The Olympia Washington Kiwanis members and their friends have cost the Washington State taxpayers over $50 million dollars (so far), because of their willful ignorance of long term, merciless and well known, child abuse that occurred at the Olympia Kiwanis Boys Ranch.

October 2006 note: This Olympia Kiwanis stuff is old news. I've left this information on the web, because I like the thought that someone will say to one of these Kiwanis friends or members: "Grandma, (Grandpa), are you still friends with those Olympia Kiwanians?"

Back to the 2011 or 2009 or 2007 or 2005 or 2003 or 2001 or 1999 or 1997 or 1995 or lbloom.net State of Washington Employees Salaries List

1994 Olympia Kiwanis Members List
2007 Thurston County employees list (pop 207,355)(1,332 employees)(includes gross & overtime wages, hire date)
2005 Thurston County employees list (pop 207,355)(1,257 employees)(includes hire date)
2002 Thurston County employees list (pop 207,355)(1,569 employees)
2002 Port Of Olympia employees list (pop 42,514)(40 employees)
2009 Oly Evergreen St Col employees list (938 employees)
Olympian Newspaper 2010 Thurston employees list
2006 Olympia School District employees list (Includes Benefits)
2002 City of Olympia employees list (pop 42,514)(685 employees)
Olympian Newspaper 2010 city of Lacy employees list
2002 City of Lacey employees list (pop 31,226)(226 employees)
2009 South Puget Sound Com Col employees list (1,001 employees)
Name search of Wash. State voters includes our addresses (and birthdays)
Name search of Wash State Court filings Traffic, Criminal, Civil, Domestic, Juvenile Offender, and Probate/Guardianship
Back to the beginning OKBR Home Page(http://lbloom.net/indexok.html)

Back to the beginning Gary Tabor Page

--part 1----part 2----part 3--
Q What response came back to you from the Olympia Police Department?
    A Well, initially they indicated that they would be assigning a detective, a new detective, to the case and he  would be trying to provide the information that I'd requested, and that was Detective Darrell Noble. And  then, over the course of the next few weeks, as I've  indicated, I had several contacts with Detective Noble,  and he did, in fact, attempt to produce the information  I'd requested.
    Q  Did you feel that you obtained the cooperation necessary  from Olympia Police department?
    A Yes.
    Q And they responded to your requests?
    A They did.
    Q Did you talk personally with Miriam Madison of the CPS concerning conversations with Laura Rambo following the initial orgy?
    MR. LAW: Object to the form.
    A I don't recall whether I spoke directly with her. I don't remember. If I did, it would have been by telephone, not face to face.
    Q (By Mr. Paul) Did you review statements she gave to the police or summaries of those statements?
    A Yes. Detective Noble did make contact with her, and I certainly reviewed whatever he had to say. I don't recall whether there was a statement, or merely his summary of a conversation.
    Q There's no way that the police can force you into prosecuting a case, can they?
    A Well, when you say "no way," I think we have a good working relationship with the police and we listen to the concerns of police, and I hope they listen to our concerns. There's often give and take. There have been occasions when we've been asked to do something and we felt it inappropriate to do that. We try to explain to them our reasons. There are other times when we make a decision and we discuss it with police, and they say, "That's fine with us." In this particular case, that was what took place. They indicated that the way we were handling the matter was fine as far, as they were concerned.
    Q My question, Mr. Tabor, is that under the scheme or the separation of powers that you alluded to earlier, the police are not empowered to make the decision about whether to prosecute, are they?
    A Well, there is separation of powers. We're both part of the executive branch, and there are different ways to exercise power and control. It is ultimately the prosecutor's decision of what charges to file, not the police decision.
    Q Did anybody besides you and Mr. Sutherland  participate in the decision not to charge Tom VanWoerden, Colette Queener, and Laura Rambo?
    MR. HANSEN: Object to the form of the question.
    A I think that the decision was ultimately that of our office. I've already indicated that I think I made that decision with Mr. Sutherland's approval. However, as I've also indicated, I did ask for the input of the Olympia Police, including Detective Noble and Chief Wurner, and so I would say that it was a decision that was collective from the standpoint that there was not any disagreement.
    Q (By Mr. Paul) Let-me be a little more specific. From within the people working for the Thurston County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, was anyone else involved in the decision not to prosecute Colette Queener, Tom VanWoerden, and Laura Rambo?
    A I may have discussed the matter with Jim Powers, who is a deputy in the Felony Section, who works primarily with sexual abuse cases. I recall that Mr. Powers worked extensively with Nancy Gassett early on in the juvenile criminal case and put together a request for a subpoena duces tecum, which he presented to a judge and the judge authorized that subpoena to the O.K. Boys Ranch. I believe that Mr. Powers and I discussed the matter at a later time when the failure to report complaint was made. I do not recall whether i specifically asked him his - for his concurrence in my decision, but I don't recall any objection. He was not assigned to the case, I was, but I often discuss things with other members of the office.
    Q Other than Jim Powers, did you discuss this case with other members in your office?
    A Not that I recall, but it would not be unusual to have discussed it with, for instance, John Bumford who's the senior deputy in the Felony Section.
    Q I'm trying to get a sense of what you recall and not what would or wouldn't be unusual. Do you recall talking to anyone besides Jim Powers?
    A No.
    Q Did you personally check with any other outside agencies to see if other investigative materials could be assembled in support of the decision you were trying to make?
    A I believe that I discussed with somebody from DSHS about  the remedial action that Detective Noble provided me paperwork concerning.
    Q  Who at DSHS did you talk to?
    A I don't recall.
    Q Did you meet face to face or telephone?
    A Probably telephone.
   Did you have any telephone conferences or face-to-face meetings with Laura Rambo?
    A No.
    Q Did you have any direct communication with Colette Queener?
    A No.
    Q Would it be unusual for you to do that?
    A Yes.
    Q Were you aware of any prior incidents of allegations of sex or sexually inappropriate contact between staff members at the O.K. Boys Ranch and residents at the O.K. Boys Ranch?
    A I didn't recall that until you asked the question, and that leads me to believe that at some point there was some inappropriate contact on the part of a staff member, and I believe there was a prosecution, but I don't have any greater recollection than that.
    Q Was that a successful prosecution?
    A I don't recall.
    Q Who was the prosecutor assigned?
    A I don't recall that either.
    Q What year was that?     A I do not recall.  What decade was that?
    A Probably the decade of the '80s.     Q Was that prosecuted in Thurston County, as far as you know?
    A Well, I would think so, yes. That would be the  jurisdiction.
      Q  Well, it could have been a federal case, for all I know.
    A Well, I don't - I don't have any recollection of any kind  of federal case, and my recollection about anything is very vague, but there may have been something. I'm just  trying to be forthcoming.
    Q Was there a conviction?
    A I've already stated I don't recall. I don't even know whether there was a case. It may have only been an allegation.
    Q What method is there to follow up on looking into that?
    A We have a case tracking system which identifies defendants  by name. Unless I have a name, that would be difficult.  The police jurisdiction would be the more likely way to follow that up, if that's actually something that took place.
    Q What sort of resources do the police have that can track  this if you don't know the suspect or defendant's name?
    A They have a computer system that deals with the site of an  incident.
    Q Is there anyone in your office that might have more  information about this, as far as someone you think may have been assigned to sex crimes?
    A well there two deputies that work primarily with our sex cases, and if it's been in the last 12 years, probably one of them would know that.
    Q Who are the people? Is Jim Powers one?
    A  Yes, Jim Powers is one and John Bumford is the other.
    Q How does Mr. Bumford spell his name?
    A B-u-m-f-o-r-d.
    Q As far as you know, were there any controlled substance prosecutions involving Ranch staff or residents?
    A I'm sure that there have been, but I do not normally work with the day-to-day cases referred regarding inmates or maybe I should say residents of the O.K. Boys Ranch. That would be in the juvenile court. And, yes, I'm sure there have been substance abuse cases in that regard. I don't have any recollection of substance abuse by staff members.
    Q Why did the removal of Tom VanWoerden satisfy you, in part, as a remedial measure?
    A Well, as I indicated early on, that was one of the primary concerns expressed by the Olympia Police specifically,  Ms. Cushman and Mr. Wurner, that they were not happy with the relationship between Mr. VanWoerden and the Olympia Police Department and they would hope that whatever the outcome, that Mr. VanWoerden would not be in his current position one way or the other.
    Q What specifically, if anything, did they complain about with regard to VanWoerden?
    A That they believed he was reluctant to bring matters to their attention that they would like to know about.
    Q Was that something that Chief Wurner expressed?
    A Yes.
    Q Is that something that Reiko Cushman expressed?
    A Yes.
    Q Is that something that Nancy Gassett expressed?
    A I don't recall a specific conversation with Nancy Gassett, but I believe that that may have been conveyed to me by Reiko Cushman that Nancy Gassett felt that way.
    Q Is that something that Detective Noble or Sergeant Noble expressed?
    A No, I don't recall him talking about that at all.
    Q Did you ever resolve a criminal investigation with someone having to resign employment before?
    A Yes.
    Q I'll pass you what we'll shortly mark as Exhibit 3.
    (Deposition Exhibit No. 3 marked for identification)
    MR. LAW: Counsel, I'm wondering if we could take about a two-minute recess so I could make a phone call to Mike Shaffer having to do with the scheduling of the boys examinations next week. I'm sorry. I wasn't able to make contact with Mr. Shaffer's office-----
    MR. PAUL: Let's take two minutes.
    MR. LAW: -- and I need to communicate a message to him.
    MR. PAUL: That's fine. Feel free to take two minutes.
    MR. LAW: I would expect no more than two minutes.
    (Recessed at 1:41 p.m.)
    (Reconvened at 1:51 p.m.)
    Q (By Mr. Paul) Did you, sir, Mr. Tabor, meet with Jean Soliz from the Department of Social and Health Services?
    A I don't think so.
    Q Did you ever - did you meet face to face with Mr. Buzzard about this case?
    A No.
    Q Is it your understanding that you arranged a deal or an agreement was made whereby a quid pro quo occurred,  Mr. VanWoerden would quit, resign, or be fired, but, in  any event, separate from employment, and in exchange for  that, he would not be prosecuted?
    A Yeah. Yeah, we did make such an agreement.
    Q Was anyone else a party to the agreement besides  Mr. VanWoerden and his attorney, presumably Mr. Buzzard and your office?
    A Well, yes. As I indicated, I called Chief Wurner before we finalized that. I believe I also talked to Detective Noble.
    Q Was Kiwanis made aware of this deal?
    A Well they were made aware, but I'm not by who. I don't know whether our office talked with them or Mr. Buzzard did.
    Q Was this deal arranged before or after you met with Mr. Van Schoorl, Mr. Sutherland, and Ms. Skinner?
    A Well after.
    Q Was Ms. Skinner made aware of this arrangement?
    A Well, I'm sure she was at some point, but as I just said, I don't know by whom or when.
    Q Did you have any contact with her to apprise Ms. Skinner of this deal?
    A No, I don't believe so.
    Q Do you have Exhibit 3 in front of you, sir?
    A I do.
       Q Do you see on page 2 where there's a statement, "Written  logs for various victims indicate this activity was occurring back as far as July 1991"?
    A Yes.
      Q Let's see. What do you understand this activity to refer to?
    A Well, there was a log entry in July of 1991 that had something to do with possible sexual activity between two or more people. I don't have a specific recollection now    whether or not that was activity with people who were within two years of the age of one another or not.
    Q Did Ms. Rambo and Ms. Queener or Mr. VanWoerden deny knowledge of that inappropriate sexual activity, as far as you know?
    MR. HANSEN: Object to the form of the question.
    A Well, as I've stated earlier, I believe that what they said was that they believed that if activity took place between people within two years age of one another that it was not reportable.That was their understanding.
    Q (By Mr. Paul) Did you understand that Mr. VanWoerden had ready access to the daily logs?
    A It's my understanding that he said he read the logs on a semi-regular basis
.     Q How do you get that understanding?
    A It seems that in his statement he said something about he read them sometime or perhaps it was Ms. Queener's statement that indicated that Mr. VanWoerden could read the logs, and did at times.
    Q And Queener and Rambo both had access to the logs, did they not?
    A Yes.
    Q And staff indicated to you that Mr. VanWoerden was at meetings where sexual conduct between and among Ranch residents was occurring?
    A I think they indicated that to Detective Noble.
    Q Do you have any information which would indicate that that was not the case?
    A Well, it depends on one's definition of sexual activity. I think again that some people would say they heard things about sex occurring, but they did not believe that it was sexual abuse because it wasn't - it did not meet the statutory criteria.
    Q Did you talk or - strike that. Did you talk with anybody in order to get a picture of how the O.K. Boys Ranch had performed their contract over the approximately 15 years they had been in operation?
    A Well, as I indicated, I think Ms. Cushman and Chief Wurner indicated that they believed there had been some problems, at least in relationship with police, over the years, but the scope of this investigation was not investigating the O.K. Boys Ranch. It was only investigating whether or not there had been a technical failure to report sexual abuse on the part of three people, and that was what it was limited to.
    Q You indicated you were relying, in part, on the remedial actions expressed to you--when you decided not to prosecute. Am I---
    A That..was one consideration-yes.
    Q Isn't it also appropriate for a prosecutor to also look at what had been the prior history of an accused when deciding whether to prosecute?
    A Yes.
    Q And to that end, didn't you have abundant information from Chief Wurner that the O.K. Boys Ranch had numerous problems with the police department over the last 10 or 12 years?
    MR. LAW: Object to the form of the question. It misstates his testimony.
    MR. PAUL: Go ahead.
    A Well, as I indicated, Chief Wurner indicated that there had been, in his opinion, problems with the way his department was related to or notified by the O.K. Boys Ranch of various things. He was not happy.
    Q (By Mr. Paul) And didn't Reiko Callner also indicate that to you?
    A Yeah. Her name was Cushman at the time, but you're right, that's her name now.
    Q Thank you.
    A Yeah, she indicated that as well. But, as I also said,  they indicated their primary concern was to see  Mr. VanWoerden removed from his position.
Q  Did they give you any feedback on whether they thought it would be appropriate for Ms. Rambo to be promoted to replace them?
    A No, we didn't discuss that.
    Q Did you talk to Mr. Buzzard about who would be replacing Mr. VanWoerden or, specifically, whether Colette Queener would be promoted?
    A No, I did not.
    Q Weren't you curious-about how her job would be affected by this?
    A No, not officially, I was not.
    Q Were you unofficially?
    A Oh, hindsight sometimes is enlightening, but that was not a consideration at the time we made the agreement.
    Q In hindsight, would you have prosecuted these people?
    A No, I don't think so. I don't have any real problems with the way that we handled the matter. Probably do the same thing again today.
    Q Did you receive any - strike that. In response to your October 2, '92, request to Chief Wurner for further information, did you receive organizational charts of the Ranch?
    A Yes.
    Q Did you receive a job description of the Director of the Ranch?
    A No, not specifically. What I received was a staff list that just indicated their job title, as I recall.
    Q Did you ask the police to conduct any further interviews?
    A At what point?
    Q Well, really at any point, sir.
    A Well, yes, the letter we were just talking about, I asked police to conduct further interviews.
    Q In addition to that letter, were there any other requests for interviews?
    A I don't recall whether or not I asked in that letter that the suspects be interviewed, but at some point I asked that they be interviewed, if not in that letter, at a later time.
    Q You indicated before that there were strengths and weaknesses to the case. What were the strengths?
    A The fact that there were indications in logs that sexual activity was suspected. The fact that a report was made to police in July about sexual activity and the allegation by staff members that they were told not to discuss such things because it would give the Boys Ranch a bad name. Those are certainly three strengths I can think of.
    Q Was the comprehensive police investigation something that you considered to be a strength of the case?
      MR. HANSEN: Object to the form of the question.
    MR. LAW: Same objection.
    A I thought the police did a good job. Certainly there are     times when police don't do a good job, and that's a weakness in the case.
    Q (By Mr. Paul) Were you concerned about whether Colette Queener would continue in her capacity as a guardian of children?
    A No.
    Q Were you concerned with whether Laura Rambo, now known as Laura Russell, would continue treating or counseling or caring for children?
    A No.
    Q Were you concerned about whether Thomas VanWoerden would continue after the date of your investigation in his capacity of treating or caring for children?
  MR. LAW: Object to the form of the question. It doesn't state a time.
    MR. PAUL: Go ahead.
    A As I've already indicated, I took into account the fact that he was resigning his position and felt that was appropriate, and that was the scope of my consideration about his involvement.
    Q (By Mr. Paul) Why was it appropriate that he be forced to resign?
    A Because I think.that the police had lost faith in his ability to deal effectively with the problems that they mutually had.
    Q That's not a crime, though is it?
    A No, that's not a crime.
    Q But Mr. VanWoerden was punished for that?
    MR. HANSEN: Object to the form of the question.
    A I don't know whether he feels that was punishment or not,  but it was - the fact that he was relieved of his duties were - that was one of the goals of police from the very  beginning, and we accomplished that.
Q  (By Mr. Paul) Your job isn't just to accomplish the goals of the police; it's to enforce the laws of the state, isn't it?
    MR. HANSEN: Object to the form of the question. You're arguing with the witness now.
    MR. PAUL: Go ahead, Mr. Tabor.
    A Well, my job is to try to discharge the duties of a deputy  prosecutor to the best of my ability, and I think I did that in this case.
Q (By Mr. Paul) But you don't know if Mr. VanWoerden was  punished?
    MR. LAW: I'm going to object to the form of that question. That's argumentative and really beyond the scope of proper discovery, Counsel.
    MR. PAUL: Go ahead, Mr. Tabor.
    A Well, I think it's certainly public record that he was resigning, and whether he considered it punishment or not, I did.
    Q (By Mr. Paul)  As far as you know, did Mr. VanWoerden violate RCW 26.44.030?
    A I'm not the ultimate determiner of that. I've indicated  that I believe there was probable cause to believe that he did. However, it would be up to a finder of fact had this matter been tried to make that determination. I made the determination about the appropriateness of continuing with  the prosecution and made the decision not to, based on all  the factors that I've previously discussed with you.
    Q Do you believe Mr. VanWoerden violated RCW 26.44.030?
    MR. LAW: Same question, Counsel. Same objection.
    MR. HANSEN: Asked and answered.
    MR. LAW: -- asked and answered. That's exactly the same question.
    MR. PAUL: It is because the answer was nonresponsive, and I'll move to strike. It suggested only what Mr. Tabor felt his job duties were and whether he feels in his testimony that he fulfilled those duties. My question now is seeking an answer to the question whether Mr. VanWoerden violated RCW 26.44.030.
    A And my answer is I don't know.
    Q You don't know?
    A Yeah.
    MR. PAUL: Okay no further questions.
    MR. HANSEN: No questions here.
        (Concluded at 2:08 p.m.)
    (Signature reserved)
--part 1----part 2----part 3--

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

There were many obvious and long-term warnings about the 1970-94 child abusing Olympia Kiwanis Boys Ranch.