January 2, 2023

Jeremy W. Culumber Keating, Bucklin & McCormack

Seattle Attorney Jeremy W. Culumber is a Pathologicl Liar that seems to have inherent issues with the truth and, apparently, with his mental condition including with his home life.

Culumber is perceived by many to be a congenital, habitual and pathological liar that may go so far as being Psychotic, not only have complaints been filed in Federal Court but he has been reported several times to The Washington State Bar Association for being a liar.

This attorney has no regard for the truth, puts words in the mouths of litigates never uttered, misquotes at will, just makes things up including accusing people of crimes and events that never happened, offers only open ended insinuations, smears and defamation and briefs that read like a schizophrenic’s manifesto that contradict themselves and are all over the place.

Don’t take my word for it, complaints were filed in Federal Court in 2020, independant of this site, for violating “oath of office” and several other Federal Statutes including Perjury.

Forsman v. Port of Seattle, Case No. C19-2050-RSL-MLP, 3 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 21, 2020).

“This pleading also alleges Mr. Culumber made misleading statements in the instant motion to dismiss. (Id.) Plaintiff claimed Mr. Culumber committed perjury pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1621. (Id. at 6.) Plaintiff also cited 18 U.S.C. § 1001 as a basis for his claim. ”

That is just one example of what it takes to win a case thus then I guess he earns his pay, committing perjury I mean, he must thus then do very well.

His pay, however, is another issue that needs to be investigated, he is a grease bag insurance lawyer that receives payments for legal matters of which may be prohibited if not by law then by Insurance Companies that ban paying for cases involving The PRA RCW 42.56 and those cases involving The OPMA and Constitutional Rights violations by City Hall Staff.

Culumber currently represents City of Port Angeles’ Employees but also, under Ordinance, if Administrative Staff act [not] "within scope of duties," however, then they are not entitled to taxpayer funded representation nor by The Agency's Insurance.

Considering that all of the above is true, which is why no lawsuit will follow this post, questions remain however regarding why the court system has never requested that his licence be revoked and why are The Courts even taking this Psycho seriously.

January 2, 2023 5:44am