Judge's Priorities Questioned Amidst Hiring and Contracting Controversies
Appointment of Commissioner Proceeded Despite Allegations Public records secured under the Public Records Act indicate that Judge Brent Basden was likely informed of serious misconduct allegations regarding Commissioner Parker prior to his appointment, yet the hiring process continued regardless. While some correspondence obtained from county sources is heavily redacted, unredacted materials from independent channels outline the flow of information between the county investigator and Basden.
The communications reveal a casual relationship between Judge Basden and Clallam County Civil Investigator Tom Kuch, who was responsible for vetting Parker's background. During the review period, Basden used official government channels to request restaurant recommendations and music suggestions for a family gathering from Kuch, blurring professional oversight with personal friendship.
On October 24, 2024, shortly before the decision was finalized, Kuch acknowledged to a concerned citizen that he had an Everett Police Department report concerning Parker regarding "perjury and or providing a false statement to a public servant." Earlier, on October 11, another citizen contacted Kuch to express concerns about Parker's lack of expertise in domestic violence dynamics, asserting his rulings had "severely impacted" families and requesting the appointment be reconsidered.
These emails appear to have been forwarded from Kuch to Basden. Correspondence discussing an in-person meeting regarding the individual in question is redacted in county records. Despite this awareness of alleged misconduct, Basden proceeded with the appointment.
Contract Awards to Former Associate Records from the Superior Court and the County indicate a broader pattern of judgment regarding the allocation of contracts. Judge Basden has awarded contracts to Lane Wolfley, a former business partner. The two practiced together at Wolfley Basden Hansen Black P S until approximately 2004.
Lane Wolfley receives compensation of $6,250 per month for his Superior Court contract. His son, Joseph Wolfley, has also received contracts and currently works alongside his father in private practice.
The nature of Lane Wolfley’s past conduct has drawn scrutiny. A grievance was filed against him with the Washington State Bar Association in 2003. In August 2004, the Disciplinary Board of the Washington State Bar Association informed him that there was "sufficient evidence of unethical behavior to take further action" and ordered a hearing. A complaint regarding this matter was filed in October 2024.
According to the Disciplinary Board, Wolfley was hired to represent a client in a personal injury case stemming from an auto accident. During the representation, Wolfley "knowingly and intentionally made sexual advances" toward the client, including kissing, fondling, touching her body, and placing hands inside her clothing.
A state disciplinary board has suspended attorney Lane Wolfley from practicing law for a three-year period following a finding that he provided false statements to the bar association. The board concluded that Wolfley knowingly and intentionally misrepresented facts regarding his interactions with a client.
The disciplinary action stemmed from a review of video footage recorded during a visit to the client’s home. The board determined that the visual evidence contradicted Wolfley’s sworn testimony. In previous statements, Wolfley had asserted that the recording would not capture any intimate contact, specifically denying that he had kissed the client or engaged in sexual relations. He further claimed he had never touched the client’s breasts or buttocks, whether clothed or unclothed. The board’s analysis of the tape indicated that these denials were false.
Conditions for Wolfley’s potential return to the practice of law include ongoing treatment with a mental health professional and regular attendance at Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous meetings. Additionally, an independent psychiatric or psychological evaluation must confirm that he has demonstrated adequate recovery before he is permitted to resume legal practice.
The recent appointment of a judicial commissioner and the awarding of legal contracts to Wolfley have raised questions about the vetting processes within the local judiciary. Critics note that the hiring of a judicial officer occurred despite active concerns regarding perjury charges, a crime that undermines the integrity of the court system. Furthermore, public funds and indigent clients were directed to a former business partner with a documented history of sexually exploiting a client and misrepresenting those events to regulators.
These decisions have led to speculation that personal loyalties within Clallam County Superior Court may be influencing judicial appointments and contract awards over broader considerations of ethics and transparency. The case highlights concerns among local citizens regarding the mechanisms in place to protect the public from the court’s internal choices.
A stipulation to discipline detailing the terms of Wolfley’s suspension is available for public review.