Was Basden Aware of Parker’s Alleged Misconduct?

New public records obtained by the Olympic Herald reveal that Judge Brent Basden was likely aware of serious misconduct allegations against Commissioner Parker prior to his appointment—and proceeded with the hiring anyway.

Heavily redacted emails obtained through a Public Records Act request, combined with unredacted documents obtained from independent sources, establish a clear timeline of information flow between the County’s investigator and Basden.

The internal communications suggest a casual, familiar relationship between Judge Basden and Tom Kuch, the Clallam County Civil Investigator tasked with Parker’s background check. In official emails sent during the vetting period, Basden utilizes government resources to ask Kuch for restaurant recommendations and song suggestions for a family event, blurring the lines between professional oversight and personal friendship.

While colloquial familiarity is not inherently improper, it sets the stage for how the Parker background check was handled.

On October 24, 2024, just days before the hiring decision, Kuch sent an email to a concerned citizen acknowledging he was in possession of an Everett Police Department report investigating Parker for “perjury and or providing a false statement to a public servant.”

Earlier that month, on October 11, another citizen had emailed Kuch detailing Parker’s alleged lack of expertise in domestic violence dynamics, warning that his rulings had “severely impacted” families and urging the county to reconsider his appointment.

These same emails appear to have been forwarded by Kuch to Basden, and are redacted in the county provided records

In the below emails, Basden and Kuch discuss meeting in person about Parker, whose name is redacted from the subject line.

In sum, Basden was aware of Parker’s alleged misconduct, and still appointed him.

Pattern of Cronyism—Basden Awarded Contracts To His Former Business Partner and His Son

The questionable judgment displayed in the Parker hiring appears to be part of a broader pattern. Records obtained from the Superior Court and the County show that Judge Basden has awarded contracts to Lane Wolfley, his former business partner.

Basden and Lane Wolfley were partners at the law firm of Wolfley Basden Hansen Black P S, until around 2004.

Lane receives $6,250 a month in compensation for his Superior Court contract. His son, Joseph Wolfley, was also awarded contracts. Joseph and Lane currently work together in private practice.

While contracting a former partner (and his son) might be viewed as simple favoritism, the nature of Lane Wolfley’s past conduct makes these appointments alarming. In 2003, a grievance was filed against Lane Wolfley with the Washington State Bar Association.

Then in August 2004, the Disciplinary Board of the Washington State Bar Association notified Lane Wolfley that there was “sufficient evidence of unethical behavior to take further action,” and a hearing was ordered. A former complaint was filed in October 2024.

The Disciplinary Board states that Wolfley was hired to represent a client in a personal injury matter arising out of an auto accident. During the course of the representation, Wolfley “knowingly and intentionally made sexual advances” toward the client. Wolfley “kissed...fondled her, touched her breasts, touched her buttocks, and/or put his hands inside her clothing.”

Initially, Lane Wolfley claimed that none of the allegations were true. Lane stated, “I know what it [videotape] won’t show. It won’t show me kissing her, it won’t show me having sexual relations with her, it won’t show anything like that because that never happened.” “I’ve never touched her breasts with clothing. unclothed, or anything.” “l have never touched her buttocks, clothed or unclothed.”

Lane “knowingly and intentionally provided false information” to the Bar Association. The Disciplinary Board stated, “A review of the video portion of a tape produced by the grievant taken while Wolfley visited her home, shows that Wolfley knowingly testified falsely…”

As a result of these violations, Lane Wolfley was suspended from the practice of law for three years.

The conditions for his reinstatement were telling. Lane Wolfley was required to continue treatment with a mental health provider and attend “Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous (SLAA)” meetings. He was also required to undergo an independent examination by a psychiatrist or psychologist to determine if he had “demonstrated adequate recovery” before he could ever practice law again.

A copy of Lane Wolfley’s Stipulation to Discipline is available here.

A Crisis of Confidence

The appointment of Commissioner Parker and the awarding of contracts to Lane Wolfley reveal a judiciary operating with a dangerous lack of caution.

In Parker, Judge Basden hired a judicial officer despite active concerns regarding perjury—a crime that strikes at the very heart of the judicial system. In Wolfley, Basden directed public funds and vulnerable indigent clients to a former business partner with a documented history of sexually exploiting a client and lying to regulators about it.

These decisions suggest that in Clallam County Superior Court, Judge Basden’s personal loyalties may outweigh the public’s right to an ethical, transparent, and accountable judiciary.

The citizens of Clallam County rely on the court to protect the vulnerable. The question remains: who is protecting the public from the court’s own choices?