WA- Sovcits – Stevens County – Foolishness

Several people of Stevens County WA, have petitioned the government for redress of grievances but they have been mostly ignored.

For over 5 months, the people on Stevens County Washington have sought answers from their public officials. The people have been repeatedly ignored and rebuffed. When “sheriff” Kendle Allen failed to take his Oath of Office for over 3 years after assuming the office, the people discovered that failure of duty to “duly qualify” constitutes falsely personating a public officer, a Gross Misdemeanor [NBC: Nope]. The bad news for Mr. Allen is that many acts he committed during his term of impersonation constitute numerous felonies [NBC: Nope]. Every arrest becomes assault and kidnapping [NBC: Nope]. Filing salary warrants known to be false is filing false instruments, a class C felony [NBC: Nope]. Signing any instrument under the color of authority becomes perjury [NBC: Nope]. Allen, as “sheriff”, is believed to have signed salary warrants so that his “deputies”, and he, himself, can get paid from the county treasury along with many other instruments. It would be difficult to imagine, after three years, probably hundreds of these acts have been committed.


Let’s examine these issues for a moment and realize why they fail to hold under WA State precedent. Since Mr Allen, the Sheriff, was duly elected, he is in fact the de-facto sheriff of Stevens County. This means that all his actions remain to be lawful and legal. While I can understand that some may be unfamiliar with WA State law, it took me, a non-lawyer, less than 10 minutes to locate some relevant precedent:

For instance the Court ruled that:

[4] The Port argues that: the doctrine of de facto officers is well settled in Washington; case law establishes that the actions of a de facto officer are valid; and the qualifications of an officeholder may only be challenged by a quo warranto proceeding or by a person who claims to be the rightful officeholder. In Green Mt. Sch. Dist. 103 v. Durkee, 56 Wn.2d 154, 351 P.2d 525 (1960), the plaintiffs sought to invalidate a decision of a county committee on similar grounds. The pertinent statute in Green Mountain, RCW 42.12.010, provides that an office “shall become vacant” if an officer ceases to be a resident of the district from which he or she was elected. The court held that the officers were de facto officers; their actions cannot be collaterally attacked; and, the only proper means of challenging the qualifications of a member of a public body is to commence a quo warranto proceeding.

We hold that Pederson’s position as a port commissioner in the case at bench cannot be challenged in this proceeding insofar as his actions as a commissioner are questioned by virtue of his residency. He was a de facto officer and his actions were valid. See Snohomish Cy. Builders Ass’n v. Snohomish Health Dist., 8 Wn. App. 589, 508 P.2d 617 (1973).

Dorsten v. Port of Skagit County, 650 P. 2d 220 – Wash: Court of Appeals, 1st Div. 1982

Since Sheriff Allen’s qualifications have not been challenged by Quo Warranto, the claims of some of the ‘people of Stevens County, WA’ fail to hold up under scrutiny.

No wonder that the prosecutor Tim Rasmussen has been ignoring them.

I recently received a communiqué from a group who call themselves, “We the People.” It was a DEMAND that I answer 75 carefully worded questions within three days. All elected officials and I have received other demands and deadlines from this group, usually that we vacate our offices because we are not legally in office or some other such nonsense.

Many of the questions they demand I answer, are like the questions a slimy lawyer would use to trick a witness rather than get at the truth. Questions like; when did you stop beating your wife? There is no answer, yet this group says it is my DUTY to respond to them and answer these questions.


You say I have three days to respond to your DEMAND. I say, OR WHAT? I am very busy dealing with county business and the trials coming up; attempted murder, vehicular assault, and the usual mayhem brought about by drunken and drugged-up people. I do have a duty. It is to the people who are the citizens of Stevens County. I believe the people want me to pay attention to important things rather than waste time to answer your clever questions. They do not want me to pander to the demands of every small group that wants attention or that find the mainstream of peaceful political dissent not radical enough to suit them. I think you folks have too much time on your hands. Do something constructive with it.

The manner in which some of the people of your group go about doing things; with discourtesy, confrontation and being generally rude and demanding, reveals something about the values and the spirit of your group. Such behavior is not a credit to you or your cause and gives a bad name to other freedom minded people who are working to effect change in society.

I have heard that your group believes the RCWs only apply to government workers and officials or people who have contracted with the state.

I have also heard your group does not believe the RCWs are binding on each of you personally. Do you seriously believe the law does not apply to you?

In your zeal to remove, replace, or control county officials, be careful not to infringe on the rights of other individuals or of the public. You may not believe the RCWs apply to you, but I believe they do. My advice is plain. Keep the peace. Do not threaten or harm or interfere with another person. Be a good neighbor. Don’t drink and drive. Pay your fair share of taxes. Get a drivers license. Treat others, as you would like to be treated.

The ‘We the People’ apparently were not impressed by Rasmussen’s well written and somewhat hard hitting response.

Expect more foolishness and given that the prosecutor is not allowing this nonsense to continue, perhaps even some arrests.

Now that the Sheriff has corrected the minor defect, he will continue to do his duties for which he was elected.