Copyright (c) 2021

This editorial review website features, contains

and includes my best recollections, hunches,

beliefs, suspicions and opinions, along with

numerous court records, trial transcripts

and certified polygraphs



Return to



Prefer a more abbreviated rendition?



NOTICE of Hack Attack:

In early November, 2021, we were notified that "someone" had begun a concerted effort to try to either get this material removed, or hidden from view.

Actually, Farcebook tried this ten or more years ago as well and within a few months we were able to overcome it; ditto Hewlett Packard, who admitted they spent over $60,000 trying (and failing) to hide the facts of their financial shenanigans regarding our commercial printers.

We have to ask the question and it's not rhetorical:

If asinine, illegal, evil people are so terrified of their asinine, illegal, evil stunts being disseminated to the public, whatever can they do? Anyone?

Hands please?


There we go:

In the third row, second seat, what's your answer?

(Skinny, freckled seven year old girl with glasses and braces stands up beside her desk and trembles slightly). In a faltering, squeaky voice she says,

"Well, maybe, just sayin', people could, uh, you know, stop doing things that are asinine, illegal, and evil...? Maybe?"

(Looks self consciously around and sits back down quickly)(And the class cheers).

But there appear to be some "Entities" and "Legal Minds" mentioned within these pages who are simply too mentally challenged to grasp that concept. So be it. Looks like the games are on again, and now I must excuse myself because I have roughly 1500 more pages of court documents to OCR and annotate and add to this website (see the photo of the actual pile far below on this page).

Maybe these imbeciles actually believe they can get those documents, and the accompanying explanations of where they fit in the puzzle, shadow-banned as well? We can't wait to find out. They'll be busy, busy bees if they try. In any case, we will overcome this as well (Hewlett Packard was bigger than all of these idiots put together, and so was Facebook); there are a hundred methods, and the website will grow exponentially.

We've now taken and are taking steps to put this material on a wide array of servers and domains around the world, some of which will act as "fall-backs" so that if some of the data "mysteriously vanishes", those sources will automatically kick in. Usually it takes a few weeks to a few months to repopulate the WWW indexes and search results. We'll try to get these pages translated into several major languages as well.

Who, oh who, might be so so determined to hide this data that they would begin to bombard Google with legal, semi-legal, or completely illegal obfuscation tactics and BS? Tough question (not really). Maybe it's a RACIST PLOT (too much MSNBC). In any case, the site is back on track for the time being and will be much more robustly protected in the future. Moral? Don't Quit. If you're right, Don't Quit. Don't quit even when you're dead. Ample measures have been taken to keep this data public and alive even if I'm not. That makes me feel warm and fuzzy.

These people are incapable of learning.

They really, really are.

Even snakes eventually learn to stop biting their own tails.

But reptiles are brainiacs by comparison.

Tired of Google? So were we.

DuckDuckGo, a (much) Better Search Engine


Okay, let's get on with the meat and potatoes.


This website details experiences with Leigh Ann Collings Tift, who, we believe, "facilitated" lies and perjury by Delann Lamb and Mark McFarland on behalf of T-L Leasing and Dart International trucking (now Dart-Entities)


Continued from Page 4

Editorial: The Morality of Judge Helen L. Halpert

Final Hearing in this Phase, 4-25-02

More Stupid Dart Tricks (3-26-02)

Latest Stunt by T&L Leasing (1-29-02)

Polygraph #1 (actual photocopy)

Polygraph #2 (actual photocopy)

Polygraph #3 (pending)

Polygraph #4 (pending)

Polygraph #5 (pending)

Very first no-contact demand to Dart

Offer to pay Lamb and McFarland to take polygraphs

Full discussion of every question in every polygraph test

Crank-Calls from Dart

"Attorney" Leigh Ann Tift (experiences with this woman and her firm)

Judge (pro tem) John Lawson (now deceased)

Judge Helen L. Halpert (complaint to the bar, discussion of possible suit for defamation)

King County Prosecutor (copy of perjury complaints re Lamb and McFarland)

Kent Police (their complicity, prior problems with this office) (complaint to State Police)

Defense Testimony (formally submitted to courts (5)X---not read by any court as of 2-12-03)

Purpose and Philosophy of This Website



Q. How Do You Chase Away a Cockroach?
A. Turn on the Light.



Note: A financial account has been established which will guarantee continuous posting of this site for a minimum of 65 years beginning 2002. We wish to thank those who are sufficiently passionate about truth to have donated so generously.

"Just Say No" to homicide---instead, expose the
truth to the light of day, then walk away.


Copyright (c) 2021

This editorial review website features, contains

and includes my best recollections, hunches,

beliefs, suspicions and opinions, along with

numerous court records, trial transcripts

and certified polygraphs


FACT: I worked for T & L Leasing for three years. T&L Leasing procures employees, generally Class A truck drivers, for a closely related company called Dart International Trucking. Both companies are based out of Los Angeles, but have an office in Kent, Washington.

FACT: I was a good or better employee. This is not an "opinion", it is a fact which has never been disputed by anyone. I was told repeatedly and often over three years, by my two superiors, Delann Lamb and Mark McFarland, that I was a good employee, or one of their best employees. I was told often and repeatedly by the company's customers that I delivered to, that I was one of the best drivers my company had ever dispatched to them. My company gave me every raise available over three years. My bosses asked me to promote up several times (I refused). I was never reprimanded. I never caused damage to any vehicle. I was late on one occasion in three years, due to a vehicle break-down. I quit in the fall of 2000 but was vigorously asked to reconsider---which I did. I quit again, in disgust, for good, in mid December, 2000. Only many months after I quit, and in a pile of unrelated court documents, did I discover a T&L Leasing document which stated my rehire prospects as being "excellent".

FACT: Some while after I quit, my immediate supervisor, Delann Lamb, emailed the following words to me from (email with header data is intact and is verifiable):

"As you wish, I will not try to change your decision [to quit].....I hope in time, you'll feel better about me, and having worked with me, than you obviously feel now.....I have a great deal of respect for you and will always consider you a friend as well as a co-worker." –[Delann Lamb]

--Doesn't exactly sound like a supervisor who had a problem, does it? More text along these lines will be posted here in time. My hunch is that Lamb never dreamed I had saved her letters and emails.

Remember that the above lines were written AFTER I quit. I was also told AFTER I quit that I would have been offered a new route had I desired it. I was told I would be missed AFTER I quit. I was told the company wished I HADN'T quit. These are FACTS and are not disputed.

FACT: I quit because I was tired of three problems with my superiors: 

(1) drugs, 
(2) dishonesty, 
(3) incompetence. 

I said nothing of these concerns when I quit, even though I was asked repeatedly by Lamb and McFarland to submit an "exit interview", simply a short document which listed my reasons for quitting. I resisted this because I did not want to cause anyone trouble. I simply wanted to be done with this group of individuals. 

Delann Lamb made no bones about the fact that she was angry that I had quit. She vehemently expressed this sentiment to a number of employees on numerous occasions, in front of witnesses. My route fell apart after I quit, and many jobs that I had performed, went undone for a year or longer. This caused problems for Lamb and McFarland. It was reported to me that Lamb threatened to fire anyone who had had anything to do with my quitting. Sarah, the secretary, told me that Lamb had refused to speak to her for three days, saying that she (Lamb) thought Sarah might have talked me into quitting. I was told by several employees that Lamb was angry because I had not stopped by to see her after I quit. Doesn't sound like an employer who had a problem with me, does it?

Several things began to concern me after I quit.

(1) I began receiving reports from other Dart or T&L employees (and Sears employees) that Lamb and McFarland were defaming me aggressively, often, and mercilessly. I could see no motivation for this, except that they were angry that I had quit. I now know they had done this to other valued employees who had quit.

(2) I was unable to find another job. I applied to dozens of companies, showing strong, clean references from pre-T&L/Dart employers. But after the prospective employers presumably contacted Lamb or McFarland, I was denied the job. (Interestingly this state of affairs continues 22 months after I quit T&L, and will be addressed through the labor board, and via civil suits, along with other issues). 

(3) I received a number of hang-up calls which traced directly to the main number at Dart/T&L (see polygraph #2). When I served Delann Lamb with a written notice to cease and desist crank-calling me (view that document here), she acknowledged the calls, then called me again within minutes of receiving my demand, and continued to call and email me over a period of weeks after that (again, refer to polygraph #2).

(4) Delann Lamb had boasted to me on several occasions over the years that she had "many ways" of making sure an ex-employee couldn't get a new job if that's what she desired (see polygraph #3). Delann Lamb had also told another employee, in my presence, twice, that she was "stalking" an ex employee who had also quit against her wishes (see polygraph #3). When this employee appeared shocked at the statement, and asked for clarification as to why Lamb would stalk the ex-employee, Lamb replied: "I just am; I just want to". There was no humor in her demeanor, in her voice, or on her face. The other employee who was present looked at me, raised his eyebrows, and changed the subject. 

I never dreamed Lamb's tactics could be directed at an employee who had quit on good terms. But in the weeks after I quit, it seemed clear to me that's exactly what she was doing. Finally, fearing that Lamb and/or McFarland were giving me poor references when prospective employers called them, I asked Lamb and/or McFarland, in writing, to write a simple reference for me. They refused several times. On several occasions Delann Lamb told me that my request for a reference had been accidentally thrown away and that I should send another; or that my faxed request had been ruined by the fax machine, that my mailed request had been destroyed by spilled coffee, etc. Not once, at any time, did anyone from Dart or T&L Leasing tell me that a written reference was against company policy and could not, therefore, be supplied. Finally, beginning to see the light, I wrote a brief reference myself, and submitted it to them. The actual text is below. I asked that it be put on my employer's letterhead, signed, and returned to me. I felt that would stop the bad references Lamb and/or McFarland seemed to be giving me. I also saw it as the last interaction I needed to have with these people, so that I could purge them from my life forever:


To Whom it may Concern,

Employee worked for T & L Leasing in Kent from 4-20-98 to 12-19-00.
Employee drove Class-A tractor-trailer equipment.
His attendance shows that he took three sick days in nearly three years.
He is not known to have damaged any equipment whatsoever.
Employee was not late for work on any occasion. (this is an error; I was late once; could have been corrected, then signed)
Employee’s starting wage was $9.50 per hour; ending wage was $11.50 per hour.
His termination was voluntary.

Delann Lamb


If the company was unwilling to sign this reference, they were free to modify it as they saw fit and sign that. I simply needed something in writing to demonstrate where I stood with this company. They refused even to do that; (over a year after the fact, I still have no reference, though it was inferred to my attorney that if I would stop fighting for the right to post this website, a very positive written reference "might" be forthcoming) (sounds like extortion to me).

I was informed that Delann Lamb, in response to this last request for a reference, made the following statement in front of witnesses: "You know, whatever [he] asks for, we're going to do the exact opposite."

What a fine way to thank a man for three years of good work. What a completely embarrassing piece of shit this woman is.

At this point I began to understand the mentality I was dealing with in Dart Trucking and T&L Leasing. I did, then, complete the "exit interview" Lamb had been requesting. I submitted it to Dart and T&L by registered mail. Then I posted a copy of it on the internet. That document stuck only to a few of the points regarding my reasons for quitting my job. The document was relatively short and pulled my punch by a huge, wide margin. I was, and am, prepared to prove every single allegation and nuance of my statement. The site was posted on a "free server" which purges (rolls off and deletes) unattended sites after 90 days. The site was only a few weeks from being automatically erased when Mark McFarland and Delann Lamb filed two anti-harassment complaints against me seeking to shut the site down.

On their complaints and in court Lamb and McFarland lied. I'm not saying it's "my opinion" that they lied. I'm stating it as a fact, a fact I am willing and anxious to demonstrate in court. Delann Lamb and Mark McFarland lied to the court in an ill-conceived and poorly executed ruse to trick the court into shutting down the internet site which spoke ill---albeit truthfully---of them. The court, presided over by part-time pro-tem judge, a man who seems to be little more than a clear and present danger to logical society (John Lawson of Aukeen Court, in Kent, Washington), bought it, hook, line and sinker. And they were granted two identical restraining orders which totally and completely stripped me of any and all First Amendment rights, and the original site was shut down. Lamb and McFarland even suggested in their complaints that their wish was to strip me of my First Amendment rights, which is, of course, an eminently actionable offense.

This site remained shut down for roughly eight months. Then, both orders were largely overturned on appeal. The bits of the orders which were allowed to remain in effect will be taken back to court and overturned entirely after perjury convictions have been obtained against Lamb and McFarland Once those blocks on this Rubik's Cube of insanity have fallen into place, I'll bring civil suits against all parties. The suits will be detailed on this site.

I have a real problem with people who lie about me.
Mark McFarland and Delann Lamb lied about me because:

(1) I had the audacity to quit their employ, and this made them angry

(2) I wanted no contact with either of them and made that clear, and this made them angry

(3) I threatened them with a criminal complaint if they continued to crank-call me at home, and this made them angry

(4) I posted my reasons for quitting on the Internet, and this made them angry

I took two polygraph tests at my expense, with several more drawn up, which can be taken at any time. Those tests are accessible throughout this site. I also offered to pay for tests of Lamb and McFarland, and to pay them a tidy sum for their trouble, and to apologize to them publicly if they passed their tests. They declined my generous offer.

The polygraph examiner on the first test, John Ketchum, now retired, is a well known and highly regarded examiner in the Pacific Northwest. His work was comprised primarily of specific testing in criminal areas, by contract with the government of the State of Washington. If he's good enough to represent the state in thousands of tests over a period of decades, he's good enough for our purposes here. The examiner in the second test also tests for the state of Washington.

These polygraphs, and their associated graphs and records, have been made available to the King County prosecutor's office for use in the investigation of the crime of perjury. A good deal of documentation has also been submitted, and will be submitted in the future. The prosecutor's office is also being supplied a list of witnesses whose testimony may be used in the investigation of charges of perjury against Delann Lamb and Mark McFarland, and whose testimony may be used in any resulting trials.

Delann Lamb and Mark McFarland were unable to suppress the original site merely because it existed. In order to suppress the original site they needed to demonstrate to the court that it was somehow part of a bigger picture of harassment. At least that's what their attorney told them. So Delann Lamb and Mark McFarland went to civil court with a sleazy and dishonest attorney, Leigh Ann Tift (my opinion) spewing forth a story that included the following allegations. 

As we all walked into the courtroom on 3-23-01, Lamb turned to me and gave me a big smile, as if to say, "We're going to screw you like you've never been screwed before." McFarland just scurried by, ferret-like, and refused to meet my eyes. Polygraph tests are expensive, as are attorneys. I now live in a one-room apartment with no furniture and no belongings. I have sold everything I own and gone into debt, in order to keep Lamb and McFarland from getting away with this grand scheme. In civil suits, I'll seek to recover those losses, and more.

Here are just a few of the outrageous claims Lamb and McFarland made in court. Those who've worked with me, especially Sears employees, know how utterly fantastic and despicable these allegations are. I submit that if these people (Lamb and McFarland) are capable of doing these things to me, they're capable of doing them to any one of you.

Accusation #1: Delann Lamb stated on her complaint and in court that I had asked her out on a date in December of 2000 before I quit, and that she had to thwart my unwelcome advances. (This, she maintained, was one form of harassment I had perpetrated against her, which should convince the court to shut down this site). When Lamb was in court spouting this nonsense, she looked at the floor and made her statement in a squeaky voice which caught halfway through the sentence. Then she said between darling sniffles, "I just wanted it all to stop." The judge apparently thought she was just so cute and helpless. This particularly putrid accusation burns through my guts like the China Syndrome, since I had spent three years diligently and properly keeping this skanky woman at arm's length.

What's the truth of this? Delann Lamb lied to the court. See polygraph 1 and 2.

Accusation #2: Lamb stated in her complaint and in court that she had "reason to believe" I had posted "distorted pictures of her" on the Internet. She never came right out and said I had done that, because I had done no such thing. She apparently just wanted to see if the court would buy the insinuation. Lamb and McFarland tried to convince the court that the same pictures everyone has seen pinned on the walls and cork boards in the Dart office for the three years that I worked there, were made against their will as some sort of harassment against them.

What's the truth of this allegation? Delann Lamb and Mark McFarland lied to the court. See polygraphs 1 and 2.

This editorial review website features, contains and includes my opinions.


Accusation #3: Delann Lamb stated that it was a fact that I had a collection of AK assault rifles. She and McFarland attempted to make the court believe that they were afraid I might use them on them (therefore they should be granted an anti-harassment order so this site could be shut down) (one thing doesn't really follow the other, does it?).

What's the truth? From the polygraph:

Polygraph Test 2, Question #71

(71) Have you ever owned, borrowed, held, or touched an AK rifle or anything that looks like one?

Answer: NO

Delann Lamb lied to the court.

Delann Todd Lamb committed perjury.


Accusation #4: Lamb states in her complaint to the court: "Prior to that time [of employee’s quitting] and subsequent, he [employee] began to make statements to me that I believed were threatening, abusive and alarming.”

What's the truth here? The truth can be found in Lamb's own written words, words written and emailed to me after I quit! Here they are again:

"As you wish, I will not try to change your decision [to quit].....I hope in time, you'll feel better about me, and having worked with me, than you obviously feel now.....I have a great deal of respect for you and will always consider you a friend as well as a co-worker." –[Delann Lamb]

Those are not  the words of a woman who has been "abused, threatened and alarmed". So now Lamb can defend herself against another perjury charge. It is a long and tortuous pattern of precisely this kind of behavior by Lamb and McFarland that finally drove me from my job a week before Christmas, 2000. Over three years of employment I came to see these two as the lowest possible form of hillbilly trailer trash.

Lamb and McFarland made a number of other accusations, all of which were just about as stupid. I believe that charges of conspiracy (to commit perjury) may be brought, as opposed to simple perjury. Please read all of the polygraph tests in order to understand the larger picture. In point of fact, neither Lamb or McFarland had any problem with me at all, except that they were angry I had quit, and then, later, they were angry that I had posted my opinion of only a few of their policies. They could do nothing about my "opinion", as this is still America, where folks have a right to their opinions. So Lamb and McFarland simply made up lies, to try and make me look like some sort of monster, as part of a concerted and conspired ruse to trick the court into shutting down my website.

As we know, this utterly terrifying judge did grant orders which shut the site down. His order was absolutely, utterly, totally unconstitutional. It wasn't a gray area, open to interpretation. It was black and white. The Dart attorney, Tift, must have known this to be the case, yet she continued to charge Dart a handsome sum for her efforts to do their bidding. I have to believe judge Lawson knew this too, but simply didn't care. His order was overturned on appeal, and he was quite roundly reprimanded for his attitude and stupid comments during the hearing.


The reader may also wish to peruse my official offer to pay for polygraph testing of Lamb and McFarland (and their response): Offer to pay Lamb and McFarland to take polygraphs..


Unfortunately, the story doesn't end with the two little stinkers, McFarland and Lamb. Enter, stage left, their bosses (two more little stinkers) from Los Angeles, California, who both also filed anti-harassment complaints against me because they didn't like my web site.

The two anti-harassment complaints from Paul Martin and Colleen Butler were so frivolous, so asinine, and so stupidly conceived and executed that they were both thrown out of court in a few minutes. Paul and Colleen were exiled to the back of the court where they presumably sulked for the rest of the session, while making snide and insulting comments to me and about me, as Leigh Ann Collings Tift smiled.


Paul Martin and Colleen Butler were well aware of my repeated offers to pay for polygraph testing of Lamb and McFarland.

Let's see now: as President of the company, how do you (Paul Martin) treat such an offer? Well, maybe you'd naturally want to see if there was any merit to this employee's story (my story). If he'd been fired, you might be a little suspicious, figuring that he was a disgruntled employee, trying to make up a story to hurt his employers for firing him. But he wasn't fired; he quit. He quit amongst loud and very public protestations of his employer. The office secretary threatened anyone who cause this driver to quit wioth immediate termination. Polygraphs, anyone?

This guy who quit is alleging that the office manager is incompetent.

He's alleging that there are drugs in the office.

He's stating flatly that he has personally seen and handled illegal drugs and drug paraphernalia in the office.

He's stating flatly that the male supervisor and the female supervisor (Lamb and McFarland) vanish and cannot be reached for up to 4.5 hours per day that he is personally aware of.

He's stating flatly that Ms. Lamb's cellular phone one day "spontaneously" called the office (the auto-dial button was probably pushed by some unknown force), and much questionable conversation was heard from her and McFarland.

He's stating bluntly that when Lamb and McFarland were made aware of the conversation and associated sounds, they (Lamb and McFarland) stated that the transmission was being taken "out of context".

This ex-employee is alleging that the male supervisor (McFarland) is doctoring his expense account and that McFarland has made at least one employee use company equipment to assist him in this activity on at least two occasions, and he's supplying his own polygraph test results to back it up.

He's alleging that the male supervisor (McFarland) has stated flatly and repeatedly that black employees are no good, that a Sears employee named Lilly is "a worthless Goddamned niggar", that his Bulgarian employees were "almost as bad as the blacks" and he wished he didn't have to hire them.

He's stating that his supervisor, Mark McFarland, has made to him, personally, this comment: It's not worth one hour of my time to save the company $1900 per month.

He's stating that he's aware of McFarland's failed drug screens, and that he also believes Paul Martin is aware of them and has been for several years, but chooses to keep McFarland as an office manager AND Class-A driver WHO IS PROHIBITED FROM DRIVING CLASS-A!! 

Well, it just goes on and on. Either this employee is off his rocker, or there's something to his story. And if there's even the slightest chance that there's something to his story, you certainly want to get on top of it before it (a) bankrupts the company, or (b) fosters lawsuits against the company from other employees.

So what do you do?

Let's see--- Oh, I know---you could take this crazy man up on his offer of paying for a bunch of polygraphs! If he's telling the truth, then you've got a real problem on your hands that needs rectification immediately if not sooner, and you should thank the whistle-blower for bringing these matters to your attention. If he's lying, you can squash him like a bug and be rid of him---and it didn't cost you a dime---after all, HE paid for the polygraph tests which ruined him!

That's option "A". Option "A" is what intelligent people choose.

Option "B" is what guilty people choose. 

Option "B" goes something like this: You call the man a liar without even asking for his evidence. You make up outrageous stories about him. Then you quietly fly in to Sea-Tac and file a couple of anti-harassment complaints against him in a stupid and ill-conceived attempt to shut down his website - which doesn't yet exist. Brainiacs? No. Never mind that the guy has never heard your name, never contacted you once. Who cares? File an anti-harassment complaint. Naw, file two. That will really scare the guy and get him off your back, right? (How freaking stupid can you get).

The truth? What's the TRUTH about your two management employees, McFarland and Lamb, in your Kent, Washington office? Aw, heck, who cares about THAT. Once this whistle blower has been scared off, you can stick your head back in the sand and live happily ever after---at least until your company goes broke because it's been sued out of existence by the next disgusted employee. So which option did Paul Martin and Colleen Butler, of Dart International Trucking, choose? Option "B", of course. 

Silly me, I thought that upper management would be appalled by the behavior of their subordinates 1100 miles away. Instead, these people seem to be positively supportive of it. I find consolation in the notion that employees like McFarland and Lamb are exactly what these companies deserve. 

FACT: Neither Paul Martin or Colleen Butler replied in any way to my offer to pay for polygraphs---not to accept the offer, not to discuss the offer, not to modify the offer, not to refuse the offer. Instead, they quietly flew from L.A. to Seattle, and each filed for an anti-harassment order against me. Their stupid and frivolous demands were thrown out of court in five minutes. And both employees, McFarland and Lamb, remained at work. Only their lawfirm replied to say that NO ONE would take a polygraph at my expense (but that didn't mean they were lying). Jesus Christ give me a fucking break.

This kind of nonsense is occurring in far too many offices around the country, though I submit that this particular case is just about as blatant as they get. This kind of despicable, illegal and dishonorable behavior by employers must stop. And, as with the cockroach, the most cost-effective way of making it scurry back into the shadows where it belongs, is to TURN ON THE LIGHT.

This editorial review website features, contains and includes my opinions.

To be continued until every single shred and shard of it is "out there".




Return to