RE: REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION OF FORFEITURE OF OFFICE BY
JUDGE MICHAEL HECHT AND FREDERICK FLEMING, AND FOR
FILING OF WRITS OF QUO WARRANTO

FROM: ARTHUR WEST
120 STATE AVE NE # 1497
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON, 98501

Please regard this as a request for investigation of the forfeiture of office by the Honorable Judges Michael Hecht and Fleming of the Pierce County Superior Court, and for the filing of a Writ of Quo Warranto to remove them from this franchise that they currently hold unlawfully.
The facts are as follows:

(1)On Octrober 28, 2009, the “Honorable” Judge Hecht was convicted of a felony. This disqualifies him for office under the express ternms of RCW 42.40.020, which provides in pertinent part…That no person shall be competent to qualify for or hold any elective public office within the state of Washington… unless he be…an elector of such county,… municipality or other district or political subdivision. Since Judge hecht is a felon, he is not an elector and ineligible to hold the franchise of Judge.

(2)In Pierce County Cause No. 08-2-043121-1, West v. Port of Tacoma, the Honorable Judge Fleming has refused to issue a decision a case within 90 days, and has allowed nearly a year to pass without a final determination. Under the express terms of RCW 2.08.240 and Article IV, section 20, such conduct automatically creates a forfeiture of the office.

This conduct is especially outrageous in that it indicates a general failure of the Peirce County Prosecutor to ensure that qualified individuals administer justice in Pierce County.Due to this failure, a known patronized of male prostitutes is a Pierce County Judge and, worse still, a judicial determination of whether records related to regional infrastructure development (The SSLC) are required to be disclosed under RCW 42.56 has been unreasonably delayed.
Please let me know whether you intend to take action in this matter, or whether it will be necessary to pursue a citizen’s action to remove Judge Hecht as well as Judge Fleming.
I certify the foregoing to be true under penalty of law..
Thank you for your consideration.
s/Arthur West
Arthur West
Cc. Hon. Judge Hecht, Fleming, and Attorney General Rob McKenna.

I guess it has been published. Wow and you can go to DC and just bend or turn a page. But because of the age, never dog ear a page.:

Judge Michael Hecht was specifically charged with paying Joseph Hesketh for performing sexual acts on numerous occasions between 1997 and 2001. Did you get that folks? The prostitutes name was Joseph not “Josephine.” Making matters even worse is that some of the sexual acts that Judge Michael Hecht paid Joseph Hesketh to perform “occurred when Mr. Hesketh was a minor.”

In its charges against Judge Michael Hecht, the Judicial Commission said that he would seek out male prostitutes in downtown Tacoma; take them to his law office; have them perform sexual acts; and then pay them for their services.

Link:
http://www.noethics.net/News/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=231:is-tacoma-washington-judge-michael-hecht-a-criminal-racist-and-pervert-of-course-he-is&catid=34:judicial-misfits&Itemid=55

i know, i know.. i shouldn’t be so hard on the poor guy. After all its the holocaust and stuff. I mean yeah. Thats it. The holocaust did it!

Blame it all on the holocaust Hecht! you’ll get off scott free. But make sure you call Sergio a Nazi first!

“… says Fidelis, a pro-family organization.”

*****************

“Fidelis” is an umbrella Catholic political action group dedicated to forcing Catholicism into the public square whether it wants it or not. It’s current rant is defaming any Obama appointee. The method of choice is guilt by association– a practice the Church refined during the heady days of the 12th Century when every eccentric female was a witch and everyone who knew the witch was one too. Very convenient from a prosecution standpoint.

Predicting a lawyer’s actions in high office based on his clients is risky business given that John Adams represented the British at the Boston Massacre, and Lincoln defended slave owners. In any event, neo-cons have little use for history or professional ethics as evidenced by Fidelis which seeks to purge society of those it considers sexually deviant with scant mention of those roman-collar wearing deviants in their midst whose antics again splashed across the pages of the newspaper just weeks ago.

BTW Larry, how’s Moe and Curley?

February 3, 2009

CHICAGO – President Obama has made a major mistake and put America’s families at risk by selecting David Ogden to become Deputy Attorney General, says Fidelis, a pro-family organization.

“David Ogden is a hired gun from Playboy and ACLU. He can’t run from his long record of opposing common sense laws protecting families, women, and children. The United States Senate has a responsibility to the American people to insure that Mr. Ogden’s full record is fully reviewed before any vote on his nomination” said Brian Burch, President of Fidelis.

“Ogden’s record is nothing short of obscene. He has represented Playboy Enterprises in multiple cases, Penthouse Magazine, the ACLU, and the largest distributor of hard-core pornography videos. He has opposed filters on library computers protecting children from Internet smut, and successfully defended the right of pornographers to produce material with underage children.”

“David Ogden has collected checks from Playboy and Penthouse to fight any attempts to establish filters on federally-funded public libraries. Ogden even sued the federal government in an attempt to publish Braille versions of Playboy magazine – at taxpayer expense, of course,” said Burch.

As a lawyer in private practice, Ogden has argued for an unlimited abortion license, gays in the military, and has urged courts to treat traditional definitions of marriage as a social prejudice.

“A vast majority of Americans support parental notification before a minor’s abortion and protecting kids from Internet pornography in our libraries,” continued Burch. “Yet David Ogden has fought tooth and nail against these common sense laws protecting our children from harm. At a time when America’s families are under increasing assault, Mr. Ogden is a dangerous choice for a position whose responsibilities include the enforcement of our nation’s laws. “

I will concur on the stipulation that he should be kept from any civil duties that would touch on prostitution or any charges he may be currently facing personally as a key element of any claim at bar in his court. For example, a landlord suing a tenant for breach over unpaid rents (and any ancillary clauses violated in the lease proper) after the tenant was shut down for running a prostitution operation would be totally inappropriate.

We really don’t disagree. i have no problem with criminal cases being diverted elsewhere, but I see no ramification for civil cases being handled by this Judge. I do resent the executive branch dictating to the judicial branch how it will utilize the courts system. That’s not it’s call and the height of arrogance and self-righteousness.

The question is, is there anything going on beyond the initial allegations? Are the prosecutors who refuse to present cases before him investigating or pursuing charges?

No one is suggesting a slander’s veto is valid, but maintaining a low rate of reversible error is a valid interest not only as a matter of proper administration of justice but as an operational efficiency as well. Why risk the appellate review at all if you don’t have to? If filling the bench is paramount, there are methods for expediting review of the judge’s case. And I take your point on credibility of accusers, but keep in mind even incredible witnesses are occasionally witnesses or are victims or accomplices of actual crimes. Even the weak of character deserve to be heard before judgment is rendered if they have relevant testimony, surely? Isn’t that what the rules of evidence and the judge/jury system is for – analysis of all relevant factors before rendering judgment? I do however agree with your suspicions of how the judge’s behavior will be impacted.

I don’t believe in a slander’s veto. I say if he wins his case, the matter is closed. Why deprive ourselves of a good judge because some ill-wishers make lurid statements? From what I see, we have inconsistent statements from two alleged hookers, and in my experience their credibility in court is just above Alberto Gonzalez’. The appellate issues only become viable if the Judge is convicted, and allegations of currying the State’s favor are the most fleeting kind. If he survives, I suspect the Judge, having been wrongfully subjected to the criminal justice system, will be more defense-oriented since his personal experience is more than “theoretical.”