Corrupt Cop Two Videos

Send us a text

City of Enumclaw

Prosecutors in Washington State

The Consider Podcast
Ecclesiastes 7:25
Examining Today's Wisdom, Folly and Madness
www.consider.info

www.consider.info

Episode Transcript

SPEAKER_11 (00:11):
And every allegation comes from the detective.
Well, my my overall comment wasthat this is an absolutely
terrible interview.

SPEAKER_02 (00:26):
Did Detective McCall ever give an opportunity for a
narrative response?

SPEAKER_00 (00:32):
No.

SPEAKER_02 (00:33):
Does this interview adhere to the basic tenets of
the Washington State Guidelines?

SPEAKER_11 (00:39):
No.
I mean, this entire interview isnot acceptable.
Every single act, alleged act,is suggested first by the
officer and um every act?
Yes, every act.
So the act that you talks abouttouching the chest and touching

(00:59):
the crotch first.
He talks about uh him touching,or excuse me, the complainant
touching the accused first.

SPEAKER_06 (01:12):
Quote, every allegation comes from the
detective.
Dr.
John Yule, forensicpsychologist.
End quote.
More information with thetranscript statements can be
found at www.consider.clickslash two G Z.
Follow the finger.
Follow the finger.

(01:32):
Prosecutors, police, andscripted accusations.
Enam Claw Detective Grant McCalland his co-conspirator had been
grooming false accusations forover a year.
The hostile effects of the hatecrime had been going on long
before this scripted accusation.
In short, Enam Claw DetectiveGrant McCall terminated the
recording, and upon resuming,the testimony of the manipulated

(01:56):
accuser had undergone a completetransformation.
The follow-the-finger testimonyserves as compelling evidence of
an orchestrated hate crime.
In a solitary meeting, sittingalone with the manipulated
accuser, City of Enum Clawdetective Grant McCall engages
with the manipulated accuser,introducing inappropriate

(02:18):
suggestions involving both thevagina and anus.
When the manipulated accuserhesitates, McCall abruptly stops
the recording to take a break.
It's important to note thatMcCall has previously deleted
evidence and ignored the actualallegations to the point of
refusing to investigate thelocation where the alleged abuse

(02:40):
had taken place.
Detective Graham McCall knewthat if the home had been
examined, the crime would havebeen impossible to commit.
With the approval of King Countyprosecutors and judges,
Detective McCall prompts theaccuser for specific responses
and pauses the recording to takea little break.
When there is no immediate replyregarding the anal suggestion,

(03:04):
McCall calls for a break,shutting off the recorder once
again, keeping in mind thatMcCall had already deleted
crucial evidence.
During the break, the narrativeof accusations miraculously
alters.
Detective Grant McCall switchesoff the recorder, influences the
false accuser, and uponresuming, the story has

(03:25):
transformed.
The transcript reads as follows.
Detective Grant McCall.
And you're certain his fingersdidn't penetrate your vagina?
Manipulated accuser.
Yes.
Detective Grant McCall.
What about Uranus?
It's alright if you want to takea little break.
Manipulated accuser.

(03:46):
Unintelligible.
Just moments after the recordingrestarts, Detective McCall
simply says, okay.
No further commentary fromMcCall.
But now, post-break, themanipulated accuser has crafted
a narrative that alignsperfectly with McCall's
objectives.
Instantly, upon McCall's okay,the manipulated accuser begins

(04:10):
fabricating a story aboutconspiring events.
The manipulated accuserexplicitly stated, never like
penetrated me or anything.
King County prosecutors inSeattle subsequently
misrepresented the assertionbefore a jury that the
manipulated accuser had alwaysclaimed penetration by a finger.
City of Enum Clause Grant McCallcoordinated the false

(04:33):
accusations while his accomplicegroomed the situation, creating
a multi-tiered scenariosurrounding a hate crime.
Prosecutor Jason Simmons and histeam embraced these fabricated
claims and reshaped them into aharmful narrative aimed at a
righteous Christian church theyaimed to undermine.
Judge Laurie K.

(04:54):
Smith colluded with theprosecutors to systematically
obliterate truth and violate therights of the accused.
In his closing arguments,prosecutor Jason Simmons claimed
the manipulated accuser hadpreviously disclosed abuse to
social services.
This disinformation tacticdistorted the truth to an
egregious extent.

(05:16):
The manipulated accuser merelyindicated to social services
that she had been abused,lacking any specific details
other than that no penetrationoccurred again definitively.
No penetration had taken place.
To elevate the allegations to afelony status, Detective McCall

(05:37):
needed to introduce an assertionof penetration.
Detective Grant McCall suggestedand guided the accuser to assert
that a finger had been inserted.
At that instant, the manipulatedaccuser displayed hesitation,
stumbling over her words.
Detective McCall then halted therecording to claim they would

(05:57):
take a break.
Upon resuming, the fabricatednarrative regarding finger
insertion began to take shape.
Judge Lori K.
Smith and prosecutor JasonSimmons solidified this
contrived falsehood during thetrial as if the manipulated
accuser had consistentlymaintained this story from the
outset.

(06:18):
In reality, the claim of afinger event originated entirely
from Enum Claude detective GrantMcCall.
This is not a mere questionableallegation.
It represents a criminal actconcealed by the King County
prosecutors of Seattle,Washington.

SPEAKER_11 (06:36):
And every allegation comes from the detective.

SPEAKER_02 (06:51):
Did Detective McCall ever give an opportunity for a
narrative response?

SPEAKER_00 (06:57):
No.

SPEAKER_02 (06:58):
Does this interview adhere to the basic tenets of
the Washington state guidelines?

SPEAKER_11 (07:04):
No.
I mean, this entire interview isnot acceptable.
Every single act, alleged act,is is suggested first by the
officer and um every act?
Yes, every act.
So that just talks abouttouching the chest and touching

(07:24):
the crotch first.
He talks about uh him touching,or excuse me, the complainant
touching the accused first.

SPEAKER_06 (07:37):
Quote, every allegation comes from the
detective.
Dr.
John Yule, forensicpsychologist.
End quote.
More information with thetranscript statements can be
found at www.consider.clickslash two G Z.
Follow the finger.
Follow the finger.

(07:57):
Prosecutors, police, andscripted accusations.
Enam Claw Detective Grant McCalland his co-conspirator had been
grooming false accusations forover a year.
The hostile effects of the hatecrime had been going on long
before this scripted accusation.
In short, Enam Claw DetectiveGrant McCall terminated the
recording, and upon resuming,the testimony of the manipulated

(08:21):
accuser had undergone a completetransformation.
The follow the finger testimonyserves as compelling evidence of
an orchestrated hate crime.
In a solitary meeting, sittingalone with the manipulated
accuser, City of Enum Clawdetective Grant McCall engages
with the manipulated accuser,introducing inappropriate

(08:43):
suggestions involving both thevagina and anus.
When the manipulated accuserhesitates, McCall abruptly stops
the recording to take a break.
It's important to note thatMcCall has previously deleted
evidence and ignored the actualallegations to the point of
refusing to investigate thelocation where the alleged abuse

(09:05):
had taken place.
Detective Grant McCall knew thatif the home had been examined,
the crime would have beenimpossible to commit.
With the approval of King Countyprosecutors and judges,
Detective McCall prompts theaccuser for specific responses
and pauses the recording to takea little break.
When there is no immediate replyregarding the anal suggestion,

(09:29):
McCall calls for a break,shutting off the recorder once
again, keeping in mind thatMcCall had already deleted
crucial evidence.
During the break, the narrativeof accusations miraculously
alters.
Detective Grant McCall switchesoff the recorder, influences the
false accuser, and uponresuming, the story has

(09:50):
transformed.
The transcript reads as follows.
Detective Grant McCall.
And you're certain his fingersdidn't penetrate your vagina?
Manipulated accuser.
Yes.
Detective Grant McCall.
What about Uranus?
It's alright if you want to takea little break.
Manipulated accuser.

(10:11):
Unintelligible.
Just moments after the recordingrestarts, Detective McCall
simply says, okay.
No further commentary fromMcCall.
But now, post-break, themanipulated accuser has crafted
a narrative that alignsperfectly with McCall's
objectives.
Instantly, upon McCall's okay,the manipulated accuser begins

(10:35):
fabricating a story aboutconspiring events.
The manipulated accuserexplicitly stated, never like
penetrated me or anything.
King County prosecutors inSeattle subsequently
misrepresented the assertionbefore a jury that the
manipulated accuser had alwaysclaimed penetration by a finger.
City of Enum Clause Grant McCallcoordinated the false

(10:58):
accusations while his accomplicegroomed the situation, creating
a multi-tiered scenariosurrounding a hate crime.
Prosecutor Jason Simmons and histeam embraced these fabricated
claims and reshaped them into aharmful narrative aimed at a
righteous Christian church theyaimed to undermine.
Judge Laurie K.

(11:19):
Smith colluded with theprosecutors to systematically
obliterate truth and violate therights of the accused.
In his closing arguments,prosecutor Jason Simmons claimed
the manipulated accuser hadpreviously disclosed abuse to
social services.
This disinformation tacticdistorted the truth to an
egregious extent.

(11:41):
The manipulated accuser merelyindicated to social services
that she had been abused,lacking any specific details
other than that no penetrationoccurred again definitively.
No penetration had taken place.
To elevate the allegations to afelony status, Detective McCall

(12:02):
needed to introduce an assertionof penetration.
Detective Grant McCall suggestedand guided the accuser to assert
that a finger had been inserted.
At that instant, the manipulatedaccuser displayed hesitation,
stumbling over her words.
Detective McCall then halted therecording to claim they would

(12:22):
take a break.
Upon resuming, the fabricatednarrative regarding finger
insertion began to take shape.
Judge Laurie K.
Smith and prosecutor JasonSimmons solidified this
contrived falsehood during thetrial as if the manipulated
accuser had consistentlymaintained this story from the
outset.

(12:43):
In reality, the claim of afinger event originated entirely
from Enum Claw detective GrantMcCall.
This is not a mere questionableallegation.
It represents a criminal actconcealed by the King County
prosecutors of Seattle,Washington.

SPEAKER_11 (13:01):
And every allegation comes from the detective.
Well, my uh my overall uhcomment was that this is uh an
absolutely terrible interview.

SPEAKER_02 (13:16):
Did Detective McCall ever give an opportunity for a
narrative response?

SPEAKER_00 (13:22):
No.

SPEAKER_02 (13:23):
Does this interview adhere to the basic tenets of
the Washington state guidelines?

SPEAKER_11 (13:29):
No.
I mean, this entire interview isnot acceptable.
Every single act, alleged act,is is suggested first by the
officer and um every act?
Yes, every act.
So the act that just talks abouttouching the chest and touching

(13:49):
the crotch first.
He talks about uh him touching,or excuse me, the complainant
touching the accused first.

SPEAKER_05 (14:03):
Laughter and conversation could be heard
around a long set of tablesstrung together to form a
conference room configurationone early morning in downtown
Enum Claw.
Various Enum Claw-based businessowners and professionals
conversed with each other abouttheir weekend while helping
themselves to complimentarycoffee and donuts.
As the laughter and conversationcarried on, it eventually became

(14:25):
time for the reason of thegathering to kick off, at which
point everyone took their seatsaround the large conference
table.
Upon starting the meeting, oneby one, different individuals
stood up and gave a 30-secondintroduction to their business
and the services they provided.
Eventually they made it aroundto an individual representing a
business by the name of NotationPrinting.

(14:47):
Notation Printing, he described,is a marketing, design, and
printing production house meantto help local businesses get
business cards, signage,websites, and more.
All geared, of course, for smallbusinesses.
This group of Enum Club businessowners were members of an
organization by the name of BI,short for Business Network
International.

(15:08):
Like the Salt Shaker ChristianBookstore, Notation Printing was
an organization that was ownedand operated by Sound Doctrine
Church.
Notation wasn't a nonprofit likethe Salt Shaker, but
nevertheless it existed to servethe community in a different
way, specifically small andlocal businesses.
Located on Cole Street, EnumClaw's Main Street, right across

(15:29):
from the post office, Notationwas frequented by numerous Enum
Claw businesses.
Some of these included doctors,dentist offices, attorneys,
restaurants, and even farmers.
One regular by the name ofRichard would come in several
times a week to use Notation'sbusiness card services that he
resold to his own customersbecause of how, quote, easy the

(15:52):
Notation folks are to work with.
Richard himself was a farmer andwould regularly bring by farm
fresh chicken and duck eggs tosell, which Notation employees
were always excited to buy.
As with the Salt Shaker,Notation's positive rapport
within the community could beattributed in large part because
of the way it was operated.

(16:13):
While it was a for-profitentity, it embodied the same
type of service and dedicationto its customers that was common
among any endeavor undertaken bySound Doctrine Church or its
members.
Long before the days ofnotation, however, members of
this particular church wereregularly finding new ways to
serve in the community.

(16:33):
What they did not realize at thesame time they came into Enum
Claw in the late 90s, however,is that this would catch the
attention of a police officerwho had joined the force only a
couple of years before, and hedid not like what he saw.

(16:54):
On May 28th, 1996, a new patrolofficer joined the Enum Claw
Police Department.
The name of this officer wasGrant McCall.
Throughout his career within thepolice department, McCall held a
number of various positions.
Starting out as a patrolofficer, he was later assigned a
role as an investigator,detective, and finally sergeant.

(17:15):
Early on in McCall's career,only a couple of years after he
became an officer, he becameaware of a new church entering
Enum Claw.
This church was called SoundDoctrine.
As it would turn out, McCallconsidered himself quite the
devout Christian and thought itwas important to incorporate his
particular brand of Christianityinto his police duty.

(17:36):
Arguably, McCall's mostimportant or pivotal doctrinal
belief was specific to thephrase bearing fruit.
When talking about fruit in thecontext of the Bible, we would
usually hear phrases or versesrelevant to the fruits of the
Spirit or a tree that bears goodfruit.
These allegorical teachingsreference virtues characterized

(17:58):
by people who lived theChristian faith.
McCall's doctrinal understandingon fruit, however, is quite
different from anything found inthe Gospels.
McCall's belief was that fruit,as it is referred to in the
Bible, refers instead toprocreation.

SPEAKER_02 (18:14):
What is it about that statement that is a
reflection of your own opinion?

SPEAKER_09 (18:20):
Well, you have to understand the term fruit.

SPEAKER_02 (18:22):
Okay.
Go ahead.

SPEAKER_09 (18:41):
Now, if you take it one step further, for example,
when I go out on Saturdays tooutreach, I go to people and I
either knock on their door and Ipresent the gospel to them, or
I'll do follow-up somewhere withkids on the bus and ask them to
come to church, so on and soforth.
If those kids come, or if theyend up getting saved, that is
fruit to what we call ouraccount.

(19:03):
The church collectively as awhole.
So we're reproducing otherChristians.

SPEAKER_05 (19:07):
As he put it, if I have a wife and we're married
and we have children, we'veproduced fruit.
In other words, McCall's beliefin regards to producing fruit is
sexual and relevant only in thecontext of having children.
This, of course, is nonsensicalfor many reasons.
Christ himself never married,nor did Paul, who wrote most of

(19:28):
the New Testament.
By McCall's logic, neither Paul,many of his disciples, nor
Christ himself ever produced anyfruit for the gospel.
One of the verses specificallydealing with the subject of
fruit says that every tree thatdoes not bear good fruit is cut
down and thrown into the fire.
If McCall's supposition thatproducing children is what is

(19:51):
meant by bearing fruit, Christhimself would have been
condemned.
Beyond being nonsensical,however, this view that the
biblical fruit is children.
Or procreation is one veryimportant word when it comes to
McCall, and that is perversion.
It is a warped or twisted viewof a concept that is written in
plain, simple to understandwords.

(20:14):
The point here, however, isn'tfor this to turn into a
theological lesson.
Instead, we first need toestablish the lens through which
McCall views the world.
For him, the gospel and itspurpose is primarily one wherein
procreation is the highestimportance, as opposed to what's
written in the Gospels, living arighteous life devoted to God in

(20:37):
all aspects.
With this in mind, it becomeseven more concerning in part
because he feels it's necessaryto go and share this sexualized
version of Christianity to kids.
Now, besides being whollyinappropriate sharing this brand
of Christianity with minors, hedid so while they were a captive
audience.

(20:58):
On a bus, they must ride to getto and from school.
What's even more telling aboutthis particular account given by
McCall isn't just the creepynature of what he's recounting.
It's the fact that he was giventhe floor in a courtroom
setting, under oath, with plentyof people watching and cameras
rolling to express as hisabsolute high priority when it
comes to his doctrinal beliefs,and this is what he chose.

(21:21):
Take note, he did not sayhealing the sick or giving to
the poor.
No, when provided an open floorto share his perspective, he
focused on the idea A ofsexualization and b expressing
these concepts to minors.
Again, if you think this soundscreepy, just wait until what we
have in store for you later onin this episode.

(21:42):
As it would turn out, McCall'sbeliefs would come into contact
with Sound Doctrine Churchmembers repeatedly throughout
the years.
At one point, a member of SoundDoctrine Church was pulled over
on two separate occasions.
In both, when asking the officerwhy they were being pulled over,
the officer responded that theywere just welcoming them to the
neighborhood.
Another church member who rentedan apartment with Enum Claw was

(22:05):
woken up at 2 a.m.
and Enum Claw police officersforcefully entered with their
guns drawn.
When asked why they had enteredhis apartment, the officers
responded that they were in thearea and noticed the door was
unlocked.
Somewhere along the way,however, a rumor began to spread
that Sound Doctrine Church didnot allow members to speak to

(22:25):
their own families.
We do not have time here toaddress this in detail.
However, this claim was easilyknowably false.
The church in question held veryclosely to a whole gospel
message, which included a devoutdaily devotion to Scripture and
serving both one another and thecommunity.
This level of devotion took up alot of time for individuals as

(22:48):
they were often busy in workrequired to serve the community
in a wide variety of capacities.
Some individuals who were notmembers of the church took issue
with this for one reason oranother.
As a result, they would spreadrumors around the community of
the church being a cult thatdidn't allow non-members to
contact people within thechurch.

(23:09):
This was despite the fact thatmany members regularly had
conversations with people whodidn't attend the church, and
some of these individuals wouldeven attend the church services
on occasion.
In fact, it was often familymembers who didn't belong to the
church who stopped communicatingwith those who attended because
they didn't share the sameseriousness about the gospel and

(23:31):
service.
Eventually, however, theserumors made their way to the
Enum Claud Police Department assome of the more sinister
members of the community wouldcall police claiming they were
being barred from talking tofamily members within the
church.
Grant McCall became the officerwho received these calls.
As a result, McCall wouldperform welfare checks on

(23:54):
members of the church.
Each time, according to his owntestimony, he always found the
individuals who he was checkingon to be healthy, happy, and
seeing nothing amiss.
Despite this fact, doing theselittle welfare checks became a
convenient way for the rumormill, along with Detective Grant
McCall, to harass Sound DoctrineChurch members whenever they

(24:15):
felt necessary.
It is important to reemphasizethat at no point during any of
these harassment sessions wasanything found out of order.
In one instance, a 19-year-oldman made a decision to join
Sound Doctrine Church.
Ironically, this was a result ofreceiving a free book from the
Salt Shaker Christian Bookstore.
A book could be considered alonger version of a flyer for

(24:39):
anyone familiar with the lastvideo.
But this all but disputedMcCall's original claim that the
church made no effort to reachout to individuals within the
community.
Not only did they reach out, butthe outreach was successful.
However, with small town gossipmaking its way to this
19-year-old's stepmother, shequickly found that any cases

(25:00):
where somebody needs to beharassed in reference to Sound
Doctrine Church, Grant McCallwas the guy.
As such, McCall showed up tothis 19-year-old's residence
just as he was on his way out ofhis parents' house, choosing
instead to move in with a friendfrom the church.
McCall stood in his way, badge,gun, and all, and asked him to

(25:20):
wait in the driveway as he had adiscussion with the
19-year-old's stepmother.
After chatting for a shortperiod of time, he returned to
talk with the young man.
So why are you wanting to leaveyour parents' house?
He asked.
Well, for a lot of reasons,being that they've become
increasingly abusive, would beone of them.
My dad even threatened to burnall of my Bibles.

(25:41):
Look, I understand that.
Families sometimes say thingsthey don't mean, but you really
should try and work things outwith them.
There's no need to leave, McCallremarked.
After explaining to McCall thata part of why he wanted to leave
was because he wanted to joinSound Doctrine Church and move
on with his life, McCall becameincreasingly indignant.
At one point, the 19-year-oldeven mentioned the book he had

(26:04):
been reading titled Even theDemons Believe, which ignited
his newfound interest inChristianity.
McCall scoffed and said, Yes, Iam aware of that book.
After further attempts to detainthe young man and attempts to
bully him into staying with hisabusive parents, McCall finally
relented, saying, Look, youhaven't committed any crimes
here, and there isn't anything Ican do to force you to stay here

(26:27):
since you're an adult.
However, I must really adviseyou to stay with your family.
Am I free to go?
The young man asked, againignoring his warnings.
Yes, McCall replied.
After which point, the young mangot into the car with his
friends, waiting at the end ofthe driveway, and he left
without ever looking back.
McCall's bullying, controlling,and outright unhinged conduct

(26:49):
wasn't specific to members of aparticular church he didn't
like.
Numerous members of thecommunity reported their unhappy
encounters with McCall as well.
In one incident, a woman wrotean email to the Enam Claw Police
Department in regards to anencounter with McCall that took
place with her 63-year-oldmother, who also happened to be
a nurse.

(27:09):
In the incident, McCalldiscovered that the woman's dog
was sitting in her car with thewindows cracked.
When the woman returned to hercar, McCall began berating her.
Every time the woman attemptedto explain her situation, McCall
would interrupt her, talk downto her to the point where she
was driven to tears.
McCall was described as beingbright red, sweating, and the

(27:32):
woman stated that she wasworried for his health even
after being disrespected.
The situation was so devastatingto the woman her daughter felt
the need to write an email tothe department, expressing just
how badly it had affected hermother.

SPEAKER_03 (27:48):
My mother said he consistently interrupted her,
talked down to her, would notlet her explain herself, and
mumbled something about herunder his breath as he walked
away.
She is distraught.
She called me crying.
She also explained that he wasbright red, sweating, and
obviously overheated himself.
She's worried he has heatstroke.

(28:10):
The lady is worried for hishealth even after being
disrespected.
This officer should be madeaware of that fact.

SPEAKER_05 (28:18):
There are no records as to if any disciplinary action
was taken against McCall as aresult of the complaint.
As much as members of EnumClaw's community had
difficulties with McCall, evenfellow police officers had their
problems with him as well.
In fact, McCall's anger grew soout of control that at one point
he even pulled a gun on hisfellow officers.

(28:47):
Despite the number of positionsheld within the Enum Claw Police
Department, unhappy interactionscontinued to take place between
Grant McCall and other memberswithin the force.
An officer filed a formalcomplaint against McCall in
regards to a polygraph test hewas asked to take in an effort
to become employed by the policedepartment.
The complaint alleges thatMcCall spread false and or

(29:09):
personal information on morethan one occasion that was in
regards to a polygraph test theofficer took in order for him to
gain employment with the city ofEnumclaw.
Presumably unhappy that thisofficer had received a rank
higher than McCall, McCallallegedly brought up the
polygraph test andmisrepresented it and other

(29:30):
personal information to at leastone other officer.
He would allegedly mention thispolygraph test to the officer
himself as well on a regularbasis.
As a result, an attorney by thename of Don Austin was hired to
investigate the situation.
As it would turn out, however,the attorney responsible had a
pretty clear bias in favor ofMcCall.

(29:52):
When questioning McCall, heseemed to take just about
everything he said at facevalue.
For example, when questioningMcCall in regards to the
polygraph test, McCall simplyclaimed he did not remember
doing it.
The attorney was fully satisfiedafter McCall tried to refresh
his recollection by searchingthrough his computer for
something else he was doing atthe time.

(30:14):
He was able to find sometraining he was conducting of
another officer around thattime, and the attorney had
exactly what he needed,apparently, case closed.
Now you might be thinking, hey,that seems like a fine
investigation.
After all, he has an alibi.
That might be true in anotherscenario, except for the fact
that McCall's signature is onthe polygraph documentation.

(30:38):
According to Don Austin's ownreport, it says, quote,
gradually he, McCall, was ableto reconstruct that he was
involved in the backgroundinvestigation but was doing
field training during the datesidentified above.
He still did not independentlyrecall the applicant's
polygraph, even though he hadsigned off on some of the

(31:00):
paperwork and signed off on thefinal report to Chief Zoll.
The question being answered herewas simply this: Was McCall
involved in any way in theofficer's polygraph and
background investigation?
There are documents that theattorney acknowledged that prove
yes.
End of story.

SPEAKER_01 (32:07):
He's not the one that let out that information.
Management doesn't care that helet it out.
Nobody seems to care that he wasthe one that gave that personal
information out.
And I'm reading your reportgoing, it's right there in front
of everyone.

SPEAKER_05 (32:22):
The officer went on to claim that McCall was
regularly disparaging him behindhis back in official meetings.

SPEAKER_01 (32:29):
It's to support that belief where here's McCall in
these meetings openly discussingthings about me being
untrustworthy.
That I'm controlling.
I control my wife.
She doesn't think for herself.
And these are statements thatare made to disparage me, that
have absolutely no place, and isno one's business in open forum
meetings sponsored by the city.

(32:50):
But management allowed it.

SPEAKER_05 (32:51):
Due to the ongoing stress caused by McCall's
slanderous accusations againstthe officer and the number of
officers McCall was successfulin turning against him, the
officer's wife eventually put ina public records request into
the Enum Claw Police Department.
The officer was then questionedas to why his wife was making
the request, and officersstarted openly discussing the

(33:14):
possibility of terminating him.
Back on the topic of thepolygraph, however, the officer
seemed genuinely confused as towhy Don Austin, the attorney
responsible for investigatingthis situation, seemed intent on
ignoring the fact that McCall'ssignature was on the polygraph
documentation.

SPEAKER_01 (33:38):
Do you have the sign form that McCall signed?
Yeah, I do.
Did he sign it?
Yeah, he did.
Why would he sign it if hewasn't there, Don?

SPEAKER_08 (33:46):
Yeah.
I mean, come on.
With regard to the things in thetimesheets and the phone
records, can you understand howthat would generate some
questions for you?
I understand it.

SPEAKER_01 (33:56):
But why the primary focus?
When you have in your hands asigned form from the polygrapher
that's done at the time of thepolygraph by McCall?

SPEAKER_05 (34:04):
When the report was finalized by Don Austin, to no
one's surprise, McCall wascleared of all wrongdoing, and
the officer who made the initialcomplaint was proclaimed to be
not credible.
As a result of Don Austin'sinvestigation, Edom Claw Police
Chief Bob Hubler issued a memooutlining the aftermath.
In an irony of ironies, theofficer who originally made the

(34:27):
complaint against McCall wasclaimed to be in violation of
police policies for manyreasons, but including the claim
that you initiated a complaintagainst Officer Grant McCall
that was unfounded and baseless,and that you lacked credibility
during the investigation of thatcomplaint.

SPEAKER_07 (34:45):
In violation of our department's statement of
values, honesty, and integrity,and the following policies.

SPEAKER_05 (34:51):
Nowhere in the report was any mention that
McCall lied about hisinvolvement in the officer's
polygraph test or backgroundinvestigation.

SPEAKER_07 (34:59):
The chief of police went on to write, quote, I have
determined with the seriousnessof the offenses you have
committed, two actions will beinitiated.
First, you will be reduced inrank to the classification of
officer.
Second, you will be dischargedfrom employment by the city of
Enumclaw.
Your reduction and discharge areeffective December 14th, 2018.

(35:22):
You will be contacted by adepartment supervisor to
coordinate uniform and equipmentturn-in.
Notwithstanding the largercircumstances, I thank you for
your past service and wish youwell in your future endeavors.

SPEAKER_05 (35:35):
There is far more to this situation, way more than we
have time to cover in thisepisode, but suffice it to say,
McCall's dedication to lying andcovering up those lies is
something that was not secludedto a single incident.
This would not be the last ofMcCall's documented misconduct
within the Enum Claw PoliceDepartment.
A different complaint was filedby a record specialist within

(35:57):
the Enum Claw Police Departmentagainst Grant McCall and other
officers.
The complaint outlines howMcCall and other officers use
the MCM, this is essentiallytheir internal police messaging
system, to quote, sendderogatory, defamatory, obscene,
disrespectful, sexuallysuggestive, harassing, or
otherwise appropriate messages.

SPEAKER_04 (36:20):
Over the past few months, I have reviewed the
instant messaging system withinSpillman, MCMs, for a public
records request made by anattorney on behalf of a former
employee.
The request asks for, amongother things, any records of any
city of Enum Claw employeereferring to a woman as a big or

(36:40):
any comments which related tothe sex life or sexual activity
of a female.
In reviewing the MCMs, I didfind responsive records to this
request, but more predominantly,I found a litany of abuses of
the use of this system rangingfrom idiotic to offensive.

SPEAKER_05 (36:57):
This investigation spanned messages that occurred
over the course of five years.
There are way too many obscenemessages that were sent by
McCall over this time period tocover here, so we'll just cover
a few.
In regards to a man whom McCalland another officer were
discussing as to the spelling ofhis last name, McCall jokingly

(37:19):
referred to him as atransgender, after which he
said, quote, No, just joking,he's from England.
Another officer referred to anelderly woman as a crotchety old
bag, at which McCall agreed andlaughed.
There were many other weirdcomments as well, many of which
I will not be sharing here, butone in which McCall referred to

(37:42):
licking a cigar.
Comments that are weird, evenfor weird people.
Later, when another officer wasdiscussing a cigar lounge he
liked, McCall asked out of leftfield, oh, dancing girls?
To which the officer responded,no, a classy place.
The pattern many of thesemessages helped further
establish is the weird, creepy,needlessly sexualizing or

(38:07):
perverting of the normal orinnocuous comments made in
casual conversation.
Not to mention the fact thatthis communication method was
for internal official policebusiness.
But that is apparently somethinggovernment employees do not have
to worry about.
According to a memo issued onNovember 1st, 2017, all

(38:27):
allegations made in regards toimproper MCM use by Grant McCall
were sustained, listing out thespecific policy that he
violated.
In a response to the findings,the police chief Bob Hubler said
that the department was takingthe issue seriously and had
taken active steps.
No mention was made on whetherany disciplinary actions were

(38:50):
taken against McCall.
Years before this incident,however, McCall had an even
darker moment within the EnumClaw Police Department.
An incident that all butsolidified there was virtually
nothing he could not get awaywith.
On December 29th, 2010, ataround noon, an officer by the
name of Tony Ryan had adiscussion with McCall in the

(39:10):
squad room.
Eventually, a heateddisagreement arose, after which
McCall threatened Ryan and otherofficers by proclaiming that
after the current police chiefwas gone, he levied a threat
that was something to the effectof everyone in the department
would soon be responsible foreverything that they said.
Following the conversation,McCall stormed out of the room.
Other officers remarked that hisrage was clearly visible in his

(39:34):
demeanor.
At some point following theconversation, McCall retrieved a
shotgun, which he began clearingin the Enum Claw Police
Department hallway in clear viewand earshot of other officers.
Clearly threatened by what wasunfolding before them.
Officers again remarked of theenraged demeanor McCall

(39:54):
maintained as he stormedthroughout the precinct.
After clearing the shotgun,McCall stormed out of the
Building only to return a fewminutes later to retrieve
another firearm, then leave withit in his possession.
As a result of McCall'sthreatening behavior, he was
placed on paid administrativeleave.
McCall's ID card, badge, andweapons were all taken from him.

(40:17):
He was also barred fromaccessing any police department
vehicles, accessing any citybuildings, including the police
station.
Lastly, McCall was to undergo apsych evaluation to determine
whether or not he was fit forservice and could return to the
force.
Nevertheless, however, accordingto the investigation report, it
says, quote, although DetectiveMcCall's behavior is concerning,

(40:40):
the investigation report doesnot provide ample evidence to
warrant termination.
And who is responsible forinvestigating McCall's conduct?
None other than Don Austin.
That is the very same attorneywho would later clear McCall of
all wrongdoing after lying abouta fellow police officer,
allegedly.
Apparently, threatening andpulling a firearm on fellow

(41:03):
officers warrants a paidvacation and no further
disciplinary action.
Which, just as a fun aside, whatdo you think would happen to a
Walmart employee if he or shethreatened co-workers and then
pulled a gun on them?
I'll leave that one to you tospeculate.
Underpinning all of thesevarious incidents, however, are
even more issues with McCall.

(41:25):
And could you believe it?
When it comes to destroyingindividuals or even a church he
doesn't like, there is no limitto what McCall was willing to
do.
This is especially when we takeinto account McCall's creepy

(41:46):
pastime of teaching procreationto kids on a bus.
McCall's opportunity to act onhis creepiness came when the
daughter of a woman who had apersonal vendetta against Sound
Doctrine Church made an assaultclaim against the pastor within
the church.
As it would turn out, McCall'sweird, creepy, perverted
perspective would be his weaponof choice in the events that

(42:10):
would unfold next.
This brings us to a forensicpsychologist by the name of Dr.
John Yule.
Dr.
Yule's expertise wasspecifically in the area of
human memory in both childrenand adults, and in their
relevance within interviews aswell as credibility assessment.
Much of his work in this fieldhad been specific to abuse

(42:30):
allegations, along with properinterview procedure to determine
the credibility of witnesses andcomplainants.
Since 1964, Dr.
Ewell's research focused heavilyupon memory, credibility
assessment, and interviewtechniques.
That being said, Dr.
Ewell's provided the opportunityto listen to an audio version of
the interview conducted byDetective McCall so he could

(42:53):
provide his analysis of the waythat it was conducted.
Well, not all of the interview,as McCall conveniently shut off
the recording for a portion ofthe time.
And yes, that really happened.
Nevertheless, here's Dr.
Ewell's response to theinterview conducted by Detective
McCall.

SPEAKER_11 (43:11):
I mean, this entire interview is not acceptable.
Every single act, the allegedact, is suggested first by the
officer and um every act?
Yes, every act.

SPEAKER_05 (43:25):
Now this looked so damning to the prosecution's
case, he accused the expert ofbeing an advocate for the
defense team.

SPEAKER_11 (43:32):
She's not given a chance to be spontaneous.

SPEAKER_13 (43:37):
So how do you get to that question then?

SPEAKER_11 (43:39):
Tell me what happened, and then what
happened, and what else?
Do you remember something aboutwhat happened with you?
Um what you want, the moreinformation that comes
spontaneously from thecomplainant, the stronger
foundation you have to build thecase.

SPEAKER_13 (43:57):
No, you testified on direct that you, you know.
You take no position in this,but you seem to be kind of
advocating it right now.

SPEAKER_11 (44:10):
No, what I'm an advocate about, certainly
nothing to do with the issueshere, is I'm just so sorry that
this kind of poor qualityinterviewing is going on in the
21st century.
We don't need this.
What we need are good qualityinterviews to be done where
where whether she's a victim ornot, whether she gets to tell
her story so we can evaluate herstory instead of it all being

(44:34):
led by what the officer'slooking for.
That's what I'm I'm an advocatefor good investigation.
Not for one side or the other inthis case.

SPEAKER_13 (44:45):
And and that's because I don't know.

SPEAKER_05 (45:47):
But it didn't stop there.
Dr.
Yule went on to demonstrate whythe interview itself showcased
McCall as being the primaryaccuser in the case and not the
alleged victim.

SPEAKER_11 (45:58):
Well, as I as I mentioned a moment ago in
cross-examination, the mainthing was just that every
allegation comes from thedetective.
He's the one who suggests um allof the things that happen.
And she either agrees ordisagrees with him, but um she's

(46:19):
not she isn't right from theget-go, he tells her why she's
there and what the allegationsare.
She says, You've been molested,uh that it happened with
somebody living in your house,it happened a certain time ago.
He shouldn't be giving thatinformation.
He should be saying, Why are youhere today?

(46:40):
And pursuing that, um, which agood interviewer would have
done, uh, might either clarifythat it's a true or a false
allegation.
Uh where were they when thesealleged acts uh uh occurred and
and you know how did theyunfold?
There's nothing here.
Uh a proper interview, we'd havea narrative.

(47:03):
We'd we'd know whether this isbased, we'd be in a much better
position to know whether this isbased upon experience or
invention or responding to theleading nature of these
questions.
I don't know this interviewee,so I don't know how susceptible
she is if is not a suggestion.
I could say that this is how, ifyou wanted to do an interview to

(47:25):
make suggestions to a complaintand this is how to do it.
So in terms of the quality ofthe interview, in terms of its
risk of suggestion, it'sextremely high.
Uh the term that's typicallyused in the literature is
created memory.
And uh it means that a personhas been that suggestions have

(47:47):
been made that lead the personto create uh either details of a
memory or an entire memory.
Um not a deliberate attempt bythem, they just this is just a
process that happens in theirmind as a result of suggestion.

SPEAKER_05 (48:04):
The reality is that there was a crime that was
committed in this case.
However, it is not the crimethat was alleged by Grant
McCall.
The crime, among others, wasMcCall inflicting his gross,
perverted way of thinking onto aminor in an attempt to destroy a
church who did not share hisperversion.
Everything comes back toMcCall's depraved version of

(48:26):
Christianity, discussingprocreation with a group of
unwilling miners all trappedwith him on a bus.
Beyond this, however, the trialsurrounding McCall's allegations
against the Sound DoctrineChurch pastor had its own set of
outlandish events thanks to thegovernmental corruption of King
County.
However, the trial itself willbe the focus of a future

(48:47):
episode.
Flash forward to the time ofthis video, and Grant McCall is
still employed by the City ofEnum Claw.
Not only that, he has since evenbeen promoted within the Enum
Claw Police Department, as wascovered within the local
newspaper, The Courier Herald,which, by the way, while the
Courier Herald wrote a gushingarticle highlighting McCall's
promotion to the rank ofsergeant, I had a really hard

(49:10):
time finding a story on McCallpulling a shotgun on his fellow
officers.
As I'm sure you've discovered,today's media, whether national
or even local, has a vestedinterest in covering up or
ignoring government corruptionon any level.
Sadly, this means if you want toattend a church that isn't
compliant with a local policeofficer's personal perverted

(49:32):
beliefs, it means he can getyour church shut down with the
help of the local government andmedia.
Keep in mind, McCall usedallegations he fabricated to
drag an entire church into acourt case with the sole purpose
of destroying it.
Here's McCall stating that theentire case revolves around the
church as a whole, only later tochange his tune once the light

(49:55):
started getting shined on hismotives for fabricating the
allegations.

SPEAKER_10 (50:01):
Well, the entire case revolves around a couple of
things.
One of them is the church as awhole.
We've received complaints frompeople about the church.
So the Sound Doctrine Churchreally didn't have anything to
do with the investigation atall.
It's just that some of thespiritual things involved the

(50:23):
kind of money the waters arelooking to have money in the
waters.
But the Sound Doctrine Churchhas got really nothing to do
with these allegations at all.

SPEAKER_05 (50:31):
And just as a side note, be sure to follow the
Consider Podcast on X to stay upto date on even more examples of
police and governmentalcorruption, since clearly the
media companies have no interestin covering it.
And in case you missed itearlier, the answer is yes.
At the time of this video,Officer Grant McCall is still

(50:51):
employed by the Enum Claw PoliceDepartment at the rank of
sergeant.
In closing here, we do not knowfor certain why Enum Claw has
continued to defend and protectMcCall's misconduct.
However, the officer who McCallsuccessfully undermined to the
point of getting him fired hadhis own opinion on the matter.

SPEAKER_01 (51:10):
And this all stems because the city doesn't want to
address or look at the bigpicture, which is they hired
somebody they shouldn't have.
Now they're trying to cover upthe turd, not the officer.
The information, and they'reblaming me, and they're trying
to make me the scapegoat.
Management knows what's goingon.
Administration knows what'sgoing on.
The old mayor knew what wasgoing on.

(51:32):
I can only assume the brand newmayor knows what's going on.
They still brief the old mayoron what's going on.
I sat in the patrol room eatinglunch one day when she went in
there, and I could hear themtalking about it.
She isn't part of the citygovernment anymore, and they're
still keeping her in the loop.

SPEAKER_05 (51:48):
So, whatever your feelings may be about the
particular church that's beenreferenced throughout this
series, it is undeniable thatregardless of whether you're a
nonprofit bookstore, a smallbusiness, a 63-year-old nurse,
or a fellow police officer,there is little Grant McCall
will not do to destroy anyone inhis way.
Notation, the storefront that,just like the Salt Shaker

(52:09):
Christian bookstore, meant toserve the community, was yet
another casualty of a corruptgovernment, which leveraged and
protected a police officer likeGrant McCall.
Now you might be thinking thateverything ends with Officer
Grant McCall.
However, it doesn't.
It goes even further.
As you will learn in an upcomingepisode, McCall was able to find

(52:30):
common cause with an individualjust as corrupt and possibly
even more sociopathic thanhimself.
For more information on whatwe've discussed in this series,
as well as even more pertainingto serving justice and justice
alone, be sure to subscribe tothe Consider podcast by visiting
Consider.info.
Thanks for tuning in, and I willsee you in the next episode of

(52:53):
Enum Claw.

SPEAKER_06 (54:29):
Title Follow the Finger.
Enam Claw Policeman Grant McCalland his co-conspirator created
lying accusations through amulti-level marketed hate crime.
A hate crime prosecutors andJudge Laurie K.
Smith fully used to create a lawfair against a righteous
Christian church.
Reasonable individuals arepainfully aware of the fact that

(54:50):
the court and police systems inthe United States are thoroughly
corrupted.
Corrupt lawfare and hatefulrhetoric are now the norm.
Washington State prosecutorshave a long history of
corruption, which is detailed atconsider.info.
Everything discussed issupported by overwhelming
evidence, some of which arelocated at Consider.info.

(55:10):
Enum Claw Police Detective GrantMcCall and his co-conspirator
framed up a false crime with thefull approval of King County
prosecutors of Seattle,Washington.
Combining favoritism towardspolice and the anti-Christian
radicalization of WashingtonState, it was a perfect storm
for legal abuse.
Enum Claw Detective Grant McCallis a radical Baptist, believing

(55:33):
that only one version of theBible is God's word.
Namely, the 1611 version of theKing James Bible with its
outdated these and thou's.
Combined with aself-righteousness that is
pathological with the abuse ofpolice powers, this matter comes
easily into focus.
To quickly grasp the situation,consider a policeman with a

(55:54):
co-conspirator who plants drugsin order to frame an individual
the two of them despise.
This is the same concept, excepton a grander scale.
The co-conspirator had beengrooming a false accuser for
quite some time.
The co-conspirator, in her ownwords, is well known for being a
liar, a bully, and amanipulator.

(56:14):
Many have suffered greatly underthe sociopathic behaviors of
this individual.
It came as no shock to anyonethat she and Enum Claw Detective
Grant McCall had groomed theindividual to make lying
accusations.
This brings us now to the LawLynching Courtroom in Washington
State by Judge Laurie K.
Smith and Judge Beth M.
Andrus.
The setting is Seattle,Washington State, King County

(56:37):
Court, and the City of EnumClaw.
In the case of King CountySuperior Court, State of
Washington, plaintiff versusMalcolm Frazier, defendant case
number 12-1-0186-0 KNT.
It is essential to clarify thatthe true plaintiff in the King
County Superior Court, State ofWashington, was against Sound

(56:59):
Doctrine Church of Enum Claw, orTimothy Williams.
Washington State prosecutorsengaged in abusive legal tactics
to pursue an impossible crimeaimed at eliminating Timothy
Williams or Sound DoctrineChurch from Enum Claw because of
Washington State'swell-understood opposition to
Christians.
The defendant, Malcolm Fraser,was the pond used by King County

(57:21):
prosecutors and Enum Claw policeto proxy prosecute Timothy
Williams.
The co-conspirator and radicalBaptist policeman, Grant McCall,
incited a hate crime by tappinginto decades of opposition from
others who had long resisted thepreaching of Timothy Williams.
Combining the anti-Christianhostility of Washington state
officials, a flammable mixtureof hatred and prosecutor

(57:43):
corruption exploded.
Those who, for decades, had homelies, will pay a heavy price of
judgment by God for putting aninnocent man in prison.
This is why God commands in theBible do not go about spreading
slander among your people.
Do not do anything thatendangers your neighbor's life.
I am the Lord.
Leviticus 19, 16.

(58:05):
Overwhelming evidence, includingvideos of the trial and clarity
of events, can be found atwww.consider.info.
It is worth reading again thetranscript of Dr.
Ewell's expert examination ofthe setup by Detective Grant
McCall.
The setup that King Countyprosecutors and judges protected
and embraced.
Dr.
Ewell's credentials areimpeccable, and he was one of

(58:27):
the founding members whoestablished the codes by which
an accuser was to be questionedby King County.
Codes that prosecutor JasonSimmons, Judge Laurie K.
Smith, and Detective GrantMcCall ignored.
Partial transcript of Dr.
Ewell.
Every allegation comes from thedetective.
Well, my overall comment wasthat this is an absolute
terrible interview.

(58:48):
Did Detective McCall ever givean opportunity for a narrative
response?
No.
Does this interview adhere tothe basic tenets of the
Washington state guidelines?
No.
I mean, this entire interview isnot acceptable.
Every single act, alleged act,is suggested first by the
officer.
Every act?

(59:08):
Yes, every act.
Okay, so the act I just he talksabout touching the chest and
touching the crotch first.
He talks about him touching orexcuse me, the complainant
touching the accused first.
Okay, let me slow you downthere.
He talks about anal penetrationfirst.
You said that he I would ask thecounsel to give the witness an

(59:31):
opportunity to finish his answerbefore he asks another question.
And every allegation comes fromthe detective.
He's the one who suggests all ofthe things that happened.
And she either agrees ordisagrees with him.
But she's not.
She isn't.
Right from the get go, he tellsher why she's there and what the
allegations are.
She says, You've been molestedthat it happened with somebody

(59:54):
living in your house.
It happened at a certain timeago.
He shouldn't say that this ishow if you Wanted to do an
interview to make suggestions toa complainant, this is how to do
it.
End transcript.
Detective Grant McCall'sscripting of accusations.
The co-conspirator had alreadyprimed the manipulated accuser,
and this is why Enum ClawDetective Grant McCall knew what

(01:00:16):
the answers should be.
Court records prove that theaccuser initially insisted no
penetration had taken place.
See graphic at consider.info.
When Enum Claw Detective GrantMcCall questioned her about
whether the defendant's fingerhad entered her vagina, she
repeatedly denied any form ofpenetration.
Her statement was unequivocal.

(01:00:38):
Never like penetrated me oranything.
To escalate the charges to afelony, Detective McCall needed
an allegation of penetration.
When he couldn't establishvaginal penetration, he shifted
his focus to anal penetration.
Introducing the idea himself, heasked, What about Uranus?

(01:00:59):
The accuser hesitated, stumblingover her words.
Sensing this, Detective McCallimmediately called for a break,
shutting off the recorder at acrucial moment.
This interruption convenientlyprovided an opportunity to
reshape the narrative.
Alone with her during thisbreak, he coached her, shaping
her account to align with hisdesired allegations.

(01:01:19):
When the session resumed, hertestimony had changed, aligning
perfectly with the detective'snarrative.
When the recorder was switchedback on, McCall simply said,
Okay.
Immediately after, the accuserbegan narrating a fabricated
account of the events, nowclaiming, Yeah, he did, but it
only happened for a few minutesbecause I screamed really loud.

(01:01:42):
This sudden shift in testimony,influenced by strategic
coaching, which the court choseto enhance, raises profound
questions of criminal activityby Washington State.
A direct transcript reveals howthis false narrative was
constructed.
Here is a portion of themanipulation and the key turning
point in the co-conspirator andGrant McCall's setup.

(01:02:03):
Detective Grant McCall.
And you're sure that his fingersdidn't penetrate your vagina?
Accuser?
Yes.
Detective Grant McCall.
What about Uranus?
It's okay if you want to take alittle break.
Accuser.
Unintelligible break.
Detective Grant McCall.

(01:02:24):
Okay.
Manipulated accuser.
Yeah, he did, but it onlyhappened for a few minutes
because I screamed really loud.
End transcript.
There are so many examples ofcomplete corruption in this case
that we do not have time todiscuss them at the moment.
The larger agenda.
Prosecutor Jason Simmons and thegang of Five Jobs should have

(01:02:46):
been there to protect SoundDoctrine Church or Timothy
Williams from such a hate crime.
Instead, for selfish andideological reasons, police
prosecutors and judges used thehate crimes lying accusations to
prosecute a crime that wasimpossible to commit.
Yes, impossible to commit.
This is why Enum Claw DetectiveGrant McCall would not examine

(01:03:08):
the house where the allegedcrime took place.
You might correctly ask whyprosecutors, police and judges
refused, blocked, and playedstone-deaf toward every call for
an investigation.
Indeed, again, Enum ClawDetective Grant McCall did not
examine the house where thealleged actions were to have
occurred because it would havestopped the hate crime dead in

(01:03:29):
its tracks.
The reason for this is that itwould have proven the crime to
be literally impossible andexposed the setup that was in
progress at the time.
This case was not about anindividual defendant.
It was a proxy attack on theSound Doctrine Church and its
leadership, particularly TimothyWilliams.
Detective Graham McCall and hisco-conspirators sought to
dismantle the church throughlegal means, and the prosecution

(01:03:52):
was complicit in this effort.
The fabricated allegations werepart of a broader campaign with
a predetermined goal to destroythe church and its influence.
Again, see the website forproof.
Prosecutor Dan Satterberg'sdecision to assign five
prosecutors to a single casehighlights an unprecedented
level of bias.
Under his direction, theseprosecutors devoted significant

(01:04:14):
resources to targeting thechurch, not in pursuit of
justice, but to dismantle itsoperations.
The consequences weredevastating.
The destruction of a business,church, and bookstore,
ultimately forcing the churchout of town.
Prosecutors Dan Satterberg andLisa Mannion clearly support
this unethical campaign,demonstrating a deliberate

(01:04:36):
intent to dismantle the churchrather than uphold the law.
Perverts of jurisprudence.
We know that the law is good ifone uses it properly.
We also know that the law ismade not for the righteous, but
for lawbreakers and perverts,for liars and perjurers, and for
whatever else is contrary to thesound doctrine.
1 Timothy 1, 8 through 10.

(01:04:58):
Judge Beth M.
Andrus's favoritism towardsprosecutor Rich Anderson came
with a wink after reprimandinghim for his inappropriate,
pre-judicial, and offensiveremarks.
She whitewashed the criminalactions of the city of Enum Claw
Detective Grant McCall, whichcontributed to a narrative aimed
at undermining the church andits operations within Enum Claw.
Eventually, it destroyed abusiness, church, and bookstore,

(01:05:21):
while driving the church out oftown.
Though Ms.
Andrus was a pastor's daughter,she systematically proved that
she is not a Christian believer.
Judge Laurie K.
Smith collaborated with KingCounty prosecutors to obstruct
the defendant's right to mount adefense.
She transformed the criminalcourt proceedings into a chaotic
family court environment thatenabled deceitful accusations to

(01:05:42):
make a mockery of justice.
Judge Laurie K.
Smith, so bribed by being namedWoman of the Year, perverted
justice to ensure a guiltyverdict against a man.
Judge Laurie K.
Smith and prosecutor JasonSimmons literally voided the
Washington State Constitution'sfreedom of religion along with
the Constitution of the UnitedStates, right of association,

(01:06:03):
religion, and Bill of Rights.
Prosecutor Dan Satterbergspecifically allocated five
prosecutors to target thechurch.
Prosecutor Lisa Mannion receivedbacking from Satterberg and
takes sinful pride in being thefirst Korean woman to hold a
position in the prosecutor'soffice.
Ms.
Mannion actively supports thecorrupt practices established by
Satterberg to the extent ofrehiring prosecutor Rich

(01:06:26):
Anderson.
Detective Grant McCall of thecity of Enum Claw was involved
in orchestrating a false hatecrime.
He deleted evidence and craftedaccusations while refusing to
investigate the claims.
Aware that examining the factswould reveal the deceit, King
County prosecutors obstructedand suppressed any attempts to
initiate an investigation.

(01:06:47):
The prosecutorial team includedprosecutor Mark Lawson,
prosecutor Lisa Johnson,Prosecutor Nicole Weston,
Prosecutor Rich Anderson, andProsecutor Jason Simmons.
This deliberate reinforcement ofthe lie was not an oversight,
but a calculated legal maneuver.
Multiple prosecutors, includingMark Larson, Lisa Johnson,

(01:07:08):
Nicole Weston, and RichAnderson, maintained direct and
continuous contact with theaccuser's family and extended
family, ensuring that the lyingnarrative remained reinforced
and unchallenged.
This was a concerted effort tocreate and sustain a falsehood
that would secure a convictionand destroy a church that
Washington state opposed.

(01:07:28):
Never would prosecutors, police,or judges use accusations
against a woman or gayindividual to attack a church or
association.
Ever heard of a public schooland its related clubs being poxy
prosecuted?
Consider the fact that when apolice person is accused of a
crime, you never hear ofprosecutors and judges poxy
prosecuting the police chief andfellow officers while asserting

(01:07:52):
they do not associate withothers outside the police cult.
If you are facing accusations ofa sexual offense in King County,
be aware that the judicialsystem has demonstrated a
pattern of manipulatingtestimonies, implanting false
memories, and enabling corruptpolice practices.
The reach of this corruptionextends far beyond the
courtroom.

(01:08:13):
Prosecutor Dan Satterberg, alongwith prosecutor Lisa Mannion,
have compromised multiple facetsof the legal system, from
medical institutions such asHarbor View Medical Center to
Social Services, Kids Court, andvarious nonprofit organizations.
These entities work in tandem tofabricate charges that will lead
to a guilty verdict, regardlessof the evidence.

(01:08:35):
Their actions reflect a strong,if not aggressive, disregard for
factual integrity and the ruleof law in order to further their
self-worth and agendas.
Indeed, the Washington StateSupreme Court, when presented
with the evidence and facts,responded that they would not
even consider it, that theywould not, quote, even look at

(01:08:58):
it.
Keep in mind that this SupremeCourt has demonstrated bias
against Christians, as evidencedby their actions against a
Christian grandmother for herrefusal to arrange flowers for a
same-sex wedding.
Additionally, the policemisconduct occurred during the
peak of the Me Too movement,which is worth mentioning as it
parallels the circumstancesleading to the events involving

(01:09:18):
the manipulated accuser who hadbeen groomed to accuse.
The current Washington StateSupreme Court enshrining right
rape and complete policecorruptions are Justice Deborah
L.
Stevens, Justice Charles W.
Johnson, Justice Barbara Madsen,Justice Barbara A.
Madsen, Justice Stephen C.

(01:09:39):
Gonzalez, Justice Cheryl GordonMcLeod, Justice Mary I.
U.
Justice Raquel Montoya Lewis,Justice G.
Helen Whitner, Justice SalvadorA.
Mungia.
Note not a single individual,group, or official, either
involved in or assisting withthe case, objected when

(01:10:01):
Detective Grant McCall sat aloneand deleted evidence.
Nor did anyone raise concernwhen Judge Laurie K.
Smith outright stated that theWashington State Constitution's
protections of religious freedomdid not apply.
These are just a couple ofexamples among many documented
violations of truth, justice,and basic reality.

(01:10:23):
The above is a brief summary intext form.
A more detailed post withgraphics, supporting points, and
visual illustrations can befound by visiting the website.
The Consider Podcast, examiningtoday's wisdom, folly, and
madness.
www.consider.info.

SPEAKER_11 (01:10:45):
And every allegation comes from the detective.
Well, my uh my overall uhcomment was that this is uh an
absolutely terrible interview.

SPEAKER_02 (01:11:00):
Did Detective McCall ever give an opportunity for a
narrative response?

SPEAKER_00 (01:11:06):
No.

SPEAKER_02 (01:11:07):
Does this interview adhere to the basic tenets of
the Washington state guidelines?

SPEAKER_11 (01:11:13):
No.
I mean, this entire interview isnot acceptable.
Every single act, alleged act,is is suggested first by the
officer and um every act?
Yes, every vote.
So the act that just talks abouttouching the chest and touching

(01:11:33):
the crotch first.
He talks about uh him touching,or excuse me, the complainant
touching the accused first.
Okay, talks about thedemonetration first.
You said you said the key.

SPEAKER_02 (01:11:45):
I would ask that the counsel give the witness an
opportunity to finish his answerbefore he asks another question.

SPEAKER_11 (01:11:53):
Every allegation comes from the detective.
Uh he's the one who suggests umall of the things that happened
and either agrees or disagreeswith them, but um she's not he
isn't right from the get-go, hetells her why she's there and

(01:12:14):
and what the allegations are.
She says, You've been molested,uh that it happened with
somebody living in your house,it happened a certain time ago.
He should have been saying thatthis is how, if you wanted to do
an interview, to makesuggestions to a complaint, this
is how to do it.