XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
Website Navigation
The Issues
and
Proposed Solutions
( Website Homepage )
Understand the ELS Federal Tax Fraud Scheme
Legal Opinions and
Documents related to the
ELS Tax Fraud Scheme
Chronological List of
Website Documents
Washington State
Precedential
Railroad Right-of-Way
Opinions Thru Brown


Arthur Andersen's participation in the East Lake Sammamish
federal tax fraud scheme

by John Rasmussen

Please read a disclaimer for the statements I make on this website accusing judges, politicians and activists of criminal actions.



Introduction:

         Conventional wisdom holds that the Enron and WorldCom scandals were the result of corporate greed. That's not the whole truth. On this website, I show that Arthur Andersen LLP participated in other accounting fraud prior to its criminal activity at Enron and WorldCom. The earlier Arthur Andersen criminal activity I discuss on this site did not result from corporate greed, but rather was the result of political greed and judicial corruption. Arthur Andersen's crime in King County, Washington, was not prosecuted because powerful politicians, judges, and law enforcement officials participated in the crime, and then had the influence and power to cover-up their criminal activity.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         If Arthur Andersen's fraudulent accounting in King County had been prosecuted, I believe that Arthur Andersen's subsequent accounting fraud at Enron and WorldCom might not have happened. The accounting fraud which hid wrongdoing at Enron and WorldCom grew from the Andersen's participation in the political and judicial corruption in King County, Washington. Because King County used Arthur Andersen for a criminal purpose, I believe that the people of King County owe a debt to the folks harmed by Arthur Andersen's subsequent accounting fraud at Enron and WorldCom.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)


Topics on this page:  (Each topic is presented as a hyperlink. Use this menu to jump to that subject.)

    * Arthur Andersen LLP participated in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme.

    * I blew the whistle on Arthur Andersen's East Lake Sammamish fraudulent accounting a number of times.

    * How did Arthur Andersen participate in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme?

    * What evidence shows Arthur Andersen's participation in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme?

    * The ELS federal tax fraud scheme was covered-up by federal and State judges.

    * Why was this criminal activity not exposed?

    * Do the Enron and WorldCom victims have a claim based on Arthur Andersen's ELS crime?

    * Summary:

    * Reference:


Arthur Andersen LLP participated in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme.

         Prior to the Enron and WorldCom scandals, the accounting firm Arthur Andersen LLP participated in a federal tax fraud scheme in King County, Washington. In committing the crime, Andersen's accomplices were the leadership of King County, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF), and a non-profit named The Land Conservancy of Seattle and King County (TLC). The cover-up of the crime involved King County, the TLC lawyers, State and federal judges, the U.S. Attorney in Seattle, the IRS, and others. I call the crime "Theft-by-Community" because it required the participation of the original conspirators, those responsible to prosecute it, and other powerful members of the community.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Read a detailed description of the East Lake Sammamish Federal Tax Fraud Scheme.

      Understand "Theft-by-Community", the cooperative effort involved in the ELS tax fraud scheme.

I blew the whistle on Arthur Andersen's East Lake Sammamish fraudulent accounting a number of times. Several examples are shown here.

    "Whistle Blower" notification to the leadership of King County, Washington:

         It's obvious that Arthur Andersen didn't suddenly become crooked when it dealt with Enron and WorldCom. But, I have heard little about the prosecution of Andersen's earlier crimes. King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng was a major player in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme. I blew the whistle on the Prosecutor's criminal acts to the leadership of King County on February 7, 2000. This was a year and a half before the Enron scandal began to break in mid-to-late 2001. If the leadership of King County had refused to participate in the ELS tax fraud scheme, I believe that Arthur Andersen's ELS fraudulent accounting would have been made public at a time that may have prevented Andersen's fraudulent accounting from doing so much harm at Enron and WorldCom.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my "whistle blower" letter to the leadership of King County on February 7, 2000.

    "Whistle Blower" notification to the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Transportation:

         At the time I discovered the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme, John McCain was chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Transportation. I believed that he and his committee had a responsibility to monitor criminal activity by the Nation's railroads. McCain was notified twice of the tax fraud scheme. He did not reply to either letter.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my letter to Senator John McCain July 4, 2000.

      View my letter to Senator John McCain January 25, 2001.

    "Whistle Blower" notification to Federal District Judge Barbara Rothstein:

         I blew the whistle on Arthur Andersen's ELS fraud in my declaration to Federal District Judge Barbara Rothstein in April 2001. This was several months before Arthur Andersen's Enron crime began to be exposed. Judge Rothstein struck my description of the tax fraud scheme and the exhibits which supported my explanation. She failed to turn over this uncontested evidence to federal prosecutors. Further, Rothstein issued a decision which was obviously intended to cover-up the ELS tax fraud scheme and protect the powerful politicians in King County who had participated in the crime. In order to justify her criminal opinion, Judge Rothstein denied my Constitutional rights, intentionally misapplied common law, violated the rules of summary judgment, and made up ridiculous facts. Federal Judge Rothstein's criminal act from the bench exposes the federal courts as participants in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme. The following is the portion of my declaration which describes the ELS tax fraud scheme, and which Judge Rothstein struck.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

           "There is evidence that, as a condition of railbanking the East Lake Sammamish spur, Burlington Northern required The Land Conservancy of Seattle and King County (TLC) and King County to certify a phony donation of land the railroad didn't own. This would have allowed BNSF to take a fraudulent tax write-off of $40.2 million.

           BNSF hired Arthur Andersen LLP to appraise the East Lake Sammamish right-of-way, and instructed the appraiser to assume that Burlington Northern owned all the right of way land, fee simple. This can be verified by looking at page eight of the Arthur Andersen appraisal dated December 10, 1996. "...we assumed fee simple title at the clients request." The client is BNSF. /14

           Then, BNSF drew up papers of sale that showed TLC accepting the phony donation, and agreeing to certify the donation to the IRS. King County followed, and acknowledged the same phony donation when TLC sold to King County.

           The Prosecutor's office and TLC have made attempts to hide the fraud, it appears. The draft copy of the agreement between BNSF and TLC was released to the public with the incriminating paragraph on page six distorted to the point it cannot be accurately read, while the remainder of the document is perfectly readable. /15 When TLC provided a copy of the final agreement to the City of Issaquah, the incriminating page was omitted. /16 The missing page six of the BNSF-TLC final sale agreement was later obtained and is now included. The page deals with the phony donation, and TLC's commitment to verify the donation with the IRS.

           The false claim to ownership of my land under the right of way serves the county's interests in several ways. If the county owns the land, it avoids the issue of its responsibility to pay for the establishment of a trail easement. It allows the county to charge bisected property owners a crossing fee to cross the trail from one side of their property to the other. An Eastside Journal article on January 6, 2000 reported that the county was considering a charge of up to $7,000 on some properties to cover a five-year crossing permit.

           The false claim of ownership protects the county from complicity in federal tax fraud claims for accepting a donation of land that the county knew BNSF did not own. There are irregularities in the amount that King County paid to TLC for the right of way. It appears the county paid several times the value of what it received from TLC. TLC paid $1.5 million for the right of way, and then sold a large portion to King County for $2.9 million within hours. /17 Essentially all of the remaining portion was then sold to the City of Issaquah for about $1 million. Several other suspicious transactions are rumored and should be investigated in discovery. By falsely claiming ownership of all the right of way land, the high price paid by the county appears to be a bargain. It is obvious to me that TLC made millions from this transaction. Was this obscene profit a payoff for TLC to shield the county from a direct connection to BNSF and the federal tax fraud?

           The false claim of ownership could also allow the county to claim the right of way land by adverse possession. The county has publicly claimed ownership, and will occupy the property by establishing the trail. After the legal waiting period the county will be eligible to file an adverse possession claim. The county executive, council members and prosecutor should confirm or deny this tactic under oath.

           King County's claim to ownership of my land is without merit, violates my rights, and is intended to hide the county's wrongdoing. There is a need to call for a full, independent, federal investigation of every aspect of these transactions."

        [Documentation: Go to Pages 7-10 of my declaration to view my description of federal tax fraud which Rothstein struck here. (Portions struck by Rothstein are highlighted in yellow)]

         The following link takes the reader to an annotated version of Rothstein's opinion, King County v. Rasmussen (2001), at the position I discuss the evidence of the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme. I discuss the relevance of each piece of evidence which Rothstein struck.

      View my discussion of the evidence of fraud which Judge Rothstein struck in King County v. Rasmussen (2001).

    "Whistle Blower" notification to the IRS:

         In addition to the "whistle blower" notifications to the politicians and judges, I presented "whistle blower" evidence to the Internal Revenue Service on April 12, 2002. While this notification was after the Enron scandal broke, it was information which could have been significant in the prosecution of Arthur Andersen and the Enron executives.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my "whistle blower" report to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS Form 211) on April 12, 2002.

    "Whistle Blower" notification to the U.S. Attorney:

         When I understood that the leadership of King County had participated in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme and that Federal District Judge Rothstein had covered-up the scheme with her 2001 opinion, I presented the evidence of the crime to Federal Prosecutor Jeff Sullivan on April 18, 2002. It appears that Sullivan then used this information to get himself advanced to U.S. Attorney in Seattle. King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng publicly supported Sullivan's advancement after Sullivan refused to prosecute Maleng for his participation in the ELS crime. After Maleng's untimely death in 2007, Sullivan was appointed to U.S. Attorney by the Federal District Court, the same court which was responsible for District Judge Rothstein's dishonest opinion, King County v. Rasmussen (2001). This was a political appointment made by judges. The Chief Judge of the Federal District Court in Seattle was Robert Lasnik. Judge Lasnik was a close personal friend of Maleng's and served as Maleng's chief of staff for fifteen years before becoming a judge.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Read a more detailed description of U.S. Attorney Jeff Sullivan's connection to the ELS tax fraud scheme.

    "Whistle Blower" notification to the Chief Judge of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court.

         After my right of due process was denied from Federal District Court to the United States Supreme Court, I filed a complaint of judicial misconduct to the Chief Judge of the Ninth circuit, Mary M. Schroeder. Judge Schroeder dismissed my complaint, claiming that the issues I brought in the complaint had already been resolved in the court opinions. Of course, this was a lie. In the following link, I describe the "Catch 22" that is used by the courts to ignore legitimate complaints of criminal acts by judges. This link also contains links to my complaint of judicial misconduct and the dismissal by Schroeder.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my 2004 Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, and subsequent denial by Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Schroeder.

    "Whistle Blower" notification to the daily newspapers in King County, Washington.

         I believed the best way to inform the public about the ELS tax fraud was through the daily newspapers in King County. The Seattle Times is considered the "paper of record" in Washington State, if not the whole northwest. I first notified The Seattle Times about the ELS federal tax fraud scheme in November 1999. For about ten years, I continued to remind the newspaper about the tax fraud scheme. The newspaper never reported the crime and ignored my email letters. My final letter to the times was on August 30, 2009. In that letter, I presented ten years of ignored correspondence, and accused The Seattle Times of being an active participant in the tax fraud scheme. I posted that letter as a public letter on this website and sent email notification to more than sixty members of the Times. True to form, not one member of The Seattle Times responded.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my August 30, 2009 public letter to the owners, editors, and staff of The Seattle Times.

         There was a second daily newspaper "serving" the East Lake Sammamish area which was notified of the ELS federal tax fraud scheme. That paper was called the Eastside Journal until 2003 when it consolidated with another newspaper and took the name King County Journal. When I learned that the newspaper was closing in early 2007, I wrote a final email to several members of the staff who had refused to report the ELS tax fraud scheme.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my January 11, 2007 email to members of the King County Journal.

How did Arthur Andersen participate in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme?

         The East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme involved BNSF donating all the land under the ELS right-of-way to King County. Since BNSF owned very little of that land, there were two elements to the ELS tax fraud scheme. The first element was to falsely claim that all the land under the ELS right-of-way was owned by BNSF. The Railroad couldn't donate the land unless it owned the land. The second element was to grossly inflate the value of the donated land. BNSF couldn't truly rip-off the American people without inflating the value of its phony tax donation. King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng had the influence within the judicial system to get judges to alter Washington State property law in order to validate BNSF's false claim of ownership. Arthur Andersen, LLP provided a grossly inflated value for the land under the ELS right-of-way. This fraudulent accounting greatly increased the amount of the phony tax write-off. So, the two elements of the ELS federal tax fraud scheme are the false claim of ownership of the ELS right-of-way land and the inflated value of the donation of that land. A discussion of Arthur Andersen's participation is next. The link shown directly below will help the reader understand how King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng participated in the ELS tax fraud scheme and hid his criminal act.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Understand how Norm Maleng used his influence and power to cover-up the ELS federal tax fraud scheme.

What evidence shows Arthur Andersen's participation in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme?

         Burlington Northern Santa Fe donated the land under the East Lake Sammamish (ELS) right-of-way to King County and then took a massive illegal tax write-off. The disgraced accounting firm, Arthur Andersen LLP, provided the appraisal of the right-of-way for BNSF. As explained above, there were two elements to the fraud involved in the Arthur Andersen ELS right-of-way appraisal: the assumption that BNSF owned all the underlying land, and the greatly inflated valuation of the land under the right-of-way. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

    BNSF instructed Arthur Andersen to value the land under the right-of-way as if BNSF owned it all.

         Both the Arthur Andersen ELS right-of-way appraisal and the King County ELS right-of-way appraisal, hyperlinked below, assumed that all the land under the right-of-way was owned fee simple by the railway. This was a fraudulent assumption because the right-of-way deeds to the Railway were based on a "form deed" which had been composed by the Railway lawyers and had previously been found to not grant fee simple title to the Railway. The Burke and Squire deeds to the Railway had been construed in Washington State courts and found to be easements. See Pacific Iron Works v. Bryant Lumber & Shingle Mill Company (1910) and King County v. Squire Investment Co., et al (1990). Further, in Lawson v. State of Washington (1986), King County failed to obtain a favorable ruling by the Washington State Supreme Court. There were about twelve Seattle Lake Shore and Eastern Railway (SLS&E) deeds involved in Lawson. In the subsequent resolution of the ownership issue of those twelve deeds, King County admitted that none of those Seattle Lake Shore and Eastern Railway (SLS&E) deeds conveyed fee simple interest to the Railway. This means that out of fourteen deeds to the Seattle Lake Shore and Eastern Railway previously contested in court, none had been found to grant fee simple title. Yet in the ELS appraisals, shown in the hyperlinks below, all the SLS&E deeds were assumed to have granted fee simple. Since the deeds were constructed on a common "form deed", composed by the Railway lawyers, it was pure, blatant, intentional fraud for BNSF to instruct the appraiser to assume that BNSF owned the ELS land, fee simple.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Read Page 8 of Arthur Andersen's ELS Appraisal to verify that the deeds were assumed to grant fee simple title.

      Read Page 1 of King County's ELS Appraisal to verify that the deeds were assumed to grant fee simple title.

    Arthur Andersen, LLP provided a grossly inflated appraisal of the land under the ELS right-of-way.

         Arthur Andersen, LLP provided a grossly inflated appraisal of the east Lake Sammamish right-of-way so that Burlington Northern Santa Fe could take an inflated illegal tax write-off. The Arthur Andersen appraisal was for $41.76 million. Compare this to the appraisal commissioned by King County at $13.97 Million. It would be nice if everyone could inflate the value of their tax donations by three times, or more, and then take that inflated value as a write-off on their IRS taxes. That’s what BNSF did, and Federal Judge Barbara Rothstein struck evidence of the crime and hid the facts when they were presented to her in federal court. Here, we're not considering the fact that BNSF didn't own what it donated, we're just considering the inflated value of the donation.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View the $41.76 Million Arthur Andersen ELS Appraisal for BNSF, Full Appraisal.

      View the $13.97 Million ELS Appraisal for King County. (Significant pages.)

    The King County Assessor's value of the land was much lower:

         Arthur Andersen's gross inflation of the ELS right-of-way value can be seen by comparing Andersen's appraisal to the King County Assessor's appraisal of my land. The 1996 Arthur Andersen appraisal valued the land under the BNSF right-of-way on my property at approximately $455,000. This was completely dishonest because the King County Assessor valued all of the land on my property at $399,400 in 1996. The right-of-way comprised only about one third of my lot and contained no waterfront. Much of the value of the land was tied to the water frontage. The hyperlink, directly below, provides documents and calculations which show the complete dishonesty of the Arthur Andersen's appraisal.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Do the math! View documents and calculations that show the grossly inflated BNSF appraisal of the Rasmussen right-of-way land by Arthur Andersen.

    What was the Actual Value of the East Lake Sammamish BNSF Right-of-Way?

         It's obscene that BNSF and Arthur Andersen valued the right-of-way land on my property at many times the County Assessor's valuation of my land, at many times the actual purchase and sale prices of my property, and at many times King County's own appraisal of the BNSF right-of-way.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         The actual value of the ELS right-of-way was what BNSF would have netted if it had abandoned the right-of-way. Abandonment was looming for the railroad because it was losing money with its operation on the ELS spur line and the track was in great need of expensive repairs. Upon abandonment, it was estimated that BNSF would have assets consisting of fee simple title to land valued at $1.5 million and the scrap value of the rails and ties. The value of these assets would be decreased by the cost of removing the rails and ties, and the cost of cleaning up the right of way. The various railroads that owned the ELS right-of-way over the last one hundred years had left their waste ties on the right-of-way when they were replaced. These waste ties were toxic and would have been expensive to remove and dispose. I’d estimate that the net value of BNSF’s interests, on abandonment, was less that $2 million. Contrast this with the $40.26 million illegal federal tax write-off, after the payment of $1.5 million by TLC in the "bargain sale". Ridiculous!
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View the Final Sale Agreement between BNSF and TLC. (Presented to a very dishonest Federal District Judge Barbara Rothstein as Exhibit 6. Rothstein struck this exhibit!)

The ELS federal tax fraud scheme was covered-up by federal and State judges.

         As I stated earlier, the two elements of the ELS federal tax fraud scheme are the false claim of ownership of the ELS right-of-way land and the inflated value of the donation of that land. The inflated valuation by Arthur Andersen can be objectively verified, as I have explained above. The false claim of ownership is more difficult to explain to the public because it involves exposing criminal activity by judges and prosecutors. These folks are lawyers who cloak their crimes with dishonest legal argument. The public is not well prepared to understand dishonest legal analysis. To understand the dishonesty by the judges who hid the ELS tax fraud, the public must look at the common law associated with construing railroad right-of-way deeds. It's probably not an over simplification to say that common law is mostly common sense which has evolved into legal precedent. Some lawyers make their living by trying to twist common law into a different meaning than is found in an honest view of precedent. On this website, I expose the manipulation of common law, the illegal use of summary judgment, the manufacturing of ridiculous facts, and the intentional denial of constitutional rights by the judges who covered-up the ELS tax fraud scheme. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         Any chance of Arthur Andersen being prosecuted for its participation in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme disappeared when Federal District Judge Barbara Rothstein struck all evidence of the fraud and issued a decision which covered-up the crime. From there, Rothstein's opinion was supported by her fellow federal judges. The first appeal went to a three judge Ninth Circuit panel. The panel refused to correct Rothstein's blatant dishonesty. The Ninth Circuit then refused en banc appeal, as did the United States Supreme Court. When a "sister lawsuit" went through the Washington State courts, Rothstein's dishonest legal analysis was adopted by the appeals panel in the Washington State Appeals Court, Division One. The final blow was the refusal of the Washington State Supreme Court to expose the corruption and dishonesty in these decisions. We-the-People have lost our judicial system to arrogant and dishonest judges.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

    The judge's dishonesty is revealed in their opinions:

         On this website, I've provided an analysis of the legal opinions which were used to cover-up the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme. The Rasmussen and Ray published opinions are presented in three forms: a version containing detailed comments which describes in depth the judges dishonesty, a version containing brief comments, and the original version without any comment. In addition, I've provided four Federal Court of Claims opinions by Judge Horn which contradict the dishonesty of the federal and State opinions in Washington. The best way to understand the corruption and dishonesty in the federal and state courts of Washington is to study these opinions. Most folks are not willing to make that effort, and this is exactly why judges are so successful in committing crimes from the bench. Links to the seven opinions, in their various forms, are presented here. For a first read of those with attached comment, I suggest reading the version containing brief comments. Each brief comment includes a link to the detailed comment for the reader who requires a more complete explanation and documentation.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View King County v. Rasmussen (2001) annotated with brief comments.

      View King County v. Rasmussen (2001) annotated with detailed comments and documentation.

      View King County v. Rasmussen (2001) without comments.

      View King County v. Rasmussen (2002) annotated with brief comments.

      View King County v. Rasmussen (2002) annotated with detailed comments and documentation.

      View King County v. Rasmussen (2002) without comments.

      View Ray v. King County (2004) annotated with brief comments.

      View Ray v. King County (2004) annotated with detailed comments and documentation.

      View Ray v. King County (2004) without comments.

      View Beres v. United States (2005).

      View Beres v. United States (2010).

      View Beres v. United States (2011).

      View Beres v. United States (2012).

    The common dishonest tactics used by judges to cover-up the ELS federal tax fraud scheme:

         The proof that federal and State judges participated in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme is found in the profound dishonesty of their opinions and the common dishonest tactics they used. As I explain above, it's difficult for the public to understand when judges commit crimes from the bench with their decisions. I've prepared a study of the common dishonest tactics used by the federal and State judges who covered-up the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme. There is no doubt in my mind that these criminal acts by judges constitute racketeering. The problem is that there is essentially no interest in federal or state prosecutors to prosecute judges. Further, judges are protected by their bar associations, and newspapers are hesitant to report corruption in the courts. This irrational protection of dishonest judges is discussed in more detail below. Please use the following link to understand the common dishonest tactics used by the Hilchkanum judges in the opinions analyzed in the section above.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Understand the "House of Cards", the common dishonest tactics used by the Hilchkanum judges.

    Appeals court judges, who refuse legitimate appeals, commit criminal acts by their refusal.

         The most cowardly and dishonest decision of an appeals court is the denial of a legitimate appeal. I write "cowardly" because appeals judges, who refuse to accept appeal of a crooked lower court opinion, write no opinion in support of the dishonest lower court judge. They do not answer legitimate arguments made in the appeal briefs. They do not sign their names to an opinion in support of their lower court judge. Instead, they distance themselves with their quiet refusal of appeal. Appeal court judges have no legal right to refuse legitimate appeals.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         In my lawsuit, the only published opinions were from the Federal District Court and the three judges Ninth Circuit appeals panel. My en banc appeal to the full Ninth Circuit and my appeal to the United States Supreme Court resulted in the dishonest denial of appeal. One can argue that the United States Supreme Court is unable to give full consideration to all appeals, but the Supreme Court knows that it overturns a high percentage of Ninth Circuit appeals. I see no evidence that the United States Supreme Court has done anything to reign in the chronic dishonest of the Ninth Circuit judges.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         My neighbors, the Rays, took the exact same legal questions involved in my lawsuit through the Washington State courts. The denial of appeal by the Washington State Supreme Court is a perfect example of the cowardly criminal acts committed by appeals judges. I wrote a public letter to the judges of the Washington State Supreme Court in 2009, accusing them of participating in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme with their denial of the Ray's appeal. That letter is linked here. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my March 31, 2009 public letter to the Judges of the Washington State Supreme Court.

Why was this criminal activity not exposed?

    Government Officials:

         I blew the whistle on the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme a number of times. In the section above, I detailed my "whistle blower" notification to several politicians. In addition to those I listed above, I notified the Governor of the State of Washington, the State Attorney General, local politicians, and others. Not one politician was willing to take a stand against this criminal act. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Review the earlier "whistle blower" discussion in a separate window.

    The Judiciary:

         The most troubling aspect of this crime not being exposed is the willingness of judges to participate from the bench. It appears that the appeals process has evolved into upper court judges protecting their fellow judges in the lower courts. Judges do this because it's just about impossible to hold judges responsible for their criminal acts. We grant great power to judges and partially shield them from the political process. But, this protection has encouraged them to abandon their oaths and commitment to the Constitution and the laws, and instead do whatever they like. I've written a more detailed description of this issue, linked here. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Judges protect their fellow judges at the expense of the Constitution and the law.

    The Press:

         I believe that freedom of the press provides the last chance for exposure of corruption in government. I concentrated on The Seattle Times, which considerers itself the "paper of record" for the region. Sadly, The Seattle Times refused to report this crime. After ten years of trying to get The Seattle Times to report the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme, I wrote a final public letter on August 30, 2009. I sent email notification to sixty-five members of the Times. Not one member replied. I have come to the conclusion that The Seattle Times became an active participant in the tax fraud scheme with its refusal to report the crime. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my August 30, 2009 public letter to the owners, editors, and staff of The Seattle Times.

    The Washington State Bar Association:

         Another factor, in hiding the dishonesty of judges, is that the bar association severely restricts its lawyers from speaking out publicly against the judiciary. That restriction keeps the most qualified voices silent. So, the public gets legal analysis from folks like me, who cannot be disbarred because I'm not a member of the Bar. But, if my exposure of the ELS tax fraud scheme ever gets significant public attention, I'll be criticized for my lack of legal expertise.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         It is possible that I will file a complaint with the Bar against the lawyers who participated in the ELS tax fraud. This would give the Washington State Bar Association an opportunity to actively cover-up the participation of its members in the ELS crime, or allow a venue for me to confront its members who have harmed my family.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

    Impeachment:

         Our system of government allows for impeachment of the judiciary and the other governmental officials involved in criminal acts. This system is broken. There is little interest in impeaching judges or politicians by the politicians themselves. I've provided a study of Federal District Judge Alan McDonald. McDonald had a long history of unethical and illegal conduct from the bench, but was never impeached or significantly disciplined. Read the following linked discussion to understand.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Federal District Judge Alan McDonald was never held responsible for his unethical and dishonest acts.

Do the victims of the Enron and WorldCom scandals have a claim based on Arthur Andersen's participation in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme?

         The leaders of King County participated in a federal tax fraud scheme, enhancing their political careers by providing a bike trail for the people of the County. The crime involved the theft of land from a few King County residents and the defrauding of the American taxpayer. Powerful members of the King County community influenced federal and State judges to cover-up the crime. These crooked politicians and judges represent the people of King County and have placed a liability on the people of the County with their participation and cover-up of the ELS tax fraud scheme. This includes the cover-up of Arthur Andersen's ELS crime. I believe that the people of King County, Washington, should be taxed to compensate those who were defrauded by Arthur Andersen's subsequent accounting crimes at Enron and WorldCom. An argument can be made that all the people of Washington State are liable because the Washington State Supreme Court denied appeal of the obviously corrupt opinion, Ray v. King County (2004). Further, because the federal judges, the U.S. Attorney in Seattle, and the IRS were also involved in the cover-up of the crime, I believe the federal government has liability also.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         While there is little doubt that the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme evolved in the way I describe on this website, there are obstacles for the folks defrauded by Enron and WorldCom obtaining compensation from King County, the State of Washington, or the federal government. First, there is the statute of limitations. I don't know the status. Second, there is the difficulty in finding a fair court to hold a trial. The Ninth Circuit is invested in the ELS crime because of the criminal acts of its judges. Even if a trial were held in another federal district, there is a good possibility that court would try to protect its fellow federal judges. A third obstacle is the fact that judges do not welcome criticism from lawyers. It would take competent lawyers to make a claim and it may be difficult to find lawyers willing to gamble their careers on a lawsuit that revolves around judicial misconduct. Another consideration is the viability of the evidence. On this website, I present fact after fact which shows that federal tax fraud was committed. In court, the judges, politicians, and other participants in the tax fraud scheme would lie to protect themselves. So, the facts I've uncovered may not hold up before a jury. This is particularly true because of the likelihood that the judge in any trial would be sympathetic to his fellow accused judges.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

Summary:

         On this page I describe Arthur Andersen's participation in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme. I explain evidence of the crime and how it was covered-up. Further, I suggest that the folks who were defrauded by Arthur Andersen's participation in the Enron and WorldCom scandals may have a legal claim against King County, the State of Washington, and the federal government. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         The East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme would never have been successful without the cooperation of federal and state judges. The scandals at Enron and WorldCom have caused public distrust in the corporate world. The public needs to understand that these scandals involve more that greedy corporate executives. These scandals were also made possible by the corruption in our government and courts.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)



Reference:

    View a Timeline of the events I describe on this webpage.

    View the Evidence of the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme.

    View an analysis of Who Participated in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme.

    View my Whistle Blower Letter to Ron Sims and Council in February 2000, outlining the ELS federal tax fraud scheme.

    "Lie, Stonewall and Slander", how King County deals with citizens who challenge its actions.

    "Theft-by-Community", how the community in King County stole the ELS land from its residents.

    Norm Maleng's "Legal Theory" the legal excuse by the Prosecutor for accepting the phony donation of ELS land.

    View a study of how Norm Maleng Covered-up King County's Participation in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme

    Understand how the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy works against the rights of Americans.

    View King County v. Rasmussen, Preliminary Injunction Hearing, September 14, 2000 annotated with my comments.

    View King County v. Rasmussen (2001) annotated with brief comments.

    View King County v. Rasmussen (2001) annotated with detailed comments.

    View King County v. Rasmussen (2002) annotated with brief comments.

    View King County v. Rasmussen (2002) annotated with detailed comments.

    View Ray v. King County (2004) annotated with brief comments.

    View Ray v. King County (2004) annotated with detailed comments.

    View Beres v. United States (2005).

    View Beres v. United States (2010).

    View Beres v. United States (2011).

    View Beres v. United States (2012).

    View my 2004 Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, and denial by Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Schroeder.

    Understand how Judges Protect their Fellow Judges at the expense of the Constitution and the laws.

    View my March 31, 2009 Public Letter to the Judges of the Washington State Supreme Court.

    View my August 30, 2009 Public Letter to the owners, editors, and staff of The Seattle Times.