Dr. John C. Yulle Forensic Psychologist Yet Prosecutors Continued With A Set-up
King County prosecutors of Washington State clearly engaged in a setup prosecution. Dr. John C. Yuille is an expert for experts. Helped write Washington State guidelines, which Judge, Prosecutor, and Enumclaw Police entirely ignored. Along with a dumbed down jury.
www.consider.info
Corruption Claims And Context
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: John C.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell, forensic psychologist.
SPEAKER_00: This consolidated disclaimer reflects the firsthand accounts, experiences, and reasoned conclusions of those who live through the events described, including perceived systemic corruption in certain cases such as the actions taken against Timothy Williams, Sound Doctrine Church, the Salt Shaker Christian Bookstore, and Wine Press Publishing by the City of Enumclaw and City of Enam Claw Police, King County prosecutors, and judges.
SPEAKER_00: See www.consider.info or www.enamclaw.com for evidence, facts and preparation for jury duty.
SPEAKER_00: Information about doctor Ewell doctor John C.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell has passed away, but his credentials were impeccable.
SPEAKER_00: He was a highly professional expert whose work was grounded in unbiased, rigorous science.
SPEAKER_00: However, both prosecutors and judges were already well aware of the documented hate crime activities and systemic corruption within the city of Enumclaw.
SPEAKER_00: In short, there was no genuine need, and it should not have been required, for the defense to hire doctor Ewell.
SPEAKER_00: The identity of the real criminals was and remains, self-evident from the facts of the case.
SPEAKER_00: This reality helps explain why Judge Laurie K.
SPEAKER_00: Smith and the King County prosecutors strong armed the courtroom by advancing the false narrative that Sound Doctrine Church was a highly controlling group.
SPEAKER_00: As with all other material facts and evidence presented in this case, the truth was clearly and strongly established.
Court Testimony On Leading Questions
SPEAKER_00: The following is court testimony.
SPEAKER_01: And every allegation comes from the detective.
SPEAKER_01: Well, my uh my overall uh comment was that this is uh an absolutely terrible interview.
SPEAKER_02: Did Detective McCall ever give an opportunity for a narrative response?
SPEAKER_01: No.
SPEAKER_02: Does this interview adhere to the basic tenets of the Washington state guidelines?
SPEAKER_01: No.
SPEAKER_01: I mean, this entire interview is not acceptable.
SPEAKER_01: Every single act, alleged act, is is suggested first by the officer and uh um every act?
SPEAKER_01: Yes, every act.
SPEAKER_01: So the act I just talks about touching the chest and touching the crotch first.
SPEAKER_01: He talks about uh him touching, or excuse me, the complainant touching the accused first.
SPEAKER_01: Okay, talks about the penetration first.
SPEAKER_01: You said you said the key?
SPEAKER_02: I would ask that the counsel give the witness an opportunity to finish his answer before he asks another question.
SPEAKER_01: Every allegation comes from the detective.
SPEAKER_01: Uh he's the one who suggests um all of the things that happen.
SPEAKER_01: And she either agrees or disagrees with them, but um, she's not she isn't right from the get-go, he tells her why she's there and and what the allegations are.
SPEAKER_01: She says you've been molested, uh that it happened with somebody living in your house, it happened at a certain time ago.
SPEAKER_01: He shouldn't say that this is how if you wanted to do an interview to make suggestions to a complainant, this is how to do it.
SPEAKER_00: I mean, this entire interview is not acceptable.
SPEAKER_00: Every single act, alleged act, is suggested first by the officer.
SPEAKER_00: Every allegation comes first from the detective.
SPEAKER_00: If you wanted to interview to make suggestions to a complainant, this is how you do it.
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: John Ewell, forensic psychologist.
SPEAKER_00: Grant McCall.
SPEAKER_00: Every act?
SPEAKER_00: Yes, every act.
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: John Ewell, forensic psychologist.
SPEAKER_00: End quote.
Who Dr. John C. Ewell Was
SPEAKER_00: Short list.
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: John C.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell is a prominent Canadian forensic psychologist known for his expertise in eyewitness memory, child testimony, interview techniques, and credibility assessment.
SPEAKER_00: He has trained law enforcement officers and professionals across North America and internationally through his private practice and is CEO of the Pacific Alliance of Forensic Scientists and Practitioners.
SPEAKER_00: His groundbreaking stepwise interview protocol, developed in the early 1990s and later refined as the Stepwise Guidelines, emphasized a structured, non-suggestive approach to interviewing children and adolescents.
SPEAKER_00: It prioritizes building rapport, using open-ended questions, minimizing contamination of memory, and avoiding leading or suggestive techniques that could distort recall.
SPEAKER_00: This method has been widely adopted and incorporated into best practice training materials for child forensic interviewing throughout North America, including in Washington State.
SPEAKER_00: doctor John C.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell and Malcolm Fraser.
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: John C.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell's unassailable credentials in forensic analysis.
SPEAKER_00: Expose a textbook case of investigative misconduct and prosecutorial overreach in the wrongful conviction of Malcolm Frasier.
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: John C.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell, nineteen forty one to twenty seventeen, was one of the world's foremost authorities on eyewitness and victim memory, child suggestibility, investigative interviewing protocols, and credibility assessment.
SPEAKER_00: A Canadian forensic psychologist of unparalleled stature, his credentials lent devastating weight to the defense in the Malcolm Fraser case.
SPEAKER_00: Yet the prosecution, police, and courts largely brushed aside his expert critique, resulting in what Fraser's supporters have described as a blatant miscarriage of justice driven by anti church bias.
SPEAKER_00: Born december one, nineteen forty one, in Montreal, Quebec, Ewell earned his BA 1964, MA 1965, and PhD nineteen sixty seven from the University of Western Ontario in Experimental Psychology with a focus on memory.
SPEAKER_00: He completed a prestigious National Research Council of Canada postdoctoral fellowship at McGill University.
SPEAKER_00: At the University of British Columbia, UBC, he rose through the ranks from Assistant Professor 1968 to Associate Professor, nineteen seventy three to nineteen eighty six, and full professor, nineteen eighty six to two thousand six.
SPEAKER_00: Later serving as professor emeritus, he held visiting professorships at the University of Salzburg, Austria, nineteen seventy four to nineteen seventy five, and acted as a visiting consultant at Cornell, University's Family Life Development Division, nineteen ninety to nineteen ninety one.
SPEAKER_00: From nineteen seventy six to nineteen ninety one, he served as a visiting lecturer at the British Columbia Police College, training law enforcement and proper interviewing techniques.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell co-founded one of Canada's earliest forensic psychology programs at UBC, bridging psychology and criminal justice.
SPEAKER_00: He maintained a private forensic practice and served as chief executive officer of the Pacific Alliance of Forensic Scientists and Practitioners, LTD.
SPEAKER_00: Over more than thirty years, he qualified as an expert witness in family, criminal, and civil courts across the United States and Canada.
SPEAKER_00: His research output exceeded one hundred peer-reviewed publications, pioneering the stepwise interview protocol for child victims, emphasizing open-ended, non-leading questions to minimize suggestion, and introducing statement validity analysis, SVA, and criteria-based content analysis, CBCA, to North American audiences.
SPEAKER_00: Courts and law enforcement agencies worldwide relied on his work for training on memory reliability, trauma effects, stress, and the dangers of interviewer bias.
SPEAKER_00: His expertise was not theoretical.
SPEAKER_00: It combined rigorous laboratory studies with real-world archival research on actual victims and witnesses, establishing him as the gold standard in forensic interviewing science.
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: John C.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell, a leading forensic psychologist, trained law enforcement officers and professionals across North America and internationally through his private practice and is CEO of the Pacific Alliance of Forensic Scientists and Practitioners.
SPEAKER_00: His groundbreaking stepwise interview protocol, developed in the early 1990s and later refined as the Stepwise Guidelines, has been widely adopted and incorporated into best practice training materials for child forensic interviewing throughout North America, including Washington State.
SPEAKER_00: In King County Superior Court cause number 12-1-01886-0, a jury convicted Malcolm John Frazier on May 29, 2013, of two counts of first degree rape of a child and two counts of first degree child molestation.
The Malcolm Frazier Conviction Overview
SPEAKER_00: He was sentenced on July 26, 2013, to 20 years in prison.
SPEAKER_00: In the 2013 trial of Malcolm John Frazier, an innocent assistant pastor at Sound Doctrine Church in Enumclaw, Washington, Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell's testimony laid bare the fatal flaws in the state's case.
SPEAKER_00: The prosecution's entire theory rested on the delayed, uncooperated account of a single complainant, referred to as MC, and a single, deeply flawed police interview conducted years after the alleged events.
SPEAKER_00: Yule's analysis proved beyond reasonable doubt that the evidence was contaminated, unreliable, and the product of suggestive, biased police work.
SPEAKER_00: Yet the jury convicted, the appeals court upheld the verdict, Washington Court of Appeals number 70702-7-1, February 17, 2015, and an innocent man was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
SPEAKER_00: This article examines Ewell's credentials, his damning testimony, the prosecution's reckless case, the clear signs of bias, and the broader implications of this wrongful conviction.
SPEAKER_00: The Malcolm Frasier Case, a prosecution built on sand.
SPEAKER_00: Malcolm Frasier, a Scottish born assistant pastor at the small conservative Sound Doctrine Church, was accused of sexually abusing an eleven year old girl, MC, in 2005 to 2006, while he and his wife temporarily lived with her family, with Timothy Williams restating never to be in the house alone, which was always firmly standard procedure.
SPEAKER_00: There was zero physical evidence, zero medical evidence, zero contemporaneous reports, and no corroborating witnesses.
SPEAKER_00: The allegation surfaced only years later, in late 2011 or early 2012.
SPEAKER_00: Frasier has maintained his complete innocence from day one, and church leaders have consistently described the charges as fabrications born of personal animus and anti-Christian hostility toward their tight-knit congregation.
SPEAKER_00: Defense attorneys proved at trial that Fraser lived in the home of only a matter of weeks, not the extended period originally claimed.
SPEAKER_00: They also presented medical evidence showing Fraser suffered from a condition that would have made the alleged acts physically painful and improbable, yet King County prosecutors pressed forward.
SPEAKER_00: Relying almost exclusively on MC's testimony and the transcript video of her interview with Enam Claw police detective Grant McCall, this was not justice.
SPEAKER_00: It was a textbook example of confirmation bias and procedural recklessness in a high stakes, he said she said, case involving a religious community.
Stepwise Guidelines Versus Detective Interview
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Yule's devastating courtroom critique, the interview that tainted everything.
SPEAKER_00: Under direct examination, Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Yule dismantled Detective McCall's interview of MC as very poor and fundamentally flawed.
SPEAKER_00: He explained the bedrock principles of proper forensic interviewing, principles he himself had helped establish.
SPEAKER_00: Interviewers must approach with an open mind, entertain alternative explanations, avoid leading or suggestive questions at all costs, and prioritize a free recall narrative from the witness.
SPEAKER_00: Someone collecting DNA needs to understand DNA.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell testified, and someone doing an interview on memory must understand memory.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell's specific, line by line critique revealed the pattern of leading questions that repeatedly suggested sexual acts rather than allowing MC to volunteer details.
SPEAKER_00: Such techniques can permanently alter a witness's memory.
SPEAKER_00: McCall appeared to treat the interview not as an impartial investigation, but as a tool to confirm preconceived guilt.
SPEAKER_00: There was no meaningful opportunity for unprompted recall, and MC had spoken to others before the police interview, creating layers of potential contamination that McCall failed to address.
SPEAKER_00: These were violations of internationally accepted best practices.
SPEAKER_00: Without a clean, unbiased interview, the sole pillar of the state's theory crumbled.
SPEAKER_00: Prosecutorial and police failures, bias, suppression, and recklessness.
SPEAKER_00: The investigation bore hallmarks of bias against Sound Doctrine Church.
SPEAKER_00: Police deleted or withheld material evidence for months.
SPEAKER_00: The prosecution resisted defense requests for exculpatory material.
SPEAKER_00: Despite overwhelming signs of reasonable doubt, prosecutors built their case on tainted testimony and asked the jury to ignore science.
SPEAKER_00: One juror later admitted Ewell's critique did not hold up, highlighting how lay jurors often default to a motion over expert evidence.
SPEAKER_00: Appeals and the system's failure to correct injustice.
SPEAKER_00: Frasier appealed, citing the suggestive interview and the weight of Ewell's testimony.
SPEAKER_00: The Washington Court of Appeals, No.
SPEAKER_00: seven zero seven zero two-seven-one, decided february seventeenth, twenty fifteen, and the state Supreme Court upheld the conviction.
SPEAKER_00: These rulings prioritize finality over scientific truth and procedural fairness.
SPEAKER_00: Frasier remains in prison for crimes he did not commit.
SPEAKER_00: Broader implications.
Bias Allegations And Appeals Fallout
unknown: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell's involvement highlights the critical role of forensic psychology in preventing wrongful convictions.
SPEAKER_00: When lay enforcement ignores these standards, as happened here, the result is contaminated evidence.
SPEAKER_00: The Frasier case exemplifies prosecutorial tunnel vision, religious bias, and a cultural reluctance to question certain allegations.
SPEAKER_00: True justice requires acknowledging this miscarriage.
SPEAKER_00: Until Malcolm Fraser is freed and the record corrected, this remains a stain on Washington's justice system.
SPEAKER_00: The Frasier case exemplifies prosecutorial tunnel vision, religious bias, and a cultural reluctance to question certain allegations.
SPEAKER_00: True justice requires acknowledging this miscarriage.
SPEAKER_00: Until Malcolm Fraser is freed and the record corrected, this remains a stain on Washington's justice system.
SPEAKER_00: This reflects the opinions and firsthand accounts of witnesses who live through the events, including what they described as systemic corruption, King County Superior Court case state of Washington versus Malcolm Frasier.
SPEAKER_00: Names associated Beth M.
SPEAKER_00: Andress, Lori K.
SPEAKER_00: Smith, Mark Larson, Lisa Johnson, Nicole Weston, Rich Anderson, Jason Simmons, Lisa Mannion, Dan Satterberg, Mike Reynolds, Bob Ferguson, Deborah L.
SPEAKER_00: Stevens, Charles W.
SPEAKER_00: Johnson, Stephen C.
SPEAKER_00: Gonzales, Cheryl Gordon McLeod, Raquel Montoya Lewis, G.
SPEAKER_00: Helen Whitener, Salvador A.
SPEAKER_00: Mungia, Colleen M.
SPEAKER_00: Melody, Theodore J.
SPEAKER_00: Angelis, with while conspiring with Athena Dean Holtz, Redemption Press, Prosecutor Lisa Mannion with Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, Olympia, Washington, all protected or now support City of Enum Claw Detective Grant McCall scripting accusations, deleting evidence, and abusing police power against a church he did not agree with.
SPEAKER_00: Supplemental Court Testimony Transcript of Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell concerning City of Enum Claw Detective Grant McCall.
SPEAKER_00: First, a concluding quote by Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell.
SPEAKER_00: Quote, I can say that this is how.
SPEAKER_00: If you wanted to do an interview to make suggestions to a complainant, this is how to do it.
SPEAKER_00: The quality of the interview of the complainant in this case was very poor.
SPEAKER_00: Well, my overall comment was that this is an absolutely terrible interview.
SPEAKER_00: There are many leading questions in this interview, with the interviewer providing information as opposed to obtaining it.
SPEAKER_00: I am just so sorry that this kind of poor quality interviewing is going on in the twenty first century.
SPEAKER_00: We don't need this.
SPEAKER_00: What we need are good quality interviews to be done, where whether she's a victim or not, whether she gets to tell her story so we can evaluate her story instead of it all being led by what the officer is looking for.
SPEAKER_00: I'm an advocate for good investigation, not for one side or the other in this case.
SPEAKER_00: If I did an interview like this, we would know what her version of events is.
SPEAKER_00: Defense Attorney Did Detective McCall ever give an opportunity for a narrative response?
SPEAKER_00: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell, no.
SPEAKER_00: Defense Attorney Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell, was this an investigative interview?
SPEAKER_00: Does this interview adhere to the basic tenets of the Washington State Guidelines?
unknown: Dr.
SPEAKER_00: Ewell answers No.
SPEAKER_00: I mean this entire interview is not acceptable.
SPEAKER_00: Every single act, alleged act, is suggested first by the officer.
SPEAKER_00: Every act?
SPEAKER_00: Yes, every act.
SPEAKER_00: He talks about touching the chest and touching the crotch first.
SPEAKER_00: He talks about him touching, or excuse me, the complainant touching the accused first.
SPEAKER_00: He talks about anal penetration first.
SPEAKER_00: And she either agrees or disagrees with him, but she's not.
SPEAKER_00: She isn't right from the get go.
SPEAKER_00: He tells her why she's there and what the allegations are.
SPEAKER_00: She says you've been molested, that it happened with somebody living in your house.
SPEAKER_00: It happened at a certain time ago.
SPEAKER_00: He shouldn't be giving that information.
SPEAKER_00: He should be saying why are you here today?
SPEAKER_00: I don't know this interviewee, so I don't know how susceptible she is or is not to suggestion.
SPEAKER_00: I can say that this is how.
SPEAKER_00: If you wanted to do an interview to make suggestions to a complainant, this is how to do it.
SPEAKER_00: Let that be repeated as we close out.
SPEAKER_00: I, doctor Ewell, can say that this is how.
SPEAKER_00: If you wanted to do an interview to make suggestions to a complainant, this is how to do it.
SPEAKER_00: Consider at jury duty that the entire Washington state legal system approves of manipulating, strong arming and working in the dark to produce false accusers.
SPEAKER_00: To the point in open court, acknowledging such planting of memories is promotable.
SPEAKER_00: The Frasier case exemplifies prosecutorial tunnel vision, religious bias, and a cultural reluctance to question certain allegations.
SPEAKER_00: True justice requires acknowledging this miscarriage.
SPEAKER_00: Until Malcolm Fraser is freed and the record corrected, this remains a stain on Washington's justice system.
SPEAKER_00: This reflects the opinions and firsthand accounts of witnesses who live through the events, including what they describe as systemic corruption.
SPEAKER_00: King County Superior Court case state of Washington versus Malcolm Frasier, names associated, Beth M.
SPEAKER_00: Andrus, Laurie K.
SPEAKER_00: Smith, Mark Larson, Lisa Johnson, Nicole Weston, Rich Anderson, Jason Simmons, Lisa Mannion, Dan Satterberg, Mike Reynolds, Bob Ferguson, Deborah L.
SPEAKER_00: Stevens, Charles W.
SPEAKER_00: Johnson, Stephen C.
SPEAKER_00: Gonzales, Cheryl Gordon McLeod, Raquel Montoya Lewis, G.
SPEAKER_00: Helen Whitener, Salvador A.
SPEAKER_00: Mungia, Colleen M.
SPEAKER_00: Melody, Theodore J.
SPEAKER_00: Angeles, with while conspiring with Athena Dean Holtz, Redemption Press, Prosecutor Lisa Mannion with Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, Olympia Washington, all protected or now support City of Enum Claude Detective Grant McCall, scripting accusations, deleting evidence, and abusing police power against a church he did not agree with, and that is only surface facts.
Podcast Disclaimer And Closing Links
SPEAKER_00: Disclaimer for the Consider Podcast.
SPEAKER_00: The Consider Podcast and any associated activity are concerned only with repentance.
SPEAKER_00: Repentance is the starting and end goal.
SPEAKER_00: Because the Consider Podcast fears God, we seek to warn all men and women.
SPEAKER_00: The views, interpretations, conclusions, and opinions expressed on the Consider Podcast, its website, EnamClaude.com or www.consider.info, articles, episodes, or any affiliated work are the personal conclusions of the host and or guests.
SPEAKER_00: These are formed after first picking up the cron.
SPEAKER_00: progress, followed by deep prayer, serious reasoning, examination of available evidence, scripture, and history.
SPEAKER_00: These opinions and interpretations do not represent any official position of any church, denomination, organization, ministry, institution, or political ideology.
SPEAKER_00: The Consider Podcast is completely independent and is not affiliated with any religious body, external ministry, or political group.
SPEAKER_00: Listeners and readers are strongly encouraged to search the scriptures daily to test everything, hating their own lives and being crucified to their own thoughts and opinions, in order to reach a genuine, spirit led conviction concerning the truth.
SPEAKER_00: Acts chapter seventeen eleven, John chapter twelve verse twenty five.
SPEAKER_00: In short, all views are offered as personal opinions expressed in the fear of God, desiring to walk in his righteousness, holiness, and self discipline.
SPEAKER_00: Regarding persecution and content, any reference to persecution or persecution by prosecution reflects the opinions and possible first hand accounts of those individuals who are witnesses to and live through the terrible events described, including what they experienced as systemic corruption.
SPEAKER_00: The content provided is for informational and educational purposes only.
SPEAKER_00: Nothing on this podcast, website or associated material should be considered legal advice, nor is it a call to action, rebellion, or harm to others.
SPEAKER_00: Final reminder Matthew chapter tense 16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves, therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
SPEAKER_00: The Consider Podcast Examining Today's wisdom, folly and madness www dot consider.info or www dot enamclaw dot com.
Apple Podcasts
Castbox
Castro
Goodpods
Moon FM
Overcast
Pocket Casts
Podbean
Podcast Addict
Podcast Republic
Spotify