A matter of trust: DUII cases at center of Deschutes County Sheriff van der Kamp’s Brady list controversy
Isabella Warren will have a follow-up report tonight on KTVZ News at Five
BEND, Ore. (KTVZ) -- Deschutes County District Attorney Steve Gunnels spoke again with KTVZ News Tuesday about his finding that Sheriff Kent van der Kamp gave false testimony in at least two cases, while a legal expert provided insight about the DA's rare move to not let the sheriff testify in the future.
Jessica Pishko, lawyer and author of The Highest Law in the Land: How the Unchecked Power of Sheriffs Threatens Democracy, told KTVZ News it's uncommon for top law enforcement officers such as sheriffs to be added to a county's Brady list.
"It is certainly rare for an elected sheriff to be on a Brady list. And the reason for that is it is certainly a mark that the individual isn't trustworthy," Pishko said.
Isabella Warren is speaking with county officials to learn what they are hearing from the public about the controversy and what steps, if any, they are taking. Her report is coming up tonight on KTVZ News at Five.
On Monday, Gunnels told KTVZ News he has placed Sheriff Kent van der Kamp on a short list known as the "Brady list" of law-enforcement witnesses who prosecutors cannot “ethically” call in criminal cases, over concerns that he provided false testimony in at least two past DUII cases.
"This doesn't mean that an individual habitually lies or that they're a bad person," Pishko said Tuesday. "It's rather a note for defense attorneys to understand that this officer has a history of being dishonest under oath so that they can properly cross-examine the officer when that time comes."
This week marks van der Kamp's 100th day in office, and Pishko says voters should pay attention: "People don't always have the resources to look into this. People trust their sheriff, or they trust law enforcement running as sheriffs to be honest about their backgrounds."
Meanwhile, Gunnels agreed to speak with KTVZ News again by phone on Tuesday to confirm some information in the swirl of news and social media reports about his Brady list decision, filed on Monday, April 7, and to clarify some points.
The DA said while all cases involving van der Kamp's testimony are being reviewed, the period of time focused upon was from about 2012-18, when "we found problems with the information he provided."
Gunnels confirmed the investigation began in November when van der Kamp was elected.
The sheriff has denied the allegations, saying in a statement he is working closely with local officials to understand the claims.
Van der Kamp was already being investigated by the Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards and Training for ethical violation allegations and for his previous law enforcement experience in La Mesa, California.
Gunnels would not confirm if the claim of falsified testimony involved van der Kamp's statements on the witness stand about his background or the facts of the cases involved. But he told us, "If a witness, particularly an expert witness, is lying about any of it, it is a big problem in the criminal justice system."
He also disputed there was any "rift" between him and van der Kamp.
"It's not a rift," Gunnels said. "I love the sheriff's office. I love the people who work there. It's a Brady listing (issue)."
"Having a dispute between a DA and a sheriff is not unprecedented," Gunnels said. "Can we ethically call an individual to the witness stand, under oath? I have determined we cannot. That is important to us."
Gunnels confirmed that two of the DUII cases involved in the decision did not lead to criminal convictions, but there were violation convictions (equivalent to a traffic ticket) that his office will seek to set aside.
"We have found at least two violation convictions that we will be moving to set aside that were connected to those criminal cases, but the same false testimony," he said.
The Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards and Training is reviewing the reports submitted by the DA's office, but a spokesman told KTVZ News there's no certainty of a decision being announced later this week, as some reports have indicated.
"I will reiterate that we cannot say when the review will be completed," Communications Coordinator Sam Tenney told us.
"We recognize the significance of this matter and are working to complete our review expeditiously," Tenney said. "If DPSST determines that the conduct being reviewed violates the moral fitness standards established by the Board on Public Safety Standards and Training as discretionary grounds for revocation of certification, it will submit its findings to the Police Policy Committee (PPC) for disposition."
"The committee next meets on May 22, and our deadline to place cases on that meeting's agenda is next Wednesday, April 23. If the DPSST review is not completed on time for a case to be presented at the May meeting, and if the review finds that moral fitness violations occurred, the case could be presented at the following PPC meeting on August 21," Tenney added.
Also, Tenney said, "DPSST is not reviewing whether the decision to place van der Kamp on the Brady list was justified. DPSST has no jurisdiction over the Deschutes County District Attorney, and it is not within our scope of authority to assess whether the DA's office was justified in adding Sheriff van der Kamp to its Brady list."
