7 Deputies Walk Off Job After Oregon Sheriff Allegedly Beats Handcuffed Suspect

Well I guess this is one way good cops can stop bad cops. Seems a bit of a strange way to go about it to me, but it's sort of a positive that they are at least doing something to call attention to what seems to be a problem. Then again, it could be that filthy viper politics too.

I can't even imagine this on a larger scale.

And yes, the headline is a bit misleading, as in they didn't walk off the job...they requested and got paid leave.

Over twenty percent of deputies Klamath County, Oregon recently asked to be put on leave after Sheriff Frank Skrah was accused of punching a handcuffed suspect.

The Oregonian reported that the Oregon Department of Justice confirmed on Monday that Skrah was under investigation for use of excessive force. At the same time, seven of the county’s 30 deputies had been granted requests for “non-disciplinary” paid leave.

“The Klamath County Board of County Commissioners today confirmed that over the last four days, Klamath County has placed seven deputies on non-disciplinary paid administrative leave, per their requests,” the county said in a press release. [Source]

Investigation ongoing.

edit on 8/27/2015 by ~Lucidity because: forgot the link to the source

I guess every little bit helps. But I wonder in how many places "paid leave" would be granted before cooked books, false allegations, intimidation, and even worse. Those would be options 1-100 before granting paid leave I imagine. Or at least I assume many would feel that way (probably no matter the profession). Right thing vs mortgage in many minds...(not making excuses).

Pretty cool story though.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

For the life of me i can't figure out why our police forces and prisons don't get the same level of oversight that our nursing homes do.

For example, if i am an RN working in a nursing facility that the state shuts down, i could possibly lose my license. It certainly puts my license at risk.

If there was risk in just being associated with corrupt departments, perhaps it would help keep them a bit more honest.

a reply to: ~Lucidity Badges? We don't need no stinkin badges...

Or a teacher who works at a school that turns A's into F's. Very good point indeed, I hadn't thought of it that way.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Good cops would have arrested him and insisted the local U.S. attorney charge him under Title 18, Section 242 of the United States code.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

The reaction of Deputy's that have gone on administrative leave in obvious nonacceptance of the Sheriff's actions speaks loudly and gives hope that more will cross the blue line when public trust is violated. It's a start...

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

Yeah...you have a point. There's a niggling question in my mind about the politics and the method they chose and which way would have made the greater impact here. But there's a lot we don't know about the situation...such as have they made complaints before, have they considered the method you suggest. For all we know the DA is his brother. I'm just not sure how all this works at the level of government in this particular situation.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: 0zzymand0s

Yeah...you have a point. There's a niggling question in my mind about the politics and the method they chose and which way would have made the greater impact here. But there's a lot we don't know about the situation...such as have they made complaints before, have they considered the method you suggest. For all we know the DA is his brother. I'm just not sure how all this works at the level of government in this particular situation.

Police are under a lot of pressure to preserve the reputation of fellow officers. We have all read about the intimidation and punitive repercussions that come with facing off with a bad cop.

What these cops did was something which is more than most seem to do in that situation. I'd say it sends a pretty clear message.

They all beat him.

I saw Rambo...

Looks like they sent the boss, ' To Coventry' well done lads.

Watched the video...

As soon as she said "public safety's our number one priority..." I had to switch it off.

Thanks OP as I live here in PDX...

I'd love to be the judge on that one.

"OK, here is my ruling. Put the sherrif in handcuffs and let the victim take his best shot. Then, seven of the victim's co-workers get a paid vacation on the county's dime."

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Because their jurisdictions want it that way. Police bring in the revenues so that the local businesses that sit on the committees and councils etc... get tax breaks without the jurisdiction going broke.

A search turns up some interesting turn of events on this story:

The Klamath County Board of Commissioners has requested that Sheriff Frank Skrah go on voluntary administrative leave while the Oregon Department of Justice investigates the department.

“We believe it would be best for his office, best for community safety, and best for Sheriff Skrah, if he would go on administrative leave until the DOJ matter is resolved,” Klamath County Commissioner Kelley Minty Morris said in a release Wednesday evening.

The request came a day after seven Klamath deputies asked to be put on administrative leave from their jobs. Eugene attorney Becky Gallagher, who represents the Klamath County Peace Officers Association, said the deputies requested to be placed on leave because they feared retaliation from Skrah. Gallagher said the deputies were interviewed by the Oregon Department of Justice as part of an investigation of Skrah.

“There were concerns about workplace harassment and retaliation by the sheriff,” said Gallagher. “So for their safety we sought protective leave. They county agreed and those deputies who requested were placed on paid administrative leave.”

The county board said it believes if Skrah took leave, the deputies would return to their posts. Gallagher said that the DOJ is conducting a criminal investigation into Skrah’s conduct. The DOJ would not confirm that and did not provide details about the case.

Klamath County Asks Sheriff Frank Skrah To Go On Leave Amid DOJ Investigation

The DOJ has opened a criminal investigation into the sheriff’s conduct, but little information has been made available. Skrah, who spent 25 years with the Los Angeles Police Department before being elected as the Klamath County sheriff in 2012, says the DOJ investigation supposedly began over a month ago, but he has yet to hear a peep from anyone.

“One month later I still have not been advised as to the specific nature of that investigation nor have I been interviewed by representatives of the Oregon Department of Justice,” Skrah said, according to Oregon Public Broadcasting. “I am learning more about the Oregon Department of Justice investigation and learning about an internal county investigation just like the rest of the public – from media reports.”

In May, a complaint filed with the Oregon Employment Relations Board by Cpl. Daren Krag alleged that Sheriff Skrah retaliated against Krag, who is the president of the Klamath County Peace Officers Association, because he had voiced concerns over the sheriff’s treatment of prisoners. The complaint claims Skrah arbitrarily changing Krag’s tour of duty and refused to pay him for overtime worked.

An excerpt from complaint, filed by Gallagher, reads:

“[Skrah’s] actions were meant to impede Cpl. Krag’s ability to process grievances and to represent KCPOA members adequately. By changing his schedule, refusing to pay him money earned and issuing corrective action the Sheriff hoped to stop Cpl. Krag’s attempts to represent his members. The threat was clear — raise union issues with me … and I will mess with your life and your job.”

www.examiner.com...

According to that complaint, in May union president Corporal Daren Krag - one of the deputies who is on leave - sent an email to Skrah outlining union-related issues having to do with court security, body-armor vests, and Krag not being paid for overtime work.

In response, the complaint says, the sheriff changed Krag’s shift, cancelled his participation in some activities and declined to pay his overtime. The complaint, which was filed on May 21, also says Skrah issued a write-up to Krag for not completing an inventory memo on time. According to the complaint, the above actions were taken by the sheriff to “chill, impede, retaliate and interfere” with the deputies’ union business and the work of its president.

UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT (PDF)

www.washingtontimes.com...

Sheriff Frank Skrah Asked To Step Down

a reply to: Kali74

A whole separate issue is brought up there: why is it even allowed that a municipality can be incentivized to create fines for its citizens to pay? Why do annual budgets get to forecast revenues gained through fines? Especially traffic related fines? Its an admission of how much money they plan to extract from your pocket, and it becomes a metric target that people are held accountable for.

Meaning: justice isn't really blind at all.

a reply to: kenzohattori69

Alfonso Bedoya in Treasure of the Sierra Madre

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

It's literally a racket.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I think that was the perfect thing to do, and I'll tell you why...

The corrupt nature of policing means that no one person can stand up against fellow officers, you're expected to cover for each other no matter what, even if you know of another officer breaking the law or even killing someone in custody. We've seen this countless times, and it was even highlighted quite publicly in a recent shooting incident where a police officer lied on record, then changed his story when he discovered there was video evidence of what actually happened.

Only those wanting to end their career would ever speak out against another officer. Even then, they will likely face years of harassment from other police officers.

By requesting to go on leave, and together, they have sent the message without having to send the message.

They haven't exposed themselves individually to the same kind of abuse and harassment they would likely receive if they had publicly "made a fuss" about this case.

Now the investigation is underway, they should be investigating all those who DIDN'T go on leave and see what their relationships are like and what their careers have consisted of. Chances are if there are officers who chose not to take a stand, they should not be officers in the first place.

If I were in charge of this, and if this all played out as I imagine it did with those officers taking a moral and ethical stand while insulating themselves, I would probably be promoting those 7 deputies, firing the rest, and hiring new officers to replace them.

From what I know about this, those 7 officers are the only ones there who SHOULD be serving the public, the rest are either colluding or are spineless and amoral.

originally posted by: Rocker2013
a reply to: ~Lucidity


Only those wanting to end their career would ever speak out against another officer. Even then, they will likely face years of harassment from other police officers.

By requesting to go on leave, and together, they have sent the message without having to send the message.

They haven't exposed themselves individually to the same kind of abuse and harassment they would likely receive if they had publicly "made a fuss" about this case.

That was exactly my point. Having a go at the rest of the officers though, is not appropriate as yet here. Certainly there is plenty of video evidence of officers elsewhere turning a blind eye to things obviously wrong, but we don't have that here.