Back to the beginning Scott Neilson Page

STATEMENT of SCOTT NEILSON on November 16,1995 95-687
I am Sergeant Glenn Cramer of the Washington State Patrol, Internal Affairs Section. The date is Thursday, November 19,1995. The time is 7:3O p.m. The following notes are dictated from an interview that Lieutenant Dan Eikum and I conducted. On November 16, 1995 at 11:10 a.m., Lieutenant Eikum and I contacted Juvenile Court Commissioner of Thurston County, Scott Neilson.
Mr. Neilson indicated that on October 20,1992, he filed a motion with Thurston County Juvenile Court for a stop placement order for two boys at OK Boys Ranch ---- and ----- Neilson said the reason he put a stop placement order on these boys is because he felt the problems at the ranch were to such an extent that it was unsafe due to the pervasive sexual and physical abuse there. He indicated some problems; no one was monitoring the boys, there was no supervision, no therapeutic program, and it was just a place to warehouse the kids. No one was taking the situations there at the OK Boy Ranch seriously, and he indicated that he was referring to the OK Boys Ranch staff and the Kiwanis Board of Directors. He also indicated he had come to this conclusion due to the 1990 and 1991 criminal activity referrals that were came to the Thurston County Juvenile Detention Center and because he talked to the administrator of the juvenile detention center Corrine Newman, who had been tracking the criminal activity referrals from the ranch.
Neilson implied he was very concerned about the sexual activity at the boys ranch, primarily the communicable diseases. He never has requested another stop motion order like this before or since then. He said the motion hearing for Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) was represented by a Richard McCartan. Neilson said the judge ruled against him and denied the motion to stop placing boys. The purpose of the stop placement order was due to the fact that the boys had been in the detention facility at the Thurston County.Juvenile Detention, they were going to be released, and he did not want to send the two boys, ---- and ------ back to the OK Boys Ranch. He felt it was his responsibility to do something about the situation and this was the only thing he could do. However, most of the kids were from out of the county. This was a problem with the system because he did not have the authority over the other boys at the OK Boys Ranch except ----- and ------ of whom he was the guardian at litem.
When the judge denied his motion, the judge however, did rule and direct DSHS under a court ruling to notify all parents, case workers, guardians at litem, and juvenile court judges from the jurist dictions the boys at the ranch were from. Of the ongoing police investigation the Olympia Police Department was conducting at the OK Boys Ranch, the judge also ruled for the boys to be HIV tested. This was a verbal order documented by the court clerk on the motion hearing. Later, Neilson said, he received a letter from McCartan indicating this had been done. He felt McCartan was an honorable man and if he said it had been done, then it had been done. However, after several months Neilson said Corrine Newman had talked to two probation officers from another county who had no idea this order was ever sent out. That's when he became skeptical of whether this order went out to the case workers, guardians at litem, and judges. He felt if this order had gone out from McCartan, the judges from other areas would have been aware of the letter, and he and Corrine Newman should have received several phone calls inquiring about the events going on at the OK Boys Ranch. They also would have wanted to take their boys out of that environment as well as find them another facility--he said this never occurred.
Neilson indicated that another part of the motivation for filing the stop motion order was if the court did rule against it, he felt they would probably have given him a ruling to notify the other case workers, guardians at litem, and judges. He thinks, if aware of the situation, the courts would have taken the boys out of the ranch and closed it down. He also felt strongly about there being enough sexual and physical abuse that something had to be done. Not to mention they had been tracking this while being quite adamant about their opinions to DSHS, but apparently no one was taking him seriously. He indicated that any time there was an issue of responsibility for DSHS they would always shield against the responsibility by saying it was a privacy issue. McCartan implied, at the hearing this was a privacy issue concerning the HIV testing and the police reports. McCartan also indicated another problem. DSHS needed to have a policy change regarding the kids at the OK Boys Ranch who were not from the local area because they relied on case workers from outside the area to monitor the progress of the boys. Nothing was ever done. It was more of a courtesy contact for the other case workers in the local area where these OK Boys Ranch people were located. Checking on the boys was a low priority for the local case workers, .once again nothing was ever done.
Neilson said he met with Jane Skinner, President of the Kiwanis OKBR, for lunch in the Fall of 1992. The purpose of their meeting was to alert her of his concerns regarding the physical and sexual abuse going on at the ranch. He implied Skinner did not see it as a problem and in his words, she blew it off as if he was being overly concerned.
Neilson said he suspected the directors of the OK Boys Ranch and members of the Kiwanis put pressure on law enforcement agencies and DSHS. He also indicated many members of the Kiwanis group were influential business and political figures in the county along with several other members who were very wealthy. These members had connections to the boys ranch and he felt they put subtle pressure on DSHS to keep the ranch open. In his opinion, Neilson indicated that Van Woerden had complete control of the entire situation, and in his words, he BS'ed the board about what was going on. When Van Woerden left Queener took over, and he personally feels Queener was a clone of Van Woerden.
Going back to the court order of October 20, 1992, Neilson said if McCartan did not communicate this to DSHS in the intent the court had meant it to as the case workers, parents, guardians at litem, and judges in the other affected areas, he felt this was in violation of a court order and would be contempt to court ( RCW 7.21).
Neilson concluded the interview by telling Lieutenant Eikum and I that we should check the traffic flow of the communication that had gone out to the different regions about the OK Boys Ranch. He feels that maybe something had gone out from McCartan to Region 6, but doubted any thing went out of Region 6 concerning the ranch and the court order to the other regions within DSHS. Also, Neilson suggested that we check on who McCartan reported to at IDSHS and if this went up the chain of command. He felt something of this nature affecting a group home in a manner causing a judge to send out an order to other judges and guardians at litem throughout the state concerning a police investigation alleging physical and sexual abuse, the Secretary of DSHS would have wanted to know about the circumstance since phone calls would ultimately be incoming when judges and attorneys heard there was something going on at the ranch. This concludes the conversation with Scott Neilson.

Below is an e-mail I received from a former Olympia, Washington resident.

From: ~~~~~~~~@aol.com
To: Louis Bloom manaco@whidbey.net
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 11:34 AM
Subject: OKBR
Just came across your pages and felt the urge to respond... In the early 80's (81-83) I was at the OKBR frequently as a young kid walking to/from school, I became friends with some of the boys. At one point a small boy confided to me that he was being raped by another boy in the home. The abusing boy talked about it openly!
Days later I walked the victim to OPD where we both gave statements. Later that evening I began to receive these incredibly threatening phone calls from a woman employee of the ranch who's name I believe was Paulette at my home. She kept calling over and over screaming at me calling me names. It was horrible. I thought I was helping someone. Nothing came of it. Then all these years later, it all comes out ... one of the boys that I had known there left as a young adult and still couldn't get it together, he eventually killed himself. As an adult now I don't often think back to those times but it still saddens me. All those boys that needed a safe nurturing place to be, and how many of them were better off for having been taken there? It's not about money. It cost these boys their lives, their souls, their trust. Those people who knew, who didn't care, they should feel such shame. Just my opinion.

From: louis a bloom manaco@whidbey.net
To: ~~~~~~~@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: OKBR
thanks for your e-mail. from what i've read, dshs, the olympia police department, and other "authorities" didn't consider child on child rape to be against the law. it was considered "normal experimentation". The "paulette" you mention, may have been Collette Queener who was an assistant director at the OKBR. Collette, OKBR Director Tom Van Woerdan, and OKBR counselor Laura Rambo Russell were ineptly charged by Wa. St. with "criminal mistreatment for failing to stop abuse". The charges were dismissed by Thurston County Judge Daniel Berschauer on technicalities. The lawyer who represented Collette Queener said, (Nov. 14, 1996 Olympian), that it was a "witch hunt", and that " a more innocent person (than Queener) you could not have for a client. She's an ex-nun ..... I don't see how you could view her in an evil or negative light."
I congratulate you for doing the right thing, when all those adults looked the other way. I repeat on most pages that the " OKBR has cost the Washington State taxpayers over $35 million dollars (so far)", because I think most people don't care about the kids involved, but they may care that it has cost them (taxpayers) money.
louis bloom

manaco@whidbey.net