Monday, February 23, 2009

Ethics Board's Mike O'Connell Reveals His Attitude And Just Maybe His Bias

This blog contains the email exchange between O'Connell and myself. I was counseled to give a firm response to his outrageously revealing and angry email to me.

Let's, however, know that this man probably recommended an expansion of the unfit foster mother's complaint against me and this blog, and then hired an investigator without telling me he was moving forward. He said he would inform me of developments. (Let's go hunt while she continues to write!)He also said he would call to set up an interview which he never did. No one has.

I would not be printing this email exchange but for two reasons. First, someone out there decided to write me saying what a nice guy Mike O'Connell is. Fine. This is not about nice. But let the email speak for itself. Secondly, I think witch hunts should be public.

Remember the story line. The foster mother in the Stuth case filed an ethics complaint against me demanding that this blog (this bit of free speech) should be shut down. Remember that I never used the names in the case. Remember that she is the one with the restraining order out against the former lover with a gun and that she had the Stuth grandchild removed from her (for cause) at the very time the state continued to argue for termination and placement with this woman! Who and what should be investigated here????!!!! (And yes, the judge agreed with me.)

Mr. Mike O'Connell sent me a cover letter with the complaint. I called him. He used to be the Senate Republican counsel many years ago and I have regarded him as at least not an enemy. I have not had much occasion to communicate with him over the last 10 years. He is employed at the will of the Democrat Senate.

I told him I thought this complaint was ridiculous. That I had the constitutional right to have a blog just like anyone else. And, that though I could if I had chosen to do so...I used no names. And, I stated that I have free speech rights. And, that as a Senator I have the right and responsibility to demand that state government follow the law by placing children with qualified relatives. The foster woman's name had even been used in open court. His letter of notification clearly released her information and he said the complaint could be public (including her name). He told me that he didn't see anything wrong, but that he would let me know if it was otherwise.

He did not. He never notified me that the purvue of the complaint had been expanded. Why? Because the longer she blogs the greater the chance of finding something we can pin on her!

I called him before Christmas telling him I wanted to know what was happening. As if as a casual aside, O'Connell informed me that the Ethics Board was going to "expand the nature of the foster woman's complaint" and go interviewing looking for something (anything) I might have done wrong. I had to call him to be informed of this new and unusual development.

Really? Not enough to do?

As you know, I am just finishing up, Twilight, a book for teens and now a popular movie that I am reading along with my granddaughter. We learn there that the werewolves do not like light! They prefer the darkness.

Email #3
-----Original Message-----From: O'Connell, Mike Wed, 28 Jan 2009 7:23 am Subject: RE: CPS Wrongdoings
You have my sincere apology if my response seems angry and irrational because surely you know me better than that. I am neither. And, it seems, I was mistaken about your intentions regarding a meeting with Ken Wilson. I simply wanted to convey to you that you have an opportunity, if you choose, to be part of the preliminary investigation.

No message to the Board has been sent on this matter. Of course you may have an attorney or anyone else you may select to be present at the interview.

Would you prefer to give me some dates and times when you would be available or should I start with his schedule and provide some options for you to consider? Whichever you prefer.

Best Regards,

Email #2
From: pamroach@ Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 8:52 PMTo: O'Connell, Mike Subject: Re: Wrongdoings at CPS


Please indicate in my letter where I refused to be interviewed. Please indicate where I refused to participate. Please indicate when or what time I have refused an interview from Mr. Wilson. When has a request ever been put forward to me for an interview?

You have indicated to me that you have hired an investigator. That takes money. Taxpayer money. We are in a recession. The state is facing a multi-billion dollar deficit. I have offered you an opportunity to read the King County Superior Court judge's ruling in this matter. The judge is not a party. However, he has rendered that ruling. That ruling supports my good work in this matter and clearly states the illegal actions and harm perpetrated on my constituents by DSHS.

Your response to my initial letter seems to be angry and irrational. I would ask that you reflect upon your words and your tone. I demand that you not relay erroneous or inaccurate information to the board. If you persist on the position you have stated in this letter I will have to seek legal assistance to defend my rights. I look forward to a more rational and well thought response from you in the future. Pam Roach

Email #1

From: O'Connell, Mike To: Roach, Pam Sent: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 5:23 pm Subject: RE: Wrongdoings at CPS

As you identified in one of our phone messages, one of the issues raised in the complaint is breach of confidentiality. This allegation involves your relationship with DSHS personnel and perhaps others. The other allegation, which we also discussed, was whether you wrongfully used you position or public resources – this could also involve your relationship with DSHS personnel and perhaps others. As you say, there may be nothing here in the end and I appreciate that it can be frustrating to be the subject of a complaint but a “witch hunt” seems a curious descriptor of a process established in law. Before a case may be dismissed the matter must be investigated. If this were not the fact then all that quasi-judicial boards would have to do would be to gather a statement from the respondent and dismiss the case or, in the alternative, gather a statement from the complainant and proceed to a hearing. Granted, a much simpler process.

Earlier you seemed eager to be interviewed – in fact, you insisted upon it and made me promise it would happen. You complained that in the past and on more than one occasion you have been refused the opportunity to tell your story. An interview would have given you an opportunity to help Mr. Wilson put his report together, with everyone’s perspectives included, before being considered by the Board. You have chosen not to participate and since there are no compulsory orders in effect at this time it is certainly your right to refuse.

I will inform Mr. Wilson and the Board that you have declined . As I mentioned earlier the Board meets on February 19 and the progress of the investigation will be a subject for a non-public, executive session. At some point the Board will determine it has enough information from the investigation to answer the question of whether or not there is reasonable cause to believe the Act has been violated. The Board will issue a public order on the question of reasonable cause, either dismis sing the case for lack of reasonable cause or finding reasonable cause and ordering a public hearing.

Best Regards,


infinite freedom said...

Washington State social workers are the source of all child abuse in our state today. They attack the innocent, and protect the abusive. They mimic domestic violence in their behavior. They abuse children, and desecrate their families in every way shape and form. They attack out of fear, just like a perpetrator of domestic violence. Fear drives abusive behavior.

Perhaps the former counsel Mr. O'Connell would like to answer this. Where is the part of what Washington State social workers are doing to citizens that is not abusive?

There are about seventy thousand children right now "in the system", removed from their homes. About forty thousand of those children will never return. What has Washington State done for these citizens, Mr. O'Connell?

"help" them you say?? My son Dylan has post traumatic stress disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and detachment disorder. At the age of 6, he was diagnosed with these three very dangerous mental illnesses. He is now eight. Is this the kind of "help" that you intended for your citizens??

And the social workers call me bad because I try to say that Dylan was happy and healthy before they gave him to a violently abusive drug addict. And then put him on "medication", and refused him the right to see his mother, his siblings, and his grandmother for three years.

The really sad fact in Dylan's case is that there is nothing wrong with him. His behavior is a reaction to the abuse that Washington State forces him to endure. If Dylan were to come home to me, he would be able to eventually go back to living a happy, healthy life.

Every one is a victim this day, and very few are able to tell the truth. How do we stop abuse?? Expose it for what it is.

Social Workers in Washington State are only hurting families. It is abundantly clear that in it's current form, our child welfare system can only compound child abuse. For it has become abuse itself.

What is the solution? Abuse prevention. And the first to get it will be the perpetrators, Washington State social workers.

What a concept, real help. The only thing that will ever fix it is giving the victims the right to a better life.

And making the social workers get treatment for their disorder.

I'll blog away about this all night. You like to join me, Mr. O'Connell? I think not, for the truth may slip, were you to speak.

Anonymous said...

This is absolutley rediculas. I can understand being a constituient placing a complaint, But a court has ruled already in this case.
Guess I will have to have a closer look at who is on the ballot and have a closer relationship with those in office.
You acted not only as a Senator in the Stuth case but, as a human being.
I do it every day. Thank God there is no review board or political entities that could give me, crap!
Next Case! I will, as I am sure you will take action to protect the next kid no matter what. There are far to many in Washington suffering the same as little Lisa was.
For what funding similar to the generation the one dollar checks will that 250,000.00 will bring in 43 million. What a fraud. And we employee these people. Where do people think this money comes from? Their neighbors taxes?
I have had it with the ethics of these people.
Keep up the great work. I am planning to move soon maybe to your district. Please run again. We need more real people

Anonymous said...

It just never ends, does it? There is no integrity in documentation, accusations, twisted ideology and hidden agenda. I can really see where you are frustrated with this and with good reason.
I read through documentation that CPS has in my file. I didn't get what I asked for, just what they wanted to send. From the beginning stages of activity with the state, there are the facts and then what they documented. It was like reading about someone else's life because it couldn't have possibly been about me. I am not sure how one would legislate this to be honest. I have really thought about it. So much of it is just sloppy work and waiting too long to document so the facts get askewed. Then there are all the faulty perceptions of "well what I heard was" perhaps but "that wasn't what I said." I believe you are telling the truth as does everyone else who has now had to deal with this bizarre system.
Eyes opened Grandma

Anonymous said...

SO? Do they all train in the same place.How to abuse and screw people.Do they make extra $ for this too.


Anonymous said...

"all that quasi-judicial boards would have to do would be to gather a statement from the respondent and dismiss the case or, in the alternative, gather a statement from the complainant and proceed to a hearing. Granted, a much simpler process."
Gee, Mike, the latter is what Pam Roach is complaining about. DSHS and Family Courts do it every day of the week. Apparently, you have completely missed the point.
From a UW Master's in Ed Grad, taxpayer, voter, parent

Anonymous said...

"gather a statement from the complainant and proceed to a hearing. "

Oh wait - Pam, thank Mike for me please. I just learned that what has been done is DSHS has been given "quasi-judicial" power.

Is that legal?
Signed - sincerely,
all of the above including social studies/government teacher