Court denies permanent protection order request against Bellingham officer on administrative leave
A Whatcom County Superior Court Commissioner declined Monday to enter a permanent domestic violence protection order against a Bellingham Police Department sergeant who was accused of domestic and sexual violence earlier this year.
Following roughly 4.5 hours of testimony split over two days in May and June, Whatcom County Superior Court Commissioner Ann Vetter-Hansen said Monday, June 17, that she had insufficient evidence to issue a two-year domestic violence protection order against Bellingham Police Department Sgt. Joshua Richard McKissick, 44.
Vetter-Hansen said in court Monday that she found McKissick’s testimony more credible than the woman’s for a multitude of reasons.
“The manner and substance of Mr. McKissick’s testimony is more persuasive to the court than the substance of (the woman’s) testimony,” Vetter-Hansen said, while explaining her ruling. “Ma’am that does not mean that some of what you’ve alleged did not happen. It means that this stranger, looking at the vast amount of evidence presented over a couple of court days, hasn’t to me met the burden of the preponderance of the evidence. I hope the take home point is that you don’t feel completely invalidated by this process, although I’m sure it’s very frustrating.”
In late February a woman known to McKissick came forward alleging that McKissick abused her. She filed a request with the court seeking a two-year domestic violence protection order against him. She also sought a court order that required McKissick to surrender his firearms and other weapons, and prohibited him from possessing them, The Bellingham Herald previously reported.
The court signed temporary domestic violence protection and weapons surrender orders Feb. 26 while the case proceeded to a full hearing on the merits of the allegations. The hearing for the requested permanent protection order was postponed three times — once in March, once in April and again in May — in part due to issues and timelines affecting evidence and because the commissioner was unavailable.
The hearing for the permanent order began May 9 and included roughly two hours of testimony from the woman. The continuation and conclusion of that hearing occurred Monday, and included roughly 2.5 hours of testimony from McKissick.
The commissioner dismissed the case following her ruling on Monday, June 17. In issuing the denial order, the commissioner checked the box citing insufficient evidence as the reason for the denial.
“A preponderance of the evidence does not support issuing any type of protection order that this court has authority to issue,” the denial order states. The temporary domestic violence protection order expired the same day, according to court records.
The woman has 10 days to file a request with the court seeking revision or review by a Superior Court judge. Because of this 10-day filing window, the temporary order prohibiting McKissick from possessing weapons or firearms was extended. It will expire Thursday, June 27, if the woman does not file by that time. If she does, the order will be continued until the matter is resolved or until July 15, according to court records.
“We are disappointed in the ruling. The safety of the petitioner and her children is our highest priority,” said Kelsey Hathaway, the woman’s attorney, in an emailed statement sent Wednesday, June 18, to The Herald.
The Bellingham Herald has reached out to McKissick’s attorney for comment.
It is Bellingham Herald policy to avoid identifying potential victims of domestic and sexual violence when possible.
Administrative leave
McKissick has been on paid administrative leave from the Bellingham Police Department, in accordance with department policy, since Feb. 27, following the court-ordered weapons surrender and temporary domestic violence protection orders.
He had previously been removed from patrol duties and placed on administrative desk duty Dec. 6 after Bellingham police became aware of a report made to another law enforcement agency alleging McKissick had perpetrated domestic and sexual violence against a woman known to him.
An internal administrative investigation into the allegations was also launched the same day, The Herald previously reported.
The Lynden Police Department handled the criminal investigation into the allegations against McKissick, while the Everett Police Department was asked to conduct the internal administrative investigation.
Lynden police’s criminal investigation, which started in February, was completed the last week of April. The case file was then sent to the Whatcom County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office for review and determination of possible charges, before it was then conflicted out to the Skagit County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.
The Skagit prosecutor’s office declined May 21 to file criminal charges against McKissick. Skagit County senior deputy prosecuting attorney Branden Platter, who was assigned the case May 8, said the case involved allegations of sexual assault and criminal harassment, which included threats of bodily harm.
“I did not find sufficient evidence to support any criminal charges of either harassment or any crimes of sexual assault. I have notified Lynden Police Department and the Whatcom County Prosecutor’s Office that I have declined filing any charges in this matter,” Platter told The Herald in a previous statement.
The internal administrative investigation had been placed on hold until after the criminal investigation had been completed by Lynden police. The internal investigation resumed May 23 and is ongoing, according to Everett Police Department Deputy Chief Jeraud Irving.
Everett police is handling the administrative investigation on Bellingham police’s behalf to avoid any appearance of bias.
“We are aware a Whatcom County Superior Court Commissioner yesterday declined to enter a two-year-long domestic violence protection order against Bellingham Police Sgt. Joshua McKissick. An internal administrative investigation is still underway. Sergeant McKissick remains on paid administrative leave, in accordance with City and Bellingham Police policy,” Janice Keller, a city spokesperson, said in an emailed statement sent Wednesday, June 18, to The Herald.
History with department
McKissick has been employed with the Bellingham Police Department since February 2007, according to public records obtained by The Herald.
He was promoted to sergeant in February 2021, according to previous posts on Bellingham police’s Facebook page.
McKissick was also a member of Bellingham police’s SWAT team in October 2015, according to Herald archives.
A city of Bellingham spokesperson declined to answer questions regarding McKissick’s hire date, rank, duties while in that rank, and whether he’s still a member of the SWAT team. Court documents filed in the case show McKissick was still performing SWAT duties as of July 2023.
In a fall 2019 edition of a city of Bellingham newsletter it was stated that McKissick became a neighborhood officer in 2019. He was responsible for 13 neighborhoods north of Whatcom Creek, according to the newsletter.
McKissick also provided a wide variety of safety-related training on various topics, such as de-escalation, active shooter response and workplace and personal safety training. He also did work with the then-mayor’s neighborhood advisory commission, according to the newsletter.
Allegations and response
The woman’s request for a protection order alleged a wide range of concerning behaviors, including concerns with McKissick’s mental health, substance abuse, suicidal ideations and hallucinations, and more.
The woman alleged McKissick subjected her to a “significant amount” of emotional abuse, as well as sexual abuse. She also alleged that McKissick controlled her and her actions, including her finances, The Herald previously reported.
In his 238-page response to the woman’s allegations that he filed with the court, McKissick denied that he ever sexually or physically abused the woman or controlled her. He also denied the remainder of the woman’s accusations.
As part of his response, McKissick included documentation that included his work attendance records showing the times he was away from work, records that show he surrendered a dog the woman claimed he abused and killed in the woods to the Whatcom Humane Society, and numerous character references from family and friends. He also provided text messages and between him and the woman and their attorneys, court documents show.
McKissick’s response alleged that the woman told him in a phone call between the two of them in September that “she was going to ruin” his life. McKissick said the woman told him she would take his children from him, that she would call the police and say he drove drunk with children in the car, that she would damage his reputation and career and she would be his “worst nightmare,” according to court records.
McKissick said he made detailed notes immediately following the phone call with the woman, and that he then reached out to his superiors through his chain of command to notify them of the phone call. McKissick provided a late February 2024 email from a deputy chief with Bellingham police recalling McKissick notifying him of the phone call to the court for review in determining whether to grant the woman’s two-year protection order.
The email stated that while the deputy chief did not recall the exact wording McKissick used to inform him of the phone call with the woman, he did remember that McKissick told him the woman said she would “destroy” McKissick, ruin his reputation and make McKissick pay for everything, The Herald previously reported.
McKissick’s response to the woman’s domestic violence protection order petition also alleged the woman knew that law enforcement policy requires any allegation of domestic violence made against a department employee be investigated, and that the agency would put the accused person on administrative or reassignment leave in accordance with department policy.
“The Petitioner knew that simply an allegation of domestic violence would have a significant impact on my career as a law enforcement officer,” McKissick wrote in his response. “I wanted nothing more than to be free from her and move on with my life,” the court records state.
In his filing, McKissick alleged the domestic violence allegations and petition for protection were filed after separate court proceedings between him and the woman soured. In a March interview with Lynden police, McKissick told a detective he felt “like I’m being legally abused,” according to court records.
Court’s decision
In making her decision to deny the protection order request, Vetter-Hansen, the commissioner, cited roughly 20 reasons why she felt McKissick’s testimony and documentation were more credible.
She said McKissick corroborated a significant amount of his claims, while the woman was unable to do the same for hers. Vetter-Hansen said she understood that that was not always possible in these types of cases, but that it was a factor that she looked at when considering whether to issue a permanent protection order.
Vetter-Hansen said the evidence presented to the court did not match the severity of the allegations made regarding concerns about McKissick’s mental health and substance use. She said while she acknowledges that there are “plenty of people in this world who are high functioning while having serious problems,” she did not have sufficient information to deem those allegations against McKissick credible.
“It doesn’t pass a basic smell test,” Vetter-Hansen said in court Monday.
She said there were also inconsistencies in the testimony and timelines given for certain events, not only provided in court but in some of the law enforcement interviews that were conducted as part of both the criminal and internal affairs investigations into the allegations against McKissick.
Vetter-Hansen said she found no evidence of coercive control or that McKissick controlled the woman’s friend group or finances. She said the domestic and sexual violence claims against McKissick contained “broad stroke allegations” that became more specific over time. Vetter-Hansen said she understood it was difficult for people to discuss such things and that victims are not always forthcoming, in part because they can feel pressured or uncomfortable providing intimate details of their lives while in such a public venue.
She said while she factored that in to her decision, she said she found the broad stroke allegations “not as authentic” as the specific evidence that was presented in the case.
Vetter-Hansen said there were also additional details shared during testimony and documentation from the woman and McKissick that she weighed in making her decision, such as the removal of firearms from McKissick’s home prior to the woman seeking a protection order from the court; and the volume, nature and timeline of the communications between McKissick and the woman.
“Unlikely things happen all the time in these cases. Every unhappy family is unique in their own way. I’m aware of these things, but it’s the cumulative nature,” Vetter-Hansen said, in referring to the communications between McKissick and the woman shared with the court. “I did see that (the woman) was under great stress at the last hearing. I do not doubt that there was some unhappiness between the two of you.”
The commissioner also said she was persuaded that there were threats made by the woman to impact McKissick’s career, his relationship with his children and his reputation. Vetter-Hansen, who has a background in family law, said she was well aware that “people are often not their best selves,” and are human and can say things they don’t mean while under stress in these types of cases.
“But I’m persuaded that that happened, and in the grand scheme of when I’m evaluating credibility, that’s something that I take into account,” Vetter-Hansen said of the alleged threats made by the woman.
The commissioner said it was “telling” that multiple law enforcement agencies and the Whatcom prosecutor’s office were contacted by the woman when she came forward with her allegations.
“Given the prior threats and the severity of the allegations, I wouldn’t be doing my due diligence if I didn’t consider the underlying motive in my analysis,” Vetter-Hansen said to the half-full courtroom Monday.
“I want you to hopefully hear me when I say this is all very abstract and removed from your day to day lives. I understand that despite the big, voluminous evidence, this is just a snapshot in time ... I wasn’t there, and I acknowledge that,” Vetter-Hansen said, addressing both McKissick and the woman. “So as an outsider looking in, that’s my conclusion about this case.”
Resources
▪ Brigid Collins Family Support Center: 360-734-4616, brigidcollins.org
Brigid Collins Family Support Center professionals are on-call between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, to answer questions about children, families, abuse prevention or treatment at (360) 734-4616.
▪ Child Protective Services: Washington state hotline for reporting child abuse and neglect, 866-829-2153.
▪ Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault Services: 24-hour Help Line: 360-715-1563, Email: info@dvsas.org.
▪ Lummi Victims of Crime: 360-312-2015.
▪ Tl’ils Ta’á’altha Victims of Crime: 360-325-3310 or nooksacktribe.org/departments/youth-family-services/tlils-taaaltha-victims-of-crime-program/
▪ Bellingham Police: You can call anonymously at 360-778-8611, or go online at cob.org/tips.
▪ WWU Consultation and Sexual Assault Support Survivor Advocacy Services: 360-650-3700 or wp.wwu.edu/sexualviolence/.
If you or a child is in immediate danger, call 911 and make a report to law enforcement.
To report child abuse or neglect call 1-866-END HARM.
