In the past few months, conservatives have been outraged that federal courts have acted improperly to thwart President Trump’s agenda; yet, many Alaskans have shown little interest when judicial impropriety occurs here in our own state court system.

Critics say the Alaska judicial system has been engaged in the cover-up of crimes committed by one of its members over 20 years ago. This issue again came to the public’s attention in 2023 when a Grand Jury indicted retired state judge Margaret Murphy for perjury, a Class C felony.

The Murphy case raised questions about the integrity of Alaska’s judiciary, including whether crimes were initially committed, why Judge Murphy allegedly perjured herself about them, and why the courts have tried to conceal what has transpired. It appears that the Alaska judiciary is attempting to hide something, and both Attorney General Treg Taylor and Governor Mike Dunleavy, who have an obligation to act on the public’s behalf, have shown a curious lack of interest in these alleged crimes.

For individuals unfamiliar with this issue, this article attempts to explain what Murphy’s indictment means and the backstory that led to it, using available public records. It involves a lengthy series of legal battles that spanned over two decades, but it all started with the controversial issue of predator control in Alaska.

In 2003, Frank Murkowski, then-Governor of Alaska, signed legislation permitting predator control for wolves in an area of western Alaska designated as GMU-19D. The legislation allowed the shooting of wolves from small aircraft to reduce their numbers and protect the moose population. This practice was popular among residents in rural Alaska, but was highly controversial, and tourism groups from outside the state threatened to boycott Alaska businesses.

There was undoubtedly pressure put on the governor to reverse course, both from legislators in Juneau and from our congressional delegation in Washington, D.C. It was a public relations nightmare.

This is where David Haeg enters the picture. In 2004, the state asked Haeg to help with the predator control operation. When he did so, he was then charged with guiding violations for conducting operations outside the area where he was told to hunt. A trial was held in McGrath before Judge Margaret Murphy. Haeg was found guilty and was penalized with the loss of his aircraft and his guiding license for the following five years. In a typical case involving guide laws that would have been the end of the matter, and everyone would have moved on, except Mr. Haeg alleges that his trial was conducted illegally, possibly due to the influence of someone outside the courtroom.

It is possible someone may have contacted Judge Murphy, thinking they were working on behalf of the governor, and urged a conviction in this case. Haeg’s attorneys were recorded stating that Governor Murkowski likely called Judge Murphy to urge that Mr. Haeg be convicted. The trial contributed to the controversy surrounding wolf population control and generated unfavorable publicity in the liberal media. Perhaps someone thought a conviction in this case would have helped alleviate the governor’s public relations problems.

The only problem is that if such communication had occurred, it would have given Mr. Haeg grounds for an appeal of his conviction.

Some of the facts in Mr. Haeg’s trial seem to support the interference theory. Mr. Haeg alleges that during his trial, there was improper contact between Judge Murphy and the state’s chief witness in the case – State Trooper Brett Gibbens. Backing up Mr. Haeg, numerous witnesses reported observing the judge and trooper having private conversations outside the courtroom and taking trips together in a vehicle. According to the Alaska Court System guidelines, this type of communication would have been prohibited. Having these conversations would suggest that they were collaborating against Mr. Haeg, which could be used to appeal a conviction.

Many individuals who have had the chance to hear Mr. Haeg tell his side of the story have become convinced that there is more to this case than a simple hunting violation.

Mr. Haeg also claims that exculpatory evidence demonstrating his innocence (indicating that he conducted wolf control exactly where State officials told him to do so) was submitted to Murphy’s court and later found to have mysteriously disappeared from the evidence locker before his jury could examine it. This allegation is proven by the evidence’s cover letter, which remained in the record. When Mr. Haeg filed a complaint about the missing evidence, the state’s attorneys did not dispute that Haeg had submitted this evidence or that the evidence disappeared before Mr. Haeg’s jury could examine it.

Given both allegations, Haeg appealed his conviction, but Alaska courts ruled he could not use this issue, or the evidence proving it, to protest his conviction.

There is not enough room in this short post to describe all the legal efforts Mr. Haeg has undertaken over the intervening years to clear his name. You can read one summary here from noted Alaskan author Craig Medred.

The bottom line is that, over the past 20 years, Haeg has been unsuccessful in every court case he has brought. However, many individuals who have had the chance to hear Mr. Haeg tell his side of the story have become convinced that there is more to this case than a simple hunting violation. Critics suspect that the original sin of Judge Margaret Murphy, dating back to 2004, is a cover-up of inappropriate behavior by more powerful individuals in Juneau.

Decades of efforts seemed to bear fruit in 2022, when Representative Ben Carpenter (District 8) convinced Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor to convene a Grand Jury for the expressed purpose of investigating the alleged claims of judicial impropriety of Judge Margaret Murphy. Undoubtedly, the AG thought the result of the Grand Jury would have been to uphold the findings made against Mr. Haeg in previous court cases.

Either Mr. Haeg was guilty of game violations and has been on a quixotic quest to clear his name for the last 21 years, or Judge Murphy acted improperly in her McGrath court, and the court system has attempted to cover it up ever since.

Mr. Haeg’s supporters welcomed the AG’s decision to appoint a Grand Jury, but in hindsight, they should have been concerned. One problem was Marla Greenstein’s refusal to testify before the Grand Jury. Greenstein is the only judge investigator for the Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct, charged with ensuring the integrity of the Alaska judiciary. Any failures to police a rogue judge would lie with Ms. Greenstein. Yet, she refused to testify before the Grand Jury, even though she had personally investigated and exonerated Judge Murphy from the same evidence that the Grand Jury examined a decade later. It makes one wonder what Greenstein knew and was reluctant to talk about.

The second unusual aspect of the Grand Jury is that it was empaneled with only 12 members, the minimum to have a quorum. Alaska Grand Jury regulations at the time required 14 members to be empaneled, allowing for alternates in cases of absence. With only 12 jurors on AG Taylor’s sham Grand Jury, the absence of one of them would be enough to destroy the validity of any indictments it made. This is precisely what occurred and was the reason Judge Thomas Matthews used to dismiss the charges against Judge Murphy.

The Grand Jury conducted investigations into this matter for over a year. They met with a full quorum of 12 jurors on April 7^th, 2023, and voted to indict Margaret Murphy for perjury. They next met on April 27, 2023, to finalize the bill of indictment; however, one of the jurors was absent, resulting in the Grand Jury lacking a quorum. The indictment was issued anyway, but neither the special prosecutor assisting the Grand Jury, the court, nor the Attorney General ever made any effort to locate the missing Grand Juror. No attempt was ever made to appoint another Grand Jury with a full quorum and alternates to rehear the evidence presented.

A report that says Haeg’s allegations have no merit would put an end to the matter. However, the court refuses to do so, lending credence to the theory that they are engaged in a cover-up.

The missing juror was just the excuse the court system needed to dismiss the charges against Judge Margaret Murphy. It is almost as if there was a conspiracy from the beginning to undermine the authority of the Grand Jury should they decide to indict the judge. This entire incident has the appearance of impropriety on the part of Judge Thomas Matthews and the attorney general’s office.

At this point, two things are possible. Either Mr. Haeg was guilty of game violations and has been on a quixotic quest to clear his name for the last 21 years, or Judge Murphy acted improperly in her McGrath court, and the court system has attempted to cover it up ever since.

Fortunately, the state can easily remedy this matter. Judge Matthews could release the public report from the 2022/2023 Kenai Grand Jury. For some strange reason, Judge Matthews has refused to make it available to the public, even though Article 1, Section 8 of Alaska’s Constitution states that the power of Grand Juries to investigate and make recommendations “shall never be suspended.” If Mr. Haeg is in the wrong, Matthews should release the report and let the document speak for itself. A report that says Haeg’s allegations have no merit would put an end to the matter. However, the court refuses to do so, lending credence to the theory that they are engaged in a cover-up.

The executive branch of the state government could also act. If AG Treg Taylor thinks Mr. Haeg really has no case, empanel another Grand Jury, this one with the correct number of jurors and alternates. Let them again hear the evidence against Judge Murphy, and if they again find nothing improper occurred in her court, make that information known to the public. If Mr. Haeg is wrong and Judge Murphy is innocent, the AG’s office has nothing to fear.

Neither of these things have happened, and the reader is left to conclude that something improper happened in the Murphy court back in 2004, something so serious that high-level officials are willing to risk everything to keep it hidden.

The governor can’t hide from this issue if the public holds him accountable for it. Fortunately, there is something the public can do. The Alaska Grand Jurors Association is planning a protest at the Governor’s office in Anchorage (550 West 7^th Ave., Robert B. Atwood Bldg.) on June 5^th at 2:00 PM. You can join them to demand that the Governor take action to investigate this mess.

The views expressed here are those of Greg Sarber. Read more Sarber posts at his Seward’s Folly substack.

Click here to support the Alaska Watchman.