After pit-stopping at the jail, where Frederickson allegedly blew a .11 Blood Alcohol Concentration, DCSO officers parked Frederickson outside the Oregon State Police Bend area command center. At 12:02 pm, someone named Kristyn Kellogg reported Frederickson’s alleged intoxication to 911 dispatch.

After receiving OSP body camera footage and a dispatch report and conducting interviews with two sources within the Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office, the Source has pieced together a troubling order of events.

DCSO insiders, to whom the Source has granted anonymity because they’re not authorized to speak on these matters and fear retribution, said news of the Frederickson incident immediately spread throughout the sheriff’s office. When no criminal investigation materialized in the weeks and months that followed, morale plummeted, they said.

State police records show Frederickson has remained on administrative leave since the date of the incident.

Sheriff Ty Rupert told the Source that third-party investigator Jim Band is conducting an internal investigation into Fredrickson. (Band is the same investigator Rupert hired to investigate misconduct by former sheriff candidate DCSO Lt. James McLaughlin.) Deschutes County District Attorney Steve Gunnels said his office is aware of the Frederickson situation and is waiting for the results of that administrative investigation.

What body cameras show
Four hours after Frederickson showed up at the shooting range, at 12:22 pm, Oregon State Police Lt. Brandon Smithers and Trooper Tony Halladay responded to the call for service outside OSP’s Bend area command center.

As seen in body camera footage, the troopers speak for about a minute, just the two of them. The audio kicks in as Smithers and Halladay make contact with the DCSO officers. (It’s common for officers to switch off an audio recording to discuss sensitive or private matters.) Frederickson is standing between two parked patrol vehicles, flanked by Dep. David Crump, the Deschutes County Sheriff Employee’s Association president, and former DCSEA president Sgt. Danny Graham. Crump and Graham did not reply to questions by press time.

This interaction lasts 30 seconds.

“Hey buddy, long time, no see!” one of the officers hollered in way of greeting.

“Long time, no see,” replied Halladay, shaking Frederickson’s hand. “OK, well, you know why we’re here.”

“You got a phone call,” Frederickson said. Graham walked away, telling Crump, “I’ll let you deal with it.”

Halladay told Frederickson: “We got a phone call that somebody smelled the odor of alcohol on you at the range. That’s pretty much all we know. So, I just gotta ask ya — did you have anything to drink today?”

“I’m gonna invoke my right to remain silent on this one,” Frederickson said. “But to answer your question, I didn’t have anything to drink today.”
Halladay replied, “OK, other than that….”

Crump interrupted to give Frederickson a prompt: “Don’t say anything else.”

“OK,” Frederickson said.

“OK, fair enough. We’re good,” Halladay said. “Take care.”

“We’re gonna end our conversation then, OK? “We’re not gonna…” Smithers said before trailing off with a chuckle. “I’m gonna shut it off [the body camera], OK?”

“Take care,” Frederickson said.

“You take care, too,” Halladay replied.

Trooper Halladay closed his dispatch memo at 12:30 pm — just 8 minutes from the time he arrived, to the time he wrapped up the service call. Halladay didn’t create an investigative case number, which would have appeared on the dispatch memo, which means he didn’t open a criminal investigation.

The Source filed record requests to OSP for any pertinent case numbers, reports or post call-for-service discussion records between Halladay and his supervisor, Smithers, of the outcome. The state police’s spokesperson said no such records exist.

The Source then emailed questions to OSP for Smithers and Halladay. We asked why, in service of establishing probable cause, they didn’t interview any witnesses at the range and elsewhere about Frederickson’s alleged on-duty intoxication. After establishing probable cause, investigators could have applied for and received a search warrant to test Frederickson’s BAC through a blood sample — independent of the .11 BAC breath test that jail deputies allegedly administered to Frederickson before the state troopers showed up.

By press time, neither Smithers nor Halladay responded to the questions the Source emailed.

‘This looks bad on everybody’

It should go without saying that cops must be sober on the job. According to Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office policy, mandatory training sessions, such as training at the firing range, count as on-duty work.

Additionally, DSCO Policy 1.02, in the personal conduct violations section, states that “members shall not drink so much while off-duty to such a degree that it affects their on-duty performance. Members shall not report for duty or make contact with the general public on-duty when an odor of an intoxicating beverage is on their breath or person. Members unable to report for duty will notify the supervisor on-duty. Members shall exercise caution in consuming alcoholic beverages prior to duty time so as not to be in violation of this section.”

When a police officer is accused of a policy violation, particularly one rising to criminality, two investigations are immediately triggered: a criminal one conducted by an outside law enforcement agency, and an administrative one, the latter which examines departmental policy violations.
Just as civilians, while being questioned, can invoke their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, so can police officers in both a criminal and an internal investigation. When it comes to an internal investigation, officers enjoy what’s called a Garrity Admonishment — so named after the Supreme Court ruling in Garrity v. New Jersey, which states that public employees cannot be forced to choose between incriminating themselves and losing their jobs. If an employee is ordered to answer questions as part of an administrative investigation, those statements are immune from use in a criminal investigation.

That said, the Garrity precedent never barred OSP troopers from building a criminal case, with evidence they gathered on their own.
Josh Rains, a former certified Oregon police officer, lead investigator and a court-recognized expert on drug-recognition and standardized field sobriety testing, reviewed all pertinent materials to comment for this story.

Reached by phone, Rains told the Source that, “this looks bad on everybody. In my opinion, the troopers didn’t do enough of an investigation. Obviously, somebody thought there was enough of an issue that they called law enforcement.”

Rains noted that both OSP troopers, Smithers and Lt. Halladay, have advanced training in impaired driving enforcement. They both attended the Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement training in 2015. Lt. Smithers completed the Drug Recognition Expert School in 2019. They also both attended same multi-disciplinary DUII training conference in 2023, according to state police records.

Nonetheless, neither trooper requested that Frederickson consent to perform any of the standardized field sobriety tests, nor did they officially interview union reps Graham or Crump about the incident in question. They also didn’t reach out to Kristyn Kellogg, who placed the original call for service to Deschutes 911 dispatch. (Deschutes County and the cities of Bend and Redmond have said that Kellogg is not an employee. It’s not clear whether she was at the DCSO Range or where she noticed Frederickson’s behavior. By press time, Kellogg had not replied to several requests for comment.)

Additionally, Rains said, the troopers could have asked Frederickson to perform a voluntarily breath test, commonly called a “jail release blow.” This breath test would have been conducted with a readily available Intoxilyzer 8000 at either the OSP patrol office or DCAJ. While that wouldn’t have triggered Frederickson’s immediate arrest, it may have helped the troopers establish probable cause for the office of Official Misconduct II related to Frederickson being under the influence of alcohol while performing his official duties, or a possible DUII when he drove his vehicle to the range, according to Rains. Presumably, DCSEA President Crump would have advised against the jail release blow. Yet the troopers’ asking for it would have shown they were at least trying to do a criminal investigation, Rains said.

On the day in question, after the initial point of contact, the OSP troopers, still standing in the circle, turn off their body cameras. Deputies Frederickson and Crump are grinning, Rains noted, and an unrecorded conversation happened between the deputies and the troopers.

“[The OSP troopers] just say, ‘Oh, you’ve been drinking?’ The guy invokes and they say, ‘Oh, OK, cool’?” Rains said. “What did the troopers observe? Did they smell alcohol on Frederickson? Did they see any other any other indicators of impairment? …They didn’t [interview] anybody to find out what was going on.”

One DCSO insider told the Source they’re disappointed in the way DCSO command staff did — or didn’t — handle the Frederickson situation.
“I’m very surprised the issue wasn’t addressed with the public,” the DCSO source said. “It makes the organization look bad and affects the public credibility of all its employees.”

Frederickson’s late paperwork

It wasn’t until Sep. 21 — more than five months since the shooting range incident — that Sheriff Ty Rupert signed and submitted Frederickson’s change of status to LOA — or Leave of Absence — to the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training.

These forms, called F4s, must be sent within 10 days of an officer’s change of status, according to state administrative rules. However, spokesperson Sam Tenney says DPSST has no punitive authority over law enforcement agencies for late filings, opting instead to educate about the reporting timeframe.

‘Clarity’

While Sheriff Rupert stood on the dais after a recent sheriff’s race forum, this reporter asked him for clarity on the Frederickson situation. Rupert said he’d “like clarity on it, as well.”

A few days later, Rupert issued a statement to the Source through DCSO spokesman Jason Carr.

“The Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office is aware of recent rumors questioning whether alleged misconduct by a deputy employed in the sheriff’s office was investigated,” Rupert wrote. “The Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office investigates all instances of alleged staff misconduct. The sheriff’s office is limited in what it can publicly disclose regarding internal personnel matters, and, to that end, the absence of public comment should not be interpreted as inaction.”