me any staus reports soEVERY DAY, EVERY NIGHT I have to wonder if they are dead or alive, safe or not.

Your own codes are directly in CONFLICT with Wa state RCWs & the only responsefrom the City prosecutor was that Everett was a first class city & you made the rules &didnt have to acknowledge the state or US constition either: REALLY??? One also hasto wonder WHY the City of Everett attorney wrote a brief for court defaming me indirect violations of court rules as well as 3.8 Special rules of a prosecutor. Why did hetake time out of his busy city schedule to write a statement about a woman sleeping inher car? So you have taken my property without a forfieture hearing as REQUIRED BYBASHINGTON STATE & CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. You are not above the laws ofthe land you do not make up your own laws as you go along, you are only granted yourvery right to existance by the kindness of the state you so heartily disregard. Ms Trask is

OBVIOUSLY a very prejudiced woman, I put an ad on Craigslist asking for others whohad trouble with her & surprise all of them were ALSO minorities I have been to courton 23 seperate occasions, you have violated about 5 different ConstitutionalAmendments, as well as state law & numerous codes of ethics & if you believe for onesingle solitary moment I will go away & shut up you are absolutely mistaken. I wrote toCounsilman Gipson as well as Mayor Stephenson & both ignored me which I take asDIRECT CONDONEMENT of this behavior. Now as the final blow they havedisallowed everyone on my witness list from rescuing animals from the everett Shelter& just recently killed a puppy who had rescue & sanctuary outside of the county,

showing further your bloodlust for innocent lives with your unconstitutional &antiquated breed specific legislation which I have several agencies looking into, I meanreally: Who kills a puppy to get back at me for complaining about mistreatment atYOUR shelter? Havent YOU noticed that 94% of the time when you seize someones

property & they take it appeals you are always ruled against? Why you continue to breakthe law & disregards RCWs is beyond me, I can send you every one of the case filesfrom the appeals courts f you need a subtle reminder. I have almost killed myself, I hadmyself admitted into a psych ward for this nonsense, those animals were my life, theyhave been with me more than 5 yrs most of them, I am about ready to take this to everynewspaper in this state, to let them know how YOU use & abuse tax dollars & citizens.

Not only did your agents take my animals, & destroy them but the person YOU havechosen to represent YOUR shelter & your city actually laughed at me when I was cryingfor my animals, it is against the law for you to keep me from them but it is your policy.Do you know that the Rutherford Institute is working with myself & my attorney on allof these matters, an institution that gets 1000s of requests every day is taking on mycause because it so blantently laughs in the face of the law & the Constitution that eventhey had to step in & do something, they have a current pool of 15 attorneys that I haveto choose from to take this case, some of which have offered to do it for free


17/41

16. Has this incident been reported to law enforcement, safety or security personnel? Ifso, when and to whom?

No

17. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of treating medical providers. Attachcopies of all medical reports and billings.

I reserve comment on this until this goes to court, to a jury, you will have discovery intime for court though.

18.Please attach documents which support the claims allegations. See Attached..A) 3 DIFFERENT REPORTS STATING THAT I AM A THIN NATIVE AMERICANWOMAN FROM OFFICER TRASK AS WELL AS REPORTS FROM OTHEROFFICERS WHO DIDNT FEEL THE NEED TO DESCRIBE ME AS SUCH & FROMTHE RESPONDING POLICE OFFICER WHO ALSO DIDNT NEED TO POINTOUT MY BODY WIEGHT OR ETHNICITYB) STILL TRYING TO OBTAIN RECORDS FROM MY PAST EXPERIENCES &

HARASSMENT FROM OFFICER TRASK OVER ALMOST A DECADES TIMEPERIODC) NUMEROUS SLANDEROUS EMAILS FROM THE COMPLAINANT ABOUTME & THE RELEASE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT MYSELF & MYANIMALS WHICH WERE NOT TRUED) REPORT FROM OFFICER WEAVER & OFFICER TRASK MAKING FALSESTATEMENTS ATTRIBUTED TO SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT EXIST FOR ATIME PERIOD THAT DID NOT EXISTE) CHARGING PAPERS WHICH SLANDERED ME, & ATTACKED MYCHARACTERF) PHOTOS WHICH WERE OBVIOUSLY SLANTED TO MAKE ME LOOK BAD.(TAKING PHOTOS OF 3 SIDES OF MY CAR & THE BACK & LEAVING OUT THEFOURTH SIDE WHICH CLEARLY SHOWED I HAD SUFFICIENT FOOD &SUPPLIES FOR MY ANIMALSG) FRIVOLOUS MOTIONS OF LIMINE FROM INFORMATION GLEANED FROMMY PUBLC BLOG REQUESTING I BRING IN ALL OF THE 169 PEOPLE WHOOFFERED TO TESTIFY ON MY BEHALF AFTER I HAD ALREADY GIVEN THEPROSECUTOR A WITNESS LIST OF 23 PEOPLE I HAD NARROWED IT DOWNTO

19.I claim damages from the City of EVERETT in the sum of $ 4,750,000FOUR MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS.(which will be itemized shortly before court as well which will also include my list ofdemands/requests)

The Claimant must sign this claim form unless he or she is incapacitated, a minor, or anonresident of the state, in which case it may be signed on behalf of the Claimant by anyrelative, attorney, or agent representing the Claimant.


18/41

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that theforegoing is true and correct.

_________________________________________________________________________________(Signature of Claimant) (Date and place (residential address, City and County)

CC: Counsel, EJN, PDDINSTRUCTIONS FORGeneral Liability Claim Please be advised that improperly filed Tort Claims will be rejected. Before filing a Tort Claim, please read these instructions and the Tort Claim forms intheir entirety. Type or print clearly in ink and sign the Tort Claim form. If you are incapacitated, aminor or a nonresident of the state, a relative, attorney or agent may sign on your behalf. Provide all requested information and any available documents or evidence supporting

your claim, such as medical records or bills for personal injuries, photographs, proof ofownership for property damages, receipts for property value, etc. If the requested information cannot be supplied in the space provided, please useadditional blank sheets so your claim can be easily read and understood. The following are examples on how to complete the Tort Claim Form:1. Smith, Karen Michelle2. 1234 College Way NW, Apt. 56, Seattle WA 981783. PO Box 910, Seattle WA 981784. Same5. (206) 123-45676. 8:00 a.m., August 9, 20047. If the incident that caused the damages occurred over a period of time, please providethe beginning time and the ending time in item 7.8. Washington, Thurston, Tumwater, Campus of South Puget Sound CommunityCollege, Building number 22.9. I-5, Southbound, Milepost 109, near the Martin Way Exit10. Washington State Department of Transportation, Highway11. Smith, Thomas Arthur, 1234 College Way NW, Apt. 56, Seattle WA 98178 (360)456-3456;

Tow Truck Driver, Nisqually Towing12. Unknown13. List all other witnesses having knowledge of the incident in question, with theirnames, addresses, and telephone numbers that are not listed within items 11 and 12. Alsoinclude a description of their knowledge. For example, if your sister was with you, whenthe alleged incident occurred, please include her name, address, telephone number, andindicate she witnessed the incident.14. Please provide all of your medical providers with their names, address, telephone


19/41

numbers, and the type of treatment. If you were treated for a personal injury, pleaseinclude your medical records and bills.15. Please describe the incident that resulted in the injury or damages, specificallyanswering the questions who, what, where, when and why.16. If you reported this incident to law enforcement, safety, or security personnel, please

provide a copy of the report or contact information to the person you spoke with.17. Please provide the dollar amount for your damages, including your time loss,medical costs, property damage loss, etc. This amount should represent your opinion oftotal compensation.

POLICE MISCONDUCT RESOURCE GUIDEWHAT IS POLICE MISCONDUCTPolice misconduct refers to brutality, corruption or other objectionable actions likeIt is a crime for one or more persons acting under color of law willfully to deprive orconspire to deprive another person of any right protected by the Constitution or laws ofthe United States. (18 U.S.C. 241, 242). Color of law simply means that the persondoing the act is abusing power given to him or her by a governmental agency (local,State, or Federal).HOW TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST POLICE MISCONDUCTIf you feel your rights have been violated, make sure to document the incident. Thereis never an excuse for the police to abuse you. Police officers can and do makemistakes. In this respect, they are no different than you or I. And it is for this reasonthat they must also be held accountable when their actions take them beyond theirscope of privilege as a sworn officer of the law. The area of law concerning policemisconduct involves situations like excessive force, false arrest and malicious

prosecution. These are the most common cases that are filed in the Court System. Policeofficers are trained to make split-second decisions under the most stressful of situations,yet it is in those situations where countless people have found themselves victims of

police misconduct. You can file a complaint with the internal affairs department, or a tortclaim with the city or county where the abuse took place. You can write letters to theeditors of community papers; the idea being that this will help bring attentionto theissue, and possibly alert members of your community to what is happening. Its alsoimportant to support your community members when needed. When something happensin your community show up at Board of Supervisors meetings, City Council meetings,and at the Police Commission meetings; they listen when people are in numbers. If youwitness someone being abused by the police, write down as much information as youcan: badge numbers, car numbers, names, and uniform types.BECOME A COMMUNITY ACTIVIST. EDUCATE YOURSELF AND YOURCOMMUNITY ABOUT YOUR RIGHTSYou can take what you learned and then help teach others of their rights. Its important tonetwork with people who have had similar experiences and have community meetings.You can always volunteer at a local organization that is working on these issues and find


20/41

a way to start your own. The more community awareness thebetter.HOW/WHERE TO FILE COMPLAINTSEveryone has the right to access a departments grievance process without harassmentor obstacles. You should be able to pick up a complaint form in person or have it mailed

to you. A complaint can be filed at any time after your incident. You want to keep inmind that there could be a risk of retaliation and also you dont want to do anything toimpede your criminal case and have it result in being played out longer than you wouldwant it to.. Malicious ProsecutionA malicious prosecution claim asserts that the officer wrongly deprived the victim ofthe Fourteenth Amendment right to liberty. To win this type of claim, the victim mustshow four things:1) the defendant police officer commenced a criminal proceeding;2) the proceeding ended in the victims favor (that is, no conviction);

3) there was no probable cause; and4) the proceeding was brought with malice toward the victim. As with false arrest, thisclaim will fail if the officer had probable cause to initiate criminal proceedings.

42.20.040False report.Every public officer who shall knowingly make any false or misleading statement in anyofficial report or statement, under circumstances not otherwise prohibited by law, shall

be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

42.20.050Public officer making false certificate.Every public officer who, being authorized by law to make or give a certificate or otherwriting, shall knowingly make and deliver as true such a certificate or writing containingany statement which he knows to be false, in a case where the punishment thereof is notexpressly prescribed by law, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

42.20.080Other violations by officers.Every officer or other person mentioned in RCW 42.20.070, who shall wilfully disobeyany provision of law regulating his official conduct in cases other than those specified in

said section, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

42.20.110Improper conduct by certain justices.It shall be a misdemeanor for any judge or justice of any court not of record, during thehearing of any cause or proceeding therein, to address any person in his presence inunfit, unseemly or improper language.

42.23.070


21/41

Prohibited acts.(4) No municipal officer may disclose confidential information gained by reason of theofficers position, nor may the officer otherwise use such information for his or her

personal gain or benefit.

42.52.020

Activities incompatible with public duties.No state officer or state employee may have an interest, financial or otherwise, direct orindirect, or engage in a business or transaction or professional activity, or incur anobligation of any nature, that is in conflict with the proper discharge of the state officersor state employees official duties.

42.52.050Confidential information Improperly concealed records.(1) No state officer or state employee may accept employment or engage in any businessor professional activity that the officer or employee might reasonably expect would

require or induce him or her to make an unauthorized disclosure of confidentialinformation acquired by the official or employee by reason of the officials oremployees official position.(2) No state officer or state employee may make a disclosure of confidential informationgained by reason of the officers or employees official position or otherwise use theinformation for his or her personal gain or benefit or the gain or benefit of another(3) Nostate officer or state employee may disclose confidential information to any person notentitled or authorized to receive the information.

42.52.160

Use of persons, money, or property for private gain.(1) No state officer or state employee may employ or use any person, money, or propertyunder the officers or employees official control or direction, or in his or her officialcustody, for the private benefit or gain of the officer, employee, or another.

42.52.330Interpretation.By constitutional design, the legislature consists of citizen-legislators who bring to bearon the legislative process their individual experience and expertise. The provisions ofthis chapter shall be interpreted in light of this constitutional principle.

42.52.460Citizen actions.Any person who has notified the appropriate ethics board and the attorney general inwriting that there is reason to believe that RCW 42.52.180 is being or has been violatedmay, in the name of the state, bring a citizen action for any of the actions authorizedunder this chapter. A citizen action may be brought only if the appropriate ethics boardor the attorney general have failed to commence an action under this chapter withinforty-five days after notice from the person, the person has thereafter notified the


22/41

appropriate ethics board and the attorney general that the person will commence acitizens action within ten days upon their failure to commence an action, and theappropriate ethics board and the attorney general have in fact failed to bring an actionwithin ten days of receipt of the second notice.If the person who brings the citizens action prevails, the judgment awarded shall

escheat to the state, but the person shall be entitled to be reimbursed by the state ofWashington for costs and attorneys fees incurred. If a citizens action that the courtfinds was brought without reasonable cause is dismissed, the court may order the personcommencing the action to pay all costs of trial and reasonable attorneys fees incurred bythe defendant.Upon commencement of a citizen action under this section, at the request of a stateofficer or state employee who is a defendant, the office of the attorney general shallrepresent the defendant if the attorney general finds that the defendants conductcomplied with this chapter and was within the scope of employment.

42.52.900Legislative declaration.Government derives its powers from the people. Ethics in government are thefoundation on which the structure of government rests. State officials and employees ofgovernment hold a public trust that obligates them, in a special way, to honesty andintegrity in fulfilling the responsibilities to which they are elected and appointed.Paramount in that trust is the principle that public office, whether elected or appointed,may not be used for personal gain or private advantage.The citizens of the state expect all state officials and employees to perform their publicresponsibilities in accordance with the highest ethical and moral standards and to

conduct the business of the state only in a manner that advances the publics interest.State officials and employees are subject to the sanctions of law and scrutiny of themedia; ultimately, however, they are accountable to the people and must consider this

public accountability as a particular obligation of the public service. Only when affairsof government are conducted, at all levels, with openness as provided by law and anunswerving commitment to the public good does government work as it should.The obligations of government rest equally on the states citizenry. The effectiveness ofgovernment depends, fundamentally, on the confidence citizens can have in the

judgments and decisions of their elected representatives. Citizens, therefore, shouldhonor and respect the principles and the spirit of representative democracy, recognizingthat both elected and appointed officials, together with state employees, seek to carry outtheir public duties with professional skill and dedication to the public interest. Suchservice merits public recognition and support.All who have the privilege of working for the people of Washington state can have butone aim: To give the highest public service to its citizens.

526 State v. Boehning May 2005 127 Wn. App. 511ANALYSIS


23/41

Prosecutorial Misconduct[1]19 We begin our discussion with an obvious truism: Every prosecutor is a quasi-

judicial officer of the court, charged with the duty of insuring that an accused receives afair trial. State v. Coles , 28 Wn. App. 563 , 573, 625 P.2d 713, review denied , 95 Wn.2d1024 (1981); State v. Huson , 73 Wn.2d 660 , 663, 440 P.2d 192 (1968), cert. denied ,

393 U.S. 1096 (1969). We hold that the prosecutors misconduct in this case violatedthat duty, both in the closing argument and in the presentation of evidence.[2]20 In order to establish prosecutorial misconduct, Boehning must show that the

prosecutors conduct was improper and prejudiced his right to a fair trial. State v.Dhaliwal , 150 Wn.2d 559 , 578, 79 P.3d 432 (2003). Prejudice is established where there is a substantial likelihood the instances of misconduct affected the jurys verdict. Dhaliwal , 150 Wn.2d at 578 (quoting State v. Pirtle , 127 Wn.2d 628 , 672, 904 P.2d245 (1995), cert. denied , 518 U.S. 1026 (1996)).[3, 4]21 Boehning did not object to the prosecutors questioning and arguments below.A defendant who fails to object to an improper remark waives the right to assert

prosecutorial misconduct unless the remark was so flagrant and ill intentioned that itcauses enduring and resulting prejudice that a curative instruction could not haveremedied. State v. Russell , 125 Wn.2d 24 , 86, 882 P.2d 747 (1994), cert. denied , 514U.S. 1129 (1995). In determining whether the misconduct warrants reversal, we considerits prejudicial nature and its cumulative effect. State v. Suarez-Bravo , 72 Wn. App. 359 ,367, 864 P.2d 426 (1994).[5, 6]23 We review a prosecutors comments during closing argument in the context ofthe total argument, the issues in the case, the evidence addressed in the argument, andthe jury instructions. Dhaliwal , 150 Wn.2d at 578 ; State v. Brown , 132 Wn.2d 529 ,

561, 940 P.2d 546 (1997), cert. denied , 523 U.S. 1007 (1998). A prosecutor has widelatitude in closing argument to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence and toexpress such inferences to the jury. State v. Hoffman , 116 Wn.2d 51 , 94-95, 804 P.2d577 (1991). However, a prosecutor may not make statements that are unsupported by theevidence and prejudice the defendant. State v. Jones , 71 Wn. App. 798 , 808, 863 P.2d85 (1993), review denied , 124 Wn.2d 1018 (1994).

134 Wn. App. 907, Sept. 2006 State v. Perez-MejiaDISCUSSIONProsecutorial Misconduct

30 In closing argument, the prosecutor appealed to the jurys passions and prejudices,urging jurors to base a guilty verdict on a goal of sending a message to gangs or taking

part in a mission to end violence, rather than returning a verdict based upon aconsideration of the evidence properly admitted in the case. The majority of thisimproper argument followed a timely objection interposed by Soto-Rodriguezs counsel.The trial court overruled this objection and, thus, no curative instruction was given. Weconclude that the prosecutors improper argument irreparably damaged the fairness ofthe trial and diminishes our confidence in the verdict reached. As a result, Soto-


24/41

Rodriguezs conviction must be reversed and a new trial held.[1-3]31 Prosecutors have a duty to seek verdicts free from appeals to passion or

prejudice. State v. Belgarde , 110 Wn.2d 504 , 507, 755 P.2d 174 (1988); State v.Echevarria , 71 Wn. App. 595, 598, 860 P.2d 420 (1993).7Accordingly, a prosecutorengages in misconduct when making an argument that appeals to jurors fear and

repudiation of criminal groups or invokes racial, ethnic, or religious prejudice as areason to convict. Belgarde , 110 Wn.2d 504 . Likewise, inflammatory remarks,incitements to vengeance, exhortations to join a war against crime or drugs, or appeals to

prejudice or patriotism are forbidden. State v. Neidigh , 78 Wn. App. 71 , 79, 895 P.2d423 (1995).8In closing argument, a prosecuting attorney has wide latitude to draw andexpress reasonable inferences from the evidence. State v. Hoffman , 116 Wn.2d 51 , 94-95, 804 P.2d 577 (1991). However, a prosecutor may never suggest that evidence not

presented at trial provides additional grounds for finding a defendant guilty. State v.Russell , 125 Wn.2d 24 , 87, 882 P.2d 747 (1994) (citing United States v. Garza , 608F.2d 659, 663 (5th Cir. 1979)).

7This principle is one of long standing. Almost three decades ago, our Supreme Courtexplained: In presenting a criminal case to the jury, it is incumbent upon a public

prosecutor, as a quasi-judicial officer, to seek a verdict free of prejudice and based uponreason. As we have stated on numerous occasions, the prosecutor, in the interest of

justice, must act impartially, and his trial behavior must be worthy of the position heholds. Prosecutorial misconduct may deprive the defendant of a fair trial. And only a fairtrial is a constitutional trial. State v. Charlton , 90 Wn.2d 657 , 664-65, 585 P.2d 142(1978).8Federal courts addressing these issues have likewise held that it is improper for a

prosecutor to urge the jury to view this case as a battle in the war against drugs, and thedefendants as enemy soldiers, Arrieta-Agressot v. United States , 3 F.3d 525, 527 (1stCir. 1993), that the constitution prohibits appeals to racial, ethnic, or religious prejudice,United States v. Cabrera , 222 F.3d 590, 594 (9th Cir. 2000), and that it is improper for a

prosecutor to direct the jurors desires to end a social problem toward convicting aparticular defendant. United States v. Solivan , 937 F.2d 1146, 1153 (6th Cir. 1991)(reversing based on prosecutors call to send a message to drug dealers, notwithstandingcurative instruction given by trial court).

125 Wn. App. 895, State v. JungersCourt of Appeals: Holding that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct at trial

by attempting to elicit opinion testimony as to the defendants guilt and by arguingstricken credibility testimony to the jury, and that the trial court erred by denying thedefendants motion for a mistrial based on the prosecutorial misconduct, the courtreverses the judgment and remands the case for further proceedings.Pattie Mhoon , for appellant .Gerald A. Horne , Prosecuting Attorney, and John M. Sheeran , Deputy, for respondent .

1 HUNT , J . Lisa D. Jungers appeals her conviction for unlawful possession of


25/41

methamphetamine. She argues (1) the trial court erred in admitting evidence seizedduring an illegal search of probationer Michael Hodgkins residence, (2) the prosecutorcommitted misconduct in eliciting and arguing inadmissible opinion evidence, and (3)the trial court abused its discretion in denying Jungers motion for a mistrial based on

prosecutorial misconduct. Holding that the search and seizure were legal, we affirm the

trial courts ruling that the methamphetamine was admissible. Holding further thatprosecutorial misconduct required a mistrial, we reverse.ANALYSISPROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT

17 Jungers argues (1) the prosecutor committed misconduct by eliciting inadmissiblecredibility testimony and arguing stricken credibility testimony to the jury, and (2) thetrial court erred by denying her motion for a mistrial based on this prosecutorialmisconduct.A. Standard of Review[1]18 A criminal defendants right to a fair trial is denied when the prosecutor makes

improper comments and there is a substantial likelihood that the comments affected thejurys verdict. State v. Reed , 102 Wn.2d 140 , 145, 684 P.2d 699 (1984). Such is thecase here.

Screws v. United States, 325 US 91, 108 (1945).This section was before us in United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 326, where we said:Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because thewrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law, is action taken `under color of statelaw. Screws v. United States, 325 US 91, 109 (1945). For it was abuse of basic civil and

political rights, by states and their officials, that the Amendment and the enforcing

legislation were adopted to uproot. The danger was not merely legislative or judicial.Nor was it threatened only from the states highest officials. It was abuse by whateveragency the state might invest with its power capable of inflicting the deprivation. In allits flux, time makes some things axiomatic. One has been that state officials who violatetheir oaths of office and flout 117*117 the fundamental law are answerable to it whentheir misconduct brings upon them the penalty it authorizes and Congress has provided.Screws v. United States, 325 US 91, 116-7 (1945) Mr. Justice Rutledge, concurring inthe result. It is not open to question that this statute is constitutional. . . [It] dealt withFederal rights and with all Federal rights, and protected them in the lump . . . UnitedStates v. Mosley, 238 U.S. 383, 386, 387. Screws v. United States, 325 US 91, 119(1945) Mr. Justice Rutledge, concurring in the result. Separately, and often together inapplication, 19 and 20 have been woven into our fundamental and statutory law. Theyhave place among our more permanent legal achievements. They have safeguardedmany rights and privileges apart from political ones. Among those buttressed, either bydirect application or through the general conspiracy statute, 37 (18 U.S.C. 88),[24]are the rights to a fair trial, including freedom from sham trials [including shamCollection Due Process Hearings] ; to be free from arrest and detention by methods


26/41

constitutionally forbidden and from extortion of property [by threat of levy, lien, orlockdown letters] by such methods; from extortion of confessions; from mob actionincited or shared by state officers; from failure to furnish police protection on properoccasion and demand; from interference with the free exercise of religion, freedom ofthe press, freedom of speech and assembly;[25] and 127*127 the necessary import of the

decisions is that the right to be free from deprivation of life itself, without due process oflaw, that is, through abuse of state power by state officials, is as fully protected as otherrights so secured. Screws v. United States, 325 US 91, 126-7 (1945) Mr. JusticeRutledge, concurring in the result. They simply misconceived that the victim had nofederal rights and that what they had done was not a crime within the federal power to

penalize.[30] That kind of error relieves no one from penalty. Screws v. United States,325 US 91, 128 (1945) Mr. Justice Rutledge, concurring in the result.

RULE 3.8 SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PROSECUTORThe prosecutor in a criminal case shall:(a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by

probable cause;(b) make reasonable efforts to assure that the accused has been advised of the right to,and the procedure for obtaining, counsel and has been given reasonable opportunity toobtain counsel;(c) not seek to obtain from an unrepresented accused a waiver of important pretrialrights, such as the right to a preliminary hearing;(d) make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the

prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense and, inconnection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all mitigating

information known to the prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of thisresponsibility by a protective order of the tribunal;(f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extentof the prosecutors action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrainfrom making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening

public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care to preventinvestigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting orassociated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statementthat the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this RuleComment[1] A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of anadvocate. This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendantis accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided upon the basis of sufficientevidence. Precisely how far the prosecutor is required to go in this direction is a matterof debate and varies in different jurisdictions. Many jurisdictions have adopted the ABAStandards of Criminal Justice Relating to the Prosecution Function, which in turn are the

product of prolonged and careful deliberation by lawyers experienced in both criminal


27/41

prosecution and defense. Applicable law may require other measures by the prosecutorand knowing disregard of those obligations or a systematic abuse of prosecutorialdiscretion could constitute a violation of Rule 8.4.[2] In some jurisdictions, a defendant may waive a preliminary hearing and thereby losea valuable opportunity to challenge probable cause. Accordingly, prosecutors should not

seek to obtain waivers of preliminary hearings or other important pretrial rights fromunrepresented accused persons. Paragraph (c) does not apply, however, to an accusedappearing pro se with the approval of the tribunal. Nor does it forbid the lawfulquestioning of an uncharged suspect who has knowingly waived the rights to counseland silence.[6] Like other lawyers, prosecutors are subject to Rules 5.1 and 5.3, which relate toresponsibilities regarding lawyers and nonlawyers who work for or are associated withthe lawyers office. Paragraph (f) reminds the prosecutor of the importance of theseobligations in connection with the unique dangers of improper extrajudicial statementsin a criminal case. In addition, paragraph (f) requires a prosecutor to exercise reasonable

care to prevent persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor from makingimproper extrajudicial statements, even when such persons are not under the directsupervision of the prosecutor. Ordinarily, the reasonable care standard will be satisfied ifthe prosecutor issues the appropriate cautions to law-enforcement personnel and otherrelevant individuals.

RCW 16.52.085.Notice requirements after removal of personal property by authorities is provided inparagraph (3). After removal of animals, notice must be provided by posting, personalservice or certified mail and the owner must be provided written notice of the reasons

for removal in this notice and legal remedies available to the owner.RCW 69.50.505Washington states civil forfeiture act was adopted to protect people from having their

property wrongfully seized by the government. In Guillen v. Contreras (Sup. Ct. EnBanc. No. 82531-9 (9/2010), amicus notes that an owner has the right to resist thetaking of any of his property regardless of market value. Amicus Br. At 8, cf Guillen v.Contreras, Sup. Ct. En Banc, No. 82531-9 (9/9/2010). A citizen has the right to object toseizure, even if temporary, of his personal property no matter the market value.Forfeitures of personal and real property are not favored in the law and very specific

procedures must be followed.by government officials and its agents when seizingproperty, including animals. If statutory procedures are not followed, the property wasillegally seized and a person is lawfully entitled to possession thereof. Unless the seized

property is needed for evidence, the petitioners are not the rightful owners, the propertyis contraband, or the property is subject to forfeiture pursuant to statute, the seized

property must be returned.

RCW 69.50.505(a)(2).Notice must be given within 15 days of seizure. RCW 69.50.505(c). If the property is


28/41

personal property, one claiming an interest in it then has 45 days to respond, and if aresponse is made, a hearing must be held. RCW 69.50.505(d), (e). Washington Statesforfeiture statutes are exclusive. Unless statutory procedure are followed, a Washingtoncourt cannot order forfeiture and must release the petitioners property. A court does nothave inherent authority to forfeit property. See, State v. Alaway, 64 Wn. App. 796, 828

P.2d 591, p. 3 (4/2/92).RCW 16.52.207(4) In any prosecution of animal cruelty in the second degree under subsection (1) or (2)(a) of this section, it shall be an affirmative defense, if established by the defendant by a

preponderance of the evidence, that the defendants failure was due to economic distressbeyond the defendants control.


29/41


30/41


31/41


32/41


33/41


34/41


35/41


36/41


37/41


38/41


39/41


40/41


41/41

Documents

Ethics Complaint Mike Fisher