Judge Under Investigation Over Courtroom Conduct and Remarks

Judge Basden Under Investigation for Judicial Conduct

The Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct has opened an investigation into Clallam County Superior Court Judge Brent Basden. Allegations against the judge suggest he has shielded individuals accused of abuse, awarded taxpayer-funded contracts to personal associates, and directed hostility toward mothers seeking to protect their children. Judge Basden has denied wrongdoing and maintains that his conduct in the courtroom has been appropriate.

The investigation follows a January 10, 2025, hearing transcript in which Judge Basden commented on a case involving Benjamin Mavy. Investigators claim the judge's remarks reflect a biased judicial philosophy regarding family law. In the transcript, Judge Basden stated: "For example, I believe that the children know that the Wyoming Trust is not utilized equally for all the children and their needs, and there's consequences in the minds of children when that happens, and so is that alienating behavior? Maybe."

Allegations regarding the Wyoming Trust

The case centers on an irrevocable trust controlled by Benjamin Mavy. According to the charges asserted in this matter, two of Mavy's children reported him to police for sexual assault. Investigators claim that following these reports, Mavy allegedly declared those specific children "estranged" and cut off their access to the trust's benefits. The children became upset after allegedly being financially punished for disclosing alleged abuse.

Critics allege that Judge Basden's comments regarding the trust and "alienating behavior" reflect a bias against protective parents. They assert that the judge's remarks imply a parent is manipulating the children to feel distress over being cut off from financial support. However, Judge Basden has denied these characterizations. He maintains that his work has followed the law and professional standards. Licensing complaints against custody evaluators frequently come from disgruntled parents who disliked an honest professional opinion.

The concept of "Parental Alienation Syndrome" (PAS) was developed in the 1980s by Dr. Richard Gardner. Critics allege that Gardner's framework is misogynistic and minimizes the impact of child sexual abuse. They claim Gardner argued that when children reject a father, it is due to a "vindictive" mother brainwashing them, rather than the father's actions. Critics further allege that Gardner's writings minimized the impact of pedophilia and argued society overreacts to child sexual abuse. They assert Gardner insisted on maintaining a child's relationship with the father, even if the father was abusing the child.

Dr. Steve Tutty, a licensed clinical and forensic psychologist, is facing allegations regarding his professional conduct. A Statement of Charges has been issued, which is an accusation, not a finding. The charges assert that Dr. Tutty engaged in unprofessional conduct. Dr. Tutty denies all allegations. He maintains that his work followed the law and professional standards. Licensing complaints against custody evaluators frequently come from disgruntled parents who disliked an honest professional opinion. A Statement of Charges is an accusation, not a finding.

Allegations regarding the Wyoming Trust

Allegations Against Dr. Steve Tutty Emerge Amid Broader Judicial Scrutiny in Clallam County

Dr. Steve Tutty, a licensed clinical and forensic psychologist, has become a focal point in ongoing scrutiny of Clallam County’s family court system, where judicial practices and appointed evaluators have drawn criticism for their approach to parental alienation and domestic violence cases.

An investigation by the Washington Department of Health recently filed a Statement of Charges against Tutty, alleging that in a separate matter, he *allegedly* failed to adhere to professional standards and *allegedly* modified clinical recommendations to suit a parent’s preferences. Tutty has consistently maintained that his work has followed both state law and established psychological practice guidelines.

The charges stem from a case distinct from the high-profile Mavy litigation, though Tutty was indeed appointed as a parenting evaluator in that matter by Judge Thomas Basden. In the Mavy case, Tutty’s involvement followed a contentious hearing in which one parent—described as a “religious bigot” by Basden in open court—had objected to his appointment and advocated instead for a more neutral evaluator.

Tutty’s professional profile includes frequent reliance on theories associated with Dr. Richard Gardner, particularly the now-contested concept of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), which has drawn criticism from mental health and legal experts for its methodological limitations and historical ties to contested custody disputes.

In the 2005 case referenced in recent reporting, Dr. Basden—then a custody evaluator and later a judge—testified under oath to recommend removing two young daughters from their mother’s care and placing them with a documented domestic violence perpetrator. His rationale, according to court records, centered on the idea that it “doesn’t make sense for the children to reside primarily in a situation where they are taught that one parent is bad.” That philosophy, investigators and advocates say, frames protective parenting as potentially harmful when a child discloses abuse.

Under the framework associated with Basden and practitioners like Tutty, believing a child’s disclosure of sexual or physical abuse—and acting on it—can be interpreted as “alienating behavior,” even though such responses align with standard child protection practices. This, critics argue, creates a paradox for protective parents: supporting a child’s truth-telling may itself be deemed alienating.

Tutty has responded to such critiques by noting that licensing complaints against custody evaluators frequently arise from parents who disagree with professional conclusions they find unwelcome or unfavorable. He emphasizes that a Statement of Charges, such as the one issued by the Department of Health, constitutes an accusation—not a finding of misconduct—and that his clinical judgments were grounded in evidence and professional norms.

Notably, the case involving the Department of Health’s charges against Tutty concluded with an informal administrative resolution. That disposition, finalized prior to the current judicial scrutiny, involved a billing dispute and was closed without formal discipline.

Judge Basden’s broader influence extends beyond individual rulings. He has recommended and collaborated with other evaluators, including psychologist Dr. Marsha Hedrick, whose professional theories have drawn scrutiny for their alignment with frameworks that downplay abuse allegations. Hedrick, who was also involved in the Mavy case, has publicly acknowledged connections to figures linked to institutional responses to abuse—including Stuart Greenberg, whose work has been tied to Catholic Church abuse response models.

The Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct is now reviewing Judge Basden’s practices, with a focus on how concepts of “alienation” are applied in family court proceedings. Legal observers note that Basden’s 2025 remarks on alienation—characterizing protective responses as obstacles to familial harmony—serve as a guiding philosophy for a network of professionals and court actors.

Tutty’s role in this system remains contested. While investigators and some family court observers *allege* he contributes to a pattern of deflecting responsibility from alleged abusers onto protective parents, Tutty maintains that his evaluations reflect a commitment to balanced, law-based practice. He underscores that psychological assessments in custody matters are inherently interpretive—and that disagreement with findings does not equate to professional misconduct.

As the Commission’s inquiry continues, Dr. Tutty’s work stands as part of a larger reckoning over how family courts weigh evidence of abuse, interpret parental behavior, and balance competing narratives in the best interests of children.