Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 989681.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 989681.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source: Official source
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/989681.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,744 chars

allegations. When viewed in the context of Sheriff Hatcher’s pattern of threatening

and retaliatory behavior, this action constitutes substantial conduct. Here, Sheriff

Hatcher was aware that Commander Croskrey had made a whistleblower

complaint regarding the sheriff’s unethical behaviors and his threats to investigate

deputies and make them “Brady cops.” There is a reasonable inference given the

40
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
In re Recall Charges Against Benton County Sheriff Gerald D. Hatcher,
No. 98968-1

entirety of the investigations that the sheriff did intend to influence any testimony

Commander Croskrey may give, thus violating RCW 9A.72.110.

6. Illegally made false or misleading statements to law enforcement and the
court regarding the number of firearms he needed to surrender pursuant to
a court order (petition charges 1, 2, and 3)

Sergeant Erickson alleges that Sheriff Hatcher made multiple false or

misleading statements to KPD in violation of RCW 9A.76.175 which reads,

A person who knowingly makes a false or misleading material
statement to a public servant is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
“Material statement” means a written or oral statement reasonably
likely to be relied upon by a public servant in the discharge of his or
her official powers or duties.

Sheriff Hatcher admitted to multiple employees that while he and his wife

were arguing about his having an affair, he “grabbed [Ms. Hatcher] by the neck

and moved her out of [his] way.” CP at 518; see also id. at 89. The court granted a

temporary DVPO to Ms. Hatcher and against Sheriff Hatcher, which prohibited

him from possessing weapons. Also granted was an order to surrender weapons,