Candidate Valderrama Says he did not Mean to 'Mislead' Sammamish Voters

Sammamish City Council candidate Ramiro Valderrama explained Monday that he never meant to mislead anyone by stating this summer that he had no criminal charge or conviction in his past – when, in fact, a formal complaint was issued against him after a 2005 incident.

Prosecutors filed a fourth-degree assault charge against him in King County District Court, The Sammamish Review reported last week. Authorities said he hit his then-14-year-old son over an argument involving the family dog.

The charge was later dropped after he enrolled in classes to address anger issues, according to the newspaper, which first reported the incident.

, Valderrama answered “No” when asked: “As an adult, have you been convicted or charged with a crime other than a minor traffic violation?”

On Monday, he stressed that his goal was never to “mislead” any resident in the city. He added that he viewed the 2005 case from a layman’s perspective. “It was dismissed. It was ruled null and void,” he said. “How would you take it?”

Also, he interpreted the words “convicted” or “charged” as having the same meaning. “I see them as synonymous,” he said. “There was no conviction.”

It was only in recent weeks that he learned that a criminal charge existed, he said.

In 2005, he was aware that authorities were conducting an investigation after his wife took their son to the doctor for a bruised ear that he suffered after the disagreement over the dog. The doctor notified authorities, The Sammamish Review reported. The son told investigators that he hit his father first.

Valderrama hired an attorney in 2005 and later received a yellow “ticket” -- which he described as a carbon sheet, from the court in the mail. It was his summons.

“I’m sure it had to say something about my son on it,” he said Monday. “But I don’t recall it saying, ‘You are hereby charged.’”

Valderrama appeared in court at least once and possibly twice. “I was more concerned about the hearing and my son than anything else at the time,” he said.

When Sammamish Patch asked whether his attorney ever told him that a charge had been filed regarding this 2005 case, he replied: “I don’t recall that.”

His attorney, Valderrama said, dealt with all the case files.  

“I never saw the files,” he said. “My attorney had asked for the files to be passed over to him and he said there was a determination not to pursue anything.”

Part of the problem with the 2005 case, he said, was that the court moved ahead of the paperwork.

In court, he never took the stand. Instead, he said, there was a discussion involving his attorney and the prosecutor. The talk turned to dismissal of the case.

“As a common layman, I assumed that was the end of it,” he said. “I never assumed it would come forward.”

Recently, though, it surfaced and Valderrama was prompted to call his attorney’s office, which informed him that the case was considered a charge.

Valderrama believes – based on conversations with other people – that his City Council opponent, , is behind the release of the 2005 court case. “I know it’s my opponent’s campaign,” he said.

On Monday, Wasnick denied that he informed The Sammamish Review about the case: “My opponent can choose to deal with it how he chooses and if one of the aspects is blaming me or my campaign for public record, so be it.”

On Monday, Sammamish Patch asked Valderrama if everything he was saying in the phone interview was honest and truthful. His response: “Yes.”

His goal, he said, is to run a positive campaign on policy issues. He is the spokesman for the community group, Citizens for Sammamish.

The group studies policy issues and holds discussions about them.

“I’ve been someone who has been open,” he said. “I have taken people from diverse experiences and sat down and worked with them.”

Editor's note: Sammamish Patch left a phone message for Ramiro Valderrama's attorney. This story will be updated should the call be returned.