More Eviction Shenanigans

The author has temporarily deleted information or used pseudonyms in this essay to comply with a contempt order issued by Judge James A. Doerty, Superior Court of Washington. That case now awaits appellate review. The publisher claims judicial bias and arbitrary censorship.

Doerty has misused antiharassment laws to claim that newsgathering constitutes "surveillance" and reporting news defines as "harassment". The court order effectively denies the constitutional rights of the author who has held an international press card for many years.

Doerty has deliberately interrupted the flow of public information and interfered with ethical reporting procedures designed to observe and report upon government dereliction. In this case, neglect by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) properly to oversee management of a government financially-assisted building.

The court action has advantaged a group of wealthy people who allegedly abuse senior citizens and misappropriate federal funds. Moreover, the property houses a US congressman's mother who has allegedly sworn a false or misleading declaration. This probably makes the issue politically sensitive for a recently elected judge.

The censored information forms part of the public record. Secretary of State, State of Washington, requires nonprofit corporations to file an annual report containing names and addresses of officers and directors. However, the directors and administrators of Council House, Seattle, neither comply with this law nor do they comply with IRS regulations that require disclosure.

Without any rational legal interpretation, Doerty retroactively ordered the publisher to remove other information (published more than a year ago). When he reviewed this op-ed piece, he claimed that Nmesis kept people "under surveillance" by using public records and attending a court hearing. Bizarrely, he wants all named journalistic sources to sign waivers. The court order effectively denies use of information contained in public records available under RCW 42.17 (Washington Public Disclosure Act).


L L. Halibut appeared in King County District Court, Seattle Division, E326 (Lamprey vs. Halibut Y1-4186), to answer harassment charges (27 Aug 01). Judge Michael S. Hurtado continued the hearing on alleged harassment to enable Halibut to obtain legal counsel. Judge Maureen A. Howard granted another continuance (07 Sep 01) to enable counsel for Halibut, Seattle attorney George F. Sjursen, to properly prepare his defense. The continued hearing will now take place at 09:00 in Seattle courtroom E312 (21 Sep 01).

The case relates to another apparent constructive eviction attempt against a senior citizen at Council House, 1501 17 Avenue, Seattle. The incident took place after a monthly Coffee with Steve (15 Aug 01) meeting held by administrator Tall Pygmy. It resulted from a verbal fracas at the meeting between two residents, V. D. Lamprey (69) and L. L. Halibut (70).

Halibut, a black man, voiced an opinion at the meeting about an incident that he considered racist. D. L. J. (68), another black resident and a witness for Halibut at the hearing, evidently saw a resident looking at children playing in the T. T. Minor school yard across the street from Council House. He heard her say: "What is this - the planet of the apes?"

Halibut, a long-term activist, a former aide to an Oregon governor, and Council House residents' association past president, had previously complained to Tall Pygmy about racist language. Tall Pygmy had done nothing when a resident used the term "shvarzer" (Yiddish - nigger) in the public rooms. Tall Pygmy has a history of not addressing resident complaints. Instead, he uses bizarre kill-the-messenger techniques.

Halibut had previously complained to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) about racial abuse at Council House. However, Diane B. Nelson, Acting Supervisor (HUD), brushed him off by writing (03 May 01):

Under the Fair Housing Act, as amended, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development does not have jurisdiction. We were unable to ascertain whether you had been injured by a discriminatory housing practice, ie, you were not told that you would lose your housing if you used the words "Jesus Christ." In addition, an individual attending an event that is sponsored by a religious group would be expected to adhere to the traditions of that group.

Nelson missed the point made by Halibut (a Christian), entirely. Consequently, the ethnic and religious debacle at Council House continued to degenerate until the confrontation at Tall Pygmy's meeting (15 Aug 01).

In court, Tall Pygmy referred to himself alternately using his correct name "Goophy" and his stage name "Goofy." Tall Pygmy, a professional stage actor, doubles as Council House administrator although he has virtually no experience or qualifications for the position. HUD Office of the Inspector General presently has him under investigation for alleged credential falsification and misappropriation of public funds.

Tall Pygmy and his lieutenant, Marquis de Sade, obsessed with trying to silence this reporter, tried to have him arrested and jailed when he arrived in court on two occasions (27 Aug 01 and 07 Sep 01). Both times they arrived at the court early to set him up. At the first hearing, de Sade threatened this reporter with a walking stick and Tall Pygmy had a hissy fit in the corridor because the sheriff would not arrest him.

On separate occasions, Judges Hurtado and Howard have informally found their conduct obstructionist and indefensible and provided protection of the court. Robert J. Siegel, Merkle, Siegel, and Friedrichsen (MSF), Seattle, attorney for this reporter, has now written to Minnie Levitica Mouse of Silence, Censor, and Beleaguer (SCB), Seattle, attorney for Tall Pygmy and Council House. Siegel has asked Minnie L. Mouse (SCB) to tell her clients to cease and desist harassing this reporter by trying to have him arrested for exercising his constitutional rights. They now know that he will probably seek a restraining order against both Tall Pygmy and de Sade if they persist in this behavior.

Judge Howard told all Council House people to remain in place to allow this reporter to leave the building. He had informed the court that Tall Pygmy, de Sade and Lamprey, had waylaid him to cause a breach of a restraining order (now on appeal) twice before. A sheriff escorted this reporter from the building at his request. About ten Council House residents attended each hearing, apparently to support Halibut.

Attorney Sjursen (Halibut's attorney appointed the day before) had not yet filed an appearance. He asked for another continuance to prepare his case which Howard granted after questioning Halibut about his industry in obtaining an attorney. The judge granted Lamprey another extension of the temporary order.

Tall Pygmy grandstanded as Lamprey's "attorney" although she had filed pro se. Sjursen objected to his speaking as a nonparty. The court overruled his objection.

Tall Pygmy then argued against continuance by claiming that he had important duties to perform as administrator of Council House and that continuances took him away from those duties. The court ignored his argument and granted Sjursen the continuance.

Through benign neglect, HUD allows Tall Pygmy to use abusive enforcement tactics and witness tampering strategies. HUD officials apparently remain completely unresponsive to Halibut's plight although fully apprized of the situation.

Noel A. Tognazzini, Special Agent in Charge, Robert W Woodard, Assistant District Inspector General for Audit, HUD/OIG-Seattle, and Clarence Nelson, HUD Contract Administrator for the State of Washington, have responsibility for investigation and oversight at Council House, respectively. They have apparently done nothing to resolve a problem that has escalated over fifteen years. Their supervisor, Anthony Crook, Deputy Director, Investigation Support Division, Washington, DC, evidently condones their neglect through willful blindness.

After reading the previous Lamprey vs. Halibut article (801-11), Elena Luisa Garella, a Seattle attorney wrote: "I've handled quite a few First Amendment cases, both at trial and on appeal, including at least four dealing with RCW 10.14 (the antiharassment statute - one of the most appallingly abused statutes in the Code)."

Evidently, Council House does not stand alone. The court finding in Lamprey vs. Halibut will confirm or deny this perception.

Nmesis.

© Copyright 2001 by Paul Trummel
All Rights Reserved: 08 Sep 01/06:37 PST
Edition: #801-12-01-1115-1155
Feedback: webmaster@contracabal.org