What happens when court administration quietly picks up the phone about a case—rather than putting it on the record?
In this video, I share and contextualize a voicemail from Cristina Platt (Pierce County Judicial Calendar Coordinator) to Jennifer Anderson (Kitsap County) asking whether one of the judges would be willing to take “the Benedict case” and suggesting a phone conversation rather than email.
That single voicemail matters.
Why? Because it raises serious questions about interference, forum shopping, and off-record coordination in a case involving allegations that Pierce County failed—over nearly a decade—to file or preserve a final probate decree.
Shortly after this behind-the-scenes coordination, a visiting judge—Judge Cadine Ferguson-Brown—was assigned and entered a sua sponte order denying a motion to correct a clerical error, without a hearing and without notice or an opportunity to be heard.
That order is now pending before the Washington Court of Appeals, Division II.
This video is not about conspiracy.
It’s about process, records, timestamps, and what happens when decisions that affect due process are made outside the public docket.
🔎 In this video, we cover:
• The voicemail and why a phone call (instead of email) matters
• How visiting judges are supposed to be assigned—and what the public record shows here
• Why this raises concerns about forum shopping and administrative interference
• How public records from multiple counties helped reconstruct what wasn’t docketed
• Why nearly a decade of probate evidence risks being erased by procedural shortcuts
📂 Context matters:
This case involves allegations of long-term refusal to file or preserve probate orders—issues that cannot be resolved without a complete and accurate court record.
⚖️ Why this matters to everyone:
If court administration can quietly coordinate case assignments off-record, it undermines transparency, accountability, and public trust in the judicial process.
