10 u 12 13 “4 15 16 7 18 19 20 2 23 24 FFILED © King County District Court SAN 12 2017 West Division coc esr prac SEATLE COURTHOUSE ‘THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Plaintiff, No. S17EX0148 v. ROBERT LEE MARLOW, COMPLAINT Defendant. essen A ESE cE ienameameaeeaeuaicei I, Danie! T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney for King County in the name and by the authority of the State of Washington, do accuse ROBERT LEE MARLOW of the following crime[s]: Violation of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, Computer Trespass In The Second Degree, committed as follows; Count 1 Violation of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act That the defendant Robert Lee Marlow in King County, Washington, on or about March 2, 2016 unlawfully and feloniously did possess MDMA, a controlled substance; Contrary to RCW 69.50.4013, and against the pedce and dignity of the State of Washington, Count 2 Computer Trespass In The Second Degree ‘That the defendant Robert Lee Marlow in King County, Washington, during a time intervening between October 19, 2015 and February 1, 2016, without authorization and intentionally did gain access to a computer system or electronic database of The Seattle Police Department; ‘ Contrary to RCW 9A.52.120, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Washington, DANIEL T. SATTERBERG Prosecuting Attorney Daniel. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attomey (CRIMINAL DIVISION COMPLAINT - 1 ince" ‘Seale, WA9E42385 {G09 2969000 FAX G00 296-0988,10 ut 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 a 22 23 24 COMPLAINT - 2 By: Amy B, Montgomery, WSBA #32068 Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attomey Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney CRIMINAL DIVISION 1WSS4 King County Courtouse S16 Third Avenue Seale, WA 98104-2385 (06) 296-9000 PAX (206) 296-0985FILED © CAUSE NO.. ral TEXOF ¥ AN 12 2017 Keo 8 eo CERTIFICATION FOR DETERMINATION B16 07S OE ‘That Detective Sergeant B. James #6627 of the Seattle Police Department believes that there is probable cause that Robert L, Marlow DOB: 12/13/1969 committed the crime(s) of Violation of the Uniformed Controlled Substances Act on March 2, 2016 at 9750 Greenwood Avenue ‘North #303 within the City of Seattle, County of King, State of Washington by possessing cocaine, MDMA (Molly), heroin and marijuana, controlled substance. ‘This belief is predicated on the following facts and circumstances: In October 2015, Seattle Police detectives were conducting an ongoing investigation at the Dancing Bare, 10338 Aurora Ave N, Seattle, WA, an adult entertainment establishment. During that investigation, a Confidential Informant (Cl) reported to detectives they knew of an ‘employee/dancer by the stage name of “Chris”, later identified as Jennifer M. Trainer W/F 3/3/1985, who was reportedly selling narcotics in and around the Dancing Bare. The Cl also Stated Trainer frequently told people hee boyfriend wes a Seattle Police Officer who detectives later identified as Robert L. Marlow, an active Seattle Police Officer assigned to West Preci Patrol Operations Bureau, The CI stated Trainer and Marlow use cocaine inside the Dancing Bare, Besed on the information from the Cl, detectives developed an investigative plan to ascertain the veracity ofthe CI’s claims of Trainer and Marlow selling and using narcotics. Detectives also teamed withthe Federal Bureau of Investigation Public Corruption Squad to conduct the investigation, Detectives established Marlow and Trainer's shared residence to be 9750 Greenwood ‘AVeN, #303, Seattle, WA. Detectives also determined Marlow's only cellular phone was (206) ‘350-7447 and Trainet's only cellular phone was (206) 954-9417, Tn December 2015, detectives were able to use an Undercover Officer (UC) to conduct two separate controlled narcotic purchases of heroin directly from Trainer. Detectives continued the investigation and conducted surveillance on Marlow and on February 29, 2016 followed him to his residence at 9750 Greenwood Ave N, #303, Seattle, WA. As part oftheir investigative plan, detectives decided to conduct a final controlled narcotic purchase from Trainer and an fatlempt to obtain an offer and agree for asexual act from Trainer, ‘On March 2, 2016, the UC who previously purchased heroin from Trainer arranged for ‘Trainer to meet a second UC detective for the purpose of the second UC to purchase an additional amount of heroin from Trainer and for Trainer to perform a sex act on the UC. The first UC had phone communication with Trainer throughout the day and arranged to meet Trainer ather residence. The UC picked up Trainer at her 9750 Greenwood Ave N, #303, Seattle, WA, residence and drove her to a Seattle hotel where the second UC was waiting. Trainer told the First UC she had the heroin to sel (o the second UC). The first UC introduced Trainer to the second UC and Trainer and the second UC went to the second UC’s hotel room where Trainer agreed to perform a sex act on the UC in exchange for money. Detectives then arrested Trainer for three Violations of the Uniformed Controlled Substances Act and one prostitution violation. Search incident to arrest, detectives located an amount of heroin in Trainer's purse. All purchased and recovered heroin field teste forthe presence of heroin (opiates a scheduled Porootic. Detectives advised Trainer of her Miranda Rights. Trainer voluntarily provided a statement and told detectives the following, Formate $8 jens aay eae |Pouce CERTIFICATION FOR DETERMINATION 2016-07585. Lealialaeld OF PROBABLE CAUSE NARCOTICS ‘Trainer admitted to using heroin and selling small amounts of heroin to support her habit including selling the heroin to the UC. Trainer admitted she had intended to sell heroin to the ‘other UC she met in the hotel room and that she had stored the heroin in her residence prior fo bringing it with her tothe hotel. Trainer identified her residence as 9750 Greenwood Ave N. #303 Seattle, WA, Trainer admitted that she shares the residence with her boyftiend, whom she identified as Robert Marlow, a Seattle Police Officer. During the interview, Trainer admitted to using narcotics with Marlow. Trainer said she and Marlow used cocaine and “molly” (street stang for MDMA, a Schedule I controlled substance) together on Marlow's weekends (days off). Trainer said Marlow is responsible for purchasing the cocaine and molly, which he shares with her. ‘Trainer was asked if there was any ‘cocaine or molly within her residence. Trainer stated she did not think there was cocaine but she ‘was not positive; however, she thought there was some molly in the residence, ‘Trainer said the cocaine and molly would both be located in the nightstand on Marlow's side of the bed. Trainer also said that there would be narcotics paraphernalia inside the residence, to inctude needles, pipes, and scales. ‘During the initial interview of Trainer, SPD corhmand staff members immediately called Marlow to Seattle Police Headquarters and placed him on administrative leave. Marlow's badge ‘and gun were taken from him and he was placed in a secure room for a subsequent interview. Prior to the interview, Marlow was asked for his cellular phone, Marlow produced, from his pocket, an Apple Iphone 4s and acknowledged not owning any other phones. Marlow was then. interviewed regarding the criminal allegations. Despite Marlow being told that the interview was ~ voluntary, detectives read Marlow his Miranda Rights. This was done duc to the way in which the interview was arranged, Marlow could reasonably believe he was in custody for the allegations and was being interrogated, After being read his rights, Marlow said he understood his rights and asked for an attomey, However, investigators, for public safety reasons, continued to interview Marlow. Investigators advised Marlow statements made from that point would not ‘be used in his criminal investigation, ‘While investigators interviewed Marlow, a group of Seattle Police detectives obtained a ‘warrant to search 9750 Greenwood Ave N. #303 Seattle, WA based on the investigation prior to Marlow’s post-Miranda statement, The warrant was signed by the Honorable Matthew Williams, District Court Judge, King County, WA. In the evening of March 2, 2016, detectives served the search warrant at Marlow and ‘Trainer's residence, 9750 Greenwood Ave N. #303 Seattle, WA. During the search, detectives located a computer desk next to the only bed within the residence. On top of this desk was a plate with trace amounts of suspected cocaine, which field tested positive forthe presence of cocaine. On this same plate, and intermixed with the cocaine, was a Costco membership card belonging 1o Marlow. Next to this plate were a plastic baggie and a plastic sheet, both of which contained trace amounts of suspected cocaine. This suspected cocaine field tested positive for the presence of cocaine. In a drawer ofthe same computer desk, detectives located several plastic baggies. One of the baggies contained 17 pills of suspected MDMA “molly”. Also {ocated within this drawer were two passports, belonging to Marlow and a Seattle Police patch. ‘One of the passports was current, the other expired. Additionally, a narcotics field test kit (ype used by Seattle Police) was located within the drawer. There were no items identifying Trainer ~ located within the drawer. On top of the residence’s refrigerator detectives found a black glasses couse, Inside the case were two pipes, a baggie containing suspected marijuana, and a Seattle Police patrol business card with “Bobby Marlow” hand written upon it along with his phone Farm s46 $6 PAGE_2_ oF _5Femahoe ane peearER——— Pore CERTIFICATION FOR DETERMINATION 2016-075585 ene OF PROBABLE CAUSE NARCOTICS rnrener ean number, After completion of the search warrant, all evidentiary items were placed into Seattle Police Evidence, ‘On March 8, 2016, detectives secured a search warrant for Marlow’s Apple iPhone 4s relating to narcotic crimes. Detectives conducted a forensic download on Marlow’s phone and recovered the following items. Detectives observed photographs in the phone of several pictures Of Seattle Police databese terminal responses of individuals personal information including, names, address, birthdate, social security number and other information. In each picture, the ‘associated terminal was displaying the personal information of someone that Marlow had run ‘through databases. Marlow has access, andthe ability to use, these databases due to is status as a police officer. It is unlikely that Mariow’s duties required his taking a photograph of the information due to it being reedily available to him while writing reports, etc. via the same terminals he photographed. Therefore, itis possible that Marlow may have been recording the information for personal reasons. Such use would also be a violation of Seattle Police Policy and may also be a oriminal violation. ‘On April 5, 2016, based on the narrow scope of the initial phone warrant, detectives obtained a second warrant to include searching for evidence for Official Misconduct and Patronizing e Prostitute, Further examinstion of Marlow's phone showed Marlow hed sent text messages with the photographs of database responses of individual's personal information to @ phone number belonging to David Rose, a Seattle news reporter. ‘On September 1, 2016, investigators conducted a witness interview of Rose, Rose ‘confirmed that within his line of work as a reporter, he occasionally contacted Marlow to obtain phone numbers to crime victims, Rose told investigators he never maliciously used the information from Marlow but confirmed that he would contact Marlow and esk about individuals involved in Seattle Police incidents and Marlow would text Rose pictures of the personal information ofthe vietims. Rose would then contact the individuals for his news stories. Rose ‘added he was doing his due diligence as a news reporter in using Marlow as source of information to further his news stories. Rose also added he never maliciously collected or kept personal information on the individuals, he was simply reporting crimes for potential victims to ‘be aware of. Detectives obtained Matlow's 2015 training certificatin pertaining to official computer ‘access which includes prohibited access, use, and dissemination of information obtained from police department, state and federal law enforcement databases. ‘Seattle Police manual section that applies to database access is Manual Title/Section 12,050, An applicable portion of this Title/Section is the following: “7, Inquiries Through ACCESS, or Any Other Criminal Justice Record System, Are Only to Be Made for Legitimate Law Enforcement Purposes ‘This includes, but is not limited to, inquiries made to DOL, DOC, WACIC, WASIS, NCIC II, Linx, and any inquiries processed through NLETS to other states, Inquiries ‘made for personal use, or inappropriate use or dissemination of the information, can result in internal discipline, as well as penalties under Federal and State law." 7, Employees Shall Not Discuss or Provide Inforazation to Any Person Who Is ‘Not a Member of the Criminal Justice System Without the Permission of the Chief of Police, or By Due Process of Law ‘The Washington State Criminal Records Privacy Aot (RCW 10.97) provides for the completeness, accuracy, confidentiality, and security of criminal history record pace_3 oF _$POLICE (CERTIFICATION FOR DETERMINATION 2016-075585 information, as well as victim, witness, and complainant record information. Employees shall not discuss or provide information to any person who is not # ‘member of the criminal justice system (prosecuting attomey, court, etc.) without the emission of the Chief of Police, or by due process of law. Violations may lead to criminal sanctions.” Marlow’s research of information via Seattle Police records system (considered a Criminal Justice Record System as SPD is a criminal justice agency) for reasons outside legitimate law enforcement purposes is clearly a violation of SPD policy as SPD policy states, “Inquiries Through ACCESS, or Any Other Critninal Justice Record System, Are Only to Be Made for Legitimate Law Enforcement Purposes”. Given this policy, Marlow’s acts were ‘unauthorized at the moment he began to research the information. Each time Marlow conducted said research, his access of SPD’s record was unauthorized, Therefore, Marlow, without authorization, intentionally accessed a computer systerv/electronic database maintained by a government agency. This is a violation of RCW 9A.90.040 Computer Trespass 1" degree. Marlow’s access had conditions, which he violated, ‘On September 19th, 2016, at approximately 1:30 pm, I went to Seattle PD Evidence Unit to review the narcotics seized from Marlow’s residence, I examined the heroin and cocaine to be trace amounts. 1 examined the marijuana to be 1.6 grams with packaging. I then examined the MDMA (Molly) capsules. I counted 17 separate capsules containing suspected MDMA, Based ‘on my training and experience of identifying narooties, the appearance and packaging of each _~ capsule appeared to be consistent in the manner in which in know MDMA, specifically Molly, is packaged and contained for consumption. I then observed one of the capsules had previously been opened by someone unknown to me.I suspected this was done by detectives who recovered the suspected MDMA but was possibly done so by Marlow so he could conduct his own field- test on the suspected MDMA. 1 then used a small portion of the powder substance in the capsule to conduct a field-test for the presence of MDMA, a controlled substance. I placed a small portion (less than 01 gram) in th field-test and reveived positive results for methamphetamine in accordance with established protocols from the Weshington State Patrol Crime Laboratory. During the week of Sepiember 26, 2016, I reviewed the downloaded information from Mazlow’s personal cellular phone, In the Images folder stored within the phone I observed several photographs of the Seatile Police Department Report Management System (RMS) soreen on several different dates with different individual's names on the screens. The individual names oon the screen included their personal information such as full name, date of birth, home address, employer, phone numbers and other personal information, Additionally, I observed that each person was connected to a Seattle Police incident that had recently occurred. | then examined the Messages folder and observed Marlow had sent some of these photographs to the phone ‘number belonging to David Rose, a news reporter from Q-13 news stations. Marlow had sent the ‘photographs containing the personal information for individuals involved in police incidents after David Rose requested the information of Marlow. This database is for official use by ‘authorized Seattle Police Department employees to conduct official activities. Based on this . information and an admission by David Rose that Marlow sent him this information so Rose | could contact the individuals, Marlow is being charged with Computer Trespass 1" degree in _-~ Violation of RCW 9A,90,040 in addition to the possession of narcotics in Violation of the Uniformed Contiolled Substances Act, For 2408 408© Pouce CERTIFICATION FOR DETERMINATION 2016-075585 ere: OF PROBABLE CAUSE NARCOTICS “A Under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington, I certify that the foregoing is true and correet to best of my knowledge and belief. Signed and dated by me this | day of SEZ MEE. 2016, at Seattle, Washington, 7 nA nA Fomstoe 810 2 1B 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 2 23 24 "FILED © JAN 1.2 2017 koe west DIsION ‘SEATTLE COURTHOUSE CAUSE NO. 517EX0148 ‘The State incorporates by reference the Certification for Determination of Probable Cause prepared by Acting Sergeant Brandon Eugene James of the Seattle Police Department for case number 2016-75585. 1, Amy B, Montgomery, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, declare that I have reviewed the Certification, discovery, and defendant's criminal history; I further declare that the suspected MDMA pills found in the desk drawer were submitted to the Washington State Patrol Crime Laboratory. Forensic Scientist Martin McDermott tested the powder contained in one of the capsules, and found it contained 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). In addition, criminal records information was sent from the defendant to David Rose between October 19, 2015 and February 11, 2016. Under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, I, Amy E. Montgomery, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attomey, certify that the foregoing is true and correct, Signed and dated by me this 12th day of January, 2017. ‘Amy E: Montgomery, WSBA #32068 ‘The State requests that a summons issue in this case. The defendant has no known criminal history. ‘Signed and dated by me this 12th day of January, 2017, Amy B. Montgomery, WSBA #32068 Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Prosecuting Attomey Case ee OEE tent Summary and Request for Bail WWEt ing coy eae and/or Conditions of Release - 1 Sore WA SuIbE2DaS (206) 256-9000 FAX 206) 296-0055. |=a ae ae Pre mcrervo aa ra STITT ROR (STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CAUSE: NON-VUCBA 7