Today, January 7, 2014, an information (a.k.a. indictment) was filed in Kitsap Superior Court against J. Reiko Callner, Esq., Executive Director, Commission on Judicial Conduct, and against Felice Congalton, Esq., Associate Director of the WA State Bar.
The entire indictment can be read at this link Cause quo warranto v Callner Congalton
Both Callner and Reiko are alleged to have conspired, using their government office, to protect dishonest judges and lawyers from charges of various crimes and unethical conduct.
WA State, under statutory authority RCW 7.56.020, provides for any person to file an “information” when any state official “unlawfully hold or exercise any public office” that affects the “interests” of that person.
Clearly when a judge or a lawyer violates the law in the exercise of their office these corrupt judges and lawyers breach their oath to the law and to their code of conduct. When such behavior is ‘concealed,’ as both Callner and Congalton have done, our “justice system” is reduced to a game established for the amusement of corrupt judges and lawyers. And citizens are nothing more than their play-toys in the game of who can tell the most believable lie.
The lawsuit also invokes the ‘conflict of interest’ statute, RCW 2.28.030, that forbids a lawyer from acting as judge on a case in which the lawyer has a direct interest. Clearly, all lawyers are directly interested in the laws, codes and public duty which apply to them. This lawsuit deals squarely with lawyers’ obligations to Scheidler specifically and to the public as a whole.
Allegations taken from the indictment #14-2-00042-3, against both Callner and Congalton are as follows
First Cause of Action: Violation of RCW 9A.80.010 Official misconduct.
(1) A public servant is guilty of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to deprive another person of a lawful right or privilege:
(a) He or she intentionally commits an unauthorized act under color of law; or
(b) He or she intentionally refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him or her by law.
(2) Official misconduct is a gross misdemeanor.
Second Cause of Action: Violation of RCW 42.20.100 Failure of duty by public officer a misdemeanor.
Whenever any duty is enjoined by law upon any public officer or other person holding any public trust or employment, their willful neglect to perform such duty, except where otherwise specially provided for, shall be a misdemeanor.
Third Cause of Action: Violation of RCW 42.20.080 Other violations by officers.
Every officer or other person mentioned in RCW 42.20.070, who shall willfully disobey any provision of law regulating his or her official conduct in cases other than those specified in said section, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Fourth Cause of Action: RCW 42.20.050 Public officer making false certificate.
Every public officer who, being authorized by law to make or give a certificate or other writing, shall knowingly make and deliver as true such a certificate or writing containing any statement which he or she knows to be false, in a case where the punishment thereof is not expressly prescribed by law, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Fifth Cause of Action: RCW 42.20.040 False report.
Every public officer who shall knowingly make any false or misleading statement in any official report or statement, under circumstances not otherwise prohibited by law, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Causes of Action specific to Felice Congalton
Sixth Cause of Action: RCW 42.20.020 Powers may not be delegated for profit.
Every public officer who, for any reward, consideration, or gratuity paid or agreed to be paid, shall, directly or indirectly, grant to another the right or authority to discharge any function of his or her office, or permit another to perform any of his or her duties, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Facts specific to Ms. Congalton and this sixth cause of action. It is a fact Ms. Congalton is paid by the members of the WSBA to dismiss grievances and then delegate to the complainant the task to determine “upon a judicial finding of impropriety the grievance may be reopened”. Exhibit 4 is representative of such delegation of authority.
Please circulate this story via facebook and linkedIn and “like” us and what we do to hold ‘corrupt government officials who violate the public trust’ accountable.