Seattle officer says in lawsuit he was persecuted for attending Jan. 6 rally at US Capitol

Mike Carter, The Seattle Times on Jun 24, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

SEATTLE — One of six Seattle police officers who attended the Jan. 6, 2021, “Stop the Steal” rally at the U.S. Capitol has sued the city, alleging officials targeted him with an internal investigation over a minor traffic collision due to his participation in the pro-Donald Trump event.

The lawsuit alleges the office of police accountability went to extraordinary lengths to conclude that Officer Jason Marchione was dishonest to Bellevue police following the fender bender, which was reported to OPA by an anonymous complainant on Feb. 9, 2022, six months after the crash occurred.

Marchione admitted fault, explaining he was distracted when he hit another car, and paid a $190 fine. Based on the anonymous call, OPA opened an investigation into discrepancies between Marchione’s version of events, video from a nearby surveillance camera and the investigating officer’s report, as well as suggestions that Marchione lied about being on his cellphone when the crash occurred.

The anonymous caller also suggested that Marchione showed his badge to the investigating Bellevue officer — something that officer denied. He said Marchione mentioned he was an officer “out of a place of embarrassment” and to alert him there may be a weapon in the vehicle.

In the end, after a monthslong investigation, Marchione was found to be unprofessional and given a 30-day suspension, the most severe discipline short of termination.

Marchione, in his lawsuit, alleges that determination resulted from persecution by OPA, and from an administration anxious to punish an officer involved in the Jan. 6 uprising, which gave the department a public black eye. The Seattle Police Department had more officers identified as attending the Jan. 6 protest than any other department in the nation.

The lawsuit claims the investigation was pretextual, “based on Marchione’s political beliefs.”

Marchione was one of six Seattle police officers to attend the rally and march outside the U.S. Capitol following the election of Joe Biden as president and Trump’s unsubstantiated claims that the election was stolen. The march resulted in an assault by thousands on the U.S. Capitol.

Two of the Seattle officers were fired. All six unsuccessfully fought in the courts for years to keep their identities secret.

An investigation showed Marchione was nowhere near the violence on Jan. 6, but in a hotel room miles away and that he had voluntarily disclosed his presence in Washington, D.C., to the department.

Marchione alleges in the lawsuit that OPA persecuted him and violated its own procedures. Indeed, at least one member of his command staff called the finding “preposterous” and then-Chief Adrian Diaz raised concerns that OPA had concluded his dishonesty was intentional while the facts indicated it was the result of a poor recollection.

Marchione alleges the department’s administration victimized him as well. After a Loudermill hearing — when an officer gets to plead his disciplinary case before the chief and his command staff — on the dishonesty finding, the department was supposed to issue its findings within 10 days. It never did.

Instead, the OPA went back to its investigation and hired an outside expert to “offer an opinion on imperfect recollection and dishonesty.”

“It is not a standard practice of OPA to retain experts to opine in disciplinary matters,” according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges the OPA director at the time, Gino Betts, then misrepresented the expert’s findings and concluded that Marchione was intentionally dishonest.

Betts then resubmitted the allegations for reconsideration, resulting in Marchione filing a grievance, and a second Loudermill hearing. Again, the department failed to issue its findings before the 10-day deadline, according to the lawsuit. Betts again resubmitted OPA’s findings, containing no new evidence, but this time concluding that the office could not sustain a dishonesty finding.

In the meantime, Marchione had spent nearly 18 months on paid administrative leave, according to the lawsuit.

“In reaching that conclusion, and because the third certification memo considers no new evidence, OPA Director Betts implicitly concedes that OPA never had sufficient evidence to support a dishonesty finding” — the focus of months of investigation, the lawsuit alleges.