Kent van der Kamp’s past dishonesty and misconduct have cost the former Deschutes County Sheriff his career in Oregon law enforcement.
Now, van der Kamp’s transgressions have resulted in five convictions being overturned by the Deschutes County District Attorney’s Office, the Source has learned.
Each of these five cases were tried in Deschutes County Circuit Court between 2012 and 2014, and most include charges of DUII. In most instances, van der Kamp served as the arresting officer and, in all the cases, as an expert witness during trial.
The overturned convictions are the result of an investigation the DA’s Office opened in early April, around the time DA Steve Gunnels placed van der Kamp on the Brady List, which precludes officers accused of dishonesty from serving as a witness in court. Van der Kamp was placed on that list for several instances in which he lied under oath about receiving degrees from universities he never attended while serving as an expert witness in cases between 2012 and 2014.
The DA’s Office concluded the second investigation regarding van der Kamp in late June, resulting in the five defendants’ convictions being overturned. Those convictions range from violations such as refusing a breathalyzer test and careless driving, to those that include unauthorized use of a vehicle, theft III, reckless driving, fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer and resisting arrest. One defendant, who racked up the latter string of serious charges — mostly Class-C felonies — was sentenced to nearly five years in prison. Other convictions include burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the first degree, also Class-C felonies.
Another case whose convictions were dismissed includes a case involving a stolen car which the defendant allegedly drove recklessly on Highway 97, passing another vehicle on the shoulder and nearly forcing the driver into oncoming traffic.
Gunnels, reached by phone, said it was unclear what restitution might look like for each defendant. Their attorneys, all of whom have been notified, will pass on the news to their clients. To have these charges expunged is a separate process, but it shouldn’t be difficult, Gunnels said, given that the cases have been dismissed.
“The fact that any convictions were obtained by false or misleading testimony by (van der Kamp) is discrediting,” Gunnels said. “What we’re trying to do is undo, as best we can, the damage he did with his false testimony.”
It’s possible that the DA’s Office may open more cases for review, he added.
Noteworthy in reviewing these cases is an altercation that van der Kamp, then a DCSO deputy, had with a defendant’s lawyer — inside the courtroom.
Case documents detail an altercation between van der Kamp and the defendant’s attorney during a recess at a DMV hearing. According to an affidavit in support of motion for discovery and pretrial production signed by Timothy Fleming on Aug. 1, 2012 — one of two attorneys for the defendant — van der Kamp struck Fleming’s partner, Jon Springer, in a DMV hearing room.
The alleged altercation was the outcome of a discovery dispute. According to the affidavit, Springer had not seen the police report, wanted to review it, and believed van der Kamp had it in his possession in a folder. Van der Kamp denied the report was in the folder and wouldn’t say what was in it. During a recess, van der Kamp allegedly left the building to put the folder in his car. Springer said van der Kamp became aggressive when Springer, who’d followed him, questioned him for doing so. According to documents, van der Kamp told Springer to “f*ck off” or “get the f*ck away” or something similar, which Springer did by going back into the hearing room. After returning, van der Kamp “intentionally and aggressively threw his elbow into Springer as he passed within close quarters; the police were called and a complaint was made, which was investigated by internal affairs.”
The affidavit also mentioned an internal DCSO investigation into van der Kamp regarding complaints of aggression while conducting traffic stops. Additionally alleged by the defense attorneys was an internal DCSO investigation into a lawsuit leveled at van der Kamp for participating in a corporate pyramid scheme in violation of California penal code. (It is not immediately clear when and where this allegedly took place; van der Kamp previously lived in California where he worked as a volunteer reserve officer for the La Mesa and Los Angeles Police Departments before joining the DCSO in 2004.)
In a separate discovery affidavit signed Dec. 31, 2012, the defense alleged that a supervising DCSO captain investigated van der Kamp for doing work while on duty that included maintaining a pornographic website that sold prescriptions.
An effort to contact Jon Springer for comment was not successful by press time.
Deschutes County Sheriff Ty Rupert, who was appointed on July 29, said in a written statement to the Source:
“This is a time to rebuild and restore trust. I’m committed to listening, learning and leading in a way that reflects the values and integrity our community deserves. We will not allow the actions of one to overshadow the hard work of the men and women at the Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office.”
The defendant in the DUII case involving the alleged assault by van der Kamp was found not guilty by the six-person jury of all charges, except for refusing a breath test. That conviction has now been dismissed.
Gunnels said it’s an injustice that some convictions don’t stand, but that onus rests on van der Kamp.
“The injustice is because then-Deputy van der Kamp gave false testimony in the cases,” Gunnels said. “We can’t rely on false testimony to gain a conviction, no matter how criminal somebody’s act was to begin with. If we base our conviction on false evidence, then that would be an injustice itself.”
This article appears in Source Weekly July 31, 2025.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Under Brady / Giglio there is no requirement for every criminal case an officer placed on a Brady list to be reviewed by the DA’s Office in that jurisdiction. However, the one caveat is this
No Automatic Case Review:
.
“There is no requirement for the automatic review of every single criminal case in the jurisdiction. Instead, the information is only relevant to cases where the officer’s credibility could impact the outcome.”
In van der Kamp’s case, especially as he was with the CODE team for three years, the DA is mandated to review every conviction (i.e. drug cases) van der Kamp was involved with and/or testified in court that resulted in a conviction. Cities like Los Angeles have suffered this challenge and have resorted to simply mass payouts as defense lawyers and public defenders have filed thousands of challenges when an officer is discovered to have lied in court about their clients and their cases.
No Automatic Case Review: is required of a DA’s Office of all criminal cases a Brady listed officer may have been involved with – however, Post-Conviction Challenges: include post trial violations that are often discovered only after conviction. In these situations, the defendant can challenge their conviction based on the Brady violation, leading to the potential overturning of the conviction. Meaning defense lawyers can and do challenge past convictions which is what is occurring with the DA’s Office.
Cities paying out millions over Brady Law violations
Several cities in the United States have paid out millions of dollars to settle lawsuits alleging violations of the Brady Law (often referred to in the context of prosecutorial disclosure obligations. These lawsuits primarily stem from police misconduct or prosecutorial misconduct, including the suppression of exculpatory evidence or lying by officers and prosecutors that impacts a defendant’s right to a fair trial.
In short, the DA is required to review all criminal cases involving van der Kamp which is one means of getting ahead of individual or collective defense filings to do so.
“Additionally alleged by the defense attorneys was an internal DCSO investigation into a lawsuit leveled at van der Kamp for participating in a corporate pyramid scheme in violation of California penal code. (It is not immediately clear when and where this allegedly took place; van der Kamp previously lived in California where he worked as a volunteer reserve officer for the La Mesa and Los Angeles Police Departments before joining the DCSO in 2004.” – Inaccurate and disproved during the 2024 campaign…and the case is found online – https://www.pyramidschemealert.org/PSAMain…
In addition, van der Kamp received a formal letter from eFusjon’s CEO that stated for the record neither Oracle or van der Kamp was ever an employee, officer, or held a controlling interest in his company. The lawsuit was ultimately dismissed. A copy of eFusjon’s letter regarding Oracle / van der Kamp is being provided to Ms. Vulcan/Source.
The internal investigations and their findings are available on the public Brady List site – https://giglio-bradylist.com/individual/ke…
This is the same site used by DPSST as part of its investigation into van der Kamp as initiated by DA Gunnels’ investigation. It is a legitimate site and used by law enforcement, courts, DA Offices, and others across the nation.
Also on this site is retired sheriff Shane Nelson, CPT William Bailey, Deputy Ryan McNee,, and Deschutes County DA Steve Gunnels.
(Prosecutor Misconduct No. 1748716496 – 171459713
May 31, 2025
Attorney Misconduct, Bias, Cooperative Misconduct, Destruction of Evidence, Failure to Disclose Brady/Giglio Material, Obstruction of Justice) – regarding his failure to place Deputy McNee on his office’s Brady list regarding Use of Force.
https://giglio-bradylist.com/united-states…
In short – van der Kamp is gone along with his PERS retirement, his real estate firm (Oracle) intact and prosperous, and his new home on a tropical island in the CARIBE.
And per DPSST policy he may be successful in retaining his Oregon LE credentials in an upcoming Oregon Administrative Court hearing due to the actions of Shane Nelson during the campaign IF it can be shown that Gunnels’ ADA – then assigned to the DCSO Forensics Unit – was in any way prompted to “find” what he did by Nelson/Garrison at the conclusion of their November 2024 IA…which was closed with no disciplinary action taken.
Scumbag