As the public learns new damning revelations about the newly elected Sheriff, Kent van der Kamp, lots of questions remain. But one thing is certain: The residents of this county deserve far more from their top law enforcement official than they’ve been getting thus far.
The string of lawsuits stemming from the actions of former Sheriff Shane Nelson were enough to cause our editorial board to endorse the guy not hand-picked by Nelson during the last election. The county needed a cleaner slate, we opined. But this week, it’s clear that the slate was not wiped clean enough.
As OPB first reported, Deschutes County District Attorney Steve Gunnels this month placed van der Kamp on a Brady list — the list of law enforcement officers identified as not credible enough to testify in court, after a DA’s office investigation found that van der Kamp had lied not once, but multiple times, in different ways, about his educational background. The discovery was made by a Deschutes County staff member who noticed discrepancies between past Curricula Vitae and the information van der Kamp provided in the 2024 Voter’s Pamphlet, OPB reported.
Documents released by the DA’s office show that as far back as 2013, van der Kamp stated in his Curriculum Vitae that he had earned degrees from the University of Southern California and the University of Arizona — schools that reported to the DA that he had never attended, let alone graduated. Over the course of several years, the information on van der Kamp’s CV changed – stating in 2013 he had a bachelor’s from USC and a master’s degree from UA; then, in 2015, it was a bachelor’s from UA and a master’s from Trident International University — where the DA’s office confirmed he actually did attend. In 2018, he lists the University of Phoenix — deemed by the DA to be accurate — as where he got his bachelor’s. So not only did he allegedly lie about his degrees, but he changed up the story along the way.
Now, the DA’s office has identified several drug cases in which van der Kamp served as an expert witness that will need to be thrown out, due to van der Kamp’s lying under oath. And there may be many more, the DA’s office has said.
So many questions emerge from this. Here are some of them you may be wondering.
Why didn’t this come out before the election? While it does seem like fishy timing, according to the DA’s office, an employee only noticed this discrepancy in mid-November, upon looking at the Voter’s Pamphlet, and the office began investigating after that. Obtaining records from the various schools obviously took time.
Will van der Kamp be charged with perjury? Not likely, unless any of the cases where he lied were within three years — the statute of limitations for perjury, Gunnels told OPB.
Is van der Kamp going to step down? Let’s hope so, and soon. Deschutes County has been sold short for years now with its top law enforcement official, and it’s time, finally, to right the ship. Should the Sheriff step down, the undersheriff — a new position ironically created by Nelson last year — will stand in as sheriff until the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners appoints someone, according to information provided to the Source by County Clerk Steve Dennison. That appointee would serve until the next election cycle, ostensibly in 2026, when voters could once again select their choice for sheriff.
That’s a lot of upheaval for one of the most important positions in our county. The public would do well to demand a rigorous vetting process.
—
This article appears in Source Weekly April 17, 2025.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
This article implies that Van Der Kamp lied in “several drug cases”. The DA’s office has reported that he misrepresented his educational qualifications under oath. Which is it?
The article doesn’t say or imply that he lied in drug cases it says he lied previously under oath. Therefore any further testimony (drug cases for example) is questionable and therefore inadmissable. Lying under oath pretty much disqualifies any future testimony.
I just don’t understand why the Sheriff felt the need to lie about his educational background. Looking forward to his explanation. However, is that an immediate disqualification for his position as Sheriff? Interested in hearing other opinions…
I heard he graduated from George Santos University, where he starred on the school’s basketball team.
To the Editors and team of The Source,
I am writing to respectfully express my concern regarding the practice of candidate endorsements in your publication. I have mentioned this before.
While I appreciate The Source as a valuable outlet for local news and community updates, I believe the role of a news organization should be to informnot influenceits readers. In todays complex information landscape, where facts are frequently contested and narratives often skewed, it is increasingly difficult for citizens to discern what is true and what is false. Endorsements by media outlets can unintentionally blur the line between objective reporting and subjective opinion, potentially swaying readers rather than empowering them to make informed decisions on their own.
By remaining neutral and focusing on thorough, unbiased reporting, The Source has an opportunity to distinguish itself as a trusted resource for all members of our community, regardless of political perspective. Trust in the media is built through transparency and impartialitynot through editorial endorsements.
On a related note, I would like to acknowledge Sheriff van der Kamp. In my professional interactions with him, he has consistently acted with integrity, professionalism, and a genuine willingness to help.
Thank you for considering my perspective. I hope you will weigh the long-term trust of your readership over the short-term impact of endorsements.
Nicole Moore Perullo
I believe that Sheriff van der Kamp was Brady’d because he misspoke (let us say) when asked about his qualifications to testify, but did not lie about the case itself. Be that as it may, this kind of conduct on the Flagrancy Scale hardly moves the needle compared to the turpitude of the Nelson administration. Please let’s not return to those old days.
According to DPSST (IRIS, Professional Standards, Kent van der Kamp – Memorandum –
https://www.oregon.gov/dpsst/CJ/CertAction…
DPSST received a citizen complaint in December 2023. The Department, per its policy, forwarded that complaint to Sheriff Nelson at DCSO for review. The complaint came from Ms. Mandi Puckett (DPSST public records request) who was and remains in a long running employment feud with the non-profit she was co-founder of, and which in 2017 Shane Nelson introduced van der Kamp to as the agency’s formal representative at CLEAR.
There are more twists and turns to what occurred throughout 2024 involving Nelson, Puckett, a former CLEAR grant writer (Calista Songstadt), former undersheriff Paul Garrison (who personally, per PRR, fulfilled PRR requests from Puckett/Songstad and then, per DPSST’s memorandum, conducted the internal investigation regarding van der Kamp.
And the only Brady list van der Kamp was first listed on is the one mentioned by name in DPSST’s memorandum – the citizen complaint that resulted in that listing coming from Puckett/Songstad using the PRR data provided by Paul Garrison. This in lieu of the Nelson claimed “brady list” he sued La Mesa PD for despite having been informed no such list existed at La Mesa, LAPD, LASO, and the DA Offices for La Mesa and San Diego County (PRR driven).
This public information sharing platform also features Shane Nelson and William Bailey under the OREGON section, along with their profiles and the complaints that saw them so listed.
https://giglio-bradylist.com/united-states…
Fast forward – at any time in 2024 Nelson could have placed van der Kamp on paid administrative leave while the internal investigation was underway. He’d done so with others such a Deron McMaster (which ended up in a civil suit payout for McMaster). He did not do so. Nelson’s own record of going after those who fell out of favor with him was well known and had cost the taxpayer millions of dollars in successful civil suits. Hence County Legal, at the tail end of 2024 and pre-election night, directing no action above a reprimand be considered by Nelson.
van der Kamp, per DPSST’s 9-page synopsis, clearly lied about a number of things and was caught doing so over the course of 2024’s campaign process…as was his opponent, William Bailey. He was elected over Bailey despite what was learned as the Employee Association endorsed him and many voters wanted the best for the employees after eight years of Nelson’s tyranny. In short, there were no “good guys” in 2024 to choose between.
van der Kamp cannot be removed from office as he is an elected official; the decertification process if DPSST pulls his LE credential can take months given he can appeal it; even if decertified he can finish his current stint as Sheriff but not run again; he can also challenge, in the courts, his having been Giglio, not Brady, listed (Giglo is far worse) as recent cases have gone in favor of the officer for a number of reasons.
In retrospect one has to wonder had van der Kamp not run against Nelson’s preferred candidate, and was for the longest time Shane’s “golden boy” at the agency, would any of this three-ring circus ever have seen the light of day/