The Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney's Office has dropped its case against several men charged with poaching and trafficking shellfish in 2015.
Those men include the former natural resources director for the Tulalip Tribe, Joseph Hatch Sr., as well as his son, Joseph Hatch Jr.
Though officers report observing the men poaching shellfish for some time, it was a set of crab-filled containers on one night in particular that led to Pierce County's case. After obtaining a warrant, officers secretly placed a GPS tracking device on a boat belonging to Hatch Sr. On May 23, 2015, that vessel left Shilshole Marina in the Ballard neighborhood of Seattle at approximately 10:25 p.m., according to the charging document. That boat was followed in secret by a Washington State Patrol aircraft, filming video from above using a thermal imagery camera system, because it was so dark.
The documents reveal that Hatch sold the crab to Puget Sound Seafood in Tacoma for $1,222.72 and the buyer, Hai Ly, admitted in an interview with police that he was aware the seafood was illegal. He said he was under pressure by his bosses, Kirby Manzanares and Anthony Paul, who is also a member of the Tulalip Tribes.
Hatch Sr. and Hatch Jr., along with the two other men, were charged with trafficking of fish or wildlife in the first degree, one of the most severe wildlife charges in Washington. Hatch Sr. was found guilty of lesser crimes by the Tulalip Tribes, but the case against him did not include the Pierce County crime.
But those charges were dropped soon after, in a move that one Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife officer called "disheartening."
Pierce County attorneys claim the decision was made because Hatch Sr. and Hatch Jr. were already tried by the Tulalip Courts, and continuing with the case would violate a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the state and the tribal governments. They also argue the men had boat issues on a day that would have been legal to fish, so the tribe allowed them to fish on a closed day.
"Defense counsels on the case requested a meeting with us and Tulalip Tribe. A meeting was set up, the defense attorneys were present, 2 members on the Tulalip Tribal Prosecutor's Office, and the Pierce County Tribal Liaison. The Tulalip Tribal Counsel also submitted a letter for our consideration. At this meeting we learned additional information, that was not provided to us prior to considering this case. (1) That Fish and Wildlife had signed an MOU with the Tulalip Tribe. As part of the MOU, it says that Fish and Wildlife must bring cases that involve tribal members to the Tribe's Prosecutor first. If that office prosecutors (sic), plea bargains or uses its discretion in filing or not filing charges, Fish and Wildlife is prohibited from taking the case to another prosecutor's office. Tulalip Tribal Prosecutor's office had been given all the information (including the trafficking) when they filed the case against the Hatches. The Hatches later pled as part of a plea bargain which resolved the case. The Tribal Prosecutor's Office and Tribal Counsel view Fish and Wildlife presenting the case to us as a violation of the MOU that was signed by those parties," the internal Pierce County memo reads.
"In addition, we learned all defendants have a viable defense that we were not told about. The shellfish season was only 5/22/15. The Hatches had a boat issue on that day, which Fish and Wildlife confirms. The Hatches claim they had permission to harvest late from the Tribal Shellfish manager because of the boat issue. Paul and Manzanares also contacted the Tribal Shellfish manager to confirm that [they] could purchase the crab in this case and were given authorization because of the boat issue. Defense presented a letter for the Shellfish manager saying the shellfish tickets were legal in this case. We are told the Shellfish manager does not specifically remember these conversations and the custom within the tribe is not to physically document. However, the Shellfish manager and others would say allowing this would not be unusually (sic). This would be a complete defense in the case," the internal memo reads.
But KING 5 obtained an internal email from Sgt. Erik Olson with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Police through a public records request, in which he relayed his disappointment to Pierce County Deputy Prosecutor Scott Peters.
"The only reason for the dismissal, as provided by you, was the fact that an MOU was in place between our department and the Tulalip Tribe regarding enforcement protocols, however, pursuant to that MOU, the State is not restricted at all from filing charges against a Tulalip Tribal member for illegal activities they engage in outside their U&A ("Usual & Accustom" fishing grounds). Certainly, forgery, perjury and trafficking are not protected treaty rights, even if they were within their U&A. However, in this case, it did not matter since the charges referred and filed by the Pierce County Prosecutor's office occurred in Pierce County, outside Tulalip U&A," Sgt. Olson wrote. "Therefore, your legal justification for dismissing charges for these subjects has no legal merit and makes no legal sense."
Sgt. Olsen continues by insinuating that politics is taking precedent over justice.
"The only similar connection Mr. Manzanares and the Hatch's have with the Pierce County Prosecutor's office is the fact that both the Tulalip Tribe and the Puyallup Tribe are financial contributors to Pierce County Prosecutor Mark Lindquist's re-election campaign, according to the Public Disclosure Commission and Financial website. The Tulalip tribe has also contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars over the last few years to the Democratic Party, which Prosecutor Lindquist has declared to be a member of," Sgt. Olson wrote.
"Your office also failed to inform WDFW, or our AAG that the charges would be dismissed, in spite of two in-person meetings, multiple phone calls and emails informing your office that this case was important to WDFW to deter others from engaging in large scale commercial poaching. This case was briefed by the highest ranks of our department to include our Chief and Director, who approved of the case being referred to your office. This was relayed to you and should have been an indicator to your office that it was important to include us in any discussions about the future of this case."
Because the case has now reached its statute of limitations after other county governments also refused to prosecute, the case can now no longer be tried.
"The fact that your office dismissed the case after the statute of limitations expired, prohibiting any reconsideration at the State level, is curious and disheartening," Sgt. Olson wrote. "The only conclusion that can be derived from these actions is that the Pierce County Prosecutor's Office decided to take unilateral, deliberate action, absent any legal justification, that would ensure charges could not be reconsidered at the State level."
