Witness tampering trial begins for Quincy attorney

EPHRATA — The trial started Wednesday for a Quincy attorney charged with witness tampering.

Mark Stansfield, 56, is charged with two counts of tampering with a witness and one count of obstruction of a law enforcement officer in Grant County Superior Court.

The charges stem from a 2006 Grant County District Court case, where the defendant was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, hit and run and negligent driving.

In the 2006 case, police discovered the crash after it occurred and didn’t know who was driving the car, said Washington state Assistant Attorney General John Hillman. When police contacted the alleged passenger in the car, Lona Richards, she informed them Roger Hinshaw was driving the car.

“In December of 2006, that case went to a jury trial, just like this one, in the Grant County Courthouse,” he told the court. “In that case the state was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Mr. Hinshaw, was the driver of the car, and they had a witness in that case named Lona Richards, who they expected to come in and testify that Mr. Hinshaw was the driver.”

Hillman said Stansfield reportedly knew there weren’t any police officers who witnessed the crash, and the prosecution’s case rested on Richards’ testimony.

“That was a problem for the defendant in that case. He chose to take care of it in his own way,” he said.

The way Stansfield allegedly resolved the problem was by calling Richards, a week before the trial started, telling her not to show up for court, Hillman said.

“Now the prosecutor in that case had subpoenaed Lona Richards … which required her to come to court. The trial was set for Dec. 4, 2006, and she knew that. And so she asked the defendant, ‘But I got a subpoena, will I get in trouble?’ The defendant said, ‘Don’t worry about it. Just leave town. Go visit your mom in Seattle for a few days. Don’t worry about it,’” Hillman said in court.

Richards reportedly drove to Seattle the day before the trial started, missing the trial, then drove back to Moses Lake the day after the trial, he said.

Grant County Prosecutor Angus Lee, who was a deputy prosecutor trying the case at the time, asked for a material witness warrant the next day, Hillman said. Lee told the judge and Stansfield about the warrant and how police were going to pick her up.

As soon as Stansfield went into the courtroom, he allegedly asked Hinshaw for Richards’ phone number and called it. When he spoke to Richards he allegedly told her about the warrant and she needed to get out of the house.

Lee and Deputy Prosecutor Teddy Chow allegedly witnessed the phone call, Hillman said.

“The prosecutors were immediately suspicious and they started to follow him out of the courtroom,” he said in court.  “During that time, the defendant had a conversation with Lona Richards and told her the police were on their way to serve the warrant, and police officers went out to her home and she didn’t come to the door and they were not able to arrest her and they were not able to bring her to court.”

A year later, Lee saw Richards during an unrelated matter. When he asked her about why she hadn’t shown up, she reportedly told him about what Stansfield said, Hillman told the court.

John Henry Browne, Stansfield’s attorney, said the first time she learned about the warrant wasn’t from Stansfield, but from Lee.

Browne accused Richards of giving conflicting information to the police and the prosecutors in the case, to the point where she was discounted as a witness by both sides.

“She told one officer that she didn’t know who was driving. She told one officer she wasn’t driving. She told another officer that Roger Hinshaw was not driving. She later told officers … Roger was driving,” Browne said in court. “As a matter of fact, Mr. Lee told the court and told Mr. Stansfield that he, Mr. Lee, representing the state, was not going to call Lona Richards as a witness.”

While Stansfield’s phone records show phone calls from Stansfield to Richards’ house, Browne said it was the same house Hinshaw lived in as well.

Browne said the trial led to hard feelings between the two.

“On Dec. 1, Lona Richards tells Angus Lee, the prosecuting attorney, that she wasn’t properly served, she wasn’t served personally, there was just something in the mail and that she was not going to testify,” Browne said in court.

On Dec. 4, Lee called Richards and she told him, “no,” again, and how she needed to go to Seattle for a medical appointment for her son, Browne said. The call was over heard by two police officers.

Once the material witness warrant was issued, Browne said Stansfield called Richards to find out what she was going to say.

“He also called Lona and asked her if she was going to come to court. She told people she wasn’t,” he said.

Browne told the court he plans on having an legal ethics professor testify about how Stansfield was ethically obligated to call Richards to find out what she was going to say.

“The defense lawyer has an ethical obligation to find out one — whether the witness is going to come to trial and next, two — what that witness is going to say,” he said. “Up until he heard there was a material witness warrant issued he was told by everybody including Mr. Lee that Lona Richards was not going to testify.”

Browne also pointed out none of the witnesses will actually say they heard Stansfield tell Richards to not come to the courthouse.

Stansfield’s attorney noted the people following the defendant were trying to listen to what the attorney was saying and invading his privacy.

“Mr. Lee never heard Mr. Stansfield say, ‘Don’t come to court,’” Browne said. “Mr. Chow is also following Mr. Stansfield, in this very courthouse, when Mr. Stansfield is trying to have a private conversation … Mr. Chow never heard Mr. Stansfield say, ‘Don’t come to court.’”

The trial is scheduled for two days.