To Kill a Messenger -- for Reporting a Corrupt Judge

To Kill a Messenger -- for Reporting a Corrupt Judge


http://DougSchafer.com

(Click on any underlined words to link to the document or other source material.)

On April 17, 2003, a 9-judge panel of the Washington State Supreme Court figuratively killed this messenger, then 24-year lawyer Doug Schafer, for having reported too much illuminating information in 1996 about a very corrupt judge. Click here for the court's misguided published ruling. What's more, the court's black-robed lawyers dishonestly and maliciously maligned me with their many fabricated untrue "facts" and suspended my law license for 6 months. Click here for my statement observing that the court's ruling destroys public confidence in our judicial system because it ranks lawyer-client secrecy as more important than judicial system integrity.

The irony is that the author of the majority opinion, Justice Bobbe J. Bridge (who admitted March 26, 2003 to needing treatment for her alcoholism and "mental health issues"), for many years (until after her February 2003 DUI and hit-and-run arrest made international headlines) chaired our state judiciary's Public Trust and Confidence Committee! (Here's my recent message to the members of that committee.) Legal and ethics scholars are now writing about "Schafer's Dilemma" and expressing belated support for my reporting of the corrupt judge notwithstanding client confidentiality issues.

I filed a timely Motion to Reconsider with a Supplement pointing out some of the outrageous ethical, factual, legal, and judgmental mistakes infecting the court's ruling, but those 9 black-robed lawyers simply denied my motion with a one-sentence Order -- "motion denied" -- on June 23, 2003. As sages have long observed, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely!" I also had formally requested public records of certain judges' past vacation schedules to probe the tainting relationship between Justice pro tem Karen Seinfeld (from Pierce County) and corrupt former Pierce County Superior Court judge Grant "Cadillac" Anderson's friends and defenders, but my requests were flatly denied.

News coverage: Associated Press Tacoma's News Tribune New York Lawyer National Law Journal

New York Times (alt) (my correction to NYT) (to ABA Cheek Task Force) (NYT lawyers' malicious motive)

My pleas that NY Times lawyers correct their falsehoods: (e-mails) (faxed documents)

Corrections to take-offs from the NY Times hit piece: Scripps Howard News Service WV Gazette

South Sound Business Examiner (Tacoma-Olympia) 5/12/03 story on me and other "Victims of the System."

Well-wishers: Law Prof. Susan Koniak Law Prof. Tony D'Amato Bus. Ethics Prof. LaRue Hosmer (with link to his law journal article)

Letters to Editors: SeaTimes 4/19 TNT 4/22 TNT 4/27 TNT 5/7

Editorials: News Tribune Boston Herald

My Letter to My Clients and Friends My Press Release of May 8, 2003. My exchanges with Bar officials on the Public Notice of Discipline.

On April 29, 2003, the ABA [Jim Cheek] Task Force on Corporate Responsibility issued its final report (click here for an excerpt) joining the ranks of every other responsible body (e.g., ABA Ethics 2000 Commission, Conference of Chief Justices) that has considered the matter by recommending that the ABA's model ethics rules for lawyers be changed at the ABA convention in early August 2003 (click here for the convention-packet report) to once again allow lawyers to reveal client information in order to prevent a fraud or a crime, or to rectify past fraud or crime in furtherance of which the client used the lawyer's services. This applies to all clients -- corporate and human ones. With strong support by the ABA leadership, the ABA House of Delegates on August 11, 2003, approved this change to the ABA's1983 model ethics rules for lawyers. [Click here for a news report (AP 8/11/03).] The change essentially will restore the traditional public-interest exceptions to client confidentiality that existed in the ABA's 1908 and 1969 ethics codes (and in Washington state's lawyer ethics code until 1985).

On the need for federalization of lawyer ethics rules and enforcement, see http://EvergreenEthics.com/SEC/ with my two comment letters to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on its proposed lawyer ethics rules.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Washington State Supreme Court in April 2003 ruled against my appeal of the State Bar Disciplinary Board's recommendation that the Court suspend my lawyer license for disclosing a client's secret in Feb.1996 when I reported a corrupt judge who the Court finally removed in Sept.1999. Posted here are the details about the corrupt judge's case and the case against me for reporting him, including my Opening Brief (and its Appendix), the state bar's Answering Brief (that it refused to provide in electronic format), my Reply Brief and some journal articles cited in my briefs. I occasionally supplement the briefs with Statements of Additional Authorities, and here post the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth , Seventh, and Eighth of those statements. The State Supreme Court hearing held May 7, 2002, may be listened to on-line anytime (click here) with RealPlayer thanks to TVW. For news stories on that hearing, click here (Seattle Weekly), here (AP) and here (Tribune). Many documents posted here are in PDF format, that requires the free Adobe Acrobat Reader, available from www.adobe.com.

Doug Schafer, idealistic lawyer in Tacoma, Washington.

Related websites: http://EvergreenEthics.com http://Doug4Justice.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jump-to Links: Click on any of these website headings to jump to its contents:

Introduction.

Overview of the "pattern of dishonest behavior" by former Judge Anderson and his colleagues.

The Public Judicial Disciplinary Case leading to Judge Anderson's removal; but see Ineffective Bar Discipline.

News clippings about Judge Anderson's corrupt conduct.

Legislative interest in Constitutionally recalling Judge Anderson; My call for Legislative overhaul of the lawyer and judge disciplinary systems.

Financial fraud, insurance fraud, and criminal activities of Anderson and friends that were not publicly exposed.

Judge Anderson and law partner David Tuell's "shopping" of Pacific Lanes; Local Bar's Cover-ups.

Liquor and Gambling Licensing Law Crimes.

The State Bar's disciplinary case against me, lawyer Doug Schafer, the whistle blower.

Washington State Supreme Court's Rules of Professional Conduct for lawyers.

The evolving ethics of the legal profession -- important current developments.

My national agenda for reform of lawyer and judicial ethics.

My Frequently Asked Questions page.

Selected media coverage of these issues.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction.

I, Douglas A. Schafer, a solo lawyer in Tacoma, Washington, have been charged with misconduct by Washington State Bar officials who recommended in May 2001 that the Washington State Supreme Court suspend my law license for a yearfor having disclosed my former client Bill Hamilton's secrets when I reported in Feb.1996 documented evidence of corrupt conduct by Pierce County Superior Court Judge Grant L. Anderson involving my former client. It took 3 1/2 years before Judge Anderson was finally removed by the Washington State Supreme Court in Sept. 1999. The Court concluded that his acts "clearly exhibit a pattern of dishonest behavior unbecoming of a judge." Among other things (discussed below), the Supreme Court found that Judge Anderson secretly accepted from Hamilton $31,000 in payments on his new Cadillac and coincidentally reduced by $92,000 Hamilton's purchase money debt for a bowling center that Anderson had sold to him, on the eve of become a judge, from a deceased client's estate of which Anderson was the executor. The State Bar had found nothing wrong with that for over 4 years -- and on March 15, 2000, the Bar cut a deal with former judge Anderson for merely a 2-year suspension of his license to practice law, which they justify only by covering up the full extent of his fraudulent misconduct! (That is exposed below.)

In Feb. 1996, I reported to disciplinary and law enforcement authorities, among other things, that Hamilton had told me in 1992 that he needed a corporation formed quickly because he was buying a bowling center from an estate that his lawyer-friend (Anderson) had been "milking" for over three years, that the friend was closing the estate quickly to become a judge so there was not time for an appraisal, that the friend was giving him a good deal and he intended to repay the friend later in some way for it. I then told Hamilton that I didn't want to hear about it; I simply formed his one-owner corporation (a routine $300 task). I waited for the three-year statute of limitations to lapse on whatever Hamilton may have done, then investigated that estate myself and reported the obvious and overwhelming evidence of Anderson's self-dealing and other grave misconduct to the authorities. (See Exhibits 1 and 2 to my Answer, below.)

This website is to post links and copies of documents that relate to the Judge's case and to the Bar staff's disciplinary case against me. My hope is that this case will inspire public discussion about the proper role of lawyers within our society and our legal-judicial system: Should lawyers be society's "guardians of our law and justice system" or simply "hired-gun mercenaries" for their clients, even corrupt ones? For example, if a victorious client credibly boasts to his or her lawyer of having bribed the judge, shouldn't the lawyer report the corrupt judge to appropriate authorities? And shouldn't the lawyer report the judge even over the objection of the bribe-paying client? If our society declares that a lawyer must silently tolerate a judge who he or she knows to be corrupt, then the lawyer will only be able to serve future clients before that judge by acquiescing in the tolerated corruption--paying the judge's bribes (or associating the judge's friends as co-counsel). If we acquiese in a corrupt "justice" system, then winning for the client at any cost becomes the only goal. Law and justice? What law and justice?

I contend that I was used as a tool by Mr. Hamilton to achieve his lawless goals, so under the well-established crime-fraud exception his comments to me were not made in a "professional relationship" that the law treats as confidential. (See my letter of 12/7/99 arguing this to Hearing Officer Mills.) Further, I feel that the highest duty of a lawyer as an "officer of the court" is to preserve or restore integrity in our judicial system (it's not owned by judges or lawyers, it belongs to all of us).
 
Please read complete article at link below:
 
http://www.dougschafer.com/
 
Editor's note: This Shark has found another "Man for All Seasons". Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com