CoS attorneys have also denied due process of law to tenants affected by false and misleading reports filed about them. Stephen A. Mitchell, a Council House director, filed those reports with several agencies as part of a vilification and blackmail campaign against tenants.

Finkle continues to stonewall public records requests made under Washington Public Disclosure Act by using fatuous exemptions. He holds a copy of a Council House letter and supporting documentation that forms part of an official complaint. However, he will not allow the subject of the complaint to have a copy of the documents or to respond to the contents of them as required by CoS regulations and state law. [RCW 42.17]

CoS continues to keep those public records on file as non-conviction data without processing them. Finkle and Watkins allowed Mitchell to file reports then kept them on file as part of a criminal record. The only thing criminal about that document relates not to its content but to the fact that Mitchell filed a false instrument with government officials. [SMC 12A.16.040]

Both Finkle and Watkins neglected to follow mandated procedures that provide due process of law and to allow the accused to refute the statements made about him. Now, to cover their tracks they call it non-conviction data and refuse to provide copies of myriad documents requested under the Public Disclosure Act. [Public Records Access] [Silent Withholding]

Mitchell offered a false instrument for filing with malicious intent to counter a legitimate complaint filed with the City of Seattle several months earlier. A person violates the law if he/she knowingly procures or offers any false or forged instrument for filing or recording in any public office. The punishment for those acts: imprisonment in a state correctional facility for not more than five years, or a fine of not more than five thousand dollars, or both. [RCW 40.16.030]

Finkle took action on a false complaint without informing the accused and ignored a legitimate complaint addressed to the same issues. He now neglects to provide copies of public records in accordance with the Public Disclosure Act. By that, he commits a misdemeanor: knowingly making false or misleading statements in an official report under circumstances not otherwise prohibited by law. [RCW 42.20.040]

Why does city attorney Thomas A. Carr not discipline Fink and prosecute Mitchell? Does he feed at the Council House trough with directors and judges Becker, Wartnik, Doerty, and Hayden? Has Carr knowingly allowed a cover up of the campaign of lies and deceit now contested in Washington Supreme Court? [Supreme Court Review]

Council House directors must accept responsibility for their dereliction and lack of response to complaints instead of consistently tying to kill the messenger. They have taken part in a surreal charade to cover up elder abuse that involves criminal liability. They have supported their contentions with a cover up and perjury.

Finkle, (a lawyer and judge wannabe) has to make political connections. To his credit he did not peddle his ass for votes on Capitol Hill during the 2000 election or use money other than from his family. However, he lost in the same election in which Judge Doerty won through preponderant machination and listening at gay bathhouse doors not from any knowledge of law as he has since proved in superior court. [Supreme Court Review] [Queer Connection]

Myriad authorities receive information about crimes yet apparently do nothing. In this case, City of Seattle and HUD must eventually take action to insure that no more deaths occur. At this writing, Mitchell harassed a man taken to intensive care with threats of eviction. Fortunately that man recovered but two other tenants - Nations and Vilensky - did not have that good fortune. [Who Killed Jackie Nations?] [Last Cruel Days. Homicide?]

Carr’s dereliction, in a consort with other CoS employees, will gradually emerge. Council House directors have consistently not complied with Seattle Municipal Code to the detriment of elderly people - even to the extent of allowing Mitchell to incarcerate four of them and participate in two cases of alleged homicide by abuse. The public prosecutor has already received information relating to the deaths of Jackie Nations and Naftali Nathan Vilensky. Public prosecutors must by law follow up reports of elder abuse. [Elder Abuse - Abstracts] [Homicide by Abuse]

The letter that Mitchell wrote to Watkins typifies hundreds of other letters that Mitchell, his principal thug, and other directors have sent to third parties (mainly relatives and former associates of tenants). They character assassinate tenants and blackmail them into submission after they dissent or complain about elder abuse by Mitchell and his thugs. Mitchell has a sociopathic disposition. [Histrionics and Narcissism] [Thespian Liar]

Judge Doerty complained about “surveillance” of Council House and its staff that took place as part of a thorough investigation of elder abuse using proven techniques and within journalism codes of conduct. Information in documented case studies shows the falsity of reports Mitchell has filed with city officials. Carr must address the convoluted scenario scripted by this professional actor. He will probably need a team of attorneys and psychiatrists to assist him full time. [Elder Abuse - Abstracts]

Finkle ignored tenant complaints then denied due process of law to tenants affected by false and misleading reports filed by Mitchell as Council House administrator. Those reports formed part of his vilification and blackmail campaign to cover up crimes that he has committed including two counts of alleged homicide by abuse. HUD and City of Seattle (CoS) act as oversight authorities for Council House yet they practice wilful blindness. [Agency Accountability] [Last Cruel Days. Homicide?] [Who Killed Jackie Nations?] [Homicide by Abuse]

Jeaneen Watkins (CoS Harassment Advocate) has ignored Council House tenant complaints for several years. She apparently has no law credentials yet makes decisions on legal matters. Finkle continues to withhold public records requested under Washington Public Disclosure Act by using fatuous exemptions. He repeatedly denied access to public records by stonewalling requests even indexes to documents. Although Carr has known about this stonewalling for more than a year he has done nothing to rectify the situation which indicates his collusion with Finkle and Mayor Gregory J. Nickels. [Public Records Access] [Silent Withholding]

When asked to provide an index Finkle again stonewalled. The law requires that:

(a) Issue and publish a formal order specifying the reasons why and the extent to which compliance would unduly burden or interfere with agency operations; and

(b) Make available for public inspection and copying all indexes maintained for agency use.

Although cautioned about further stonewalling with regard to providing copies of records under RCW 42.17 neither Carr nor Finkle did anything to rectify the situation. Stonewalling usually results from a need to cover up criminal activity or political machination. In this case, it covers up multiple condonation of Council House criminal activities and acceptance without question of false reports that they file with government agencies.

They continue their established pattern or practice of unlawful stonewalling with a complete disregard for law. The mayor’s office has completely ignored reports and complaints about elder abuse at Council House for four years - contributory factors in at least two deaths and several dozen other incidences of abuse.

Almost four years ago (16 Apr 01) the city received notice and a complaint regarding Council House activity. It addressed four counts with an urgent request for attention:

1. First Amendment Issues. Retaliating against an investigative freelance reporter protected under the First Amendment to the US Constitution for publishing reports about malfeasance and reporting it to government authorities. Distributing leaflets by hanging them on doors and posting them on a bulletin board.

2. Invasion of Privacy. Invading privacy by creating an intimidating, hostile, and offensive living environment. Indulging in public slander among other residents and divulging private information contained in confidential written documents to third parties for unlawful purposes. Behaving in a manner that alarms, annoys, harasses, and interferes with the quiet enjoyment of HUD federally-assisted housing. Violating and changing a lease also HUD regulations.

3. Unlawful Eviction Threats and Lease Changes. Inciting residents generally to ostracize and to call police each time that they receive oral or written communication: actions designed to provoke an adverse response and collectively create enough evidence to evict. Instigating residents to act as accessories before and after the fact of unlawful eviction by imploring them to obtain capricious antiharassment orders as a means to “imprison” then unlawfully to evict through harassment.

4. Excessive Nocturnal Noise. Neglecting to address noise pollution and flanking sound transmission problems thus violating City of Seattle ordinances that mandate responsibility for noise disturbance and abatement.

City of Seattle neglected to respond to those complaints. Council House took that official dereliction as tacit approval to continue unlawful practices. Now two people have died and others have had a close encounter.

However, City of Seattle does not stand alone in withholding public records. Washington Supreme Court recently fined King County more than $100,00.00 for withholding public records. He said that: “The finding of facts and conclusions of law outline in gruesome detail four years of runaround" by the office of County Executive Gary Locke and his successor Ron Sims.” The county eventually acknowledged “gross negligence”. [Public Records Access - Washington] [Silent Withholding]

Carr and Finkle remain similarly out of control. Their negligence allowed dumping confidential documents at curbside for anyone to access concurrent with willfully withhold open records. According to Lewis Kamb, Seattle Post-Intelligencer [10 May 03], the City Attorney’s office left dozens of legal case files containing personal information unattended outside the building that houses the City Attorney's Office located on a busy downtown Seattle sidewalk. They stayed there several hours before pickup for recycling.

The files contained names, addresses, dates of birth, social security numbers, state driver's license numbers, and full driving records. Some of the documents contained the heading “Confidential - Not for Release.” Kathryn Harper (a City Hall public relations flak) furnished convoluted answers about the issue that amounted to nothing more than self justification. A city records management employee claimed that city departments generally follow state records retention requirements and made a strong point for the obvious that:

Anything of a confidential nature should be obliterated, . . . We don't recommend the practice to just leave records out on a public sidewalk. From my experience, most city departments would keep them behind locked doors until they were to be picked up.

It seems that Mayor Nickels and Attorney Carr still have a lot of explaining to do about this incident in light of their behavior since it occurred. Especially, when their public relations bimbos try to explain away malfeasance with surreal performances.

Mayor Nickels responded to a complaint about the City Attorney’s office in an undated letter signed by a receptionist. Apart from the arrogance of not responding personally, he referred the complaint back to the perpetrators Carr and Finkle by saying:

This office does not have any of the materials regarding Council House that you have requested.

One can only assume from this statement that the city attorney does not work for the mayor’s office but runs an independent law office. As did Finkle, Nickels (or his peon) referred the complaint to Kathryn Harper, a tyro public relations flak who works for Carr and responds insolently to members of the media while she stonewalls requests for public records.

Although Nickels feigned ignorance, he referred to previous statements that a requested index did not exist . This shows that he evidently has knowledge of the withholding of public records with false “non-conviction data” exemption claims and indicates that he also knows about the underlying malfeasance and cover-up of elder abuse at Council House.

The document requested with particularity contains a series of false and misleading reports filed by Stephen A. Mitchell to cover up his unlawful activities. Carr and Finkle have colluded with Mitchell by withholding details of that document and by not acting upon criminal complaints under city ordinances. Those ordinances require them to give the person subject to complaint a fair and impartial hearing.

In his refusal, the city attorney admits to the existence of the formal charge and other documentation signed by Mitchell. However, he continues to neglect to process it while allowing the Council House blackmail to continue. Mitchell also sent similar formal complaints to other agencies without any valid supporting documentation.

Finkle claims not to have proceeded with charges yet he classifies the documentation as “non-conviction data". That ranks as a law 101 oxymoron. How can public records classify as “non-conviction” when an investigation or trial has never taken place?

Meanwhile, Finkle continues to neglect to provide other information of a non-criminal nature in accordance with the Public Disclosure Act. [RCW 42.17]

To a request for a copy of Watkin’s job description he replied:

After conducting a search of our records, we have determined that no document exists in our office that describes Ms. Watkins' job functions.

He ignores the requirement for job descriptions:

City of Seattle, Personnel Rule 2.1.1(G). “Classification specification” shall mean a written description of a classification . . . that includes a title, a description of distinguishing characteristics, a statement of typical duties and responsibilities, and a statement of minimum qualifications.

If Watkins does not have a written job description then what does she do? How can she work for City of Seattle without it? She certainly does not address harassment complaints. She has apparently colluded with Finkle in denying due process on a complaint about false filings by Council House.

To top it all, the mayor does not respond to complaints. Instead, he employs a bevy of out-of-control bimbos to detract from the real problems. Those complaints include withholding police incident reports to cover up alleged crimes by Council House administrators and directors. [Public Records Access] [Silent Withholding]

If Nickels spent less time having his picture taken then perhaps he could address elder abuse instead of giving it lip-service. He stands for reelection next year. Perhaps, publicity about his Machiavellian influence and arrogance will persuade the electorate to find someone more sensitive to the needs of senior citizens to vote for in the next mayoral election.

[Nmesis]