|
|
Post by crazy8 on Oct 28, 2013 8:36:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Deputy Sheriff on Nov 1, 2013 8:16:28 GMT -5
Apparently you only have partial info from the opponent as he is good at twisting information.
The K-9 was paid for "WAGES" by Federal Law for Care and Training of the dog, and expenses she incurred due to not going to the donated care offered to the Sheriff's Office (she chose to do that and the county had to pay the bill). I might also note she paid the $8,000 value of the dog back to the county (I'm sure the opponent did not mention that part).
The clerical employee went on medical leave and was never seen again as the County HR and Commissioners terminated her employment. Not sure how this is Sheriff Muller's faught??? but yes he was named in the suit because she worked for his office. Intelligent people could figure that out. Check page 100 of the Budget that the opponent previously touted - you will see this was not part of the Sheriff's Office Budget.
Sheriff Muller handles the K-9 now to ensure this will not happen again as he unfortunately trusted this employee who by the way was a terrible
K-9 handler.
It is a shame when people from the outside want to falsely accuse and spread untruthful information not knowing the real story. And if you believe everything you hear and read - I feel sorry for you.
|
|
davew
Poster Child
Posts: 308
|
Post by davew on Nov 4, 2013 9:02:21 GMT -5
>And if you believe everything you hear and read - I feel sorry for you.<
>Intelligent people could figure that out. <
Insulting people as an advocate for the Sheriff is a good way to get them to vote for Redding. You realize that, don't you?
|
|
