Appellants tell appeals panel hiring trooper in uniform created state action, should exclude evidence

Nigel Malden, counsel for the appellants identified as the Jaws, opened by posing a constitutional question to the court: ‘‘Can anyone hire a uniformed law enforcement officer with a badge and a gun to act as their private investigator…?’’ He answered the question for his clients: ‘‘Our position is the answer absolutely not,’’ and he argued that allowing such conduct without consequence would permit private parties to evade constitutional limits.

Malden told the panel that the record contains photographs, maps, emails and testimony showing Trooper Ashton was instructed where to go and what to do and that ‘‘he wanted to intimidate.’’ He further argued the parties had less intrusive remedies—CR 34 discovery inspections or a court‑ordered survey under RCW 7.28—rather than bringing in a uniformed officer.