Worthington v. WestNET Saga part II – “Why I now fear for my life”

Worthington v. WestNET Saga part II

“Why I now fear for my life.”

When is “WestNET” a government agency liable under the “Open Public Meetings Act”, which is State Law, RCW 42.30, and obligated to full disclosure by the Washington State Public Records Act, RCW 42.56? Or, when is “WestNET” a NON ENTITY that isn’t subject to any Washington State law?

It seems Kitsap County’s Prosecutor, Ione George, claims WestNet is both an agency and a non-entity. In a lawsuit between John Worthington v WestNet for ‘WestNET’s” violation of state law, George claims WestNet is NOT a government agency and is exempt from law because it “doesn’t exist”. But then, according records obtained by John Worthington, it appears that WestNET “is a government agency” when it comes to receiving money, disbursing money, cashing checks and filing records with the Auditors Office and Treasure’s office.

“WestNET” is an acronym for the “West Sound Narcotics Enforcement Team”, which comprises the Sheriffs offices of Kitsap, Bainbridge Island, Bremerton, Mason County, the National Guard Counter Drug Task Force. Naval Criminal Investigative Services and Port Orchard, Poulsbo, Shelton, and Washington State Patrol.

When “WestNet” raided the home of a drug suspect and confiscated this suspect’s property, which included 1500 marijuana plants, they alleged they talked to an informant who stated a guy named Big John was the suspect’s partner. WestNET determined Big John was the 5-5 John Worthington and allegedly called in the DEA to go raid “Big John Worthington.”

Worthington’s soon discovered the DEA guy was actually a federally cross designated Washington State Patrolman who took his grow light and 6 medical marijuana plants. Worthington filed suit in the state court for the acts of a state employee that enabled law enforcement to bypass the state medical marijuana law. That case was removed to federal court where Worthington’s case was dismissed pursuant to CR 12 B 6 because Judge Robart ruled the DEA was immune from state marijuana laws and could take his plants and grow light.

It was during that case Worthington found out the DEA refused the case and asked WestNET to conduct the raid and take pictures for future prosecutorial consideration. Worthington tried in vain to convince Judge Robart that it was actually WestNET that raided him but the task forces were able to convince Judge Robart that Worthington’s documents of the WestNET acts were not authentic.

At that time John Worthington was an advocate for medical marijuana as he was awaiting hip replacement for his badly damage hips. Mr. Worthingtn advocate marijuana was an effective agent to moderate his pain. In his role as an advocate for the medical use of marijuana, John felt marijuana was a suitable alternative to prescription pharmaceuticals for controlling chronic pain that didn’t carry many of the undesirable side effects of the harsher prescription drugs.

This is where Ione George, Kitsap’s prosecutor enters the picture. Rather than admit there was no DEA raid and that WestNET actually raided him, George quarterbacked the effort to hide the truth so that the statute of limitations could expire on future legal claims by Worthington. This leaves Mr. Worthington with trying to find out who it was that decided to use WestNET to conduct a phony DEA raid well after the statute of limitations has expired.

So Mr. Worthington, in trying to find out who ordered the phony DEA raid, filed “public records requests” to see which of the “entities of this Non entity” were involved . Ione George argued that Mr. Worthington’s public records request must be dismissed as it is directed to “WestNet” which is a “non-entity” and not subject to the laws. The trial court and the Washington State Court of Appeals agreed.  Mr. Worthington appealed to the Washington State Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of Mr. Worthington and against this “shell game” being played by Ione George and remanded the case back to Kitsap County Superior court. During the Supreme Court briefing George and the Kitsap County Prosecutor argued WestNET did not conduct seizure forfeiture activity.

On remand the Trial court ruled against Worthington and ruled WestNET was actually Kitsap County and under the umbrella of the Kitsap County Sherrif’s office. Worthington filed a motion to reconsider and submitted numerous court appearances by WestNET and also produced some checks written to WestNET.

The Counsel for WestNET filed a motion acknowledging the sanction able gaff to the Supreme Court regarding WestNET seizure forfeiture activity and the Kitsap County Superior court Judge Melissa Hemstreet ordered a hearing.  Worthington submitted a document trail showing over 300 checks were written to WestNET , then deposited into the WestNET fund. Worthington has also discovered affidavits for search warrants, notice of intents to seize and other judicial and quasi judicial paperwork was also filed in the name of WestNET. Ione George claimed the 12 years of WestNET   seizure activity was the result of scrivener’s errors.

Mr. Worthington is now asking the Kitsap County Superior court, via a declaratory judgment action, to determine if WestNet is a government agency or a Non -Entity.  If the court decides that WestNET is not a legal entity then, they would have to return all the property and cash they confiscated from thousands of people since 1998.

What this means is that now there are serious criminal implications for the acts of WestNET in criminal seizure and forfeiture the last 12 years, which also involve three or more court venues who required defendants to pay them WestNET related fines and fees, which they forwarded on to WestNET after they took their cut. This  case has Rico Act, bank fraud, mail fraud, forgery, criminal impersonation, racketeering, money laundering, official misconduct, obtaining a signature by deception and perjury implications.

What this also means is that public officials may have to go to jail, towns and counties may go broke after they pay back these ill-gotten gains obtained in their role as a non-legal since 1998.

How would you feel if you were in Mr. Worthington’s shoes. If ever there was a whistleblower situation this is it.

 

 

Comments are closed.