Everett Animal Abuse

 Here is where we will show you the true corrupt nature of "The Beast" Now generally a prosecutor is the one who handles criminal cases, & a City Attorney handles City Business... Not in Everett & NOT when they have a vendetta against you. If you are ever considering taking any of these jobs, this is a prime example of how NOT to do things. They have managed to violate just about every tenet of Rule 3.8 Special Rules of a Prosecutor, this is of special interest in regards to the City Attorney as he himself stepped into the role of a prosecutor as soon as he slandered me in an open court***, he authored the order & the prosecutor presented it. In order to understand this you have to understand the "Chain of Command" in a Municipality. First there is the Mayor, none of this would be happening without his DIRECT approval, there have been 3 meetings with the Mayor, & the City Council regarding my case, so the Mayor okays this, the Council agrees, & then the City Attorney & the Prosecutor have free reign to the City's back accounts & the tax-payers pockets to shut me down, by any means necessary.

***(I was just advised that the City Attorney James Iles did not write or file the Superior Court Motion that slandered me, but his name is in fact on the statement, & it is not on any other statements from the courts, all of the documents are signed by Mike Fisher the city of Everett Prosecutor though.)

1) The prosecutor filed these charges because I sent him emails from 2008/2009 that showed that I was the one who fed the info about the Rene Roske puppy mills to Rose Adams their star witness, so I made him look stupid, next day he filed charges on me for not having a constant supply of water...

2) I filed a Motion for Return of my animals in Superior Court & at that time the ***CITY ATTORNEY prepared a very slanderous, statement to the court against me where he stated " A cynical person might wonder if Respondent, who fancies herself as some sort of "Pet Rescuer" was keeping George around to continue soliciting with donations" (George was my terminally ill dog, & I used to rescue dogs from the Everett animal shelter so at one point they "fancied" me as a pet rescuer too... DUH! I also NEVER got, or asked for donations for my own dog for any reason) Making statements as facts of evidence of which there is no proof because it didn't happen.

3) I AM STILL WAITING FOR THE DISCOVERY!!!

4) I have an Affirmative Defense which is credible so even IF I was guilty it would still mitigate the charge, but instead of taking all of this into consideration the prosecutor is STILL pursuing charges against me, further proving the malicious intent of their prosecution or more correctly their "persecution"...

5) The city & the prosecutor sit on my web page for 20 to 70 hours per week, the day I was put in jail (for not appearing at a hearing even though I called in to let them know I couldn't make it they issued a $5100 warrant for a $1000 misdemeanor) they were on my page well over 30 times & logged in 23 hours & 47 minutes just on the time I was in jail on this web page ALONE, the blog was slightly less.

6) They are using my blog & web page to file frivolous Motions of Limine,

7) They have their "Star Witness" waging a campaign on me through hundreds of craigslist posting & literally hundreds of email campaigns, on the day i turned myself in when I found out that I had the warrant her & their other witness were standing outside telling me "You better fuckin run bitch" & she drug a clerk out of the Office to tell the police I had a warrant... When I was going to the police station to turn myself in WTF???They were so adamant about getting me arrested that the clerk found that the warrant hadn't processed yet so she had the Judge sign it right there on the spot so I could be arrested. She told the Officers that the prosecutor had informed her that I had a warrant. Really? We don't even have to ask why on that one. So their state's witnesses can harass me, threaten me & slander me but it is okay with them, even encouraged by them?

8) At the Superior Court Hearing they failed to tell me of my 5th Amendment rights to not incriminate myself, therefore I presented my whole case & they built a prosecution against me based on that, & the Judge dismissed it because she said I didn't file one Motion which I most certainly did but again she didn't have a CLUE what the hell was going on anyway.

                           RULE 3.8   SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PROSECUTOR
The 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 to obtain counsel;
  (c) not seek to obtain from an unrepresented accused a waiver of important
pretrial 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 the
prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by
a protective order of the tribunal;
  (f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the
nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law
enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a
substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and
exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement
personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the
prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that
the prosecutor 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. This responsibility 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. Applicable law
may require other measures by the prosecutor and knowing disregard of those
obligations or a systematic abuse of prosecutorial discretion could
constitute a violation of Rule 8.4.
  [2] In some jurisdictions, a defendant may waive a preliminary hearing and
thereby lose a valuable opportunity to challenge probable cause.
Accordingly, prosecutors should not seek to obtain waivers of preliminary
hearings or other important pretrial rights from unrepresented accused
persons. 
  [5] Paragraph (f) supplements Rule 3.6, which prohibits extrajudicial
statements that have a substantial likelihood of prejudicing an adjudicatory
proceeding. In the context of a criminal prosecution, 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 the
accused, a prosecutor can, and should, avoid comments which have no
legitimate law enforcement purpose and have a substantial likelihood of
increasing public opprobrium of the accused. 
   [6]  Like  other lawyers, prosecutors are subject to Rules 5.1  and  5.3,
which  relate to responsibilities 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 improper extrajudicial statements in a criminal case.  In
addition, paragraph (f) requires a prosecutor to 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.


                                   RULE 8.4 MISCONDUCT
    It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
    (a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct,
knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;
    (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's
honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;
    (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;
    (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
    (e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government
agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of
Professional Conduct or other law;
    (f) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a
violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law;
    (g) commit a discriminatory act prohibited by state law on the basis of
sex, race, age, creed, religion, color, national origin, disability, sexual
orientation, or marital status, where the act of discrimination is
committed in connection with the lawyer's professional activities.  In
addition, it is professional misconduct to commit a discriminatory act on
the basis of sexual orientation if such an act would violate this Rule when
committed on the basis of sex, race, age, creed, religion, color, national
origin, disability, or marital status.  
    (h) in representing a client, engage in conduct that is prejudicial to
the administration of justice toward judges, other parties and/or their
counsel, witnesses and/or their counsel, jurors, or court personnel or
officers, that a reasonable person would interpret as manifesting prejudice
or bias on the basis of sex, race, age, creed, religion, color, national
origin, disability, sexual orientation, or marital status.
     (i) commit any act involving moral turpitude, or corruption, or any
unjustified act of assault or other act which reflects disregard for the
rule of law, whether the same be committed in the course of his or her
conduct as a lawyer, or otherwise, and whether the same constitutes a
felony or misdemeanor or not; and if the act constitutes a felony or
misdemeanor, conviction  thereof in a criminal proceeding shall not be a
condition precedent to disciplinary action, nor shall acquittal or
dismissal thereof preclude the commencement of a disciplinary proceeding;
     (k) violate his or her oath as an attorney;
      (l)  violate a duty or sanction imposed by or under the Rules for
Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct in connection with a disciplinary matter;
including, but not limited to, the duties catalogued at ELC 1.5;
Comment
  [1] Lawyers are subject to discipline when they violate or attempt to
violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce
another to do so or do so through the acts of another, as when they request
or instruct an agent to do so on the lawyer's behalf. 
  [5] Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going
beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer's abuse of public office can
suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of lawyers. The same
is true of abuse of positions of private trust such as trustee, executor,
administrator, guardian, agent and officer, director or manager of a
corporation or other organization.

Every person who shall, maliciously and without probable cause therefor, cause or attempt to cause another to be arrested or proceeded against for any crime of which he or she is innocent:
(1) If such crime be a felony, is guilty of a class C felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in a state correctional facility for not more than five years; and
(2) If such crime be a gross misdemeanor or misdemeanor, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.