‘Toxic and authoritarian’: WA high court says Benton sheriff may have committed felony

When Benton County Sheriff Jerry Hatcher backdated a formal investigative request by one week, he may have committed a felony that carries a maximum 10-year prison term, according to the state’s highest court.

Hatcher’s alleged action last February is one of eight charges that voters will have to consider if a recall effort makes it onto a ballot.

The sheriff claims that instead of using the date the file was created on a computer, he backdated it seven days to when he had the initial conversation with an employee about requesting an administrative review by the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office.

The Washington state Supreme Court — which already has given the green light for the recall petition to proceed — said it did not weigh the evidence and it will be up to the voters to decide if Hatcher falsified the letter.

However, the court added Thursday that it’s “not simply an act of changing a date.”

“Sheriff Hatcher falsified the date on the administrative review of himself, which he sent to his political ally,” said the court’s opinion. “This act, when viewed in context with all of the wrongful actions taken by Sheriff Hatcher, is a substantial act.”

“This violation is also a class B felony and could result in up to 10 years in prison,” the opinion continued. “That the sheriff, who has been elected to uphold the law, would also intentionally violate it, is substantial.”

All nine Supreme Court justices signed off on a 47-page opinion that criticized Hatcher for his alleged behavior including retaliatory acts, intimidation, abuse of discretion, and tampering with and destruction of evidence.

The opinion, written by Justice G. Helen Whitener, was released Thursday. It explains why the high court entered a unanimous order nine weeks ago affirming a Superior Court judge’s ruling on the recall petition, filed by sheriff’s Sgt. Jason Erickson.

Hatcher repeatedly has denied the allegations made against him by Erickson, other employees in management positions and the Benton County Deputy Sheriff’s Guild, and currently is not facing any criminal charges.

He could not be reached Thursday before press time about the opinion.

Whitener wrote that “An elected official need not be charged and found guilty of a crime prior to a recall on said allegations.”

Erickson “filed the petition to recall Sheriff Hatcher after 90 percent of the Benton County Deputy Sheriff’s Guild met and unanimously voted to pursue recall,” wrote Whitener. “The recall petition alleges 26 separate charges that, assuming, as we must, the truth of the allegations, illustrate a toxic and authoritarian culture that Sheriff Hatcher has created since his appointment in 2017.”

Those 26 allegations — claiming misfeasance, malfeasance and violations of oath of office — were whittled down to eight charges by the Benton County Prosecutor’s Office to meet ballot synopsis requirements.

In order to qualify for an election, Erickson and the Committee to Recall Sheriff Hatcher need to gather 13,937 signatures from registered county voters. That number is 25 percent of the total votes cast for Hatcher in the 2018 election.

The recall petition was reviewed by the entire Supreme Court in early November after Hatcher appealed the August ruling by Judge M. Scott Wolfram from Walla Walla County.

“We look at each allegation in the context of the approximately nine-month period at issue, Sheriff Hatcher’s experience in law enforcement, and the culture of control he has created within his department as alleged by the recall petitioner,” Whitener wrote in the Supreme Court’s opinion.

“Assuming, as we must, that the allegations are true, they identify recallable offenses.”

Hatcher has argued that if he is being accused of doing something illegal, why is he not criminally charged.

Five of the eight charges on the ballot synopsis include alleged “illegal” actions, such as Hatcher’s possession of 14 cases of county-owned ammunition for his own use.

The Supreme Court opinion noted that it’s inaccurate for Hatcher to say that the allegations against him don’t meet legal sufficiency for a recall because “the proper avenue for criminal law is the criminal process.”

“As alleged by the recall petitioner, Sheriff Hatcher’s acts rise to the level of a knowing and intentional violation of criminal law,” the opinion said. ”Therefore, the recall petitioner has established a prima facie (on the face of it) case that Sheriff Hatcher committed misfeasance or malfeasance without any legal justification.”

Alan Harvey, the Vancouver, Wash.-based attorney who represents Erickson and the union, said the problem with trying to criminally charge Hatcher is that the sheriff has maintained he’s the only one who has the power to investigate himself.

“I think in their analysis it puts to rest the ridiculous arguments by Sheriff Hatcher of whether or not he has done anything illegal,” he told the Tri-City Herald.

The Washington State Fraternal Order of Police issued a statement Thursday “strongly supporting” the state Supreme Court’s unanimous decision.

“As dedicated law enforcement officers, we are never happy to see one of our own accused of misdeeds. But the public demands and deserves all police officers to be accountable to the laws they are sworn to uphold,” said president Marco Monteblanco, who’s also a Kennewick police detective.

“When a sheriff allegedly engages in unlawful conduct and subsequently loses the respect and support of the officers he is supposed to lead, it creates a negative situation that threatens the safety of the people we are sworn to protect and serve.”

Monteblanco added that the opinion “is an important step in the due process for holding elected officials accountable under state law.”

“The recall effort moving forward ensures that the public will have the opportunity to carefully consider the charges against Sheriff Hatcher and decide whether they want him to continue serving them as their sheriff.”

This story was originally published January 14, 2021 at 12:17 PM.