Comments

1
A defendant has the right to confront their accuser. Charges made in public are rightfully to be answered in public. Orders for him to shut the fuck up are harassment and intimidation. I have no love of NAZIS or pigs, but that doesn't make it okay to violate his rights. If he disobeys an order from his employer, he might be subject to termination or other discipline, but if the employer is arbitrary and abusive, the employer may be subject to legal action.
2
The slander was made in the original text messages between Kuykendall and Galvan, and made public when they those messages were first provided to a third party, irrespective of who or what that third party is. Kruger is the injured party and ought to be the one to be filing law suits, if not counter suits. In fact criminal charges could be brought against Galvan for harassment, threatening to sue, rather than just doing it. Galvan is the one who doesn't know when to shut the fuck up.
3
Why are the cops trying so hard to defend a guy who is AT LEAST a Nazi sympathizer, and very possibly an actual Nazi?

Any union contract that doesn't allow someone like Kruger to be fired is a bad contract, and offensive to the public.

The fact that forces deep within the police force have been leaking documents in order to help this guy is completely insane, and shows the Portland Police are rotten to the core.

Kruger pulled this latest stunt because he knows he's safe. The powers that be are on his side. Which means the department itself holds Nazi sympathies.

Bust their fucking union. They deserve worse.
4
Just so it's clear, Kruger's a piece of human garbage who should be fired for any number of reasons, not least the shitty judgment and score-settling impulse shown here.

1. @hippo, There is no law that an employer can't act arbitrarily. Nearly the opposite is true: employers can't deliberately treat members of protected classes differently.

2. @Denis, I don't think Kruger posting a letter clearing him of harassment becomes itself harassment, nor does it rise to harassment just because Kruger wrote Galvan's name on it. He wasn't ordered to keep this secret, and her name has been public record for a long time - Galvan was certainly known as the complainant inside PPB.

That maybe changes if he'd e-mailed the letter to the entire Bureau, or did some larger-scale thing, but this is a pretty understated action for a guy who, in his spare time, builds Nazi shrines on public property.

The bottom line is that Kruger's a dick, but unfortunately in this case (and many others), it's not against the law to be a dick.
5
CC summed it up well.
6
And of course that "defendant (having) the right to confront their accuser" thing has nothing to do with this actual story, but thanks for that.
More like "guy who has the entirety of the legal system on his side intimidates someone who tried to call him on his shit," which is a different area of law, I believe.
7
CC: Appreciate the well-stated point you make: Galvan's only been anonymous in terms of the harassment complaint that cleared Kruger—and not exactly in the public sphere.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.