Whatcom public defender’s office removed from representing Bass over conduct concerns
READ MORE
Bass on trial for Stavik’s death
Timothy Bass was convicted in Whatcom County Superior Court for the 1989 murder of Amanda Stavik.
Expand All
The Whatcom County Public Defender’s office’s request to be removed from representing Timothy Forrest Bass, the Everson man convicted last summer of abducting, raping and murdering Amanda “Mandy” Stavik in 1989, was accepted over concerns that continued involvement in the case would violate the rules of professional conduct or another law.
At a Whatcom County Superior Court hearing Wednesday, Sept. 23, Judge Rob Olson ruled that Bass’ lead defense attorney, Starck Follis, as well as the rest of the public defender’s office, should and could withdraw from representing Bass.
Olson also ruled that a conflict attorney would be appointed for Bass to advise him of his next steps and to represent him in future proceedings.
Stavik disappeared Nov. 24, 1989, while jogging near her home on Strand Road in Clipper, near Acme in Whatcom County. Three days later, the 18-year-old’s nude body was found in the south fork of the Nooksack River. She had been abducted, raped and murdered.
On July 2, 2019, Bass was sentenced to nearly 27 years in prison — almost as much time as he was free — for killing Stavik. A jury found Bass guilty of first-degree murder May 24 after a three-week trial in Superior Court. Bass maintains his innocence and filed an appeal immediately following his conviction.
Pre-trial conversation
On Sept. 8, the court granted a hearing to hear new evidence that Follis, who is also the director of the public defender’s office, said cast doubt on Bass’ conviction. Follis had argued that former Whatcom County Sheriff’s deputy Paul Murphy and a woman both had knowledge of a potential suspect in Stavik’s murder who was never investigated. Follis argued that he was unaware of this information until Bass’ mother, Sandra, brought it to him in early 2020, according to court records.
Murphy was fired from his position with the sheriff’s office in 2012 after he allegedly tampered with his work computer and maintained private files on citizens, according to previous Bellingham Herald stories. Murphy sued for wrongful termination the following year. His lawsuit was settled for $300,000 in 2014 and Murphy agreed to resign from the sheriff’s office, Herald archives show.
On Sept. 15, Murphy reached out to Follis and to a sheriff’s detective, informing them that he had in fact had a conversation with one of Bass’ defense attorneys in 2018, according to court records. At the time and during trial, Bass was represented by Follis, senior deputy public defender Shoshana Paige and deputy public defender Stephen Jackson. Jackson left the public defender’s office after Bass’ trial and now works as a private criminal defense attorney.
Murphy runs a public Facebook page in which he posted statements in 2015 regarding the Stavik case and about a possible tip that was never followed up on. In December 2018, Jackson reached out to Murphy through Facebook messenger about the potential evidence Murphy said he had, court records show. Murphy later informed Jackson about a potential suspect, who was brought up during Murphy’s wrongful termination lawsuit, and about an argument a woman said she saw between Stavik and an older man.
Motion to reconsider
On Sept. 16, the Whatcom County Prosecutor’s Office filed a motion arguing the court should reconsider its decision to hold a hearing presenting the defense’s evidence. The court records state that Bass’ defense team knew about Murphy’s information and had held a conversation with him about the potential evidence at least five months prior to Bass’ 2019 trial, according to court records.
The prosecutor’s office argued that Murphy had disclosed this information and the evidence was known to the defense five months prior to trial, according to court records.
“Bass’ counsel further misrepresented critical facts when this Court inquired, and (Follis) stated repeatedly that he did not have any of this information until January 2020. This left the Court and the public with a false impression that Bass was in the dark about this alleged impeachment information. Nothing could be further from the truth,” the prosecution’s motion states.
The prosecutor’s office asked the court to reconsider its decision to hold an evidentiary hearing and to deny Bass’ motion for relief from judgment, meaning a dismissal or new trial in the case.
Follis asks to withdraw
On Monday, Sept. 21, Follis filed a motion asking to withdraw as Bass’ attorney. Follis stated that continuing to represent Bass in his post-conviction proceedings is prohibited and continued representation would violate the rules of professional conduct or another law, according to court records.
In his motion, Follis argued that he was unaware that Jackson had spoken with Murphy or had knowledge of the potential evidence. Follis said he didn’t learn about the conversation until Murphy reached out to the defense on Sept. 15, court records state.
Follis said he’s consulted with people versed in legal ethics, including a professor of law in Seattle, and was advised to ask permission to withdraw as Bass’ attorney.
Wednesday hearing
At Wednesday’s hearing, David McEachran, former longtime Whatcom County prosecuting attorney and who was hired as a special prosecutor for Bass’ case, said the record needed to be corrected for the public and for Bass’ appeals case. If it wasn’t, it could further perpetuate fraud, McEachran argued.
McEachran called the defense’s behavior “reprehensible” and said that it was deceitful and done with fraud. He also argued that it was a strategic move by the defense team.
Paige, with the public defender’s office, appeared for Follis and said the attack on his credibility was “out of bounds”. Paige said Follis has been an exemplary defense attorney for decades, submitted motions to the court and made statements under penalty of perjury, and that he brought his motion to withdraw as Bass’ attorney as soon as he had information showing Murphy had communicated with a member of the defense team.
Paige said there was no intentional deceit involved.
Before allowing Follis to withdraw as Bass’ attorney and appointing a conflict attorney, Olson said he was inclined to believe that Jackson had contact with Murphy about the potential evidence prior to trial. Olson said he didn’t believe Follis’ actions were intentionally deceitful.
“There wasn’t something done here that was nefarious. I’m not inclined to believe that, not without more information,” Olson said.
Olson reserved judgment on the prosecution’s motion for reconsidering holding an evidentiary hearing until Bass has had time to speak with his conflict attorney about next steps.
Jackson declined to comment for this story.
This story was originally published September 24, 2020 at 5:00 AM.
