President of Washington State Bar Association resigns hours before criminal warrant issued

“When honor and the Law no longer stand on the same side of the line, how do we choose[?]”  Anne Bishop

---

On June 23, 2017, Washington State Bar Association’s (WSBA) President Robin Lynn Haynes was notified of pending criminal charges for theft.

Some of you may not have known this since the  Seattle Times (Washington’s most circulated newspaper) assisted the WSBA by not reporting.

In 2015, the Gold Bar Reporter contacted Seattle Times Editor Mike Carter, after having ample evidence that WSBA Hearing Officer Lin O’ Dell was using a convicted killer, Mark Plivilech, to steal from O’Dell’s elderly clients, but instead of reporting on WSBA O’Dell theft and fraud, Seattle Times Editor Mike Carter wrote ” Who cares.”

With no surprise, the biggest story involving WSBA corruption, President of WSBA resigns after her arrest warrant is issued, and the Seattle Times does what any embedded ( reporters who are spoon fed stories to look the other way on behalf of advertisers) journalist would do, not report the real news.

Not only was WSBA Hearing Officer Lin O’ Dell found guilty of stealing from her clients using a convicted killer to harass them inside their homes, the duo also  unlawfully diverted money to Mark Plivilech, a convicted killer, and Lin O’Dell’s fraudulent companies. Companies the duo started so that Lin O’ Dell could transfer client’s money from the elderly person’s trust account to pay Mark Plivilech and mafia friends to make home repairs on elderly clients homes ( many who are over 80 and bed ridden).

In December 2013, Judge Monasmith Steven County Washington found Lin O’Dell guilty of trust embezzlement. The WSBA has yet to take any disciplinary action against O’Dell ( June 24, 2017).

From sources, the WSBA received twelve complaints against Lin O’Dell over the last twenty years for stealing and the WSBA broomed every single one.  An insider from the WSBA said ” it’s common knowledge that lead counsel Linda Eide worked with Lin O’Dell inside the guardian scam” hence why so many complaints were dismissed.

Since 1993, attorney Lin O’Dell has been stealing from Washingtonians, almost all elderly and vulnerable adults. In one case from Pierce County, the Simpson case, the daughter who was caring for her father ended up dead, their house burnt down and a Caboose was stolen by Lin O’ Dell.

Over the last four years, we found at least ten clients Lin O’Dell has been stealing from and committing SSA fraud ( diverting clients SSA funds into her own bank account).  One fact is clear, Lin O’Dell and Mark Plivilech didn’t steal by themselves, they had a lot of help, including one Spokane County Commissioner, one Spokane County Superior Court Judge, one Stevens County Superior Court Judge, and one Dr Zimmerman ( who fled to Denton Texas once we started reporting on Lin O’Dell’s fraud).

However, WSBA Hearing Officer Lin O’Dell didn’t steal without the assistance of the Washington State Bar Association, and the Washington State Supreme Court.

Joe Patrice, a reporter with “Above the Law” wants to know ” What in the World is going on in Washington?”   Joe its simple, the WSBA has been taken over by scammers and fraudsters to further their agenda ( stealing with no accountability).

The 39-year-old Robin Haynes, who last year became the youngest lawyer to hold the President position.   Gonzaga Law School brags that she is a mentor.  This begs a question: Is Ms. Haynes teaching racketeering 101 or how to steal with the assistance of the WSBA?

---

Sadly Ms. Haynes has been replaced by WSBA Brad Furlong who has ties to more WSBA criminals, Geoffrey Gibbs and his co-conspirators Lin O’Dell ( Gibbs and O’Dell scammed taxpayers out of thousands on the Snohomish County Housing Authority scam of Whispering Pines).

Robin Haynes is well connected with Supreme Court Justices Debra Stephens, Barbara Madsen, Mary Yu and Mary Fairhurst. So much so that Haynes funneled public monies to their campaigns.   The next time our readers decided to contribute to Justice for All, think twice.

 

How we know this is simple: Robin Haynes bragged about it on her Instagram account.

Robin Haynes “brags” she is a at a backyard Barbie Q with WA State Chief Supreme Justice Mary Fairhurst. Perhaps Justice Fairhurst has never heard of Judicial Ethics Cannon Rules, Appearance of Fairness?

 

above Robin Haynes and WA Supreme Court Justice

above Robin Haynes and WA Supreme Court Justice Barbara Madsen

above Robin Haynes and WA Supreme Court Justice Mary Yu

---

 

So Joe Patrice, you ask ” What in the World is going on in Washington State? ‘ Well it’s called racketeering, fixing cases, forging and withholding evidence to ensure convictions, fraud, and WSBA elite few members stealing with the assistance of the WSBA Office of Disciplinary Counsel ( Linda Eide and Doug Ende).

Washingtonians need not worry but we’re going to abolish the Washington State Bar Association. They are making criminals out of non-criminals and we must do everything in our power to stop them with as much sunshine as possible.  Stay tuned.

---

If you look at great human civilizations, from the Roman Empire to the Soviet Union, you will see that most do not fail simply due to external threats but because of internal weakness, corruption, or a failure to manifest the values and ideals they espouse.

Cory Booker

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

King County Washington, maliciously prosecuting hundreds of innocent citizens

Those of you who know me know that I value the First Amendment as the greatest gift Thomas Jefferson brought back with him from Europe – more valuable than a Bar license.  Once we lose sight of the only difference between the rest of the World and America-free speech – we are no better.

From my past articles, my readers can assume that I blame the Washington State Bar Association (WSBA), because instead of regulating unethical lawyers who steal money from their clients, as evidenced by convicted frauder and attorneys Geoffrey Gibbs, Lin O’Dell (who was actually caught accepting bribes from former Snohomish County political appointee John Pennington and his convicted bank frauding wife Crystal Hill Berg Pennington – convicted of bank fraud in 2005 using an alias of Berg) Linda Eide (who destroyed evidence in my case, Allan Hall and Bob Grundstein’s cases), the WSBA is nothing more than a racketeering association making criminals out of non-criminals and us reporters must do everything in our power to expose the cockroaches where they hide.  Unfortunately for the taxpayers, they hid all too often inside government agencies.

About six months ago, I met a few like-minded open government supporters who have been investigating what I refer to as the “King County animal abuse scam.”

This story took me over six months of sifting through mounds of public emails before I felt comfortable enough to publish it.  King County has refused comment as did Brady cop Jenee Westberg (former King County animal control officer fired for fraud).

If Washington State is ever to become a place where companies and honest people want to live, both King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg and Snohomish County Prosecutor Mark Roe must go.

 King County elected prosecutor Dan Satterberg – What IS he doing?

 Why is Dan Satterberg prosecuting innocent people for animal abuse then failing to prosecute those having sex with animals?

Neither King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg nor Snohomish County Prosecutor Mark Roe have prosecuted one single case of having sex with animals.

Marketing face of movie “ZOO WE AREN’T WHO WE APPEAR TO BE”

Marketing face of movie “ZOO – WE AREN’T WHO WE APPEAR TO BE”

Yes that question is basically shocking isn’t it?  Did anyone even know Washington State has serious problem with people having sex with animals?

It is not something new in our human society.  Certainly distasteful to many,  enough so, that the man who died having sex with a horse at a well-known animal sex brothel in Enumclaw in July of 2005, spurned a very quick independent legislative action to further the unanimous legislation Satterberg and Susan Michaels (Pasado’s Safe Haven) worked so hard to get into law the year before. So the Satterberg and Michael 2005 animal cruelty law morphed into the 2006 anti- bestiality legislation real quick.

With the inception of his 2005 lobbying, Dan Satterberg and his animal rights extremist friends at Pasado’s Safe Haven, Susan Michaels (and company), had just spent 11 years together, as a team, getting animal cruelty into a prosecutable class C felony under a legal term called “criminal negligence.”

Satterberg did all this as Norm Maleng’s chief of staff, (a government attorney) two years before Norm Maleng died suddenly of a heart attack while in his seventh term of office in May of 2007.

Satterberg would then assume Maleng’s position of elected prosecutor through appointment by the King County Council until there could be a special election in November of 2007.  He subsequently was elected to the remaining three years of Maleng’s term.  He then ran for the position in 2010 and won.

Dan Satterberg now, as the elected prosecutor for King County, could easily be in one of the most powerful positions in the State of Washington if not the highest position among municipal mountains in the nation.  He certainly has the power to decide the fate of virtually any warm body in King County.

With a cache of some 210 attorneys protecting the ass-ets of King County and running a $7.2 billion dollar taxpayer funded judicial system representing over 72% of the county budget; it has to be tempting to not let it all go to your head… or to your tail… depending on what one might glean from the research exposed here.

The bigger question arises then – at what point would one consider actually employing a prosecutor’s special duties to protect the public from criminals – and – when does it begin to blur when protecting the criminal?  This then becomes a constitutional issue.  And let’s not forget the question of who is the real criminal – the prosecutor or the defendant they accuse?

This is a troubling conundrum playing out all over our nation.

In King County it appears to play out with Mr. Satterberg making the claim that he played an active role in lobbying for stiffer laws to protect animals from abuse making animal cruelty for “any person with criminal neglect who starves and dehydrates an animal a class C felony.  (He rarely mentions the “with criminal neglect” part in the same sentence though the law is written that way).

What is “with criminal neglect” anyway?  It is a legal term.  It is a standardized legal term – but –  in Washington State it is defined by RCW 9A.08.010 with a few additional embellishments (underlined).  http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.08.010:

RCW 9A.08.010(1)( d):

“CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE. A person is criminally negligent or acts with criminal negligence when he or she fails to be aware of a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur and his or her failure to be aware of such substantial risk constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation.”

 This RCW is just legal blasphemy.  It is also a 1975 constitutional violation written right into the legislation of the State of Washington.

There is a legal adage, “You don’t know what you don’t know.”  No one person can know what they don’t know.  It is a fact of life.  Every human on the planet is plagued by this.

It is appalling it has not been corrected by now.  It is further appalling that an elected official, an attorney no-less, who is tasked with protecting the public, surely knowing the standardized legal adage above, would employ it.

But then how would prosecutors have a reason for their existence if they were not able to make criminals out of ordinary honest taxpaying citizens who don’t know what they don’t know?

While Mr. Satterberg was Chief of Staff for former seven (7)-term prosecutor Norm Maleng, on March 10, 2005, Satterberg testified to the Washington State Senate Law and Justice committee to make starvation and dehydration with criminal neglect a class C felony.  Now the constitutional violation is built right into another law (once removed – definition is in another law).

Maleng died suddenly two years later and Satterberg took the throne.

According to press at the time, http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Legislation-makes-animal-neglect-a-felony-1171992.php  Satterberg actively joined forces with the infamous Pasado’s Safe Haven director Susan Michaels (and her self-appointed “Snohomish County Humane Investigator” husband Mark Steinway).  Pasado’s is a well-known animal rights extremist backed group located in Monroe, WA. Their team together successfully lobbied to get this legislation into law.  http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2005-06/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/Senate/5352.SBR.pdf

In 2005 Pasado’s had not yet been charged for misuse of donated monies fraud in 2010 by the Attorney General but they were certainly involved at the time in implementing the fraud they eventually got caught for.

This isn’t the first time Susan Michaels, Pasado’s and Dan Satterberg worked together.  The former version of the animal cruelty law was lobbied by the two of them in 1994 making their relationship definably long-term.   (Note – Pasado’s are desperately trying to re-color their tarnished history currently.  But corrupt is what corrupt does – one can never overcome acts of dishonesty).

Here is the detail according to public records:

The record shows when Satterberg was some 28 years old (and a fresh deputy prosecutor) he lobbied as representative of the King County Prosecutor’s office with (the future to-be-caught fraud artist from Pasado’s) Susan Michaels at his side in 1994 on house bill 1652.

This was the bill that was labeled Pasado’s Law as a result of the donkey named Pasado who was brutally beaten to death in 1992.

This is also when the “criminal negligence” language first got traction at Satterberg’s hand.   There was no outcry at the time because animal abuse cases were few under Norm Maleng (3 – 4 a year).  No one noticed.

The “Satterberg” bill of 1994 was then enhanced in 2005 while Susan Michaels was misrepresenting Pasado’s money purposes that they would later be charged for by the AG in 2010.

The bill was testified to by Satterberg (he had been promoted to chief of staff by then), Susan Michaels, her husband Mark Steinway (Pasado’s) and other animal rights extremists who have succinct conflicts of interest to the bill.  It was then neatly passed unanimously into RCW 16.52.205 and put into law in May of 2005.

In Satterberg’s March 10, 2005 testimony – standing with him was:

• Dana Bridges a veterinarian known since to capitalize her services on animal abuse cases,
• Matthew Rusnak, WA Federation of Animal Control Officers a group whose existence depends on animal prosecutions,
• Glen Bui, American Canine Foundation (formerly Washington Animal Foundation) another lobbyist specifically formed to stop canine abuse.

Satterberg had really stepped it up. The 2005, legislative reports note it was all about the “with criminal negligent starvation and dehydration” clause while also making that a class C felony.

March 10, 2005, Satterberg and his animal rights friends at Pasado’s testified in front of the Senate Law and Justice Committee that starvation and dehydration with criminal negligence should be in the legislation and therefore it should be made a class C felony so that “prosecutors and police can give it more attention.”

The legislative record states they all argued For:

“People that, with criminal negligence, starve or suffocate an animal worthy of serious attention and, in the criminal system, the way to get attention is to elevate a crime from the misdemeanor category to the felony category.  By making it a felony, the prosecutors and police can give it more attention.  This bill is the next step in modernizing our animal cruelty statute.  It is disheartening to see starvation and dehydration cases that aren’t dealt with seriously by the authorities and these people often repeat these offenses.”

(Well so far, NONE of the 23 falsified animal cruelty cases were repeat offenders nor were they guilty of the allegations.)

And so it was, with that little legal undefined clause combined with the “criminal negligence” definition that then King County Chief of Staff Dan Satterberg (and his animal rights extremist terrorists “buddies”) enabled himself to prosecute and persecute innocent taxpaying citizens on his watch instead of going after animal sex brothels (an underground practice that has apparently gotten completely out of hand).

And Satterberg got in the saddle and whipped that horse within moments of Maleng’s death May 24, 2007 spiking the animal cruelty prosecution numbers from 3-4 a year to 12 in 2007 – a triple/quadruple jump from each year for the six (6) years prior.  It would appear that Norm Maleng’s presence had kept the numbers down and Satterberg wasn’t wasting any time changing it.

Hanging out with fraud artists and domestic terrorists– Shades of Animal Rights Extremists (ARE) Terrorists as defined by Homeland security – the ends justify the means.

After a 16-month investigation by the Washington State Attorney General, Rob McKenna’s office in 2010, Pasado’s charged with a summons for misrepresentation of their use of donated funds (fraud).

The AG’s October 28, 2010 summons alleged four causes of action under numerous statutes of consumer protection.

Among them was that Pasado’s “misrepresented (fraud) specific uses or purposes for donated funds from approximately September 1, 2005 through approximately December 1, 2009.”   They also misrepresented their disaster relief qualification and roles.  This would have been around the time of Hurricane Katrina debacle.  There were many complaints about how Pasado’s didn’t act during disasters while keeping FEMA monies.  https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/charities/SummonsComplaintPacket20101102.pdf

The political appointee to FEMA Region X in 2005 was disgraced/terminated former director of Snohomish County, John E. Penningon.  Pennington assisted Pasado’s Safe Haven with stealing taxpayer FEMA monies.

Pasado’s Safe Haven ended their attempts at defense by agreeing to a Consent Decree that ordered Pasado’s into mandatory audits and a $70,000 fine for misuse of funds (fraud).

This was specifically aimed at Satterberg’s animal rights lobbyist buddy, Pasado’s founder and director Susan Michaels.   Susan Michaels was barred from serving on the Pasado’s board or working in executive management.  https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/charities/ConsentDecree2010-11-05.pdf

The Herald April 11, 2011:

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110411/BLOG48/704119864

The Herald Oct. 29, 2010:

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20101029/NEWS01/710309957

One thing is certain; a leopard doesn’t change its spots.   Susan Michaels, a former KING TV reporter, was apparently in the throes of Pasado’s misrepresentations to the public consumer while at the same time lobbying right next to Dan Satterberg to “enhance” the law she and he would directly benefit from.

It appears with Pasado’s the end justifies the means consistently even now.  Laws are for everyone else not them and it appears that Satterberg is making sure his old lobbying buddies are never charged for their crimes against humanity.  He is, after all, in the position to make that so.

Pasado minions continually thumb their nose at the law as if they know they will never be prosecuted for their actions.  And it looks like they have good reason to be arrogant and free in their lawlessness.

Once in Pasado’s crosshairs there is little that can be done to disentangle oneself of any ARE campaign be it over-the-top misrepresentations of animal abuse on innocent people, shouting profanities at their prey, using money donated to help disaster victims diverted to build a resident mansion on their property or their self-appointed animal cruelty investigator Kim Koon openly admitting breaking and entering to videotape Chihuahuas and calling that “evidence.”

Breaking and entering is Class B felony (worse than a Class C felony).   Pasado’s Kim Koon openly did this in the King County prosecution in order to stimulate a seizure of appx. 100 Chihuahuas and other breeds- $2,500/a dog – from the well-known AKC breeders and judges James and Margie Hamilton.

That’s a cash value of about a quarter million that King County doesn’t seem to have any accounting for except for an email where King County Deputy Prosecutor Gretchen Holmgren was trying to give $15,000 to another “nonprofit” for “helping” them distribute the dogs after the seizure.

Apparently the recipient failed to mention to Holmgren she wasn’t on the board anymore while two members of the board told Holmgren they would be content with $10,000.  (Margie Hamilton was ordered to pay $35,000 in restitution later reduced to $22,000.   King County has been unable to produce any records of this payment).

In the Hamilton case, one of the Regional Animal Services of King County Animal Control Officers, Shelby Russell took one of the poor, abused, starved, “emaciated” Hamilton Chihuahuas to a four-day dog show the day after the seizure.  No one talks about that.

James Hamilton died three weeks into their arraignment but King County didn’t have anything to do with that or so the court documents claim.

Surprise! That wasn’t the end of it… oops.

But just after the end of that 2005 legislative session and Satterberg had just put the animal cruelty legislation all nicely put to bed, the Enumclaw man Kenneth Pinyan managed to get killed having sex with a horse.  This exposed an animal sex brothel trade and a practice that had largely – successfully –  been kept underground away from us regular folk.

Apparently it is big money business.  Primarily it is mini horses.  Some are just regular mini horses.  Some are very high end Arabian-like mini horses bred for sale for those boutique-types in an affluent demographic.  Some prefer goats, sheep and pit bulls.

The demographic is primarily the affluent who can afford it as the experience demands 5 figures; ownership and/or pimping (quite like drug use).   All of which, the last time I checked, are criminal acts.

Neither Satterberg nor Michaels brought animal prostitution up during their lobbying and thus no one had considered it a problem in the earlier “Satterberg” legislation in 2005.

Pinyan’s death was certainly an event that exposed a compelling argument for animal cruelty.  Gosh, not only do we have the child sex trade, we now have the animal sex trade – all are prostitution and predatory on those who have no voice.

In the next legislative session in 2006, Senator Pam Roach came in like a winter storm alert with SB 6417 and added “anti-bestiality” legislation to RCW 16.52.205 banning bestiality in Washington State.  Roach’s bill was voted through unanimously then added to RCW 16.52.205 in June of 2006.

The bill passed unanimously.  There does not appear to be any record of anyone testifying on this second round involving bestiality.

Satterberg didn’t show up.  His buddy Susan Michaels didn’t show up.  Her husband Mark Steinway did not show up but then they are divorced now.  Not even the self-anointed Pasado animal cruelty “investigator” Kim Koon showed up.  Aren’t they all about saving all those animals from cruelty? Not rape?

With Pam Roach’s unintentional help, the former “Satterberg” legislation then became the “anti-bestiality” law that Senator Pam Roach introduced in 2006.

One thing is certain.  Satterberg couldn’t have missed the bestiality legislation.

So the bigger question is –

Why is Satterberg promoting and prosecuting innocent people with an unconstitutional law and NOT prosecuting those in the animal sex prostitution business?

Well the answer to that must be that they all draw the line when calling THAT kind of “loving” – “animal cruelty.”

Satterberg doesn’t change his spots either. What the records show –

Just as Satterberg used the Susan Michaels of Pasado’s entourage, he continues this behavior to use Pasado’s minions in his phony prosecutions for animal cruelty against innocent people.

Consistently employed by King County – without any apparent procurement required (procedures put in law to keep just this very thing from happening), are service providers without any required RFQ (requests for qualifications) calls.  They are Pasado’s minions while engaged in many conflicts of interest.

At the head of list – has been veterinarian Hannah Mueller Evergreen and Jenny Edwards of Hope for Horses (HFH – now replaced by Jamie Taft/Bonnie Hammond of Save a Forgotten Equine).

Satterberg then brings up the rear (forgive the pun) with, it appears, any Brady cop he can find as witness to the fabricated crime.  (Brady cops are officers who cannot be trusted to tell the truth under oath).

Satterberg’s office consistently fails to disclose to the innocent people he is prosecuting, that these witnesses have a criminal history and no credibility as required by law (and special duties of a prosecutor) to guarantee the constitutional rights of the defendant.

How the Pinyan death affected the legislators

When Kenneth Pinyan died in July of 2005 having sex with a horse at a well-known animal sex brothel in Enumclaw, it was two months after Satterberg and Pasado’s got SB 5253 neatly put in place.  The shocking event served as a stark realization to legislators that animal sex abuse problems needed to be addressed more explicitly.   There was no stopping this damage.

Then curiously came the movie about Pinyan.  One wouldn’t really know it without watching it but it was an advocacy argument for sex with animals from the “handler’s” (the male madam) point of view.  It is likened to being in the closet like homosexuality was in the 1950’s.  It feels like a marketed “justification” that having sex with animals really isn’t so bad.

In fact, the film producers magically managed to have the actual – (the very same) ”handler” (pimp) who was running the Enumclaw animal sex brothel where Pinyan died – to help narrate the documentary about mid production.  (I guess he couldn’t be prosecuted for animal cruelty – or so they said – or maybe the King County Prosecutor’s Office just didn’t want to prosecute him and draw anymore attention to Satterberg’s overt protection of the animal sex prostitution trade.  After all Satterberg hadn’t shown any interest it).

In the movie, sex with animals was depicted as just an expression of “loving” an animal the same way as one would “love” their human lovers.  AND that the animals liked it.  They were born to like it.

The movie was professionally produced and went to Sundance where it won some unknown awards in the face of nearly 100% abject recoil by the press.  A personal favorite was Danny Westneat’s “The spawn of horse sex” article.

Through the production of the documentary “ZOO” Pam Roach was clearly given credit for the entire legislation.  Nothing was mentioned about the starvation and dehydration with criminal negligence that Dan Satterberg led the charge on over the previous 13 years.

Whether intentional or not, this film served as a passive marketing device that cloaked Satterberg’s involvement with the animal cruelty with “criminal negligence” and spotlighted Pam Roach with the animal cruelty/bestiality legislation.  It appears to be an attempt to quell the public’s natural recoil.  He could then control the message any way he pleased later – and he does.

And curiously, Satterberg’s favorite animal cruelty witnesses, veterinarian Hannah Mueller Evergreen and Jenny Edwards from Hope for Horses were both featured in this film.  They must have thought they both would gain more business for it – except the public didn’t really see it that way.

The film also minimized the idea that the gathering of men who were involved in this were “johns” and depicted the groups as just a bunch of guys getting together like for a sports event.  This is far from the case.  This is a business model and a version of the prostitution trade using animals.  It is that simple.

It is doubtful if Satterberg would want the world to know that his prosecutions all employ animal rights extremist terrorists (and/or other associated individuals to them) who were involved in a documentary that advocated having sex with animals.  (Mainly Hannah Mueller Evergreen and Jenny Edwards of Hope for Horses – (who was later replaced by Jamie Taft/Bonnie Hammond of Save a Forgotten Equine)).

And although Satterberg mentions his involvement with lobbying for stricter animal abuse laws occasionally, he keeps his zero record on prosecuting bestiality invisible and even this message under the radar while the animal abuse talking point is the fourth prong of his campaign goals.

One has to really look for it – study the legislative notes – to find his true involvement with the animal rights extremist group, Pasado’s (who were committing fraud at the time, even then, with their claims to aid animal victims of the disasters like Hurricane Katrina).

How did the film happen?

When in 2007 Charles Mudede https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Mudede an associate editor of the weekly “The Stranger” suddenly came up with the idea to produce an animal sex advocacy film based on Pinyan’s death having sex with a horse at the animal sex brothel, the timing was surely serendipitous.

Given the messages within the film to soften the view of sex with animals to the public to “loving” the animal, the movie served to make Pam Roach the poster child of the bestiality animal cruelty legislation thus concealing Satterberg’s involvement in the base animal cruelty unconstitutional legislation he drove previously.

They called the movie “ZOO” and coined another name for bestiality – “zoophile.”  Then they took the film to Sundance – which anyone can do with $150 entry fee.

Much of the abject recoil in the press reviews was suppressed. It actually won some awards though not well received by the public.  Let’s just say it wasn’t a best seller except to a very specialized demographic.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoo_(film)

The movie documented that the 2005 death and the subsequent 2006 bestiality legislation was fueled with daily commentaries by pundits Bill O’Reily and Rush Limbaugh fueling a media circus until it was passed unanimously in both the senate and the house.  No one dared to vote against it and no one did.  [And it would pay to remember that O’Reily and Limbaugh don’t do anything like that for free.]

Satterberg has consistently used his lobbying on animal cruelty legislation as a campaign platform but his position on bestiality message is under the radar and remains blurred.

He also consistently leaves out, or rather “distances,”  his well documented long-term relationship with the defrocked Susan Michaels former director of Pasado’s Safe Haven while clearly they have been a team since at least 1994 – 22 years.

Susan Michaels was the founder and director of the “rescue” Pasado’s Safe Haven that would be charged in 2010 by the Attorney General’s office for fraud and misuse of donated funds.  No amount of recapitulation of that event located on Pasado’s website is going to change the fact that as a nonprofit, they fraudulently misdirected funds for their personal use.

Our “watershed moment” came when we got phone records that showed Snohomish County Emergency Director John Pennington (now terminated) pedophile who is responsible for 43 people dying in the Oso mudslide due to his spectacular incompetence – that moment exposed that Pennington, Jenny Edwards (Hope for Horses) and Charles Mudede (Editor for the Stranger) had each other on speed dial.  At least in August of 2015 they did and THAT is an interesting connection to Snohomish County and their band of unlawful prosecutions and illegal horse rustling following in Satterberg’s footsteps.

This all suggests that the film about Pinyan’s demise (as being an accidental unplanned event) was to serve as damage control for so as to not get people in the public too upset that there is a thriving market of animal sex brothels going on right under their noses – some within a 1,000 feet of some of their children’s schools.

More of Satterberg’s concealed position on bestiality:

In his political “issues” https://dansatterberg.com/issues/animal-abuse curiously Satterberg goes on to state:

“I took a leadership role in successfully lobbying the State Legislature to pass laws making animal cruelty a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.  In 2005 I also support legislation that made it a crime to dehydrate or starve an animal to death.”

That is only part of what he did.  He fails to mention the part about “with criminal negligence,” (nor his lack of prosecuting animal sex prostitution).

The actual language of the RCW states:

 RCW 16.52.205 – http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=16.52.205(2)

“(2) A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the first degree when, except as authorized by law, he or she, with criminal negligence, starves, dehydrates, or suffocates an animal and as a result causes: (a) Substantial and unjustifiable physical pain that extends for a period sufficient to cause considerable suffering; or (b) death.”

RCW 9A.08.010(1)(d)

“Criminal Negligence” (from above) http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.08.010

“(d) CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE. A person is criminally negligent or acts with criminal negligence when he or she fails to be aware of a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur and his or her failure to be aware of such substantial risk constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation.”

Apparently Satterberg should have added to that claim, “I intend to persecute innocent good honest taxpaying citizens with no criminal record INSTEAD of pursuing the prosecutions of the people running the prostitutions involving animal sex brothels in the area.”

The numbers tell the tale, there is only one prosecution for animal sex in the entire state (that we could find) and it failed.  And it wasn’t Satterberg’s case.  He has zero.

What is that saying?   It would certainly appear he is protecting the animal sex trade.

 What has happened since?

According this 2005 article Satterberg’s watershed moment came with a Bellevue case through the crime scene photos.  http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Legislation-makes-animal-neglect-a-felony-1171992.php   But obviously it was much-much earlier.

“Satterberg said King County prosecutors try about 10 animal-cruelty cases a year.”

[Court records reveal that at that time, the King County Prosecutor’s office was consistently trying 3 – 4 cases a year.]

Satterberg also states that “Neglect cases are not expected to add an unmanageable burden.”

In hindsight, since Satterberg took the reins to replace Norm Maleng after Maleng’s untimely and sudden death May 4, 2007, the King County Prosecutor’s Office has accumulated well over 130 cases between 2007 and 2013.

That is triple/quadruple what Maleng prosecuted and an astronomical spike in prosecutions for animal cruelty.

Of those cases reviewed, it appears at least 23 cases were fraudulently prosecuted against completely innocent people with no criminal history using fabricated evidence.  [They were all, property owners.]

In addition, those cases were rife (nearly exclusively) with corrupted State experts from Satterberg’s lobbying efforts, and the law enforcement who testify are undisclosed criminals themselves.  (Brady officers, someone who can’t be trusted to tell the truth under oath).

Hannah Mueller and Jenny Edwards led that charge.

Satterberg has one of his chiefs, Dan Clark in charge of the “Brady Committee” where – apparently – Mr. Clark suppresses criminal employees from getting on the Brady list along with the assistance of his former personal assistant Ann Westberg, mother to the infamous Brady Officer, RASKC Animal Control Officer Jenee Westberg the career criminal herself.

Westberg photo from public records passed out in the back of a police car  during her 19-count drug arrest.

What is Satterberg’s motivation here?  Empire building?  Having an excuse to employ more people?  Justify his existence?  Cover up incompetence of what it would take to go after the epidemic of real criminals who are sexually abusing animals?  Drugs?  Money?   Protecting the practice of bestiality in WA State?  More money?

One thing it isn’t – is advocacy for animal well-being.

We may never know the whole answer to that question but facts are facts.  The numbers don’t lie.  Just these 23 cases alone have cost King County many millions of tax dollars, it has cost those wrongly accused their reputations, their livelihoods, in some cases, their lives.  And these cases only serve as a diversionary cloak from the real thriving criminal money-making problem – having sex with animals instead of people.

In contrast to those non-criminals Satterberg has chosen to prosecute, State witnesses employed in these cases are individuals with criminal backgrounds, corrupted veterinarians and “rescues” who are gouging, embezzling and committing perjuries en masse and undisclosed “Brady Officers (those who cannot be trusted to tell the truth under oath).”  They are providing falsified evidence and perjury for the appearance of an easy win through cheating.  The “fix is in” or so they  say.

Only those vulnerable with NO criminal record who own property are chosen for prosecution.

Egregiously altered transcripts appear when a defendant has the audacity to seek justice in a higher court.  A leopard doesn’t change his spots… er… rather a snake doesn’t stop slithering.

This campaign is an animal rights extremist’s dream and keeps all the animal sex violations out of view through obfuscation.

There are definitively 23 innocent people in King County that Satterberg has wrongfully made criminals of who were law abiding, taxpaying citizens before him with no criminal history.  These are people who believed in the justice of the judicial system who do no longer.

Many people have reached out to Satterberg begging him to correct and vacate these cases. This would include the wrongfully accused, their lawyers and other elected officials.  He is certainly aware of it yet he has refused to do anything.  It would appear he has painted himself into the proverbial corner when he could have done the right thing years ago.

But if he is protecting a massive deviate sex prostitution organization with lots of revenue, why would he care?  He has the power to prosecute whoever he wants.

This is what Dan Satterberg is REALLY doing besides:

1. funding his friends at Pasados,
2. protecting Hannah Mueller Evergreen (whose credentials at the Dept. of Health Licensing leaves me to believe she should be investigated for fraud),
3. protecting Jenny Edwards (whose self-dealing with King County Animal Control leaves me to believe she’s running quite the little racket getting people charged with animal abuse and them collecting taxpayers money from government agencies to care for the animal bilking for hundreds of thousands),
4. protecting Ms. Michaels at  Pasado’s using taxpayer’s monies through the animal abuse scam to grab headlines news a hell of a lot of public and private donations between her and Save a Forgotten Equine’s  Jamie Taft and Bonnie Hammond.

Snohomish County Prosecutor Mark Roe is playing the same animal abuse scam. More on those two cockroaches soon.

Snohomish County’s terminated political appointee, John E. Pennington, claims to have a log book of high ranking political officials, including judges, lawyers, and politicians writing down their “feelings” inside a log book after having sex with animals at Echo Lake.  For now, I’m going to hold off publishing their names but Pennington’s little extortion scheme is coming to end.  And if anyone is wondering, there are copies.

Board members blast Washington State Bar, resignations spread like wild flowers

Washington State Bar Association, Inc.

“Placing profits over people”

---

Washington state’s Practice of Law Board (POLB) is virtually defunct because of massive resignations and in fighting feuds with the bar association’s leaders.

No, it cannot be the Washington State Bar’s corrupt elite few Board members trying to control the honest fight for justice Boards and its members?  Shocking!

---

Attorney Scott Smith writes a letter basically agreeing with the Gold Bar Reporters federal Racketeering complaint; Washington State Bar Board members are threatening members who disagree, all in an effort to dominate the Washington State Bar 

On November 8, 2015, former POLB board members released an 11-page letter (PDF) accusing the executive director of the state bar of pursuing “a campaign to eliminate the Practice of Law Board (POLB) citing disgust over how to bridge the access-to-justice gap in the state.

The 11 page letter to the Supreme Court has validity because we found records from the City of Gold Bar proving beyond any shadow of a doubt that Gold Bar’s former Mayor Crystal Hill Pennington ( nee Berg, bank fraud 2005) was writing motions, briefs, and pleadings for two former Snohomish County Dept. of Emergency Management employees, we reported Ms. Hill Pennington to the Bar, but lead counsel Linda Eide (caught destroying evidence in several proceedings) and Doug Ende allowed Crystal Hill Pennington ( nee Berg, bank fraud) to continue harming the public with her criminal conduct ( practice of law without a license).

If our story on the King County ( which we believe extends to every county in this state is not enough to start removing judges and lawyers from office, I’m not sure what is) animal abuse scam, a racketeering enterprise designed to fleece the taxpayers of Washington State for a small few to line their pockets with the gold of others, isn’t enough to push reforms inside the Washington State Bar, I believe its time to start a new Reformed Washington State Bar.

Something hundreds of us reformist already started ( Rwsba.org coming soon).

---

The letter signed by several members of the POLB, including ex-chairman Scott Smith stated there has been countless clashes between the POLB, and the Bar’s Director over the POLB’s role in regulating the unauthorized practice of law.

“The treatment of the practice of law board over the last three years is a textbook study on how to discourage and disempower a board comprised of volunteers: oppose their mission; cut their budget; withhold meaningful staff support; personally attack and seek to oust the volunteers who disagree with you; conduct secret meetings to discuss the future of the group without informing its volunteer members or inviting them to participate; dismiss or reject out of hand the volunteers’ concerns; and replace the group’s members and leadership team,” the resigning board members wrote. “There is no surer way to demoralize a group of volunteers and undermine their good intentions.”

The POLB was set up as an independent entity under the Washington State Supreme Court, but partly funded by the state bar.  Although it as structured so that POLB would not be unduly influenced by the rest of the bar association,  the POLB letters of resignation stated the Bar’s Director has undermined and even threatened the POLB with elimination on multiple occasions.

Threats that we believe amount to Racketeering, extortion, bribery, and threats against persons property interest.  In December 2014, the United States Supreme Court held in FTC v North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners that if the supervising branch ( in this case the Supreme Court) is not actively supervising its Board members, then they are subject to lawsuits, with no immunity, under Sherman Anti-Trust.  see http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/north-carolina-board-of-dental-examiners-v-federal-trade-commission/

Several Racketeering and Anti-Trust law suits have been filed against the Washington State Bar in U.S. Federal Court, only after public records confirm that the Washington State Bar’s Directors, counsel, and Board members are guilty of extortion, threats, and bribery.

The POLB’s resignation letter supports that the Bar is being dominated by Board members who are threatening members who have a difference of opinions. As attorney Smith claims ” to dominate  and control the Boards.”

---

“The Washington State Bar Association has a long record of opposing efforts that threaten to undermine its monopoly on the delivery of legal services,” the resigning board members wrote. The 13-person POLB is now down to four as a result of resignations.

---

The Washington State Bar Association said that the letter contained “significant misinterpretations and misunderstandings.” The letter also maintained that the POLB, when reinstated, was instructed to focus on consumer protection and explore new ways for non-lawyers to provide legal and law-related services and to cease its enforcement activities.

“Access to justice and the protection of the public are unwavering commitments shared by the Washington Supreme Court and the Washington State Bar Association,” Robin Haynes, president-elect of the Washington State Bar Association.  Ms. Haynes was just elected in June 2015.

POLB disgusted members also noted that the WSBA Board of Governors voted unanimously to eliminate the POLB in May 2012, a month before the Washington Supreme Court formally adopted the LLLT rule. The supreme court voted to reinstate the POLB in June.

POLB chairman Smith says “The composition of board is critical,” Smith said. “If you can control who is on the board, then you can control the outcome. [Chief Justice Madsen] rejected our opinions on who should serve on the board, and the court was putting off having a conversation with us about our concerns. As a volunteer board, it’s pretty hard to get a whole lot done if we don’t have support.”

“If the board is no longer independent and becomes a rubber stamp for the state bar, then it’ll prevent any meaningful reforms to solving the access-to-justice gap,” Smith said.

---

Bravo to attorney Scott Smith for having the courage to stand up for Justice.  Your letter  of resignation will prove very helpful in my Racketeering, ADA, and Sherman Anti-Trust suit against the thugs inside the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.