Rampant Judicial Delusion
Judge Edith Jones, US Court of Appeals (Fifth Circuit), told The Federalist Society  of Harvard Law School (28 Feb 03) that the American legal system has been corrupted almost beyond recognition.  Jones said that legal philosophy has descended to nihilism - extreme skepticism that couples baseless values with delusional behavior. In Washington superior court, a situation exists where moral rectitude has become routinely sacrificed to political expedience. In particular, the behaviors of Judge James A. Doerty and Judge Anthony P. Wartnik, exemplify this condition.
The Federalist Society builds upon three principles:
1. States exist to preserve freedom;
2. Separation of power remains central to the US Constitution; and,
3. The judiciary must interpret the law not change it.
Doerty has violated all three of these principles in one way or another. One can only describe as preposterous his penchant for making false and misleading statements unsupported by evidence. Aberrant behavior by both Doerty and Wartnik rank as repugnant when one considers that judges must by their code of ethics make, rational, fair, and unbiased decisions. Based upon his findings and court demeanor, Doerty’s delusions of persecution and grandeur have apparently reached a point where he needs psychiatric evaluation. [JAD-02-0617-0000]
Several Seattle attorneys have appeared before him then described the Doerty delusion. They have variously described him as "running amok", "out-of-control", "unstable", "vicious", and "evil". Another Seattle lawyer, who claims to have appeared before him many times, says: "He does not strike one as having both oars in the water". Foggy from Seattle referred to Doerty thus:
Taking a page straight out of Kafka, four months ago Judge Jimmy "The Token Twinkie" Doerty of KingCo Inferior Court did something pretty weird even for an inexperienced Hicktown judge. He ordered somebody to do something, then made it physically impossible for them to comply. [Judge Jimmy Bags a Geezer]
So much for any respect for the Superior Court of Washington.
The comments by lawyers sound reasonably accurate when one considers Doerty’s handling of the Council House case. He tried to coerce a reporter by jailing him. Moreover, he denied the reporter his civil rights and access to a lawyer. He then jailed him indefinitely for contempt of court without giving him the wherewithal to purge the contempt. Consequently, the reporter languished in jail for 111 days.
The case now awaits appellate hearings that Doerty has deliberately thwarted for more than two years. The appellate court will hear the case under a unanimous order (by five judges) in the Washington Supreme Court.
[Unanimous Decision] [Appellate Brief #1] [Appellate Brief #2]
The issues have extended meaning when one examines the alleged backstage machination in Washington Superior Court among Judge Anthony P. (Tony) Wartnik, Judge Michael C. Hayden, and James A. (Jiminy) Doerty), who all sit in the same courthouse. In consort, these judges have allegedly acted with bias to protect Council House directors from federal and state prosecution for alleged perjury and subornation, misappropriation of federal funds, and homicide by abuse. [Homicide by Abuse]
The intervention by Judge Wartnik, married to Council House director and past co-president Lynn C. Wartnik, has allegedly created multiple conflicts of interest. Married to a litigant, Judge Wartnik apparently supported his wife in a cover up through ex parte (backstage) communication - a reasonable person interprets this as gross judicial misconduct.
Washington Supreme Court Decision (30 Mar 06)
In a unanimous decision by nine judges, Washington Supreme Court concluded that Doerty abused his discretion in restraining the author from contacting nonparties and in adding content restrictions to a frivolous antiharassment order brought by Mitchell. It also concluded that the Doerty erred in multiple findings of contempt of court. It reversed the draconian trial and appellate decisions which resulted in the author spending time in jail.
All the contempt motions based upon alleged violations of the original flawed and unconstitutional anti-harassment order. The trial court denied the author his right to counsel and jailed him for 111 days (including 25 days in solitary confinement where he suffered torture at the hands of King County Jail guards). [Metamorphosis]
Supreme Court found that Doerty had absolutely no justification for refusing a continuance and neglecting to provide legal counsel. It reversed all trial and appellate court decisions. By failing to address judicial misconduct by Doerty, Judge Mary Kay Becker, Washington Court of Appeals condoned prior restraint, constructive eviction from a residence, and jail time, without considering constitutional rights.
Council House and King County have not made reparation for unlawful incarceration without charge or trial for almost four months in the same way that University of Washington have not addressed myriad administrative abuse and breach of contract over two decades. Instead, both entities continue their harassment using web site and computer sabotage which construes as criminal malicious mischief. [Supreme Court Decision #2 - 30 Mar 06]
A Council House triumvirate acted as principal witnesses for Council House during several legal proceedings. They suborned testimony from more than forty residents to support fantastic contentions. Doerty, with his political connection and bias toward Council House directors, willingly wrote that perjury into the record without questioning it.
Doerty refused the reporter legal representation and any opportunity to refute more than forty declarations by Council House directors, staff, and residents. By that refusal, he disallowed the discovery process usually considered an essential part of due process of law.
A discovery process would have disclosed the insanity and perjury contained in the declarations predominantly authored or suborned by the triumvirate: Stephen (aka Stefan) Mitchell, Council House administrator; Felippe Jacques (aka Marquis de Sade), Council House resident; and, Nathaniel (aka Knate) Stahl, an allegedly schizoid resident. This triumvirate and other thugs coerced signatures from gullible senior citizens and Doerty accepted their statements without question - the inmates apparently took charge of the asylum. [Marquis de Sade]
Doerty suffers from egocentric absurdity similar to that apparent in the triumvirate. The written record and his actions support that contention. Like the triumvirate he fails to notice his absurd implications. He bases his decisions solely on insane fantasies and submissions by an allegedly incompetent legal counsel (Richard A. Du Bey, Short Cressman Burgess - Seattle) who represents Council House.
Not surprising in this incestuous judiciary, Du Bey sits on the executive committee and Judge Wartnik sits on the board of directors, Herzl-Ner Tamid, Mercer Island. Other Council House directors’ family members and another superior court judge also inhabit that hornet’s nest. Moreover, Du Bey and his cohorts have consistently repeated what the triumvirate has told them then participated in planned subornation to support it. Ethical lawyers must logically and eagerly anticipate future disciplinary action by the Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) against these dregs of legal society. [Hornet Nests]
Doerty has repeatedly made absurd comments in his judicial diatribes. For example, he made a statement on the record that his victim (whom he had jailed for 111 days without affording him legal representation) had wasted $30,000 of taxpayer money by staying in jail. He later confirmed his absurd implications by refusing to reconsider his finding when lawyers gave him an opportunity to recant.
Council House board of directors has since followed suit by filing more perjured declarations in a cover-up based upon rants by the triumvirate. Doerty has had to constructively recuse himself and the case awaits an appellate court hearing. Appellate lawyers should have a field day unless a reincarnation of Niccolò Machiavelli preempts them.
[Appellate Brief #1] [Appellate Brief #2]
Council House directors and managers have allegedly misappropriated large amounts of taxpayer money; continue to abuse residents; and, use lawyers in a cover-up. That cover-up includes allegedly subverting at least three superior court judges by “judge-shopping” - a politically motivated selection process that prejudices one litigant in favor of another. Manipulation of the justice system by juggling assignment of cases based upon political affinity construes as judicial misconduct.
Doerty typed his findings prior to scheduled hearings and disallowed oral argument. He embellished both sworn and unsworn documents containing invective which bordered upon hate speech. Sadistically, he read that typescript into the record. Some findings, allegedly written by the triumvirate of half-wits and an insane judge, resulted in a draconian order that eventually led to indeterminate imprisonment for the reporter who exposed their machination.
Doerty merged ethics and morals apparently for political expediency. Consequently, he functions more as an out-of-control oligarch than a judge. He received more than five-hundred email messages many of them protesting his behavior and his decisions. Doerty has since, in consort with the court clerk Paul L. Sherfey, unlawfully withheld those public documents. Although Sherfey has received repeated requests to release copies of them under Washington public disclosure laws, he continues to refuse access to them. Inquiry into other cases shows a pattern of withholding documents by Sherfey. Doerty’s actions also resulted in about nine hundred articles in the international media.
Doerty has assumed the powers and responsibilities reserved for the legislature in addition to those granted to him as a judge. He redefined legal interpretation and construction by merging them. His biased litany established an ongoing practice of judicial misconduct until he constructively recused himself more than a year later. The appellate briefs call for either his removal or official recusal.
As with previous hearings, Doerty did not give attorneys for the journalist an opportunity to depose witnesses. He did not allow cross-examination of declarants and did not allow refutation of what they wrote. Instead, he spent his time trashing the journalist and accusing him of harassment. He vilified both the reporter/publisher and his web site in court. His behavior has attracted worldwide protest. The reporter’s trade unions have expressed outrage. In Kafkaesque fashion, Doerty demonstrated that judicial power in Washington state essentially remains implacable and malign.
The exposé subject to the court action mentioned individuals allegedly guilty of crimes but mainly dealt with the systemic corruption at Council House. Doerty’s pettiness seems extraordinary. As a first-time judge, he has a crude understanding of power and the law. He has not only accepted kill-the-messenger techniques as the right way to deal with adverse publicity but has openly suggested from the bench that Council House prosecute against constitutionally protected speech. He gave one party before him unsolicited legal advice by recommending a counter suit. He then reinforced his previous position by admitting the declarations into evidence unquestioned. He wrote two findings that any sane person would find incredible - mindful madness taken to a judicial extreme. [JAD-02-0617-0000] [JAD-02-0621-0000]
Perjury and Subornation
Apparently someone sent bootleg copies of an updated but unpublished draft written (25 Feb 02) to Council House directors. They claimed that the journalist sent it in violation of a restraining order (26 Oct 01). They failed to acknowledge that the journalist languished in jail with his incoming and outgoing mail scrutinized by jail officers at the time of the alleged mailing. Jail officers neither allow inmates to make multiple mailings nor grant them release long enough to place pamphlets under residents’ doors during the night as some Council House residents claimed in sworn testimony.
The declarations by Victor J. DeLeon and Lynn C. Wartnik illustrate the absurdity (and probable insanity) inherent in all twenty-one declarations. Essentially, one person wrote all of them. They all referred to the restraining order (26 Oct 01). That order contained this admonition:
2.1 Paul Trummel is permanently RESTRAINED from:
(f) Posting to the Internet or his web site, directly or indirectly, any personal identifying information including, but not limited to the name, address, phone number, social security number, or photograph, of any current, former or future staff member, resident, Board member, or agent, including attorneys, of Council House.
All declarants falsely claimed that the journalist had written to them by US Mail (about 19 May 02). He could not have written to them from jail. Jails insist on return addresses on all correspondence. In any event, the order did not restrict written communication. If the journalist had sent that material by US mail as they claim then the order would not prohibit it because it only applied to Internet publishing.
The journalist sent nothing to the directors, or anyone else for that matter, and the directors provided no proof that he did. They arranged backstage to have him thrown into “the hole” under the worst conditions in the state of Washington. They then tried to justify their action after the fact through perjury. The journalist had to suffer 25 of 111 days in solitary confinement locked down 23 hours a day based upon uncontested testimony. [Cruel and Unusual Punishment]
Jail officials told him that he had not broken any jail rules. They said that the order for solitary confinement emanated from Doerty sua sponte (by his whim and without a hearing). Approaching 70 years of age, the reporter suffers from respiratory problems and has difficulty walking more than a year after release from jail - medical conditions that did not exist before Council House directors petitioned Doerty to jail him (or commit him to a mental institution).
DeLeon cites the order in sworn testimony then declares that:
On May 19, 2002, I received via U.S. Mail a copy of an article . . . The article was sent in an unmarked envelope with no return address. The envelope was postmarked in Seattle on May 18, 2002, . . . I believe that [the journalist] sent this letter to me to further harass and intimidate me.
If the journalist had mailed the letter then it would bear a King County jail return address - the standard requirement for outgoing mail. Deleon and other witnesses who made similar paranoid declarations believe that their fantasies constitute proof admissible in a court of law and commit perjury to support them. They probably feel that with two (probably four) superior court judges in their pocket they have immunity to do and say whatever they please.
This becomes doubly significant when they perjure themselves to cover-up cruel and unusual punishment after the fact. This confirms business as usual at Council House and follows a previous pattern or practice of subornation and perjury.
Lynn Wartnik (wife of Judge Wartnik) failed to recognize that Washington state requires all directors of non-profit corporations to publish their names and addresses as part of the public record. As a pillar of a temple, Lynn apparently fantasized that she would bring a Devil to ultimate defeat by curtailing his writing. She probably sees all journalists as evil, impulsive animal-humans with tails and horns, accompanied by lesbian subordinate devils posing as editors. In her declaration, she has apparently fantasized that one of those devils sent letters to her from inside a jail. Accordingly, she perjured herself by swearing a satanic oath declaring:
. . . For at least the past two years, [the journalist] has written demeaning, threatening and evil messages about the staff, the board and residents at Council House. He has posted my name and address on his website, in his newsletter, and perhaps more. Every right has been afforded him by the system, and he continues to waste the energy and financial resources of all those involved. I believe the man should be given a thorough mental health evaluation.
Lynn Wartnik made her declaration without submitting exhibits to support her claims or psychiatric reports to support her mental health contentions. This recurring behavior makes one think that she should probably commit herself for psychiatric examination. She exhibits the same mental abnormality apparent in the triumvirate and Doerty. She has, in consort with several other directors, perpetrated malicious and false accusations and prosecution without cause. One reasonably construes that she acts on the legal advice of her husband Judge Wartnik who has allegedly interceded with the trial judge in her behalf.
An attorney or a director used a fax machine to transmit copies of an updated, unpublished bootleg draft to twelve witnesses (between 23 May 02 and 04 Jun 02) for them to attach to their statements. The documents did not include the name, phone number, or address of the sender. This violates a federal law that requires originators to display "identifying information” at the top of all fax transmissions. Kurt Schroeder, deputy chief of the telecommunications consumer division of the Federal Communications Commission, says that a 1991 regulation mandates that people should know where faxes originate.
A person violates the law if he/she sends a fax without the message containing in the margin at top or bottom of each transmitted page the date and time it was sent. This must include sender identification and sending machine telephone number.  Schroeder says, violation carries with it a fine of up to $11,000. It looks like the Council House person who sent the anonymous faxes has incurred another $132,000 liability in addition to fines for perjury and subornation.
The court has never determined which people received the document in the US mail and from whom they received it. Some witnesses appended the faxes to their declarations then swore that they received them in the mail or under their doors at night. Doerty accepted them without question, after the fact, to support sending the journalist to solitary confinement.
Sheila Sternberg (wife of bankruptcy attorney Craig S. Sternberg), Lynn Wartnik’s co-president, had the smarts not to submit a declaration at all. In this case, a bankruptcy lawyer’s advice to his wife seems to make more sense than that of a judge to his wife - assuming that cultural and religious paternalism still exists in the hornets nest. If Judge Wartnik thinks that he can get away with judicial misconduct then he should submit himself for psychiatric examination with his wife and Doerty.
Since the reporter’s release from solitary confinement (17 June 02), the directors and their associates, several of them members of the higher echelons of Herzl-Ner Tamid, have conspired to return him to jail. The directors have made more unsubstantiated charges by accusing him of violating the restraining order and stalking.
Stalking ranks as a felony. However, Du Bey has not responded to two requests by attorneys for him to provide proof. Conviction on stalking charges would allow Judges Doerty and Wartnik to instruct the US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to initiate deportation proceedings - shades of Camp X-Ray and Auschwitz.
The way that judges Wartnik and Doerty also Council House directors have behaved shows how the public and the Seattle media apparently view rights afforded under the US Constitution. They have remained complacent and recalcitrant judges have silently used their immunity to allow Council House directors to choose expedience over process. These constituencies have remained ignorant and cavalier about freedom and civil liberties. They have allowed judges to usurp powers reserved for the US Congress without outcry or comment. History has evidently taught them nothing.
As part of a silencing or gagging procedure to cover-up previous unlawful acts, Judges Wartnik and Doerty allegedly indulged themselves with ex parte communication that solely benefitted the directors. Then, Doerty issued sua sponte (at will and without a motion) an order to move (to incommunicado, ultra-security, solitary-confinement with a 23-hour lock down) the journalist who exposed and reported the alleged crimes. Doerty’s insidiousness becomes apparent from his statement: “It's what the statute terms a ‘coercive sanction’ . . . intended to ratchet up the coercion. There remain additional such measures that have not been used.”
Doerty issued that order without a hearing (23 May 02). This occurred after 86 days incarceration and included denying his victim telephone access to the attorney handling his case. In other words, the sua sponte order placed the journalist in extreme conditions with accused murderers and rapists to coerce him into silence to support a Council House cover-up.
The journalist had no idea why Doerty moved him to “the hole”. No probable cause existed apart from propaganda generated by the triumvirate and the directors. Doerty neither allowed him his right to know the reason for the draconian move nor gave him the right to face his accusers. Moreover, he has denied him his basic right to a defense by his choice of lawyer on several occasions. Even Auschwitz prisoners knew the probable reason for their imprisonment in advance - ideology and political expediency.
With no lawyer, no Miranda rights, no telephone rights, no accounting for judicial action or the whereabouts of his prisoner, and no chance for his victim to tell his side of the story, Doerty moved the reporter into solitary confinement. The reporters friends spent several days frantically trying to locate his whereabouts by inquiring at different jails in Washington state. Doerty made him disappear for several days as surely as if he lived in North Korea, Cuba, or Texas. That should concern people who live in Washington more than it apparently does.
Five directors, an administrator, and fifteen residents allegedly perjured themselves after the fact of imprisonment. Post-documentation supported a frame-up which followed an identical pattern or practice of subornation and perjury organized at Council House fourteen months earlier with intent to unlawfully incarcerate. The directors condoned both frame-ups by actively participating and perjuring themselves. They jointly and severally subverted the judicial process by willfully committing criminal acts knowing about a legal challenge to their previous behavior.
Council House filed twenty-one allegedly fraudulent declarations (signed 04 through 19 June 02). Those declarations supported the sua sponte decision for solitary confinement ex post facto (after the fact or a previous act). The directors filed their declarations - up to four weeks after the removal of the journalist to solitary confinement - to retroactively fabricate a justification for Doerty’s finding. Moreover, seven declarants signed their declarations after the court released the journalist from jail. In other words, Council House directors conspired to influence Doerty through an ex parte communication by Wartnik. They had the journalist moved without a hearing or cause from one jail to another and incarcerated him under the most cruel conditions then later fudged evidence to support their act.
Judge James A. Doerty speaks volumes about the way Washington courts view the rights accorded individuals by the US Constitution. On civil liberties Doerty and Wartnik have apparently written themselves a blank check. Both the public and the media should at least ponder over the court decisions in conjunction with comprehensive appellate briefs.
[Appellate Brief #1] [Appellate Brief #2]
Seattle media sits in silence (or publishes disinformation) as judges choose expedience over process and the public could care less. History has taught that sometimes expedience is the birthplace of shame. Unfortunately, that lesson seems to have fallen on deaf ears in Seattle, especially at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Apparently, the editor and publisher, Roger Oglesby, has joined himself to Doerty at the hip despite journalism ethics and the responsibility of that paper to publish the truth.
An example of distortion of evidence occurred in the matter of an article about a terrorist sympathizer residing at Council House. The reporter wrote to the FBI and the directors about the risk of inaction before publishing the article. This happened about a year prior to the Twin Towers 911 disaster.
After 911, Council House manufactured a complaint to twist that report into involvement by the reporter with terrorist activity despite 911 proving that he had predicted a risk correctly. Now, a former employee and terrorist sympathizer presumably still has a set of master keys to the Council House building because the directors have not changed the locks.
Doerty used disinformation presented by Mitchell as one of the motives for his draconian decision to censor content and political cartoons on the web site The latest terrorist warning (08 Feb 03) by the federal government specifically stated that Jewish affiliated apartment blocks stand at principal risk for attack by terrorists. Yet the directors have still done nothing to improve security at Council House. [Tall Structure Terror]
The public, and especially residents of Council House, need to become more vigilant and more skeptical of their directors and administrators who have backstage connections with the judiciary. Their neo-fascist administrator Mitchell has pointed out to residents on many occasions that he would have no compunction in arranging similar treatment for any other resident who disagrees with his ideology.
Residents need to pay close attention to see that the administrators and judges that the directors have in their pockets do not cut corners and abrogate rights for their own reward. The media in a democratic nation represents the most important check on potential excesses, especially in light of the despots now in control of government.  Yet Oglesby and his ilk still withhold the truth to feather their political nests.
The public has repeatedly allowed judges like Doerty and Wartnik to get away with making decisions on the basis of political expedience instead of law. Public apathy and lethargy lets them indulge in unethical behavior without restraint. Doerty runs for reelection soon. Hopefully, by that time the electorate will wake up to what has happened and relieve him of his power. After he loses the election he can occupy himself with running the Seattle gay rights parade. As Foggy would probably express himself: Doerty could then find an ethical, unabashed “twinkie” who knows something about the law to replace himself on the bench. [Queer Connection]
Judge James A. Doerty, Superior Court, State of Washington, issued two anti-harassment orders and contempt citations to censor this forum by prior restraint at the behest of Council House directors and their administrator. Mary Kay Becker, Washington Court of Appeals affirmed them. Washington Supreme Court reversed most of those decisions (30 Mar 06).
[Washington Supreme Court - Decision] [Background Information]
Using their financial power, the directors obtained SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) court orders and contempt citations using perjured testimony against the author of valid exposé. They then had him jailed in solitary confinement.
In this case, SLAPP consists of frivolous charges designed to bankrupt an opponent and create a prior restraint. The landlords have used this tactic on several occasions to try to cover up issues that affect all their tenants.
Doerty thwarted an appeal of his findings for more than five years by withholding court documents and other manipulation. The author/publisher claims judicial bias and arbitrary censorship that deny him his rights under the First Amendment to the US Constitution and Washington State Constitution. Doerty has challenged a principle journalism ethic - seek truth and report it - by denying a reporter’s First Amendment rights. Doerty then wrote biased decisions all without due process of law.
His findings enabled Council House directors to cover up crimes that they and their administrators allegedly committed. A Washington Supreme Court review has allowed the public to know the names of people involved in elder abuse. It will also give an ethical prosecutor an opportunity to consider felony charges of homicide by abuse against Council House directors and their staff. [Homicide by Abuse]
Homicide ranks as a class A felony punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment in a state correctional institution or by a fine of fifty thousand dollars or both. Both the victim’s family and a Council House administrator benefitted financially by allegedly defrauding federal and state agencies prior to death of a resident. [Who Killed Jackie Nations?]
Doerty’s order precluded naming the people involved which forced redaction of copy pending review. Washington Supreme Court reversed the trial court decision which relieves restrictions on publishing details regarding resident deaths and other abuse.
Washington Supreme Court
Council House, Seattle - Summary
Supreme Court Decision #1
Supreme Court Decision #2
Respondents [Mitchell and Council House Inc.]
Appellant Reply [Trummel]
Respondents [Mitchell and Council House Inc.]
Appellant Reply [Trummel]
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA)
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
National Union of Journalists/London Freelance Branch (NUJ)