Report leaves FWay court in healthier light
THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Getting information about a dispute within Federal Way’s municipal court has been as hard as pulling teeth from a crocodile. What has emerged tends to discount a claim that Judge Michael Morgan has posed a threat to others.
Last November, a court supervisor, Cindy Rocque, told the police and others that Morgan had spoken of suicide and about taking “others down with him.” Police Chief Brian J. Wilson reacted as he should have, recommending that the judge be placed on leave and evaluated. Wilson also concluded that there was no cause for a criminal investigation. The police took no further action.
Rocque was subsequently fired. Getting a full picture of what actually happened has been greatly complicated by her threat of a wrongful termination lawsuit. Given the potential of legal action, city employees and officials have been reluctant to say much. For that matter, Rocque and her attorney have repeatedly refused to return phone calls to a News Tribune reporter.
Through a public records request, this newspaper has obtained the report of an investigation done by Judge David Larson, who works alongside Morgan. The report – whose specifics lend it weight – concluded that the suicide issue was “overstated” and that Rocque’s claim of Morgan posing a threat to others was unfounded. Larson based his findings on interviews with Rocque, Morgan and other city employees; he was also close to the situation himself.
Too close, actually. As presiding judge, Morgan was Larson’s superior to a degree, though both are independently elected and Morgan cannot fire Larson. Still, as a personal acquaintance of all the parties involved, Larson was hardly the ideal person to be looking into this. At a minimum, he had an interest in not publicly embarrassing the municipal court.
Larson was relieving Morgan at the time and serving as acting presiding judge; in that capacity, he says the law did not allow him to delegate the investigation to others. It would have been more reassuring to have a genuinely independent investigation.
Yet Larson’s account is supported by several factors. Morgan allegedly posed a threat to him personally, but Larson – who knew him well – perceived no threat. Larson appears to have spoken to everyone in a position to evaluate the supposed danger. He recounts contradictory statements by Rocque, who reportedly backtracked on her allegations and – after she reported the threat – said she wanted to work for Morgan directly.
There’s also the fact that this all happened last fall; there’s no evidence that Morgan has displayed a hint of violence in the months since.
At this point, it looks like Rocque’s word against everyone else’s – everyone else being the very people she said Morgan might harm. We’ve only heard one side of this story, but that’s because Rocque and her attorney haven’t been more forthcoming. Perhaps her lawsuit will bring further clarity, if it materializes. Given what we’ve learned so far, the burden of proof falls squarely on her shoulders.
