Fred Walser Fails to Keep Confidences

Some people are angry at us for posting the truth about Fred Walser. They call it "mud-slinging." But we don't make irrelevant personal attacks, or spread lies, as Walser is doing about Senator Val Stevens. We are giving facts, and providing evidence, about subjects that are directly relevant to Walser's ability to serve in elected office.

For example: Walser's pattern of not keeping confidences as part of his official capacity as a public servant, improperly revealing confidential information to department personnel, and to the media.

In our review of the Pepperell scandal, we learned that as part of his coverup, Walser -- despite specifically being told not to -- warned Pepperell that she was to be interviewed by the Washington State Patrol as part of their official investigation of her. Of course, this potentially allowed Pepperell to conduct further coverups, in preparation for that interview.

And it wasn't the first time. In 1994, he did the same thing.

In his May-June 1994 appraisal -- as part of his probation as a new lieutenant with the WSP -- he was told:

Statements of worth of his subordinates from administrative staff should not be broadly discussed in an open forum. ... He has shown a tendency to let stress control his emotions. This was demonstrated when Internal Affairs served a no contact order. ...

Fred has divulged comments of other command staff to other employees. Items of employee performance discussed at staff meetings will be kept confidential. Comply with the Internal Affairs' directive to not have contact with anyone regarding their investigation. You may only discuss this issue with myself. Phone calls and written correspondence apply.

His problems with keeping confidences were not limited to personnel investigations, but also included, on multiple occasions, revealing confidential information about pending criminal cases to the news media, against department regulations, and jeopardizing a criminal prosecution.

In August of 1991, a truck ran a stop light and killed the driver, as well as a mother and her 12-year old daughter. Walser told a reporter that he had never seen such a blatant case of "wanton disregard for public safety. ... It's the most aggravated case of blatant disregard for life I have ever seen."

By this time, King County Prosectors had not even yet decided whether to prosecute the trucking company, and his written reprimand noted, "Detailed information and personnel opinions relating to the defendant's guilt were prejudicial and argumentative to a criminal case."

Mistakes happen, but just over a year later, he did the same thing again. This time he didn't merely receive a reprimand for releasing information, but got an additional violation for insubordination, and lost two days of leave.

Any elected official must be able to keep confidences to do their job. Walser has shown on multiple occasions over many years, and leading up to the incident that resulted in his criminal conviction and one-year jail sentence this June, that he is sometimes either incapable or unwilling to do so.

Walser's State Patrol Records Reveal More of the Same

The big problem with Fred Walser -- Democratic candidate for State Senate in the 39th LD -- is not simply in what he did in committing his crime, but that a very clear pattern of disturbing and unbecoming behavior has emerged throughout his career.

As Police Chief of Sultan, he covered up, he minimized his wrongdoing, he disobeyed superiors, he ignored rules, and he went after people who got in his way.

He did the same things at the Washington State Patrol.

Walser joined the WSP as a cadet in 1967, and retired in 1995 to run for Snohomish County Sheriff. Walser initially announced his retirement for March, thinking he would be appointed Sheriff, but when Patrick Murphy was appointed instead, he pushed his retirement to June. He once again lost to Murphy in the Democratic primary, ironically saying that "Patrick Murphy is an affront to law enforcement" because of his "untruthfulness" on many issues."

Just two years earlier, the son of Walser's friend Pat Slack -- Pat Slack, Jr. -- was involved in an accident. Walser was an accident investigator for the WSP and was authorized for an off-duty private traffic collision reconstruction business, and decided to help out the Slacks on his own time, completely unrelated to his work with the State Patrol.

Unfortunately, Walser identified himself in the report as a reconstructionist with the WSP, something he was explicitly forbidden from doing in his signed off-duty employment authorization (as well as in a similar authorization seven years earlier).

Walser concluded that Slack, Jr. was not at fault, and that his reconstruction represented "the only way the collision could have occurred." Unfortunately, this directly contradicted the report by the Snohomish Police. The WSP's Traffic Investigation Division out of Tacoma agreed with the police.

But when proven wrong, rather than backing down, Walser did testify in court that his original "only way" conclusion and the police/TID conclusion were both wrong, but then he provided a new theory to exonerate Slack, Jr. TID once again testified that Walser was wrong.

The WSP told Walser his actions:

cost the department and the Snohomish Police Department several thousand dollars, lessened the public's confidence in the department's operation and training, and was motivated by your friendship to Patrick Slack, Sr.

Walser finally agreed to his penalty for the Slack incident on December 20, 1993 -- ironically, the very day before he was promoted to lieutenant.

As with all new lieutenants, Walser was under probation, and was subject to regular performance appraisals. In his May-June 1994 appraisal, his superior writes that:

recent disciplinary action prior to reporting to this assignment has not changed his attitude. He has been adamant that he would do the same thing again if confronted with the same circumstances. This type of action will further subject the patrol to monetary liability.

In the July-August appraisal, it only gets worse.

Walser's judgment is not conducive to a good working relationship with his peers, nor in keeping with advice and counsel of his superiors. ... Fred has made serious allegations resulting in no significant findings. Fred's credibility will be affected by this action. ...

His recent allegations involving TID commanders have had a devastating impact between divisions, particularly when Fred or his units are involved. ... Fred has filed counter allegations against previous command staff. ... this type of action increases the Patrol's investigative costs and potential monetary liability. It is my opinion that Fred's motives are completely self-serving without regard to the internal damage his allegation causes. I question Fred's self-discipline, integrity, reliability, and conduct over the issues bringing disciplinary action and his subsequent allegations and actions.

Walser attempted to dodge and minimize the allegations in his response: "Whether or not I agree with [the] statement is immaterial -- my actions and enthusiasm will demonstrate my loyalty, integrity, and reliability."

The September-October appraisal contains more of the same:

Fred's self-discipline, integrity and conduct are in doubt. The investigation into his allegation against two command personnel has concluded. Fred's allegations were unfounded. At the end of this reporting period, it was brought to my attention that Fred's conduct and integrity should continue to be in doubt. ... His emotional outbursts and attempts to justify his alleged improper decisions are examples of poor conduct on his part. Fred's reliability in the area of setting positive examples is seriously questioned.

It's the same old Fred Walser story, over and over. Covering up. Minimizing wrongdoing. Disobeying superiors. Ignoring rules. Going after people who get in his way.

Whether it was the Slack incident, the fallout from it that followed him into his probationary period as lieutenant, or the Pepperell incident, it's the same things.