At the end of last year, Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell fired former Seattle Police Department (SPD) Chief Adrian Diaz, who had been placed on administrative leave the previous fall. Harrell wrote that one of the chief reasons behind his decision was the results of an independent investigation overseen by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) that found that Diaz had engaged in a romantic affair with his SPD Chief of Staff, Jamie Tompkins.
Diaz and Tompkins have consistently denied there was any affair.
Now, new information involving the case has come to light amidst a $10 million tort claim Diaz has filed against the city, Harrell, and Deputy Mayor Tim Burgess and a demand letter from Tompkins alleging that SPD subjected her to a sexually hostile workplace. Tompkins is asking for a $3 million settlement.
The independent investigation
In a report documenting her independent investigation into Diaz, Shayda Z. Le, a partner at Barran Liepman LLP, wrote that based on a preponderance of evidence, she found that Diaz and Tompkins had engaged in an intimate or romantic relationship.
“The primary evidence which weighed in favor of this finding consisted of the handwritten card, the subsequent handwriting analysis, and the direct statements relayed by the security detail,” Le wrote in her report.
Most of the evidence presented in the report is circumstantial and based on the unsupported testimony of several SPD employees, including Diaz’s security detail. The main piece of physical evidence is a handwritten birthday card with a fuzzy Ewok on the front. A member of Diaz’s security detail says he found the card while cleaning out his own assigned car on May 27, 2023. The officer allegedly held onto the card for over a year before revealing it was in his possession.
Diaz’s birthday is July 21, almost two months after the card was allegedly found. May 26, 2023 was Tompkins’s first day of work at SPD.
According to the report, the card said the following:
“Adrian, When I think about you, I think of the first time I saw you smile. You were so shy, but sweet. And I loved the way you chose your words so carefully. I wondered what you were filtering out. What made you tick? What made you laugh? Why would a person want to take on such a challenging role? Now that I know you, I know the answers to those questions. What I did not expect was how knowing you would bring me closer to me. More in line with who I am. How I feel. What I want. Where I want to go. Before I knew you, I didn’t really know me. You woke me up. Like a prince in one of your Disney movies. I hope I always know your kiss. I hope I always feel your influence. I hope to always know you and me. I love you, Me.”
A handwriting analysis was conducted by expert Robin D. Williams as part of the report. Williams found that it was “highly probable” that the handwriting in the greeting card belonged to Tompkins. She also said she found evidence of disguise in some of Tompkins’s writing samples.
However, Diaz’s legal team initiated their own handwriting analysis of the card from expert Hannah McFarland, who found the card was “probably not written by Jamie Tompkins.” McFarland did note she would have preferred to analyze the original card instead of the copy she was provided.
Forensic handwriting analysis is subjective by nature, which calls its reliability into question, as is illustrated by these two differing expert opinions. A paper about handwriting analysis published in 2019 in The Journal of Forensic Science and Medicine said, “Although this form of evidence has been used in courts for a long time, its standing as evidence is relatively weak. Although it is based on expert opinion in practice, it is less reliable than other forms of evidence based on scientific knowledge.”
Other information provided in the investigatory report involves SPD employees sharing conversations they’d had with Diaz, which would not always be evidence that is admissible in court. The report also brought up an irregularity in Diaz’s handling of Tompkins’s background check.
The report discussed confusion about what Tompkins’s role was supposed to be as Chief of Staff, given Tompkins’s experience as an anchor and journalist, most recently at FOX 13. Chief of Staff at SPD has often been a role filled by a sworn officer instead of a civilian. However, Le reported that Diaz had told her he had first been considering hiring an anchor at KIRO to be his chief of staff.
The Urbanist obtained a copy of an email, dated November 11, 2024, sent by Tompkins to Le and OIG Inspector General Lisa Judge in which Tompkins said she wanted to share some new information pertinent to the investigation. She said she spoke with former Deputy Mayor Monisha Harrell, who told her Deputy Mayor Tim Burgess personally shared the rumor of Tompkins and Diaz’s affair with her and was, according to the email, “behind the fabrication and media frenzy of this rumor.”
“Monisha says she is willing to testify on the record for any attorney or investigator. She said the goal was to “get rid of Diaz” and I was quote, “just in the way”,” Jamie wrote.
The Urbanist contacted Monisha Harrell, who said nobody ever reached out to her regarding the investigation.
Diaz provided Le with a draft of his remarks at a Command Staff meeting a week before Tompkins began at SPD. In the draft, he denied any romantic relationship with Tompkins and said he was aware of allegations that West Precinct officers had been surveilling Tompkins to confirm the rumors. He also stated that he had reached out to federal authorities to discuss these surveillance allegations.
Undisputed is the fact that Diaz went to Tompkins’s apartment on many occasions, he says to help her with various chores. The report details Diaz’s concerns about whether he was being followed or tracked in his car.
The greeting card was the linchpin of the investigation’s findings. With authorship of the card called into question, it’s unclear if the investigation is adequate to make a confident finding on the question of the nature of the relationship between Diaz and Tompkins.
With the providence of the greeting card in doubt, there is also the question of whether the card could have been forged, which would be a criminal offense.
The Urbanist has learned that Diaz’s legal team has requested a criminal investigation by an outside agency, but such an investigation does not appear to have been initiated at this time.
Tompkins’s demand letter
The Urbanist obtained a copy of Tompkins’s demand letter to the City, which was signed by attorney Michael C. Subit. The letter states, “Before Tompkins began work, and continuing throughout the entirety of her employment, SPD subjected her to a sexually hostile work environment. On a regular basis, SPD officers and employees taunted and insulted Tompkins by repeating the false charge that she was in a sexual relationship with former SPD Chief Adrian Diaz.”
The demand letter alleges that rumors about a relationship between Tompkins and Diaz began before she’d even begun working at SPD. The letter states that a reporter let Tompkins know before she began work that SPD officers were surveilling her. The letter goes on to say that once Tompkins began the job, she frequently heard comments “about her alleged affair with Diaz and/or her physical appearance.”
The letter continues by listing a number of incidences and examples of the sexual harassment Tompkins says she experienced during her year and a half at SPD. She resigned on November 6, 2024.
The letter concludes, “Words cannot describe the anguish and humiliation Tompkins experienced as a result of the continual sexual harassment she experienced.”
The letter expresses a desire to begin settlement negotiations, suggesting the figure of $3 million.
“The City takes allegations of this nature seriously, and we are committed to creating a Police Department that reflects our Seattle community and where women have the opportunity to succeed in leadership and in the department,” said Jamie Housen, a spokesperson for the Mayor’s Office.
After conducting an investigation, the Washington State Employment Security Department approved Tompkins’s unemployment benefits after she resigned from SPD. They found Tompkins had “a good reason for quitting her job.”
Tompkin’s allegations of sexual harassment land on an already troubled department. SPD commissioned a study done in August of 2023 as part of its 30×30 initiative, which seeks to hire more women officers.
During the study, researcher Dr. Lois James documented many stories of women officers at SPD experiencing sexual harassment while on the job. Women officers also complained of discrimination against getting promoted, a problem that appeared to worsen the higher up the ranks an officer climbed.
The report reads, “Most of the participants would not encourage other women in their lives to join the department.”
Several lawsuits have been filed against SPD alleging sexual harassment and discrimination in the last two and half years.
In addition, SPD doesn’t seem to be making much progress in its 30×30 goals. At a press conference on Monday, SPD’s new Chief Shon Barnes said, “Last year we hired 10 females. This year we’ve hired five, so we still have some work to do on that.”
At the press conference, Harrell announced SPD had hired 60 officers so far this year, meaning the percentage of new women officers is 8.33%. And PubliCola reported that 5 of the 24 departures from SPD this year–or 20%–have been women, meaning SPD has achieved a net gain of zero women officers this year.
Combined with the 30×30 report, Tompkins’s claims of sexual harassment offer one possible explanation as to why SPD has so many female officers leaving the department.
Harrell responds
At Monday’s press conference, Jonathan Choe, a reporter at Turning Points USA, a far-right youth group founded by Charlie Kirk, asked Harrell about Tompkins’s demand letter and her allegations of SPD being a sexually hostile working environment.
“I can’t comment on either litigation or threatened litigation,” Harrell said. “I’ll have to defer to the City Attorney’s office.”
FOX 13 reporter Hana Kim then pressed Harrell further, saying that he was specifically named in the demand letter and could be assumed to have known about it.
“So you should not make assumptions,” Harrell said. “I have both a City Attorney’s office to handle all litigation–threatened, pending, and actual litigation. I have a General Counsel that handles all litigation–threatened, pending or actual litigation. And we are running a city and moving forward today. So it’s very […] it’s a poor assumption [to assume] I know every complaint made by every employee. It’s just not a good assumption. So again, on this date, we’re moving forward.”
Harrell then turned back towards the lineup of SPD recruits present for the conference and said, “You guys with me, right?”
Barnes, standing next to him, said, “Absolutely.”
With allegations flying on both sides and so much of the evidence being circumstantial, it is hard to guess what actually happened in the lead-up to Tompkins’s resignation and Diaz’s firing late last year. Harrell might not want to be proactive about what’s proving to be a messy debacle for the City, especially given that it’s an election year. But due to the seriousness of some of the claims being made, Harrell might feel forced to give Diaz the independent criminal investigation he’s been requesting.
In the meantime, the public is left considering two competing narratives: that Diaz created a position for and hired a woman with whom he was having an affair while privately bragging about it, or that Diaz, having recently realized he was gay, received moral support from a former theater kid and decided to hire her when his top choice for the job fell through.
Amy Sundberg is the publisher of Notes from the Emerald City, a weekly newsletter on Seattle politics and policy with a particular focus on public safety, police accountability, and the criminal legal system. She also writes science fiction, fantasy, and horror novels. She is particularly fond of Seattle’s parks, where she can often be found walking her little dog.
