, , , , , , , ,
Westlaw Books Welcome
Citizens Court Watch !
Sovereign Unalienable Info.
Important Court Cases
Real Court Case's Now
Guestbook Sign In Log !
5 Disclaimer and Fair Use
Bad Judges And Courts !
Court System How Works
Radical Reference Info.
Words & Law Glossary !
Z Misc Information Etc.
42 USC 1983 A Lawsuits
5000 New Police Jobs ?
A Bomb 66 Yrs Later Info.
A Letter To NBA Owners
Abortion Facts And Info.
Abuse Of Court Powers
Accident/Hit and Run Etc.
Adopt A Kitten or Dog ?
Advanced Trial Handbook
Against Seizing Children
Aggravated Assault Etc.
Aiding & Abetting Info.
Aiding & Accessory Info.
Alcohol Crimes (DUI) Etc
Alcohol Crimes (DWI) Etc
Alcohol Getting Help Info.
Alienation Of Affection
Amerasian Children Info.
American Express Refund
Animal Cruelty & Rights
Apartment Rental Scams
Anamorphosis Pics Info.
Arrest Is It Legal Arrest ?
Arson and Fires Laws Info.
Assault and Battery Etc.
Asylum Canada’s  System
Attempt Crimes Laws Etc.
Attorney Client Privilege
Background Checks Info
Bankruptcy Options Info.
Beatings By Officers Info.
Bicycle Laws & Info. Etc.
Bigamy & Polygamy Laws
Bill Of Rights & Other ?
Bivens Action Lawsuits
Black Kittycat Law Books
Black Mail & How To Stop
Body of Missing People's
Breast Cancer Help Info.
 Brutality Excessive Force
Bribery Laws & Info. Etc.
Burglary Laws Info. Etc.
Cannibalism In The World
Case Numbering System
Censorship Rules Info. Etc.
Chesterfield Services Bad
Child Abandonment Etc.
Child Abuse Laws Info.
Children's Internet Act
Child Pornography Etc.
Child Support Laws Info.
Chinn, C. Bradley Bad J.
Christmas Peace Wish !
Citizens Court Watch !
Civil Forfeiture Laws Info.
Civil Rights Overview ?
Civil Rights Warning Etc.
Clear & Present Danger
Cohabitation Laws & Info.
Color of Law Abuses Etc.
Collateral Estoppel Info.
Common Law Info. Etc.
Complaints & Canons Etc.
Computer Crime &  Info.
Consortium, Loss Of Info.
Conspiracy Crime Info.
Constitution & Its Laws
Constitutional Law Info.
Contempt of Court Info.
Contempt of Cop Info.
Convicted Sex Offender
Cops Pulling You Over 4 ?
Copyright Patent Trade
Court System How Works
Court Forced Labor Info.
Couches 4 Rent Sex Info
Credit / Debit Card Fraud
Credit 4 Time Served ?
Crimes A-Z Get Help Now
Crimes Against Justice ?
Crimes Against A Person
Criminal Contempt Court
Criminal Investigations
Civil Contempt of Court
Crimes Against Children
Criminal Rights Violations
Cyber Bullying Info. Etc.
Cyber Crimes Laws & Info.
Date Rape Info.Sex Etc.
Dating Black Mail Info.
Dating and Sex Info. Etc.
Death and Dying Info.
Death Penalty Laws Info.
Defamation Libel Slander
Deflowered by Police Info.
Dim Witted Persons Etc.
Disability Rights & Laws
Disorderly Conduct Etc.
Disturbing the Peace Etc.
Do Not Call 911 Info. ?
Do Not Call 911 Dot Com
Dog and Animal Abuse
Dog/Animal Bites & Info.
D.V. & Animal Abuse Etc.
Domestic Violence Etc.
Double Jeopardy Laws
Drinking Water Safety ?
D-WBM Law Firm Info. ?
Driver New Pay By Miles
 D.V. Consortium Info. !
Drug Charges & Info.
Drug Cultivation Etc.
Drug Distribution Etc.
Drugs Getting Help Info.
Drug Manufacturing Etc.
Drug Possession Etc.
Drug Trafficking Etc.
DSHS & APS & Get Help
DUI and DWI Laws Etc.
DUI & DWI After Arrest ?
Easement Laws & Rights
E Bay & Craiglist Scams
E-Books Copyright Laws
Embezzlement Info. Etc.
Emergency Help Info.
Emergency Fire 911 Info.
Essays and Speeches
Expungement Laws Info.
Extortion Laws & Info.
Exemption From Laws
Exercise Your Rights Now.
False Advertising Laws
False Arrest Laws & Info
Feeding Homless Laws
Federal U.S Code & Laws
Federalism & Laws Info.
Feminism Laws & Info.
First Corinthians 7 Info.
First Date's Is It Safe ?
Fleecing of America !
Food Poisoning Info. Etc
Forgery Laws & Info. Etc.
Forced Guardianship Info.
Forced Labor & Its Laws
Forced Marriage Laws
Foster Care Laws & Info.
Fracking Regulations
Fraud Laws & Info. Etc.
Freedom Of Press Info.
Freedom of Speech Etc.
Friends Civil Rights Laws
Friend Of Court Brief
Funny To Scare Horses
Gangs Laws & Other Info.
Gang Rape Woman Laws
Gay Marriage Rights Etc.
Going Postal Get Help !
Glossary of Terms/ Words
Gonzaga Law School Etc
Good Samaritan Backfires
Grant Programs Info.
Guardian Ad Litem Info.
Guardianship Laws Info.
Guide To  File a Lawsuit
Gun Control Laws Etc.
Gun Rights In 4  U.S.A.
Guns Safety How To Info.
Habeas Corpus Laws Etc.
Harassment Laws & Info.
Hate Crimes Laws & Info.
Hearsay Evidence Case
Homeless Programs Etc.
Homicide Laws &  Info.
How To Bypass The Laws
How To Cook Babys Info
How To File a Lawsuit !
How to Self-Publish Book
How To Sue A Judge !
How The Courts Work
How The Courts Work ?
Human Trafficking Laws
Husband and Wife Laws
Hustler Mag v. Falwell
Identity Theft Info. Etc.
Indecent Exposure Etc.
Info. & Deaths Spokane
Injunction Rules & Laws
Insanity Defense Laws
Insurance Fraud Etc.
Intellectual Property Etc.
Intelligence Agency ?
Internet Laws Public Etc.
Internet Security Center
IRA Inheritance Laws
Jane Doe & John Doe Info.
Jaywalking Laws & Info.
Judical Conduct (CJC)
Judge Cozza, Salvatore F.
Judical Immunity Rules
Judical Lawsuits Case's
Judicial / Legal Corruption
Judicaial Misconduct Info.
Judical Picnic 9/11 Ethics
Judicial Review & Laws
Judicial Trust Fund Info.
Jurisdiction Laws & Info.
Jurisprudence & Laws
Jury Duty Welcome Info.
Juvenile Law & Info.
Kidnapping Laws & Info.
Law Enforcement  Powers
Laws Suits Filling Info.
Lawyer Discipline Info. !
Layman Law Firm PLLP
Layman Bible Laws Etc.
Legal Research Internet
Life at Conception Act
Lithium Batteries Danger
Loan Pay Off How To
Magna Charta 1215  Text
Magna Carta Legal Info.
Mail Fraud & Scams
Mail Order Brides Info.
Mandatory Reporters Etc.
Manslaughter Involuntary
Manslaughter Voluntary
Marijuana & Cannabis Laws
Marital Rape Is A Crime ?
Medical Marijuana Info.
Mental State/ Defendant
MerryHallowThanksMas !
Millennials Generation Y
Minor in Possession (MIP)
Miranda Rights Warnings
Miranda v. Arizona ?
Misc Facts & Info. Etc.
Misc Files & Laws & Info.
Money Laundering Etc.
Mormon Polygamy Info.
Most Important Info. Etc.
Motorcycle Accidents Etc.
Murder First Degree Etc.
Murder Second Degree Etc.
My Constitutional R. Watch
Aaron M. Naccarato Bad
Naked Children Laws
National Debt Figures US
No Contact Orders Info.
O'Connor, Kathleen M. B
Obscenity Laws & Info.
Open Container Law Etc.
Other Pink Thing ! 1973
Other White Meat/ Baby
Panhandler Ordinance
Pay Pal and Misc Scams
Pedestrian Accidents Etc.
Perjury In Court & Info.
Permanent Injunction Law
Pet Adopt & Laws Info.
Photography is Not Crime
Pharmaceutical Viagra !
Plea Bargains Laws/Info.
Pledge of Allegiance Etc.
Police Brutality &  Force
Police Crimes Info. Etc.
Police Misconduct & Info.
Police Misc Photo Files
Polyamory Dating Rules
Polyamory Relationship
Pornography Laws Info.
Premarital Agreements
Premarital Questions
Probable Cause Arrest ?
Probation Violation Info.
Process of Arrest Info.
Pornography Charges
Prisoner's Right's Info.
Property Crimes & Info.
Pro Se Litigant Info.
Pro-Se Rights Case Law
Pro-Se & Self-Help Info.
Prostitution Free/ Money
Publication Private Facts
Public Intoxication Info.
Pyramid Schemes Etc.
Racketeering/ RICO Etc.
Rape Of  Men & Women
Rapist and Sex Offenders
Red Light Cam. Tickets
ReElect Nobody Info.
Rental Deposit Fees Laws
Resisting Arrest Info.
Respect ALL Religions
Restoring Gun Rights
Retaliation After Crimes
Retaliation By Judges
Revenge Court Case's
Right to Counsel Laws
Robbery Crimes Etc.
Rockwood, Virginia B. Bad
Rules of Evidence & Info.
Rules of Evidence Etc.
Safe Haven Laws & Info.
Same Sex Marriage Info.
Scuba Diving Rapist Info
Scam's & Frauds Elderly
Search and Seizure Laws
Search Warrant Info. Etc.
Search Engines Helper
Search Engine Optimization
Secret Canon 3/2 Info.
Securities Fraud & Info.
Self Defence Laws Info.
Separation Agreement !
Seat Belt Laws & Info.
Sex Offender Registry
Sex & Am I Ready For ?
Sex Scam's Gift Cards
Sex Slave For Sale Ads
Sexual Abstinence Info.
Sexual Assault Laws Etc.
Sexual Orientation Info.
Sexual Predator Laws
Sex Crimes Laws & Info.
Sex Offenses & Laws
Sex Slave's For Sale Ads
Sexting Laws & Info. Etc.
Sexual Exploitation Info.
Sexual Slavery ? Laws
Shooting On Dick Spokane
Shoplifting Laws & Info.
Shower Safe & New Laws
Sit & Lie Down Ordinance
Fred Van Sickle + Fed. J.
SLAPP Statutes & Laws
Smoking Getting Help Info.
Sodomy & Gay Info.  Laws
Solicitation Laws & Info.
Someone Drugged ME !
Speech Ban For Life ?
Spokane Bad 4 Business
Spokane City Facts or ?
Spokane Code Enforcement
Spokane Dead Body Pics
Spokane Do Not Visit ?
Spokane Fire Dept. Bad
Spokane Internal Affairs
Spokane Local Killings
Spokane Marijuana Stores
Spokane Ombudsman Pr
Spokane Police Guild Bad
Spokane Police Very Bad
Spokane Prostitution Info.
Spokane Fireman Sex ?
Spokane Sex Clubs Info.
Spokane Stalker WoW
Spokane Unidentified Bodys
Standing Rules & Laws
Starting a Business Info.
Starting a New Website ?
Stalking & Forms of It ?
Stalkers + Traits of ?
Statute Of Limitations
Statutory Rape Laws Etc.
STD's & Other Diseases
Donald Sterling v NBA
Substantive Due Process
Sueing for Discrimination
Sue Without A Lawyer
Suing A Judges In Court
Suicide Get Help Now !
Support for Hitler USA
Supremacy Clause Info.
Surf The Web Safely Etc.
Tattoos and Branding !
Tax Evasion Laws Etc.
Telemarketing Scams Etc.
Terminology In The Laws
Theft / Larceny Info. Etc.
Traffic Laws & Tickets ?
Traffic Stops & Rights Info.
Transgender Bathroom Laws
Transgender People Info.
Transient Shelter Laws
Transvestite Laws & Info.
Trial Rights & Laws Etc.
Trust Laws & Court Rules
Unauthorized Practice Law
United Nations Laws Etc.
United States Constitution
U. S. Constitution Laws
U.S. Constitutional Law
Unlawful Vehicle Mod.
Vaccine & Vaccination
Vagrancy Laws & Info.
Valentines Day Hearings
Valentines Day Stalker !
Vandalism Laws & Info.
Vehicle Searches & Info.
Violent Crime Control Act
Wa. State Constitution
Waiting for Rights Etc.
Wedding Day 11 12 13 14
Westlaw Arrest Story ?
Westlaw Arrest Tickets
Westlaw Books Come Out
Westlaw Books Dot Com
Westlaw Court Dockets
Westlaw Books Updates
W-Deposition Cindy Jones
W Stephanie Doe Call 4 Help
We The People Laws
White Collar Crime & Info.
White House Laws/ Bills
White, Richard B. Bad J.
Woman Raped By Law
Wire Fraud Laws Etc.
Yes We The People Info.
Yin and Yang Philosophy
Z  Words &  Glossary !

Dishonorable Attorney Aaron M. Naccarato, Attorney at Law, LLC + You May Write Him At + C/o UPS Store Sundance Plaza Shopping Center  + 8921 N Indian Trail Road, PMB 281 + Spokane, Wa. 99208 In The U.S.A. Only ! + You Telephone Him At 509-499-3703  + Practice Areas: Lying In Court + Personal Injury + Dishonest In Court + Making False Statements In Court + If You Need Someone To Lie Any ? Please Call Me First + Business Litigation Personal Injury General Business Litigation Law School: Gonzaga University School of Law + WSBA # 36816 Old Info. 2011

Aaron Michael Naccarato + WSBA Number: 36816 + Admit Date: 11/10/2005
Member Status: Judicial + Public/Mailing Address: Office of Administrative Hearings
16201 E Indiana Ave Ste 5600 +Spokane Valley, WA  99216-2842 + United States
Phone: (509) 456-3975 + Fax: (509) 456-3980 + This Up Dated Now Feb 14 2014

So After Lying In Court For Years + He Now A Lead Administrative Law Judge ? ?

http://www.oah.wa.gov/ + Spokane OAH Office 16201 East Indiana Avenue, Suite 5600 Spokane Valley, WA 99216  Phone # (509) 456-3975 + (800) 366-0955 (Toll-free) 

AARON M. NACCARATO, ATTORNEY AT LAW, LLC General Information Aaron M. Naccarato, Attorney at Law, Llc is a limited liability company registered in the state of Washington (UBI #602947498). It was incorporated in Washington on August 14, 2009.
Removed From My Job At Address Below ( Will Not Tell You Why ) Back In 2008 ?
LAYMAN, LAYMAN & ROBINSON PLLP ( Removed or Fired 2008 ? )
By:  The Dishonorable AARON M. NACCARATO ( Removed 2009 ? )
Attorney at Law 601 S. Division Street Spokane, Washington 99202 or              P.O. Box 10179 Spokane, Wa. 99209-1179 ( Is know at this address ? )

Aaron Michael Naccarato WSBA Number: 36816
Admit Date: 11/10/2005 Member Status: Active
Public/Mailing Address: PO Box 10179
Spokane, WA  99209-1179 United States
Phone: (509) 499-3703 
Email: aaronmnaccarato@gmail.com
Website: westlawbooks.com

As For My Experience With This Law Firm From 2006 to Now & Its Owners So far Is Bad The Layman Know From Court Records In 30 Cases The Attorney of Record Lied In Court

Updates Not All Attorney at This Law Firm Are Bad or Will Lie For You In Court Case Etc.

Below Is A List Of ALL + The Court Case AARON M. NACCARATO Lied In or Filed False Statement In Court and Perjury I May LIE But I Do Win The Case In Court ?  PERJURY A crime that occurs when an individual willfully makes a false statement during a judicial proceeding, after he or she has taken an oath to speak the truth. ?


All Case’s are Randles Tompkins V. Stephanie DOE / But (2)
Denial of Due Process /Insufficiency Evidence /Cross-Examine!

Wa. State Spokane /APS Case # 60932 / 3-21-05 2:26pm Closed

At this Time 11-02-2005 In Miss. S. DOE Life / She is Working                              Full Time / She Ask Me (Randles)To Marry Her & I Said (Yes)

Wa. State Spokane /APS Case #54686 /11-04-05 9:53am Closed

Wa.State Spokane/APS Case #70174 /11-09-05 10:33am Closed

Wa. State Spokane /APS Case #73600 / 2-13-06 4:54pm Closed

Sheriff Report Filed By Law/After Got Threatened to be Killed
By ? I Filed Report #06-45600 For Miss. S. DOE Filed 2-13-06

Dept of Health Wa. State / Case # 06-02-0108NA / Feb/27/ 2006
DISMISSED on Jan/27/2007 Criminal Case Is Over /The State
Said Case Closed Because All Statement Are Perjury /FALSE !

District Court Spokane / Case # 686281-DV / 2-28-06 Appealed

Superior Court in Spk. /Case # 06-2-01414-1 /3-30-06 Appealed

Court of Appeal Div-III Wa.Case # ? Filed Late 4-30-07 Closed

District Court Spokane /Case # CR0052967 / Criminal Stalking
Sheriff Filed on 4-17-06 // on Jan/18/2007 ! CASE DISMISSED

Superior Court in Spk. /Case # 08-1-02625-7/ 8-14-08 CLOSED

District Court Spokane /Case # 697086-AH/11-21-06 Moved To                               Superior Court Spk. /Case #06-2-05360-0 / 12/28/06 Dismissed

Superior Court in Spk./Case # 98-4-01002-1/12-04-08 Appealed

Court of Appeal Div-III Wa.Case # 27636-8-III 02-10-09 OPEN

Wa. State Spokane /APS Case # 73372 7/30/07 10:09am Closed

District Court Spokane / Case # 787861-DV / 8-23-07 Appealed

Superior Court in Spk. /Case # 07-2-04098-1/ 8-30-07 Appealed

Court of Appeal Div-III Wa.Case # 268586-III 2-5-08 Appealed

Supreme Ct./Temple of Justice/Case # 82129-1 This is Appealed

District Court Spokane / Case # 787861-DV / 8-18-09 Appealed

Superior Court in Spk. /Case # 09-2-03720-0/ 8-19-09 Appealed

Court of Appeal Div-III Wa. Case # 29145-6-III 6-16-10 OPEN

U.S. District Court Eastern D. Wa. / CV-07-195-FVS Appealed

9th Circuit Court of Appeals / Case # 09-35336 This Case Open

Wa. State Bar Ass./Case & File # 07-01362 / 09-10-07 Appealed

Supreme Temple of Justice /C. # 81209-8 & 82494-1 & 84697-9


File a Complaint Against a LawyerIf you are complaining about a Washington lawyer, please follow the steps below to complete a grievance form.                                      Please see the Lawyer Directory for a listing of licensed lawyers in Washington.

Step One:  Read the answers to our frequently asked questions for general information about the grievance process.

Step Two:  Read Lawyer Discipline in Washington, which is also translated into Spanish.  It gives you important information and you must read this before you file your grievance.

Step Three:  Prepare your grievance form and file it.  You can use our electronic grievance form; or print a grievance form, complete it, and mail or deliver it to us.  Read more if you have questions about filing an electronic grievance form.

Please leave a message with our Consumer Affairs staff at 206-727-8207 if you have any questions.  We generally return calls within 24 hours.

GRIEVANCE AGAINST A LAWYER Office of Disciplinary Counsel

Washington State Bar Association

1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 600

Seattle, WA 98101-2539


Read our information sheet Lawyer Discipline in Washington before you complete this form, particularly the section about consenting to disclosure of your grievance to the lawyer.

If you have a disability or need assistance with filing a grievance, call us at (206) 727-8207. We will take reasonable steps to accommodate you.

If you prefer to file online, visit http://www.wsba.org. Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial


City, State, and Zip Code

Phone Number

Alternate Address, City, State, and Zip Code

Alternate Phone Number

Email Address INFORMATION ABOUT THE LAWYER Last Name, First Name


City, State, and Zip Code

Phone Number


I am a client

I am a former client

I am an opposing party

I am an opposing lawyer

Other: __________________

Is there a court case related to your grievance? ___________ YES ____________ NO

If yes, what is the case name and file number? your relationship to the lawyer who is the subject of your grievance: Revised 4/1/2010 Explain your grievance in your own words. Give all important dates, times, places, and court file numbers. Attach additional pages, if necessary. Attach copies (not your originals) of any relevant documents. AFFIRMATION I affirm that the information I am providing is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I have read Lawyer Discipline in Washington and I understand that the content of my grievance can be disclosed to the lawyer. Signature: _______________________________________ Date: ______________________________

Sundance Plaza Shopping Center - 9001 N. Indian Trail Rd., Spokane, WA 99208

Description Sundance Plaza is a neighborhood grocery-anchored shopping center located along Spokane's northwest corridor.

The UPS, to name a few. This tenant-mix obviously creates great synergy, and in turn generates tremendous foot traffic and exposure for the existing businesses within the shopping center.

Sundance Plaza presents a unique mix of national tenants along side strong local tenants, arguably the best neighborhood shopping center in the northwestern Spokane market.

Sundance Plaza is situated on 32 acres, located in northwestern Spokane, Washington on the corner of Indian Trail Road and Lowell Road.

Dense residential neighborhoods surround the shopping center directly to the north, east, and south. The shopping center also enjoys the benefit of a rapidly growing residential sector to the west.

Aaron Michael Naccarato
WSBA Number: 36816
Admit Date: 11/10/2005
Member Status: Active
Public/Mailing Address: Attorney at Law
PO Box 10179
Spokane, WA 99209-1179
United States
Phone: (509) 499-3703
Email: aaronmnaccarato@gmail.com
Website: Practice Information Back to top
Firm or Employer: Attorney at Law
Firm Size: Not Specified
Practice Areas: General
Other Languages Spoken: None SpecifiedLiability Insurance Back to top
Private Practice: Yes
Has Insurance? No - Click for more info
Last Updated: 01/27/2012Committees Back to topMember of these committees/boards/panels:

NoneDisciplinary HistoryNo Public Disciplinary HistoryOnly active members of the Washington State Bar Association, and others as authorized by law, may practice law in Washington.

The discipline search function may or may not reveal all disciplinary action relating to a lawyer. The discipline information accessed is a summary and not the official decision in the case. For more complete information, call 206-727-8207. Disclaimer for wa state bar.

The most recent annual report for Aaron M. Naccarato, Attorney at Law, Llc was / is due on August 31, 2010. Aaron M. Naccarato, Attorney at Law, Llc is a for-profit entity Officers:Member: Aaron Naccarato (email) + 8804 N Pamela + Spokane, WA 99208 Registered Agent Aaron Naccarato + 8804 N Pamela + Spokane, WA 99208

Aaron Michael Naccarato
WSBA Number: 36816
Admit Date: 11/10/2005
Member Status: Judicial
Public/Mailing Address: Office of Administrative Hearings
16201 E Indiana Ave Ste 5600
Spokane Valley, WA  99216-2842
United States
Phone: (509) 456-3975
Fax: (509) 456-3980
Website: Practice Information
Firm or Employer: Office of Administrative Hearings
Firm Size: Not Specified
Practice Areas: General
Other Languages Spoken: None SpecifiedLiability Insurance
Private Practice: No
Has Insurance?   - Click for more info
Last Updated: 02/01/2013Committees Member of these committees/boards/panels:

NoneDisciplinary History No Public Disciplinary History Only active members of the Washington State Bar Association, and others as authorized by law, may practice law in Washington.

The discipline search function may or may not reveal all disciplinary action relating to a lawyer. The discipline information accessed is a summary and not the official decision in the case. For more complete information, call 206-727-8207. Disclaimer + Feb. 14 2014


           2                  EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

               RANDLES P. TOMPKINS,
           4              Plaintiff,

           5         vs.                      No. CV-07-195-FVS

               CINDY NORTH JONES, and
           7   OZZIE KNEZOVICH,



          11                 EXCERPT FROM THE DEPOSITION OF

          12                      RANDLES P. TOMPKINS


          14         BE IT REMEMBERED that the following is an excerpt of

          15   the transcript from the deposition of RANDLES P. TOMPKINS,

          16   which was taken on the 27th day of October 2008, at the hour

          17   of 10:00 a.m., before Allison R. Stovall, a notary public

          18   and court reporter, CCR No. 2006, at 423 West First Avenue,

          19   Suite 250, Spokane, Washington, pursuant to the Washington

          20   Rules of Civil Procedure.

           1                   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

           2                  EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

               RANDLES P. TOMPKINS,
           4              Plaintiff,

           5         vs.                      No. CV-07-195-FVS

               CINDY NORTH JONES, and
           7   OZZIE KNEZOVICH,

           9                DEPOSITION OF RANDLES P. TOMPKINS

          10               BE IT REMEMBERED that on the 27th day of October

          11   2008, at the hour of 10:00 a.m., the deposition of RANDLES

          12   P. TOMPKINS was taken at the request of the Defendants,

          13   before Allison R. Stovall, a notary public and court

          14   reporter, CCR No. 2006, at 423 West First Avenue, Suite 250,

          15   Spokane, Washington, pursuant to the Washington Rules of

          16   Civil Procedure.

          17   A P P E A R A N C E S:

          18   FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

          19   By:  RICHARD D. WALL
                    Attorney at Law
          20   423 First Ave., Suite 250
               Spokane, Washington 99201
               FOR THE DEFENDANTS:
          23   ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
               By:  JAMES H. KAUFMAN
          24        Attorney at Law
               1115 W. Broadway AVe.
          25   Spokane, Washington 99260


           1   ALSO PRESENT:

           2   STEVE BARTEL

               By:  AARON M. NACCARATO
           4        Attorney at Law
               601 S. Division Street
           5   Spokane, Washington 99202

                                        * * * * *

           8                            I N D E X


          11   EXAMINATION:

          12   By Mr. Kaufman - Page No. 4


          14    EXHIBITS:

          15    Exhibit No. 1 - Marked at Page No. 51
                 Complaint filed
                 Exhibit No. 2 - Marked at Page No. 109
          17     E-mail address

          18   Exhibit No. 3 - Marked at Page No. 112
                 spokanestalker.com address
                 Exhibit No. 4 - Marked at Page No. 115
          20     valentinesdaystalker.com address

          21   Exhibit No. 5 - Marked at Page No. 120
                 Letter from Aacres Allvest
                 Exhibit No. 6 - Marked at Page No. 166
          23     Ticket signed by Cindy North Jones


           1    EXHIBITS:

           2    Exhibit No. 7 - Marked at Page No. 176
                 Motion to remove guardianship
                Exhibit No. 8 - Marked at Page No. 178
           4     Letter regarding Crime Victims
                 Compensation Program
                Exhibit No. 9 - Marked at Page No. 213
           6     Motion filed requesting documents

           7   Exhibit No. 10 - Marked at Page No. 228
                 Background authorization form
                Exhibit No. 11 - Marked at Page No. 256
           9     Copy of pages from website

          10   Exhibit No. 12 - Marked at Page No. 261
                 Copy of pages from website


           1                       RANDLES P. TOMPKINS,

           2                called as a witness at the request

           3                 of the Defendants herein, having

           4                  been first duly sworn on oath,

           5                     did testify as follows:

           6                           EXAMINATION

           7   BY MR. KAUFMAN:

           8   Q    Well, for the record, could you please state your full

           9   legal name as it stands today and spell it, please, Mr.

          10   Tompkins?

          11   A    Yes.  It's Randles, R-A-N-D-L-E-S, Psychedelic,

          12   P-S-Y-C-H-E-D-E-L-I-C, Tompkins, T-O-M-P-K-I-N-S.

          13             MR. KAUFMAN:  And for the record, Counsel, this is

          14   being taken as we have in prior depositions -- I guess maybe

          15   not in this case but in other cases -- and all objections

          16   reserved except as to the form of the question and

          17   responsiveness of the answer unless there's an issue of

          18   privilege or something.  Is that acceptable?

          19             MR. WALL:  That's acceptable.

          20             MR. KAUFMAN:  Thank you.

          21   Q    (BY MR. KAUFMAN)  Mr. Tompkins, it's my understanding

          22   that your name has not always been Randles Psychedelic

          23   Tompkins; is that correct?

          24   A    Yes, sir.

          25   Q    Okay.  And when did that get -- when did that get


           1   STATE OF WASHINGTON? )
                                         :    ss:   REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
           2   COUNTY OF SPOKANE         )


           4                        I, Allison R. Stovall, a notary public

           5   in and for the State of Washington, do hereby certify:

           6                        That the foregoing deposition of

           7   RANDLES P. TOMPKINS  was taken on October 27, 2008, at 10:00

           8   a.m., at 423 West First Avenue, Suite 250, Spokane,

           9   Washington, as shown on Page 1 hereto;

          10                        That the appearances listed on Page 1

          11   and Page 2 of the transcript are true and correct;

          12                        That the above-mentioned deposition did

          13   conclude at 4:45 p.m. on October 27, 2008;

          14                        That the completed transcript of the

          15   above-mentioned deposition was 323 pages in length;

          16                        That the foregoing is a true and

          17   correct transcription of my shorthand notes of the requested

          18   excerpt from the above-mentioned deposition transcribed by

          19   me or under my direction;

          20                        WITNESS my hand and seal this 23rd day

          21   of September 2010.

                                    ALLISON R. STOVALL,
          23                        CCR No. 2006
                                    Notary Public in and for the
          24                        State of Washington, residing at
Mr. Tompkins. Attached is a txt file of your excerpt.  I hope this will work for you.

Rhonda Goehring + Office Manager + Spokane Reporting Service

421 W. Riverside Avenue, #1010 + Spokane, WA   99201

(509) 624-6255 + 800-759-1564 + FAX (509) 624-8911

This e-mail is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Secs 2510-2521, and is legally privileged. This e-mail, and any attachments, may contain confidential and/or proprietary information belonging to the sender which is protected by work product and/or other privileges. Any unauthorized dissemination or copying of this e-mail or its attachments, and any use or disclosure of any information contained therein, is strictly prohibited.  Notify office@spokanereporting.com or telephone 509.624.6255 if you have received this e-mail in error and delete it from your system immediately. Any views or opinions represented in this email are solely those of the author/sender and do not necessarily reflect or represent those of the corporation.


PERJURYA crime that occurs when an individual willfully makes a false statement during a judicial proceeding, after he or she has taken an oath to speak the truth.

The common-law crime of perjury is now governed by both state and federal laws. In addition, the MODEL PENAL CODE, which has been adopted in some form by many states and promulgated by the Commission on Uniform State Laws, also sets forth the following basic elements for the crime of perjury: (1) a false statement is made under oath or equivalent affirmation during a judicial proceeding; (2) the statement must be material or relevant to the proceeding; and (3) the witness must have the SPECIFIC INTENT to deceive.

The punishment for perjury in most states, and under federal law, is the imposition of a fine, imprisonment, or both. Federal law also imposes sentencing enhancements when the court determines that a defendant has falsely testified on her own behalf and is convicted. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the court is required to automatically increase the defendant's sentence.

Two federal statutes govern the crime of perjury in federal proceedings. Title 18 U.S.C.A. § 1621 codifies the COMMON LAW of perjury and consists of the elements listed above. In 1970, the scope of section 1621 was expanded by the enactment of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1623. Section 1623 changes the definition of intent from willfully offering false testimony to merely having knowledge that the testimony is false. In addition it adds to the definition of perjury to include the witness's use of information, including any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material she knows contains a false material declaration, and includes proceedings that are ancillary to any court, such as affidavits and depositions, and GRAND JURY proceedings. Section 1623 also contains a retraction defense. If, during the proceeding in which the false statement was made, the person admits to the falsity of the statement before it is evident that the falsity has been or will be exposed, and as long as the falsity does not affect the proceeding substantially, prosecution will be barred under section 1623.

Commentators believe that the existence of these two federal statutes actually frustrates the goals of Congress to encourage truthful statements. The reasoning behind this concern is that when a retraction exists, prosecutors may charge a witness with perjury under section 1621 and when a retraction does not exist, the witness may be charged under section 1623.

Two variations of perjury are SUBORNATION OF PERJURY and false swearing; in many states these two variations are separate offenses. Subornation of perjury is a crime in which the defendant does not actually testify falsely but Page 428  |  Top of Article instead induces, persuades, instigates, or in some way procures another witness to commit perjury. False swearing is a false statement made under oath but not made during an official proceeding. Some states have created a separate offense for false swearing, while others have enacted perjury statutes to include this type of false statement. These crimes also may be punished by the imposition of a fine, imprisonment, or both. Maybe ?


BE IT REMEMBERED That The Above Case # CR52967 Entitled Matter Was Heard On July 25, 2008 + Before The ???-Honorable Richard White Spokane, Wa. 99260 In The District Court Of The State Of Washington In The County Of Spokane, USA

2                                     July 25, 2008, 10:10 a.m.
6   matter?
9 (The following proceedings occurred in open court:)
THE COURT:  Mr. Ames, are you here on the Tompkins

MR. AMES:  Yes, sir.

THE COURT:  Okay.  Why don’t you come on up?

MR. AMES:  I was subpoenaed as a witness, Judge.

10             THE COURT:  Subpoenaed as a witness. Okay.

11   There’s quite a lot of information here. This is case CR

12   52967.

13             Mr. Tompkins—

14             MR. TOMPKINS: Yes, Your Honor.

15  THE COURT: --  why don’t you come up? So, you’re

16  not here representing Mr. Tompkins?

17  MR. AMES:  No, in fact there’s orders of

18  withdrawal in the file.

19  THE COURT: Right.  Okay.  That’s what I expected.


21             MR. AMES:  And there’s no-- there’s no charging

22   document pending.

23             THE COURT:  No.  So, Mr. Tompkins, why don’t you

24   come on up and tell me what-- what this is? What are you

25   requesting the court to do?

Page # 1

1             MR. TOMPKINS: I’m trying to--  the case was 

2   dismissed with-- without--  this thing was dismissed with

3   prejudice originally. And then the public-- the

4   prosecuting attorney changed it to without prejudice so that

5   way they could reopen the case against me.

6   I’ve got a lawsuit in Federal Court for false

7   arrest.  Cindy North-Jones has testified that she’s actually

8   falsified most of the information in the case, did not do an

9   investigation. And they testified at the hearing that they

10 had a probable cause affidavit that they used against me,


12   and now they’re telling me that that stuff doesn’t exist.

13             What I’m trying to do is I’m trying to get all the

14   documents from the other side that they’re hiding from me to

15   defend myself.  I’m in court again now in the Court of

16   Appeals, Division III, because the case still hasn’t gone

17   away.  So, I’d like the case to be dismissed with prejudice

18   so that they can’t reopen it, cuz supposedly there’s a

19   three-year statute of limitations was my understanding.  And

20   that I want the probable cause affidavit-- the prosecuting

21   attorney told me when I went over to the office that they

22   cannot talk to me on a closed case, and they didn’t have to

23   make an appointment with me.

24   And then Jay Ames and me had a meeting, and I’ve


Page # 2

1   actually got the documents from Jay Ames that I needed.  So,

2   I actually subpoenaed him at the time to come here because I

3   had not received documents from him. But, I had--  I’m

4   trying to go back to work. I haven’t worked for two and a

5   half years.

6   I’ve received death threats, I have it on cassette

7   tape of threats to do bodily harm to me, and the mother has

8   made allegations. She’s now filed a claim with the

9   Department of Labor saying that her daughter was assaulted

10   on October 31, 2005, but she spent the entire day with


12   another man in court testimony. So, it wasn’t even me with

13   her that day. And now, she’s trying to ask for money from

14   that.  So, the mother is continually filing false claims,

15   accusations, and I’m just trying to clear myself, my name,

16   because I have not done anything wrong.

17             THE COURT:  Okay.  So, public defender withdrew in

18   February 9, 2007.

19             MR. NACCARATO:  Your Honor, if I may. I’m Aaron

20   Naccarato.  I am actually the attorney for Charlotte

21   DOE.        This is kind of a-- I had no idea that this was

22   going on.  I’m here today on a separate matter.

23   THE COURT: Oh, okay.  Do you know what the motion

24   is about?  I was told—


Page # 3

1             MR. TOMPKINS: I’m trying to--  the motion here is

2   to request discovery of all oral, written, recorded

3   statements defendants, third parties of all plaintiff, and

4   execution from the prosecutor’s knowledge, which was to try

5   me.  And then the next page is the actual-- there’s an

6   actual statement here—

7   THE COURT:  Okay.  The case was—

8   MR. TOMPKINS: --  that he had probable—

9   THE COURT: --  the case was dismissed on January

10   18, 2007.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: --  right.  They said, though, that

13   the statute of limitations doesn’t apply on part of them,

14   because they had stopped the case for a competency hearing

15   for like six or seven months.

16             THE COURT:  Yeah.

17             MR. TOMPKINS: And that that changes the statute

18   of limitation timeline. I don’t know. My main concern,

19   they said they could recharge me for-- up on this crime up

20   to three years, I’m thinking from the date of dismissal.

21   So, I want it to be changed back to dismissed with prejudice

22   so that they can’t refile it, and then turn over the

23   documents to me to they claimed they had when they arrested

24   me, which they don’t supposedly have any more.


Page # 4

1             They said they had a probable cause affidavit.

2   They said they had all kinds of stuff, which now turns out

3   Cindy North-Jones’ deposition, which you have there.

4   There’s a deposition of Cindy North-Jones. She stated that

5   she made everything up, and she’s falsified most of the

6   documents in the record, and that she had not done any

7   investigation, had not talked to anybody in the case, and

8   that there was no probable cause affidavit, even though they

9   told the judge—

10   THE COURT: I see.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: --  that they did.

13             THE COURT:  Okay.  So, you were—

14             MR. TOMPKINS: So that—

15             THE COURT:  --  you were charged with stalking in

16   April 2006—

17             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

18             THE COURT:  --  and then it was dismissed.

19             MR. TOMPKINS: In 2007.

20             THE COURT:  Correct.  And, Mr. Ames, you’ve just

21   simply been subpoenaed as a witness to testify today?

22   MR. AMES:  Yes, sir.

23   THE COURT: I see that the public defender’s

24   office and Mr. Lorenz, and I believe Mr. Ames were allowed


Page # 5

1   to withdraw by court order last year, I think.

2             And your name, sir?

3             MR. NACCARATO:  Aaron Naccarato.

4             THE COURT:  Well, Mr. Naccarato. Okay.  Now, you

5   represent somebody that was involved in the case as a

6   witness, or a victim, or—

7   MR. NACCARATO: No, I represent Charlotte

8   DOE, on behalf of Stephanie DOE, who actually was

9   the victim of the stalking—

10   THE COURT: Uh-huh.


12             MR. NACCARATO:  --  who basically she’s the

13   central character involved in this. I don’t know if you

14   want some background information on this. I know after

15   reading the documents that Mr. Tompkins has provided that

16   sometimes it can be extremely difficult to find out exactly

17   what he’s asking for.

18             THE COURT:  Uh-huh.

19             MR. NACCARATO:  In short, this involves domestic

20   violence.  There was a-- originally a no contact order

21   which was entered—

22   THE COURT: Uh-huh.

23   MR. NACCARATO: --  approximately February of

24   2006.  And then there was an additional one. Mr.--  Mr.

Page # 6

1   Tompkins appealed that, and that was-- that appeal was

2   denied by Judge Clark in Superior Court. And then Mr.

3   Tompkins was arrested for stalking Ms. S. DOE in April of

4   2007.

5             Those charges were later dismissed. I was not

6   involved in that situation. And then another DV protection

7   order was entered on-- in August of 2007. Mr. Tompkins

8   appealed that once again to the Superior Court. Judge Price

9   had a hearing, and Mr. Tompkins was represented by counsel

10   during that second appeal, Richard Wall, who’s also


12   representing him in-- in connection with a lawsuit against

13   the county and-- and Cindy North-Jones.

14             Now, we’re in Division III, Court of Appeals. Mr.

15   Tompkins has filed-- filed a motion for discretionary

16   review.  The discretionary review was denied and Mr.

17   Tompkins has once again filed another motion now to modify

18   the commissioner’s ruling.  And that is ongoing there.

19             So, with respect to the information that he claims

20   that’s missing, I’ve seen hundreds, if not thousands of

21   documents provided. And, quite frankly, I don’t understand

22   what Mr. Tompkins is-- believes is out there that he hasn’t

23   been provided. And I would also invite Mr. Tompkins to

24   discuss this matter with Mr. Wall who has conducted

Page # 7

1   extensive discovery in this matter, and has subpoenaed all

2   of these documents.

3             MR. TOMPKINS: They haven’t turned any of the

4   documents over that have been subpoenaed. Mr. Wall is not

5   representing me on this.

6   The criminal charges were dismissed because the

7   judge said that every statement that Charlotte DOE

8   made was perjured.

9   THE COURT: Okay.  Let’s--

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Every—


12             THE COURT:  --  stop right there—

13             MR. TOMPKINS: --  okay.

14             THE COURT:  --  Mr. Tompkins. What is your motion

15   today?

16             MR. TOMPKINS: I’m trying--  the motion is to get

17   the--  I’d like the case dismissed with prejudice so that

18   they can’t reopen the case, and the public-- the prosecutor

19   on the case at the time stated in his prepaid-- this is a

20   transcript of the hearing, that they had two major case

21   files here. I have an affidavit of probable cause dated

22   3/30 2006.  I spoke with Debby Braddock (phonetic). They

23   say they have all this stuff, but they won’t turn it over.

24   And they also-- Naccarato’s-- documents from


Page # 8

1   Naccarato here stated that Charlotte DOE did not know

2   I was arrested. They didn’t—

3             THE COURT:  Okay.  Hold on.  It says a motion a

4   reopen case to see all filed, and to re-filed all files lost

5   by PD in my case to see affidavit of probable—

6   MR. TOMPKINS: Cause.

7   THE COURT: --  cause from the prosecutor making

8   false statement to the judge. Okay.

9   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.  Originally, I filed over 480

10   pages of documents with the public defender’s office, and I


12   have stamped documents. The criminal case file is now

13   missing all those documents.

14             I asked for a copy of part of the file and they

15   supposedly-- I don’t know what happened, but they’re saying

16   that some of the stuff destroyed, shredded-- where it went.

17   So, I would like to replace all the files that I have public

18   defender stamps on that I actually submitted to the court 

19   that were accidentally misplaced, taken out of the files.

20   Because the file only has a ticket in it, and a few oddball

21   little odds and ends, and everything else that I had

22   actually subpoenaed the court, to force to be in the files

23   to get my name cleared.

24   All the evidence that was used to clear me—

Page # 9

2   about?
4   THE COURT:  Is this the court file you’re talking

MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah, the court file.

THE COURT:  Okay.  It’s quite extensive. There’s

5   a lot of information in there.

6   MR. TOMPKINS: It was--  originally the file was

7   this thick at the trial. It was over two files’ thick.

8   There was over 800-and some pages total, and they’re no

9   longer there.

10   THE COURT:  And this report—


12             MR. TOMPKINS: There’s not much in it.

13             THE COURT:  --  was released to your attorney—

14             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

15             THE COURT:  --  back in March of 2007. Okay.

16             MR. TOMPKINS: I don’t--  that’s why I—

17             THE COURT:  So, the motion-- okay.  So, the

18   motion is to--  for a dismissal with prejudice and to see

19   all filed and re-filed, and affidavit of probable cause.

20             MR. TOMPKINS: Right, which they-- I don’t know.

21   You can see there’s an actual three-page text of the hearing

22   what they said they had. They had two major files. The

23   police report that got turned over to me is about 60, 70

24   pages.


Page # 10

1             THE COURT:  Okay.

2             MR. TOMPKINS: In the original police report, I

3   counted over 240 pages.

4             THE COURT:  You’re probably talking about the

5   police report, it sounds like.

6   MR. TOMPKINS: Well, the police report. But,

7   there’s also a probable cause affidavit. Cindy North-- if

8   you’ve got the deposition there, Cindy North-Jones has now

9   stated that she had made up most of the stuff in the case,

10   and that she hadn’t-- I don’t know if you’ve got that


12   there.  There’s a 70-page document of what Cindy North-Jones

13   said—

14             THE COURT:  Okay.

15             MR. TOMPKINS: --  at the deposition.

16             THE COURT:  This court has no jurisdiction to

17   entertain your motion. The case is dismissed, and there

18   is--  there’s no pending charge, and so this case-- this

19   court has no jurisdiction to reopen the file on your motion.

20             MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.  Well, they told me I could

21   try.  I mean, I’m trying to-- you know, they say they have

22   it.  They won’t talk to me, so-- so I appreciate your time,

23   Your Honor.

24   THE COURT: And your remedies are through the


Page # 11

1   appeal process, and apparently that’s already been resolved

2   in the Court of Appeals.

3             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, it’s still going on. It’s

4   going to the Supreme Court after that, so-- is my

5   understanding.

6   THE COURT: Okay.  So the motion for discretionary

7   review was denied?

8   MR. TOMPKINS: It’s been appealed.


10   THE COURT: Mr. Wall is your attorney at present,


12   apparently on that case, so I would just suggest you call

13   him and see what’s going on.

14             MR. TOMPKINS: But, he’s not my attorney on that

15   case.  I’m representing myself. Mr. Wall’s the attorney on

16   a federal lawsuit for false arrest only.

17             THE COURT:  Okay.

18             MR. TOMPKINS: So, I don’t have an attorney on

19   this appeal with Mr. Naccarato.

20             THE COURT:  Okay.  So, the motion’s-- motion or

21   motions are denied. Mr. Ames, I appreciate you coming down

22   here.  I do see that there was court order signed a couple

23   weeks ago, a subpoena duces tecum. I don’t think there’s

24   any need to entertain any testimony, or any additional


Page # 12

1   evidence at this hearing. Okay.  Thank you.

2             MR. NACCARATO:  May I have a copy of that as well,

3   please?

4             THE COURT:  Okay.  We’ll just go ahead and have

5   Mr. Tompkins and sign off, and get you a copy.

6   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

7   (End of hearing 10:22 a.m.)

               By:  AARON M. NACCARATO
9                    Attorney at Law
                      601 S. Division Street
10                  Spokane, Washington 99202

Page # 13

BE IT REMEMBERED That The Above Case # CR52967 Entitled Matter Was Heard On Nov. 19, 2008 + Before The ???-Honorable Annette Plese Spokane, Wa. 99260 In The District Court Of The State Of Washington In The County Of Spokane, USA

APPEALED TO SUPERIOR COURT + CASE # 08-1-02625-7 + Spokane, Wa. 99260

APPEALED Court Of Appeals Div.-III + CASE # 29145-6-III + Spokane, Wa. 99260

1                         MORNING SESSION

2                                 November 19, 2008, 10:26 a.m.

3                                    (The following proceedings

4                                      occurred in open court:)

5             THE COURT:  Tompkins—

6             MR. TOMPKINS: Here, Your Honor.

7             THE COURT:  --  anybody else?  Why don’t you come

8   on up, Mr. Tompkins. Did you have something on this docket,

9   or are you just watching?

10             MR. NACCARATO:  No, Your Honor. I’m actually

11   Aaron Naccarato. I’m the attorney for the Charlotte

12   DOE, who is the guardian of Ms. S. DOE.

13   THE COURT: On a case that I have today?

14   MR. NACCARATO: Yes, Your Honor, this is—

15   THE COURT: What was the defendant’s name?

16   MR. NACCARATO: It’s an interesting-- it’s an

17   extremely interesting matter. My understanding is that Mr.


19   Tompkins is attempting to obtain subpoenas in this case.

20   This is--  this stems from a stalking case that was

21   dismissed.  And Mr. Tompkins, I believe is trying to reopen

22   this matter to obtain subpoena powers based upon it in order

23   to prove his allegations in the other cases that are

24   currently pending.

25             Mr. Tompkins has had two DV no contact orders

Page # 14

1   placed against him. The second one is still in place right

2   now.  Additionally, there is a guardianship, and Mr.

3   Tompkins is subject to an injunction issued by Judge Cozza

4   in the guardianship matter that is actually going to be

5   modified on Friday, prohibiting him from having any contact

6   with Mr.--  or Ms. S. DOE, Ms.-- Mrs. C. DOE or Mr.

7   DOE, and as well as prohibiting him from harassing or

8   even contacting the third parties.

9   This is--  this stems from about a three-year

10  ordeal.


12             THE COURT:  Well--  and I had a chance-- Mr.

13   Tompkins, the reason they set this for motion today, one, so

14   you could be heard on the record. Two, so I can address

15   some of the issues that if you didn’t like my ruling, you

16   can appeal it and not continue to file motions. And, for
17   the record, this is CR 52967. This is a criminal charge of

18   stalking that occurred or allegedly occurred back on April

19   17th of ’06.

20             It appears that Judge Cooney had this case a

21   couple of times for pretrial and Judge Derr had it. And it

22   says on January 18th of ’07, Judge Cooney signed and order

23   dismissing this charge and releasing you from anything

24   further criminally from this charge.


Page # 15

1             And at that point, this court, meaning the court,

2   the Municipal and District Court, lost jurisdiction on this

3   case to do anything at all, as far as issue subpoenas, issue

4   cases, or to bring the case back to a criminal charge,

5   because the moving party dismissed it. Okay.

6   MR. TOMPKINS: Yes, I understand.

7   THE COURT: And legally, looking at the research,

8   I have no power to do what you’re asking me to do at all,

9   legally.  Okay.

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.  The last time I asked to


12   have the case reopened because when I-- my public defender

13   here, Mark Lorenz just happens to be here. He said that he

14   could not talk to me unless the case was reopened, because

15   there’s a bunch of files involved. The prosecuting attorney

16   cite said--  I don’t--  did you have a chance to read the

17   packet?

18             THE COURT:  I did.

19             MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.  He said that he had an

20   affidavit of probable cause dated 3-- dated on March 30,

21   2006, which turns out in police records that no affidavit of

22   probable cause was ever issued.

23   When I was sitting here before you on April 17,

24   2006 in handcuffs, they actually held up a piece of paper

Page # 16

1   stating this is an affidavit of probable cause and then they

2   read to you—

3             THE COURT:  What—

4             MR. TOMPKINS: --  and they had to two major case

5   files.

6   THE COURT: --  okay.  And here—

7   MR. TOMPKINS: So, I’m trying to actually see the

8   evidence, see the files, and they’re saying that everything

9   is—

10   THE COURT: --  well, here’s the issue. I’m--

11   th

12   when you saw me actually on April 18 when you came in for a

13   first appearance on the arrest, the prosecuting attorney,

14   because I did your arraignment—

15             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

16             THE COURT:  --  read into the record the probable

17   cause from a police report. And at that time probable cause

18   was found, meaning should the case move forward from this

19   point.

20             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

21   THE COURT: As far as you, as a person can order

22   the tape, we’re on a record—

23   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

24   THE COURT: --  and you can listen to the tape of


Page # 17

1   what they allege on the record, because it’s public record.

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, there’s a transcript here.

3             THE COURT:  Yeah, there’s a transcript, but

4   everything past that, as far as re-- it’s not reopened

5   because it’s not a civil case, so I can’t just reopen it.

6   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

7   THE COURT: The case has been dismissed, and the

8   moving party is the prosecutor, who filed the charges, and

9   the prosecutor who dismissed them. So, to reopen the charge

10   would, in essence, what you’re asking is to reinstate a


12   criminal charge against you—

13             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

14             THE COURT:  --  and prosecute yourself, which is

15   not--  I can’t do that.

16             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, this time they-- this time I

17   dismissed the original motion that I had. And this time I

18   filed the document. It’s--  it’s number 1503.

19             THE COURT:  I have it.

20             MR. TOMPKINS: They gave it to me at the clerk’s

21   office.  They said if I wanted to see the files—

22   THE COURT: Uh-huh.

23   MR. TOMPKINS: --  that I would have to file that

24   document.  So, the court, themselves told me that that was


Page # 18

1   the document I needed to file. And on that one it says I’m

2   not asking to have the case reopened. I’m trying to

3   actually be able to see the evidence against me. I’d like

4   to see the affidavit of probable cause, and then anything

5   that the prosecutor had in those two files.

6   THE COURT: Well, when you’re asking me to see my

7   files, you can see the court file—

8   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

9   THE COURT: --  because it’s public record. But,

10   you can’t see the prosecutor’s file, you cannot see the


12   advocate, or those files. You get to see police reports, if

13   there’s a criminal charge you can demand a copy of the

14   police report, but because there’s no criminal charge—

15             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

16             THE COURT:  --  I have no power. You can do, just

17   like anybody else, a public records request from the police

18   department to see specific police reports. And they have a

19   form over there at police records that you would have to

20   fill out saying I want a copy as a citizen to this police

21   report.  Okay.

22   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.  No, I did do that—

23   THE COURT: Okay.

24   MR. TOMPKINS: --  and they told me that in this


Page # 19

1   particular case, the officers involved, along with public

2   defenders and everybody kept all the files in their offices.
3   And they did not actually turn the documents over to

4   records.

5             THE COURT:  Well, the prosecutors and public

6   defenders, you would not get to see their files anyway,

7   legally—

8   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

9   THE COURT: --  because they’re work product.

10   They’re their cases.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

13             THE COURT:  But, if there’s any police reports

14   filed with the police department, you do get, by public

15   records request, you can ask for one.

16             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

17             THE COURT:  If they say they won’t give you what

18   they have, then you’ve got to file something in Superior

19   Court.  But, as far as District Court, what you’re asking

20   me, I will allow you to look at the criminal court file,

21   because it’s open. It’s a public document.

22   MR. TOMPKINS: Right, uh-huh.

23   THE COURT: Past that, I have no power to make you

24   or let you look at a prosecutor’s work product, or file—


Page # 20

1             MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.

2             THE COURT:  --  a detective’s file, or even the

3   public defender’s file.

4             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.  Now, that particular form

5   they gave me had a box that actually checks box number

6   three, that says we’re requesting the following documents.

7   How do you actually use that particular form? I mean,

8   that’s what they gave me to do this procedure in the first

9   place.  So that’s—

10   THE COURT: Well, they gave it to you, because at


12   the clerk’s office downstairs—

13             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

14             THE COURT:  --  they said they tried to explain

15   it, and then they-- they gave up explaining what you can

16   do, because they can’t give legal advice—

17             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

18             THE COURT:  --  and they can’t tell you, but they

19   can say I’m going to put you in front of a judge so you can

20   hear from the judge the legal—

21   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

22   THE COURT: --  okay.  And this form is used that

23   if there’s a criminal charge and you are still facing that

24   criminal charge your public defender has a right to demand

Page # 21

1   anything they’re going to use against you in trial.

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

3             THE COURT:  And this form sometime is used for

4   them to demand specifics—

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.

6   THE COURT: --  in a pending criminal violation.

7   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

8   THE COURT: And pending being the key. There is

9   no pending—

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.


12             THE COURT:  --  criminal violation.

13             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, since that stuff was turned

14   over to the pros-- to my public defender here, Mark Lorenz,

15   I was under the impression that I could possibly—



18   evidence—

19   THE COURT:  It—  MR. TOMPKINS: -- actually see the cards, see the
THE COURT:  --  well, he can’t-- he can’t by

20   rules either give you copies of anything that’s in his file,

21   because it’s work product.

22   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

23  THE COURT: But, if there is a police report

24   involved in this case, which I’m assuming there is some kind

Page # 22 

1   of a police report—

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Yes, I do have that.

3             THE COURT:  --  you, as a citizen, have a right to

4   fill out the police department form and make a demand.   And

5   because there was a report number, of which you should have

6   a copy of that report number—

7   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

8   THE COURT: --  you can make a demand on police

9   records for that specific ’06 police report number—

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.


12             THE COURT:  --  and they have to give you

13   something back in writing that says we can’t give it to you

14   because of this law. We’re giving it to you, but it’s going

15   to be redacted, because they have a right to hide certain

16   things—


18   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.

THE COURT:  --  or we don’t have it. I’m guessing

19   they have it if there was originally some kind of a charge,

20   unless it’s still involved in something else criminally I

21   don’t know about.

22   MR. TOMPKINS: Well, what I’m trying to prove is

23   Mr. Naccarato here has stated that he’s going to continually

24   take me back to court every two years for the rest of my


Page # 23

1   life, getting a no contact order issued.

2             Cindy North-Jones, in her deposition stated that I

3   have not violated the contact order ever since it was

4   issued, and I have not-- any evidence that concerns--

5   Charlotte DOE has recently contacted the Department of

6   Labor asking for crime victims compensation, which came out

7   of the deposition that she used my name again to commit

8   perjury with the state.

9   So, I then filed a motion to have the guardian

10   removed for financial fraud. So, they actually have


12   initiated everything against me—

13             THE COURT:  Okay.

14             MR. TOMPKINS: --  and all I am trying to do is

15   defend myself.

16             THE COURT:  Well, each of those avenues, though—

17             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

18             THE COURT:  --  if you go to court, and there’s an

19   order--  a no contact order, or a protection order filed in

20   a specific court, you can go to the court, and say I can

21   defend myself, but I need this, this, and this to defend

22   myself in that case. And you get very specific—

23   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

24   THE COURT: --  on how can-- you have to give


Page # 24

1   them an offer of proof on how you can prove through

2   something—

3             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

4             THE COURT:  --  instead of just a fishing

5   expedition.  So, what I’m saying is this is not the proper

6   court.  This criminal charge is not the proper way to do it,

7   because I have no—

8   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.

9   THE COURT: --  jurisdiction.

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.


12             THE COURT:  Does that make sense?

13             MR. TOMPKINS: What--  I’m trying-- I understand.

14   I wasn’t trying to reopen it again.

15             THE COURT:  Yeah.

16             MR. TOMPKINS: I was just--  my understanding was

17   they said the public defender could not talk to me even--

18   even though he was representing me without the case being

19   reopened.

20             THE COURT:  Well, and—

21   MR. TOMPKINS: So, after I did file my motion to

22   have it reopened, Jay Ames did then come and talk to me, and

23   I did get the documents that I needed from the public

24   defenders.


Page # 25

1             THE COURT:  Okay.

2             MR. TOMPKINS: So, that’s why I no longer have a

3   subpoena to have them come any more.

4             THE COURT:  Okay.  And if—

5             MR. TOMPKINS: So, I did achieve what I was trying

6   to achieve.

7   THE COURT: --  okay.  So, you got at least some

8   of it.

9   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

10   THE COURT: And then anything else that the police


12   department has, you can do it by a public records request

13   through the police department’s records—

14             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

15             THE COURT:  --  division, and put it in writing,

16   keep it very simple on what you want from them, because they

17   do have rules that they have to follow.

18             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

19             THE COURT:  But, as far as me giving you any kind

20   of discovery on a case that doesn’t-- isn’t even in my

21   court—

22   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.  Because they threatened in-

23   -  in this other hearing—

24   THE COURT: --  right.


Page # 26

1             MR. TOMPKINS: --  that they were going to reopen

2   this case.  They had until April of 2009 to reopen the case

3   in the federal lawsuit.

4             THE COURT:  Okay.  Well—

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, that’s my intention. So,

6   that they were—

7   THE COURT: --  okay.

8   MR. TOMPKINS: --  telling me oh, by the way, if

9   you don’t kind of plea bargain with us, we’re—

10   THE COURT: Okay.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: --  going to recharge with the same

13   crime again, is my understanding.

14             THE COURT:  Well, if they recharge you, then

15   we’ll--  then it will be back on, and we’ll—

16             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

17             THE COURT:  --  talk about it.

18             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

19             THE COURT:  If they do, then at that point I’ll

20   have jurisdiction—

21   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.

22   THE COURT: --  to address it, if they file it in

23   this court.

24   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.


Page # 27

1             THE COURT:  Okay.  So, at that point remind me—

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.

3             THE COURT:  --  and ask me about it. At this

4   point, but because I have nothing in front of me.

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah.  Like, I—

6   THE COURT: Does that make sense?

7   MR. TOMPKINS: --  I talked to you at Riverfront

8   Park at your election booth that one day.

9   THE COURT: I know I saw you down there.

10   MR. TOMPKINS: I don’t now if you remember me.


12   But, what I was concerned about is you told me that if you

13   knew--  my understanding was the prosecutor actually stated

14   that he had a document, and he showed it to me.

15             THE COURT:  Well, you asked me if you could see

16   the court files with the affidavit in it, and I said you

17   have—

18             MR. TOMPKINS: And the—

19             THE COURT:  --  a right to go get—

20             MR. TOMPKINS: --  yeah.

21   THE COURT: --  an affidavit out of any court file

22   that’s filed with the court.

23   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.  They said that the

24   prosecutor never actually had an affidavit and that they

Page # 28
1   actually—

2   THE COURT:  And I’ve got my file in front of me,

3   and all’s I show in-- is that on the file I did your first

4   appearance on April 18th.

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

6   THE COURT: And it says here I found probable

7   cause and that because this is a ticket they read the

8   probable cause into the record. Do you have a copy of the

9   record?

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Yes, I have a printout of that.


12             THE COURT:  Okay.  Does it say on there that they

13   read into the there? Did you have a chance to read it over?

14             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, I’ve looked at it here. It’s

15   on--  I don’t have the document here, but it’s on page--

16   let me see here.

17             THE COURT:  Okay.

18             UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Actually, Your Honor, Mr.

19   Rankin (phonetic) didn’t read it in.

20             MR. RANKIN:  It wasn’t me.

21   UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You actually paraphrased it

22   for him, because of all of the substantial information that

23   was included in the-- in the affidavit of PC.

24   MR. TOMPKINS: Well, it actually states here that


Page # 29

1   they--  okay.  It says Mr. Rankin wasn’t the public

2   defender.  Now, they-- the lady that transcribed it found

3   it was Mr. Rankin, but the actual public defender is Lindsey

4   Smithson (phonetic). And it says here Your Honor-- it
5   says, Your Honor, if I may just have a statement--  a

6   probable cause affidavit, if I can approach.

7   There are two major files. I do not really want

8   to read it. I’m going to take it awhile. Can I summarize?

9   And then you said yes, you can. And he then said

10   Mr. Tompkins, based upon-- said here they would--


12   affidavit of probable cause that on 3/30/2006, we spoke with

13   Deputy Braddock phonically. So there goes—

14             MR. RANKIN:  There’s--  Your Honor, this is Mr.

15   Rankin for the record. I was not the prosecutor that

16   initiated this.  I was the prosecutor that eventually ended

17   up dismissing this. With regards to the record, I-- I

18   don’t know .

19             MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah.

20             MR. RANKIN:  I wasn’t here. It’s Linden

21   (phonetic) Smithson—

22   MR. TOMPKINS: Linden Smithson.

23   MR. RANKIN: --  was the prosecutor’s--

24   prosecutor’s name at that-- that hearing. And I do not


Page # 30

1   have a copy of those proceedings or that document in front

2   of me.  So, I cannot—

3             THE COURT:  I actually—

4             MR. RANKIN:  --  and will not comment on that.

5             THE COURT:  --  do now.

6   MR. RANKIN: But, I would certainly concur with

7   the court with regards to any and all information.  I’m

8   looking at the 1503 that Mr. Tompkins filed, and

9   specifically the part that said asking to see all files from

10   all prosecutors. We object and we concur with the court,


12   that is work product and that’s essentially all we have to

13   say on that.

14             MR. TOMPKINS: I understand that.

15             THE COURT:  Okay.

16             MR. TOMPKINS: My curious thing was, though, they

17   said they had two files of documents against me. They said

18   they had Valentine’s Day cards, necklaces, documents that I

19   can’t actually see that either, and they said they had an

20   affidavit of probable cause. So, I thought those are

21   documents that were actually presented before the court.

22   The other thing that they did before the court is

23   you asked them to make me read on the report, they gave me a

24   copy of the ticket. And then they gave a copy of the


Page # 31

1   ticket--  I don’t know if you have this document here.

2   It’s on page—

3             THE COURT:  Yeah, I have it. 73, it says here

4   that I did not have a copy of the ticket to give to you.

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Yes.

6   THE COURT: They made you a copy and gave you at

7   the time of the hearing.

8   MR. TOMPKINS: So, they gave me a copy. So, the

9   ticket that I received is on page 52.

10   THE COURT: Okay.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: They then gave a copy on page 55 of

13   the ticket to the Department of Health. That also is a

14   blank ticket, and then the backside of it is page 53.

15             But, then after the ticket was given to me, on

16   page 57, the ticket is now refilled in with more information

17   and somebody else signed it, and they actually changed the

18   information after the arraignment, which I didn’t think that

19   was appropriate either, that they would actually change a

20   ticket after I had already been seen by you, and it doesn’t

21   match the copy of the ticket that was given to me.

22   They added some more information. It’s not a big

23   deal, but—

24   THE COURT: Well, usually what happens is the

Page # 32

1   tickets go to the prosecutor’s office—

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

3             THE COURT:  --  prior to coming to the court.

4             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

5             THE COURT:  They write in the charging language,

6   and then they file it with the court. And if I gave you a

7   copy in court, that would have been a copy of what I had,

8   which would have been the written in copy. So, as far as

9   what copies—

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.


12             THE COURT:  --  the issue at this point is there

13   was a police report—

14             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

15             THE COURT:  --  that was read into the record at

16   the time—


18   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

THE COURT:  --  and you can make a demand on

19   police records for the allegations, and I’ll give you the

20   report number, but you have a copy of the report number.

21   MR. TOMPKINS: I have that, Your Honor.

22   THE COURT: So, ask for the police department to

23   give you a copy of the affidavits, or the police records

24   that I read from—


Page # 33

1             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

2             THE COURT:  --  and that’s on the page 73 that

3   says I was reading from the police report, the affidavits—

4             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

5             THE COURT:  --  of the officer. And they have to

6   give it to you under certain circumstances. They might have

7   to redact a whole bunch of it—

8   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

9   THE COURT: But, there is no criminal charge for

10   me any more, so—


12             MR. TOMPKINS: I real--  I--  I understand that.

13             THE COURT:  --  yeah.  Now, does that make sense?

14             MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah. And I gave some documents to

15   Cindy North-Jones. I actually had a tape recording with me

16   of my actual crime and they actually stated in her-- in her

17   deposition that no such tapes existed. And I also filed a

18   report to internal affairs, and they said that those

19   documents don’t exist. But, I’ve actually got a document

20   here in this file that actually shows that there was a tape

21   in the actual court—

22   THE COURT: What I’m saying is the thing that I

23   read from from page 73 that says those—

24   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.


Page # 34

1             THE COURT:  --  that they spoke with a Deputy

2   Baddeke (phonetic), all of that, I was reading from a

3   document from the police department. So, you should get

4   copies of those police reports—

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.  Okay.

6   THE COURT: --  and match it up with what I read

7   into the record.

8   MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah.  We couldn’t find any dates

9   that actually stated that 3/30/2006, there was actually no

10   documents from that date. Well, I’m just trying to-- I


12   keep going to records, and I ask for different stuff, and

13   they say there’s like a five or six-month waiting window.

14             Then they say well, what report numbers do you

15   want.  Then I ask could I have copies of all the documents

16   ever filed against me in any case. And they say well, if

17   you don’t know what the report number is, we can’t tell you

18   that.  That’s kind of a secret. So, I asked—

19             THE COURT:  Well, did you give them the ’06 report

20   number that’s—

21   MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah, I gave them 45-- 45600.

22   THE COURT: Okay.  That’s the one that supposedly

23   I was reading from that day.

24   MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh, right.


Page # 35

1             THE COURT:  And do you have a copy of that report?

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah, I do have a copy of that

3   report of what they had.

4             THE COURT:  Okay.  So--  okay.

5             MR. TOMPKINS: But, some of the stuff that I had

6   actually filed with you in court, too, that I gave my public

7   defender here, Mark Lorenz, none of that stuff actually made

8   it to the file, either.

9   THE COURT:  Into my court file?

10   MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah, in the court file. All the


12   documents from the trial between April of 2006 to December

13   of 2006 are missing.

14             THE COURT:  Well, there are some stuff missing,

15   because there was a confidential file also included.

16             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

17             THE COURT:  So, you would not get that because

18   confidential files would not—

19             MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah.

20             THE COURT:  --  be included. Okay.

21   MR. TOMPKINS: Right, because I filed documents

22   here.  This one was filed on-- on page 228 with the public

23   defender’s office on March-- on May 8, 2006 that was 102

24   pages.  That document doesn’t exist any more.


Page # 36

1             Police records doesn’t have a copy of it. There’s
2   just a lot of stuff missing.

3             THE COURT:  Well, I have all the stuff that you

4   filed.  That’s what these are. I’ve got everything.

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, this is the new stuff, from

6   the actual trial itself with me going through-- there’s no

7   documents in there from April of 2006 to December of 2006.

8   MR. RANKIN: Well, I’m not sure what trial he’s

9   referring to.

10   THE COURT: And you didn’t actually have a trial


12   in this matter.

13             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, I understand that. It

14   didn’t--  never had a hearing.

15             THE COURT:  Yeah, okay. Right.

16             MR. TOMPKINS: Everything was just dismissed.

17             THE COURT:  Okay.

18             MR. TOMPKINS: Well, I’m not sure what I can do.

19   I understand what you’re telling me—

20             THE COURT:  Okay.

21   MR. TOMPKINS: --  but, I was just trying to see

22   what I could do—

23   THE COURT: Well, and—

24   MR. TOMPKINS: --  what I could actually see—


Page # 37

1             THE COURT:  --  and I understand what you’re

2   trying to do, but the clerks set it here so that I could

3   tell you legally—

4             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

5             THE COURT:  --  on the record that there’s nothing

6   I can do other than let you see the court file, which they

7   said you’ve done.

8   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

9   THE COURT: And that’s it.  Everything from here

10   forward is dismissed, so I have no jurisdiction.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: Right, I understand it. I’m not

13   going to appeal with this ruling.

14             THE COURT:  Okay.

15             MR. TOMPKINS: I just--  the point is I wasn’t

16   getting any answers. They couldn’t talk to me—

17             THE COURT:  Right.  Because they said they—

18             MR. TOMPKINS: --  that I needed to see you

19   personally.  And then they asked me-- I did appeal the

20   original ruling to Judge Ellen Clark, and she said that you

21   wanted to see me yourself, and that I dismissed that case,

22   you could then see me. So, that’s why I dismissed that

23   Superior Court hearing.

24   THE COURT: Well, they set up the Superior Court


Page # 38

1   hearing as an appeal from this case?

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah, uh-huh.

3             THE COURT:  But, they understood that I had not

4   ruled on anything yet.

5             MR. TOMPKINS: Right, right.

6   THE COURT: So, they wanted a record of what my

7   ruling is, and my ruling is that I have no jurisdiction to

8   rule—

9   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.  Okay.

10   THE COURT: --  on anything.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: They told me—

13             THE COURT:  Does that make sense?

14             MR. TOMPKINS: --  that you couldn’t even see me

15   with that appeal pending, because it already been seen. So,

16   that’s why I dismissed that.

17             THE COURT:  Okay.  So, now we’re done—

18             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

19             THE COURT:  --  as far as this case.

20             MR. TOMPKINS: Uh-huh.

21   THE COURT: There’s nothing I can do for you at

22   this point.

23   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

24   THE COURT: If they reopen or refile, we’ll


Page # 39

1   address it at that time.

2             MR. TOMPKINS: Okay.
3             THE COURT:  Does that make sense?

4             MR. TOMPKINS: Yeah, I understand.

5             THE COURT:  Okay.

6   MR. TOMPKINS: I wasn’t--  I’m just trying to

7   prove that every statement made-- because you told me that

8   if you knew that they had something-- every statement—

9   THE COURT: Well, on the record, that’s everything

10   that they accused you of at that time—


12             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

13             THE COURT:  --  and then we transferred it to the

14   mental health—

15             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

16             THE COURT:  --  court.  And there’s some documents

17   in there just as far as your mental health stuff—

18             MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

19             THE COURT:  --  but, past that, there’s nothing,

20   just the dismissal.

21   MR. TOMPKINS: Right.

22   THE COURT: Okay.

23   MR. TOMPKINS: I understand that.

24   THE COURT: Okay.  Thank you.

Page # 40

1             MR. TOMPKINS: The actual mental health docket was

2   actually on--  the Judge Chinn was the mental health judge

3   to see me.

4             THE COURT:  Okay.

5             MR. TOMPKINS: He was the one that actually then

6   reissued the no contact order after he was told that the

7   original case was dismissed because Charlotte DOE had

8   actually perjured herself and it was dismissed in the

9   interest of justice.

10   THE COURT: Okay.


12             MR. TOMPKINS: So, then he reissues the case—

13             THE COURT:  I understand what—

14             MR. TOMPKINS: --  it’s a big mess.

15             THE COURT:  --  yeah.


17   sometime.


19   concerned–






25   MR. TOMPKINS: It’s been going on for quite
Page # 41

THE COURT:  Well, you’re done as far as I’m

MR. TOMPKINS: I’m concerned. THE COURT: --        on this.            Okay. MR. TOMPKINS:   Okay.     Thank you. THE COURT:      Thank you.

MR. TOMPKINS: Thank you, Your Honor, appreciate

1   it.

2   THE COURT:  We will be in recess.

3   UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you, Your Honor.


               By:  AARON M. NACCARATO
6                    Attorney at Law
                      601 S. Division Street
7                  Spokane, Washington 99202

Page # 42

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO READ THIS WEBSITE + I HOPE THAT THIS WEB SITE CAN HELP YOU & OTHER PERSONS WITH COURT CASE'S IN U.S.A. Etc. Also You Can E-Mail at yourcivilrights@yahoo.com You Can Also Write To Me At Rommel P. Westlaw @ P.O. Box 18010 Spokane, Washington. 99228-0010 U.S.A. My Phone Message # 509-701-5683 Or You Call Me At Work From 6am to 10pm PST & Call At My New (Washington D.C. Offices) At 202-670-LAWS (5297) + HELP OTHER By Making A Small Donation Or Help With Your Time Etc ! + Thank You ! PLEASE REMEMBER ! DO NOT TAKE THE LAW INTO YOUR OWN HANDS Get Help !

Thank You For Visiting My Civil Rights & Court Websites & Law School Helper & Info.Etc.

Disclaimer of Warranties and Liabilities:
This site does not warrant the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, safety or merchantability of fitness for a particular purpose of the information contained in This site nor in any way endorse the individuals or institutions listed in This site. This site does not validate, inspect, credential, or ensure the competence of any of the providers listed or the content provided. Due diligence on the part of the consumer is required prior to contacting any providers. In no event shall this site be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken by you in reliance on such information. Any damages for any reason shall be limited to the Amount Paid to Access And This Web Site Is Free For All To See and Use. The above warranties are the only warranties of any kind either expressed or implied including warranties of merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose. The user hereby indemnifies This site fully for all actions and agrees that This site is not to be held responsible for any adverse consequences to you. Or to you in person and or to you in courts or to you and any 3rd party persons or people you help with this website.

Disclaimer: + This is A Disclaimer from the Owner of this Website + Please Read ! + Nothing Here Is To Be Construed As "Legal Advice". We Are Not lawyers, And We Are Not Pretending To Be lawyers. This manual and website and information is intended purely as a communication of information in accordance with the right of free speech. It does not constitute either general or specific legal advice. Anyone who is seeking any legal advice should consult a competent professional. Neither the author, editor or publisher or anyone guarantee that using Any of this information will result in success or protect the reader from harm. The reader must accept that risk, and thoroughly study the law before using any of this material. Readers must take full responsibility for the consequences of any actions taken based on the contents of this website manual & Information Pics hear.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work on this website is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. Read all about Copyright & Fair Use at- http://fairuse.stanford.edu/

If you are a copyright holder who is unhappy about our promotion of your work to help others for Free ! + Please (Let Us Know) and we will happily remove it from the website if i can do so.

If you have a complaint about Westlaw Books Dot Com Content of this site, how about telling the webmaster first? You can Contact the Webmaster In Writing At P. O. Box 1144 Bonners Ferry, ID. 83805-1144 U.S.A.

Everything Written by Prof. Rommel P. Westlaw or Randles P. Tompkins or Randall C. Nutter Carries No Copyrights. Nothing I Do is for Money or "Fame". Feel free to copy, reuse, republish what I write. I don't care about attribution or credit. I Care Only About Not Shutting Westlaw Books Down and Putting As Many Bad Police Officers & Dishonorable Judges & There Agents in Prison As Possible and Per All U.S. Laws for Treason & for Violating the United States Constitution! Please Remember ! Do Not Take The Law Into Your Own Hands (Get Help) !

Our Website & logos are copyrighted to limit their use to honorable purposes. We specifically Prohibit Our Website to be associated with supremacist, sexist, or "hate" groups or purposes.

Westlaw Books Friends and allies may freely use and distribute Westlaw Books produced artwork, posters, brochures, articles, or other educational materials available on any of the websites owned by Westlaw Books P. O. Box 1144 Bonners Ferry, ID. 83805-1144 U.S.A..

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work on this website is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. Read all about Copyright & Fair Use at- http://fairuse.stanford.edu/
We Encourage you to go to the original sources to read the Whole Story
Read all about Copyright & Fair Use at-

This website is dedicated to helping people who are still serving long prison sentences received during the "ritual abuse" panic of the late eighties and early nineties. During this time, scores of innocent people were accused by overzealous social workers and police of heinous crimes against children.

In time, the hysteria subsided and most people were freed from prison (although many had spent years in prison and had been bankrupted by the process). It was discovered that the young children had been virtually brainwashed by the leading questions and repeated interrogations of social workers, therapists and law enforcement officials. Therefore, their wild testimony about animal sacrifice, devil worship, traveling in submarines, secret tunnels, and flying to secret locations where they were molested were fabrications, mostly without a shred of truth.

But incredibly, some people still remain in prison, forgotten and powerless.
"I didn't like to think about what that could do to the soul of a human being, to have to sit in a prison cell day after day for a crime you had not committed. And nothing to look forward to at the end of a day but the knowledge of hundreds more days like the one you just endured."

Permission to reproduce this material in a electronic or printout form is hereby granted free of charge by the copyright holder. Free permission to reprint the essay is granted to non-profit research and educational purposes only. and Free thought publications. All others must secure advance permission of the author through the Westlaw Books, which can be contacted at the address at the end of this file.

The following form is provided by Westlaw Books Etc., for informational purposes only and is intended to be used as a guide prior to consultation with an attorney familiar with your specific legal situation. Westlaw Books is not engaged in rendering legal or other professional advice, and this form is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. If you require legal advice, you should seek the services of an attorney All rights reserved by this website for anything not cover above.

We try very hard to make sure that the information on this page and links to information is accurate and up-to-date. This information is presented For Your Educational Purposes Only, and not actual Legal Advice, which you would expect to receive from a Real Lawyer who hates Dishonorable persons, peoples, & judges, And Bad Court of the Lands with every fiber of his being, spends the time necessary to become familiar with your case, supplies Competent Counsel, and knows how to present a Vigorous and Effective Defense against dishonorable persons, peoples, & judges, Etc. insane wild allegations and Character Assassinations, and does not try to talk you into a Plea Bargain when you are innocent and if you are innocent stand your ground.

Lack of counsel of choice can be conceivably even worse than no counsel at all, or of having to accept counsel beholden to one's adversary." Burgett v. Texas, 389 US 109 see all court cases.

We supply All information for free. No Westlaw Books & Advocate under the westlawbooks.com Umbrella charges you for their help. You may feel free to help your advocate financially, but you are not required to do so.

Some of Westlaw Books member advocates may have 501 (c)(3) Non-profit Tax Free status many of our advocates do not, and must not represent that donations to them are to be. "Tax Free".

Westlaw Books Dot Com Does Not have a 501(c)(3) Status and will not have in the furture at all.

We don't want one because we refuse to have our self help and political activities hand-cuffed:

IRS Charities & Non-Profits Page "An IRC Section 501(c)(3) organization may not engage in carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities."

Our #1 goal and intention is to connect families with current information and news. we promote many copyrighted works, and try very hard not to infringe a-pond anyone law-full copyrights.

We Want people to read the original sources In Context, so they know we aren't "making it up".

Mission Statement

Westlaw Books and association is a first amendment rights association speaking on matters of Public Concern of parents, grandparents, family rights advocates, former foster and adopted children, attorneys, law school student, licensed social workers, medical professionals, human rights and freedom advocates.

The insertion of the coercive force of government into the private lives of families, without accountability, due process, or recourse to redress the government for grievances is epidemic nationally and invariably harms families, communities, threatens our country's future and should be vigorously opposed.

We are dedicated to assisting families and their children by providing access to educational materials, news, support and information which will allow families and individuals to educate themselves on subjects of vital importance in restoring, exercising, and defending their rights and liberties. If you use our materials, we certainly would appreciate being informed.

Permission to quote statements we make and use our graphics is hereby granted without obtaining permission. We do Not copyright our quotes or graphics we create, which we Want to be widely dissembled to further the cause of Liberty and Justice for your Families and For All Families. If you use our materials, we certainly would appreciate being informed. Thank you !

Our Website & logos are copyrighted to limit their use to Honorable Purposes. We specifically prohibit our logos to be associated with supremacist, sexist, or Any "hate" groups or purposes.

Educate the public to be aware of the methods and operation of the unconstitutional insertion of government power into the family, the unconstitutional conduct of the courts in these cases;

Bring our grievances before the officials whose job is supposed to be to Fix It Our The Systems!

Promote legislation to protect the freedom of parents and children in their families
activities promotes both Advocacy and Activism Whether one is attracted to advocacy or activism is highly related to one's personality type. Both are highly important to the freedom of parents/ children.

Westlaw Books and Association stands true to it's founding principles and the U.S. Constitution.

Another worthy contribution on the part of Westlaw Books is We give people Help and Hope, and a method to blow off steam through our Numerous Forums when faced with these unaccountable and immune judges and state DSHS / CPS workers and are constantly denied redress of grievances by the unconstitutional and corrupt civil and family courts in U.S.A..

We have been providing the Safety Valve that is supposed to be the job of impartial Courts of Constitutional Due Process.

Public officials, ignorant of the law or paralyzed by suspicion, regularly thwart citizens exercising their constitutional right to inspect public records, a statewide audit has found. This is a Huge research project definitely worth spending some time going over. People are being denied their records all across the nation, primarily because it is the proof they are being falsely prosecuted.