Gause Law Offices PLLC

10/07/2026

A NEW TRIAL. ANOTHER CHANCE AT JUSTICE.

On June 15, 2026, King County Superior Court Judge Mark Larrañaga vacated Vaughn Weems’ conviction and granted a new trial, finding that racial bias tainted the jury’s deliberations.

In his ruling, Judge Larrañaga wrote:

“However, explicit or implicit, purposeful or unconscious, racial bias has no place in a system of justice.”

This decision reaffirms that the constitutional right to a fair trial requires more than a jury of twelve. It requires a verdict free from racial prejudice.

We are grateful to the juror who came forward and spoke candidly about what happened during deliberations. Without that courage, this injustice might never have been exposed.

Vaughn Weems has maintained that he acted in self-defense. We believe the evidence supports that defense, and we will continue fighting to vindicate him at his third trial.

Gause Law Offices
206-660-8775

07/01/2026

What the heck is a Berhe hearing??

I had never litigated a Berhe hearing before. In fact, I didn't immediately recognize that concerns raised by a juror after a murder trial implicated one of Washington's most important protections against racial bias in jury deliberations. That case forced me to become an expert in an entirely new area of law, and ultimately resulted in a murder conviction being vacated and a new trial ordered.

Here's what a Berhe hearing is, why it matters, and why every criminal defense lawyer should understand it.

What is a Berhe hearing? Learn how Washington's landmark State v. Berhe decision addresses racial bias in jury deliberations, why these hearings matter, and how one Berhe hearing resulted in a murder conviction being vacated and a new trial being ordered.

05/01/2026

My favorite words? NOT GUILTY. 🥊
But I'll settle for CASE DISMISSED.

04/19/2026

Cases like this are not rare anomalies, and that should concern all of us. When families are separated based on flawed or untested medical conclusions, the consequences are immediate and devastating, often leaving parents fighting for years to undo a decision that never should have been made. The stakes are simply too high to accept a system that can operate without meaningful checks.

The child abuse evaluation system plays a critical role in protecting children, but with that power must come rigorous oversight, transparency, and accountability. When conclusions are reached without sufficient evidence or without room for challenge, families can be torn apart unnecessarily, and trust in the system erodes.

After bringing their baby to the hospital for an unexplained medical condition, a family is separated by suspicion of abuse and now fights to be reunited with their children. NBC News’ Dan Slepian has their story.

04/10/2026

We are hiring!

Learn more at https://emilygauselaw.com/careers