Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Norfolk Officer Doxxed and Fired After Donating “Anonymously” To Kyle Rittenhouse Defense Fund

Norfolk Officer Doxxed and Fired After Donating “Anonymously” To Kyle Rittenhouse Defense Fund

“We do not want perceptions of any individual officer to undermine the relations between the Norfolk Police Department and the community.”

The Norfolk, VA, Police Department fired Sgt. William K. Kelly III after a hacker group revealed his anonymously donated money to Kyle Rittenhouse’s defense fund.

Stacey blogged about the hacker group releasing the information of the anonymous donors. The media reported on those who used their government emails.

(People, do NOT ever use your work emails for personal tasks. Please. This isn’t complicated. Not saying that’d stop the media or the left, but still.)

On April 16, Police Chief Larry Boone announced the department reassigned Kelly, who worked as the Internal Affairs Division’s executive officer. Officials also started an investigation.

Norfolk Mayor Kenny Alexander said Kelly’s donation is “not consistent with the values of our city or the standards set for our employees.” Stacey noted that Alexander never elaborated on which “values and standards” Kelly allegedly violated.

The Guardian said Kelly left this comment with his donation:

That donation also carried a comment, reading: “God bless. Thank you for your courage. Keep your head up. You’ve done nothing wrong.”

The comment continued: “Every rank and file police officer supports you. Don’t be discouraged by actions of the political class of law enforcement leadership.”

Fast forward to Tuesday, April 20:

Norfolk City Manager Chip Filer said Boone advised him to relieve Kelly of duty.

“I have reviewed the results of the internal investigation involving Lt. William Kelly. Chief Larry Boone and I have concluded Lt. Kelly’s actions are in violation of City and departmental policies. His egregious comments erode the trust between the Norfolk Police Department and those they are sworn to serve. The City of Norfolk has a standard of behavior for all employees, and we will hold staff accountable,” Filer said in a statement.

I guess everyone missed what actually happened that August night. Even the New York Times reconstruction of the night Rittenhouse allegedly killed two people even suggests self-defense.

Someone send the NYT timeline of that night to Boone:

“I want the residents of Norfolk to know that their police department will represent and uphold our organizational values of Service, Honor, Integrity, Equality, Leadership, and Diversity. A police department cannot do its job when the public loses trust with those whose duty is to serve and protect them. We do not want perceptions of any individual officer to undermine the relations between the Norfolk Police Department and the community. I ask the community to continue to support the officers of the Norfolk Police Department as in the past knowing that right now, at this moment, they are continuing to serve and protect them.”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Fair is fair.
Let’s dox contributors, private and public, to BLM.

“A police department cannot do its job when the public loses trust with those whose duty is to serve and protect them. ”
Empty posturing.
Increasingly, the PDs in major cities do NOTHING to protect their citizens. Indeed, they sit back and watch the mayhem.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to herm2416. | April 21, 2021 at 9:14 am

    They sit back and watch the mayhem. They only step away from the Winchells or Dunkin’ box when they see someone defending themselves.

    As for exposing supporters ofBLM, we can start with Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, Starbucks…

    FortesFortunaJuvat in reply to herm2416. | April 21, 2021 at 9:52 am

    Excellent idea. Unfortunately, no one who can seems willing or it would have already been done.

    Milhouse in reply to herm2416. | April 21, 2021 at 10:07 am

    Let’s dox contributors, private and public, to BLM.

    What will that achieve? Do you really think their employers will fire them? Or will they praise and reward them?

    Dimsdale in reply to herm2416. | April 21, 2021 at 1:16 pm

    Regardless of his now not so anonymous donation, none of the people shot by Rittenhouse were black, and Norfolk, VA is a long way from Kenosha, too.

    So which community is being affected by his donation? It must be the wokerati.

      Rube in reply to Dimsdale. | April 21, 2021 at 1:57 pm

      The first guy to lynch Rittenhouse was skinny black guy who knocked underaged Kyle down and ran away so the other jackels could move in to attempt a public execution.

      avi natan in reply to Dimsdale. | April 21, 2021 at 6:36 pm

      no they were Hitler Jugend lifted from ” Triumph Of The Will”

Hopefully he can sue the living feces out of them…

    Milhouse in reply to PaulB. | April 21, 2021 at 10:12 am

    I would like to think so to, but for what? I don’t know what that department’s union contract says, I would assume it provides some procedure and the city already took that into account; but other that what grounds would he have for suing? An employer can fire someone for any reason he likes, except those specifically prohibited by law.

      PaulB in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 10:36 am

      Hence the word “Hopefully”…

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 10:59 am

      Sounds like he is being fired for using his work computer to partake in personal business. As such, this contribution and his comments could possibly be construed to be the official position of the department he works for.

      Having said that, this sounds like a moment for counseling, unless he has been counseled and he has engaged in repeated violations.

      Remember, the woke will not forgive. They are like the living dead, staggering around without real consciousness and with an insatiable appetite to consume everyone not like them.

        Wow, this is fun! I have found a point on which I disagree with our Brave Sir Robin. It’s kind of Twilight Zone territory, but here it is. Read the statement from Boone on this guy’s firing. Read it again. Where in there do you see, this horrifying use of an office email address is a threat to the community? This is NOT about official email vs. private email. Heck, he could have made that donation while at home in his skivvies while eating a Rueben. He just typed in an email address, there’s no indication he actually made the donation of his own money from his office computer.

        Boone money quote: “His egregious comments erode the trust between the Norfolk Police Department and those they are sworn to serve.”

        “His egregious comments” NOT his violation of work email rules/policy.

        As an aside, though, how freaking stupid do you have to be to do this? There is NO way to donate to anything anywhere anonymously; if your money is moving, it’s traceable. Period. No matter what email addy you use or what VPN service, etc. Unless you are some kind of criminal mastermind, or a politician, you can’t move money without a trail leading directly to your doorstep.

        Sounds like he is being fired for using his work computer to partake in personal business.

        What indication is there that the did that?

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 12:36 pm

          Thought that was what I read from the story. Perhaps I am wrong.

          turk187 in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 1:01 pm

          Second paragraph, last sentance: “The media reported on those who used their government emails.”

          henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 2:45 pm

          He entered his work email address on the donation form.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 8:01 pm

          Turk:

          Second paragraph, last sentance: “The media reported on those who used their government emails.”

          So? How is that any indication that he used his work computer to partake in personal business?
          HenryBowman:

          He entered his work email address on the donation form.

          Same question. How does that indicate in any way that he used his work computer?

          How does that indicate in any way that he used his work computer?
          He used work resources. In the sense the server “belongs” in some way to the Norfolk PD or the city, he was using a work computer.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | April 23, 2021 at 6:58 pm

          He used work resources. In the sense the server “belongs” in some way to the Norfolk PD or the city, he was using a work computer

          Again, what makes you think he used the PD’s server?

        caseoftheblues in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 22, 2021 at 8:59 pm

        An audit of official email accounts of same county that fired this guy found 178,000 emails to BLM, Act Blue, Planned Parenthood, George Floyd conributions etc, etc etc….so the guy was fired for having the wrong opinion nothing more

      JusticeDelivered in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 1:09 pm

      Milhouse, think outside the box. When I was dealing with a corporate adversary I looked for product liability problems and then used those to make their lives interesting. That was by no means the only weapon is used.

      herm2416 in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 1:21 pm

      Violation of First Amendment rights,

        Milhouse in reply to herm2416. | April 21, 2021 at 8:05 pm

        Government entities are allowed to fire employees who deal with the public, and whose ability to do so is impaired by the opinions they’ve publicly expressed. E.g. beat cops who make racist statements in public.

        But they’re not entitled to fire employees who don’t deal with the public, or whose opinions have not become publicly known. (And I don’t think they can deliberately reveal the opinions to the public for the purpose of then being able to fire them.) For instance, when an employee of a police department, whose job was entirely internal, expressed the opinion that she was sorry the attempt to kill Reagan failed and that she hoped the next attempt would succeed, the supreme court said she could not be fired for that, because of the first amendment. Had she been dealing with the public and said it in public it would have been different.

          ALPAPilot in reply to Milhouse. | April 23, 2021 at 2:27 pm

          Amendment VI

          In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

          It seems like the Norfolk PD would have to argue that supporting the 6th amendment to the Constitution would somehow undermine the local justice system and somehow be inimical to public safety. It would be quite easy to show this right is currently under assault by many, now to include the Norfolk PD.

      henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 2:45 pm

      “An employer can fire someone for any reason he likes”
      Not a public employer, and not a unionized employee.

      caseoftheblues in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 3:25 pm

      Police, an arm of government, fired a guy for expressing himself…for his his 1st ammendment rights… so theres that…

        Milhouse in reply to caseoftheblues. | April 21, 2021 at 8:08 pm

        You’d think so but if his job is dealing with the public, and his remarks make that impossible then he can be fired for it. But yes, it’s something to argue. He can challenge the claim that the public would have a problem with his comments (since I would imagine a majority would have no problem with it).

          Particularly since Norfolk (and surrounding cities) is a HUGE military town (there are 7 military installations I can think of just off the top of my head in the area; 3 of those are major). The state is open carry and loves its 2A rights (except the morons in NoVa).

          However, there is a large urban minority contingent in the city, who do play the racial grievance game. And guess where a large amount of policing effort goes in Norfolk?

          caseoftheblues in reply to Milhouse. | April 22, 2021 at 9:05 pm

          His comments and contribution were private and announymous. And an audit of official emails of same county found 178,000 emails by workers to BLM, Act Blue, Planned Parenthood, George Floyd Foundation, Biden for President etc etc etc…NONE resulting in firing

        DaveGinOly in reply to caseoftheblues. | April 21, 2021 at 10:35 pm

        And then there’s the question of support for due process. A police officer violates a city’s “standards” when he gives support to a defendant who is presumed innocent by law? The city might be able to fire a cop for support of a convicted murderer, but that’s not the same thing as supporting a mere defendant. Did the City of Norfolk already have a written/declared “standard” concerning support for defendants (or Rittenhouse in particular) that the officer could have violated? Would such a standard even be legal? Certainly, it would be a difficult standard for government to justify, as it would tend to denigrate due process rights that is bound to defend and enforce.

          Arguably, it would be a denial of civil rights under color of authority. (And yes, it would be a weak argument, legally.)

          But I do think he would have a leg to stand on in a civil suit for wrongful termination over support for due process rights, when the organization firing him is required by the Constitution to adhere to due process itself.

    stl in reply to PaulB. | April 21, 2021 at 2:04 pm

    While it may have been “against policy” to use his work email, certainly not a fireable offense. Government employees do not give up their constitutional rights as government employers are still “government”. I hope he does sue them and I would bet he’d get a good jury.

JusticeDelivered | April 21, 2021 at 9:18 am

Norfolk is 42% black, while this is in the short term going to be painful for Sgt. William K. Kelly III, he will be much better off not being in a shit hole like Norfork.

    Conservative Beaner in reply to JusticeDelivered. | April 21, 2021 at 10:25 am

    Back when I was stationed there we called it NoF*ck, Vagina.

      I was just up there a couple months ago to visit my kid. That place is a real shit hole.

      At their high school the cheer is:

      We don’t drink
      We don’t smoke
      Norfolk
      Norfolk

      If their reason for the firing is inappropriate use of departmental facilities, then the punishment had better be in line with those who had also been disciplined, such as a letter in their permanent record. If it is above and beyond, then the officer has just bought a ticket to the “woke lottery.”

    It’s actually not entirely a sh**hole. Just some large parts.

So how much longer do we put up with this crap?

    A question I’ve been wondering about for some time now.

    Kyle Rittenhouse was the victim of an attempted lynching. Kenny Alexander is down with lynching as is the leadership of the Norfolk PD.

    FortesFortunaJuvat in reply to Virginia42. | April 21, 2021 at 9:54 am

    As long as it takes for people to recognize that there’s only one way to put an end to it. Most people are not logistically ready for that. Not to mention physically and mentally.

      If we haven’t done it yet, then we aren’t going to. The most rowdy our side has ever been was an unarmed protest at the capitol. Worst insurrection ever.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Virginia42. | April 21, 2021 at 9:56 am

    Until we learn to stop being nice. I really do not want to see this happen, but, I think vigilence committees will make a come-back. When some scum is released in some no-bail place, or there are DAs and judges who will not do their job, street justice will make a return.

    In the late 1800s up through the early 1900s, Jewish men in New York patrolled their own neighborhoods, doing it in pairs. The kid who smashed the Jewish shop-keeper’s window did it ONCE. The attackers of Jewish women did it ONCE. This is while the police looked the other way; I’d expect nothing less of a department comprised of Poles and other devout Catholics.

      Italian-Americans did the same type of patrols in Little Italy. How do you think the mafia started?

        The Friendly Grizzly in reply to pmpalmiero. | April 21, 2021 at 11:10 am

        Oh, I know. And, the protection money wasn’t always “be a shame if something happened”; oftentimes it really was for actual protection.

          henrybowman in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | April 21, 2021 at 2:49 pm

          Protection money is like public school taxes. You pay for the public service every year because you have to, and then you pay a private organization to actually get the actual service you still need.

        DaveGinOly in reply to pmpalmiero. | April 21, 2021 at 10:40 pm

        Not really. The Mafia in the US was an offshoot of the well-established crime families in Sicily and the Italian mainland. It did not grow organically in Little Italy anywhere here in the US. It had nothing to do with the Anglo-Saxon concept of public policing.

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | April 21, 2021 at 11:00 am

      “Until we learn to stop being nice.:

      Never will happen.

Kyle Rittenhouse was the victim of an attempted lynching. Kenny Alexander is down with lynching as is the leadership of the Norfolk PD.

    FortesFortunaJuvat in reply to Rube. | April 21, 2021 at 9:56 am

    Generalizations tend to do nothing but turn potential friends into enemies. I know several NPD officers. None of them are “down with lynching”. They don’t like what has happened any more than you do.

Guys don’t send any personal messages or any political messages on any communication medium that isn’t your own. Do not use a CPU ECT that doesn’t belong to you or a network that someone else pays for to send any political or public policy comments. That is a basic concept. Your employer can discipline you for doing so.

Had this person used his own account at his residence this would be a different situation. Don’t give a ‘woke’ employer the rope to hang you with, make them earn it.

    FortesFortunaJuvat in reply to CommoChief. | April 21, 2021 at 9:57 am

    In either case you end up getting hanged.

    Milhouse in reply to CommoChief. | April 21, 2021 at 10:15 am

    Um, you are doing exactly what you say not to.

    And an email address is not a resource; giving a work email address with your donation doesn’t cost your employer anything.

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 11:03 am

      Many employers may consider this as binding their organization with the employee’s individual cause. The LT has a lot better case if he uses only his personal computer and network.

      MarkSmith in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 11:10 am

      Actually it does. The work email address is the property of the employer that requires services to manage. I am pretty sure there is a policy about using work emails for personal use. That is his mistake. As for firing him over it, that is a little excessive.
      Personal use of work computers is not isolated. We know why he was fired, just say it.
      Being conservative and being supportive of self defense is reason to cancel.

      With free emails everywhere, he should have used one of those accounts. Shoot, look at the federal government:

      Using the Freedom of Information Act, the News4 I-Team obtained investigative records from a dozen federal agencies to gather a sampling of recent cases of computer misuse by employees.

      https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/federal-workers-continue-accessing-pornography-government-issued-computers/151803/

        I think all this focus on using a work email address is missing the point. Personally, I would never use a work email address to do anything non-work related; however, the primary issue here is clearly not the work email address. Does anyone here really believe that if this cop had used his .woohooMAGA email account, the result would be any different? Trees. Forest. Think.

          CommoChief in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 21, 2021 at 12:14 pm

          Well sure, the use of employer provided resources isn’t really the biggest issue. It did provide a convenient and justified reason for discipline. My point is do not provide anyone an easy way to get at you.

          In other words the LT created an ‘own goal’ situation and his employer took that opportunity to discipline him.

          In DoD this is a big no no. Heck even using a private device on a DoD network means that the information on that device now belongs to the DoD. Clear warnings about this and other misuse of DoD information systems at every log in and the much dreaded ‘annual refresher’ training.

          Though I did hear they torpedoed the annual requirement recently. I have been happily retired since 2014 so it’s not my problem anymore.

          Well, no, Chief, that’s not what happened. The faux-JOURNALIST whined about the offical email addy after being thoroughly humiliated on Twitter. The cop’s actual boss said that his views as expressed in his donation note did not comport with official policy. There is no mention by his boss about typing in his work email addy (which was dumb but could have done from home at anytime, not necessarily while at work). That was not the issue for his boss nor why he was fired, unless there is some new statement I haven’t read yet.

          CommoChief in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 21, 2021 at 12:33 pm

          Fuzzy,

          That is another large no no for DoD and I expect for his department.

          At best the LT used his personal CPU at home. However, he seems to have used his employer provided email address in relation to what can be fairly described as a political issue.

          In doing so he created a connection or association however tenuous between his personal advocacy and his employer. That isn’t OK. He provided the employer a pretext to discipline him and they did.

          What I am suggesting is don’t use any employer provided resources. Don’t wear any employer provided uniform in a photo or use a job title or anything else in a signature block for anything that is unrelated to scope of work.

          What someone does in their own home, on their own time, on their own dime as long as it is legal isn’t your employer business. When you tie in your employer, however tenuous, it becomes their business.

          Be smarter than that.

          On this we agree on principal. But exactly none of that applies here. He didn’t get fired for typing his official email addy into a supposedly anonymous donation form. We know this because his now-former boss tells us so.

          If he had used his [email protected] email addy, the result would be the same once he was doxxed by the “leak.” He was, according to his boss, fired for wrongthink, not for typing his work email addy into a form.

          Getting side-tracked by leftist loons is unbecoming. Stop it.

          CommoChief in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 21, 2021 at 2:03 pm

          Fuzzy,

          If the LT had chosen to use a non employer provided email then his employer would not have any basis to discipline him.

          He would have been using his own CPU, internet connection and personal email account. He would have done everything reasonably possible to separate his personal comments from those of his employer.

          In this case he didn’t. He chose to provide an employer provided email address. This act created a link between his employer and his comments. Tenuous link? Sure.

          Would the dox have been successful in identifying him? Probably. Would there be any association between his comments and his employer? Nope.

          That situation doesn’t Land itself to discipline. There wouldn’t be any association with the employer in that scenario. Any attempt to discipline him would be actionable by the LT.

          When I was in the Army we had it drilled into us. Write all the comments you want but sign using your name, don’t use rank or branch of service. Attend all the political rallies you want but not in uniform or a unit shirt or a ‘Stay Army’ re-enlistment hat.

          Don’t provide any link between your personal comments and that of the Army or DoD. Don’t create a situation where someone could mistakenly infer that your personal comments reflect the official policy of the Army or DoD.

          In simple terms don’t cause some jack leg reporter to gin up a controversy about your personal comments by providing any link to the Army.

          This guy handed his employer a way to discipline him by using his employer provided email. Absent that what is his employer going to do? Fire him because a reporter got the hacked info and his hacked tax records and then sifted through the records of public sector employees to find his name, call the employer to see if this name matches the employee?

          No reasonable person could anticipate all that and no employer could discipline an employee on that basis.

          The real issue is the failure to understand that public and private employers are under pressure to be seen as on the ‘right side’. If you give your employer a choice between standing up for you v a mob when these employers desperately want to be seen as on the side of the mob and you hand them a legit way to discipline you what do you think they will do?

          Be smart enough not to provide the rope.

          henrybowman in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 21, 2021 at 2:52 pm

          “Does anyone here really believe that if this cop had used his .woohooMAGA email account, the result would be any different? Trees. Forest. Think.”

          No, sorry, you think. The presence of his official email address was the ONLY tip the hacker and his running dogs had that this guy was a Virginia cop, which is why he got busted. If the cop had used his woohooMAGA email account, the hackers would never have been able to tell him from the checkout boy at the local Piggly Wiggly.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 21, 2021 at 3:59 pm

          “If the LT had chosen to use a non employer provided email then his employer would not have any basis to discipline him.”

          I cannot speak for either Norfolk or VA, but in most jurisdictions state, county, and municipal employees have various protections similar to federal civil service employees designed to protect employees from political retribution. If this is so in Norfolk, and it likely is, the officer would have had to violate some policy of the department to justify termination. Even then, firing is difficult, and the action taken against the officer must be commensurate with action taken against other employees with like or similar offenses. Normally there is a published Table of Offenses which lists the type of offense and the corrective or punitive actions suggested or even allowed under that offense which also includes a consideration of frequency of occurrence.

          Most such Table of Offenses would demand counseling and then escalation to re-training, then official performance improvement plans, then termination, or some sort of sequence. If this did not occur, the officer likely has actionable cause against his department. If he is not pursuing this, it is likely because the laws and policies of his jurisdiction are rather unique, or he has a file with escalated counseling, remedial training, performance improvement management, etc. entries.

          I take your point on many facets. First, he is being doxed by the Woke Zombie Hordes who are cruel and merciless fascists who take joy in the destruction of people they disagree with, second, the officer, in the current woke political fascist climate, has extremely limited means of redress and will have all the weight of the city, county and press weighing against him should he push back, and third, that if he made such a contribution to BLM nothing bad would have come of it. Double standards are the only woke standards.

          Of course the press will bury this if they do not use it as a meme to vilify this officer and destroy him utterly and completely. But it is difficult to know the full background.

          If this officer was a good cop and well liked and respected in his department, this is nail the wrist of good morale.

          Again, it appears he tied his official position, even tenuously, to a personal action, and this was the seam used to gut him. If you are LT Norfolk Police Department, you need to make real sure that if use that title it is absolutely clear what you are doing or saying is completely of your own accord and has no relation to any official or unofficial position of the department.

          But again, firing? Seems way overdone indeed, and likely based on politics, unless there is more to his personnel file, which we do not know. If based on politics, and in disregard to a Table of Offenses (assuming there is one), this officer has actionable claim against his termination in all probability. But that fight, especially in this climate, is a long and expensive one.

          If wronged, I do hope his brothers and sisters in the rank and file support him, as we should, too.

          Sorry if earlier comments misstated, confused, or misrepresented my position.

        Milhouse in reply to MarkSmith. | April 21, 2021 at 12:11 pm

        The work email address is the property of the employer that requires services to manage.

        No, it is not property, and it does not require any services to manage.

        I am pretty sure there is a policy about using work emails for personal use.

        I am quite sure there is no policy about using work addresses for personal use.

          CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 12:17 pm

          So who is paying for the server space and paying for the enterprise services required to set up, manage and maintain those services? Who is paying for the internet connection?

          The employer.

          The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 12:18 pm

          No, it is not property, and it does not require any services to manage.

          Then, why did I receive an annual bill for domain administration and another for hosting that domain when I ran my own business?

          daniel_ream in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 5:52 pm

          Sorry, man. Take it from a former Director of IT for several mid-sized international companies: an email address is a corporate asset, it is owned by the employer and every employment AUP ever written contains clear directions on what you may and may not do with that email address.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 11:04 pm

          The domain registration fee is not for administration, it’s just a rent you pay for the name. It doesn’t depend in any way on usage.

          The hosting fee is of course not for the domain but for for hosting whatever site you’ve got it pointed to, if any. I generally don’t have my sites hosted at the domain registrar. I usually buy my domains from godaddy, but point them at content I host elsewhere. So I don’t have to pay godaddy anything for hosting, just the annual renewal fee for the domain itself.

          But in any event using an email address (not using email services, just the address itself, as in this guy who filled in a form with the address) doesn’t cost anything.

          The domain registration fee is not for administration, it’s just a rent you pay for the name.
          Even if I’m not living in the building, if it’s my building, you best not move into it. It’s my property. In the case of a domain name, it’s intellectual property. In the case of a government domain name, it’s the property of the people – but that doesn’t mean you get to use it anymore than you get to pop on down to the police garage and take one of their cruisers for a spin just because “you paid for it.”

          but point them at content I host elsewhere
          And wherever that is, you’re either paying for it, or you’re providing it from your own resources. (Or you’re grifting off someone else.)

          You’re as pedantic about this as you are the law. Unfortunately, it seems you know less about this than about the law.

          No, it is not property, and it does not require any services to manage.
          You’re grotesquely wrong to say that. It most certainly does require services and resources to manage. It is also the “property” of the employer – if you are fired you are no longer allowed to use it. PERIOD.

          I am quite sure there is no policy about using work addresses for personal use.
          And, again, you would be grotesquely wrong. Not even in left field, but out in the edges of the parking lot wrong. EVERY single employer with which I have worked has said that use of the company email for anything other than official use was prohibited. And, for the longest time, many wouldn’t even let you use your company computer to access personal email accounts. (Many won’t even let you make personal calls on the company phone.)

          Have you ever been employed, Milhouse? Did you actually read the company manual? Heck, they even make you sign usage agreements nowadays.

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 11:18 am

      BSR makes a valid point: tying the employer to the cause. Some scheiss-ter can make a real case out of that in the gambling casinos some refer to as “the courts”. Second, It’s the employer’s servers, domain, and other things that cost money. So, yes, it DOES “cost”.

      Before I retired, I never, EVER used my company email address for anything but business. I also made sure that my employer had no issue with my using my company machine for checking personal email if I was, say, in middle of some personal business requiring my checking. One said “no”. I respected that.

        Using the address does not cost the employer anything. The employer’s servers are not involved. The domain costs a fixed amount no matter how many addresses are assigned and how often they’re used. The address doesn’t even cost anything to create, let alone to use. There’s no indication that he made the donation while at work, or on a work machine.

          Exactly, he probably just entered his work email address on the “anonymous” donation form. This is all red herring chasing silly.

          henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 2:55 pm

          “There’s no indication that he made the donation while at work, or on a work machine.”

          Well, we can’t say that for sure without inspecting the actual data dump, which may well have included the date and time of the donation; and knowing this guy’s work schedule, which his management certainly did.

      CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 12:04 pm

      Milhouse,

      If I didn’t make the point clearly enough I apologize. Here is another stab.

      Don’t use any employer provided resources to communicate any non employment related opinions or to take any actions not related to your scope of employment.

      Alternate

      Your employer is paying you to perform within the scope of employment. Using either time on the clock or the employer provided internet connection or the employer provided information system/electronic device for personal use is just as wrong as taking home stamps, envelopes, pens and paper to compose and mail a letter to the editor.

      I am using my own internet connection and my own electronic devices to post comments to a public forum. That is 100% not using any employer provided resources, which is the point. Not that it would matter in my case as I am self employed/retired depending upon the day.

        Milhouse in reply to CommoChief. | April 21, 2021 at 12:14 pm

        CommoChief, what you originally wrote was “Guys don’t send any personal messages or any political messages on any communication medium that isn’t your own.” You are using LI’s communication medium, as am I.

        Using either time on the clock or the employer provided internet connection or the employer provided information system/electronic device for personal use is just as wrong as taking home stamps, envelopes, pens and paper to compose and mail a letter to the editor.

        There’s no indication that he did any of these things.

          CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 12:20 pm

          That’s why I provided additional clarification and an apology for not being more clear in my original post. No worries, happy to clarify when I am not communicating clearly.

          Again, good point, Mihouse. My guess is the guy just typed in his most-used email addy when filling out the “anonymous” donation form; we have no indication at all that he used police property to make the donation.

          Has no one here ever donated to anything online? If that’s the case, here’s how it works:

          You find the cause’s website to which you wish donate, you enter your full (real) name, your real address, your email address, your telephone number, and your payment info. Some fields are required, so you can usually fudge the ones that aren’t, but what you can always do is perform this task from home on your own time and on your own device.

          So far, all we know is that the dude included his work email addy (which I can’t stress enough was DUMB) on some aspect of the later-leaked “anonymous” donation form, but it’s not a crime to include it on a form, nor is it even objetionable in any conceivable way (except being DUMB).

          Hint: nothing you do online is ever anonymous. Someone, somewhere can and will find you. For most of us, as normal citizens, it’s not even hard. Using your bank account or PayPal or whatever is going to lead to you. Period. It’s your money, and don’t think for a minute the government doesn’t know to the penny what you have and where you spend it.

          henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 3:17 pm

          “CommoChief, what you originally wrote was “Guys don’t send any personal messages or any political messages on any communication medium that isn’t your own.” You are using LI’s communication medium, as am I.”

          Claptrap. Unless you communicate TO somebody else that isn’t you, it’s not communication, it’s a diary.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 8:14 pm

          Commenting on this forum is communicating to anyone who reads it. That’s what communication means.

          henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | April 22, 2021 at 9:13 pm

          “Commenting on this forum is communicating to anyone who reads it. That’s what communication means.”

          Precisely. Now, follow the rest of the argument: if “communication” with anyone requires you to send information to their “communication medium that isn’t your own,” your advice logically boils down to “don’t communicate personal or political messages at all.” Which is why I said; claptrap.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to CommoChief. | April 21, 2021 at 5:53 pm

    Or used his own device via a VPN, as long as there was no one seeing his actions.

    I have a MiFi using a VPN, that is even better than using an employer’s WiFi.

    There is still the the issue of timestamps, so be careful of that.

    DaveGinOly in reply to CommoChief. | April 21, 2021 at 10:48 pm

    Had this person used his own account at his residence this would be a different situation.

    You seriously believe that? There was no mention by city officials that the officer’s firing was for his use of his work email account. The only thing I can see that might have been different is that the city would then lack even the slightest excuse (an excuse of which they have not availed themselves) for its actions against the officer.

FortesFortunaJuvat | April 21, 2021 at 9:51 am

Kelly ought to sue for an extremely large sum. Of course, being that it is Virginia, Peoples’ Republic of, he won’t win at any level in that state. But, the odds vastly improve when entering the Federal court system. Will it take time? Sure. He can get hired onto another department.

    smalltownoklahoman in reply to FortesFortunaJuvat. | April 21, 2021 at 10:10 am

    See, I’m more of the mind that it wouldn’t have mattered what device or on who’s time & dime Mr. Kelly made these comments on. He dared to support someone the left wants destroyed and if you do that they are making it very plain that they will come for you too. If Kelly had done this at home using his own personal email account they just would have used a somewhat different excuse.

    Also I get the feeling top brass in his department might have took things a little personal given the comment Kelly left with his donation.

      smalltownoklahoman in reply to smalltownoklahoman. | April 21, 2021 at 10:12 am

      Whoops, that should have been in reply to CommoChief, not FortesFurtunajuvat.

        CommoChief in reply to smalltownoklahoman. | April 21, 2021 at 7:30 pm

        That is probably the case. However, by refraining from using employer provided resources he would force them to find that ‘something else’.

        My point is don’t had the mob the rope they will use to hang you. Make them work for it. Make that hard not easy.

      I agree (see my comment above) but disagree on a particular point. If the officer had used a personal account, he would have been fired and the city would have used the same excuse, because the city hasn’t explained his firing by way of his use of a city email account.

      henrybowman in reply to smalltownoklahoman. | April 22, 2021 at 9:15 pm

      “See, I’m more of the mind that it wouldn’t have mattered what device or on who’s time & dime Mr. Kelly made these comments on. He dared to support someone the left wants destroyed and if you do that they are making it very plain that they will come for you too.”

      I think we all agree that’s the case. We’re just arguing over what grounds he could claim in a lawsuit.

    Sue for what? And how could the case ever “enter the federal court system”? How would it ever be the business of the federal courts?

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 11:23 am

      Exactly. Sue for what? Using a resource that did not belong to him to conduct personal business, and presumably while on the clock? He’d be laughed out of court.

      Some think “sue!” is the answer to everything.

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2021 at 4:04 pm

      Please see above. It is likely he is covered by various laws, rules, and regulations protecting him from arbitrary and political retribution. It is likely his department has a published Table of Offenses that guides remedial actions a nd punishment, to include severity and frequency and that includes, in most instances, escalatory corrective action. If this was not followed by his department, he may well have actionable cause.

      If this is the case, it is a shame the officer is wronged and he must now expend a large sum of money and time while denied an income to regain his position. I hope he is a union employ (possibly not given his rank) and has union financial and other backing.

      ALPAPilot in reply to Milhouse. | April 23, 2021 at 2:25 pm

      Pickering v. Board of Education

      MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL (ironically)delivered the opinion of the Court.

      Appellant Marvin L. Pickering, a teacher in Township High School District 205, Will County, Illinois, was dismissed from his position by the appellee Board of Education for sending a letter to a local newspaper in connection with a recently proposed tax increase that was critical of the way in which the Board and the district superintendent of schools had handled past proposals to raise new revenue for the schools. Appellant’s dismissal resulted from a determination by the Board, after a full hearing, that the publication of the letter was “detrimental to the efficient operation and administration of the schools of the district” and hence, under the relevant [391 U.S. 565] Illinois statute, Ill. Rev. Stat., c. 122, § 10-22.4 (1963), that “interests of the school require[d] [his dismissal].”

      Appellant’s claim that his writing of the letter was protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments was rejected. Appellant then sought review of the Board’s action in the Circuit Court of Will County, which affirmed his dismissal on the ground that the determination that appellant’s letter was detrimental to the interests of the school system was supported by substantial evidence and that the interests of the schools overrode appellant’s First Amendment rights. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Illinois, two Justices dissenting, affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court. 36 Ill.2d 568, 225 N.E.2d 1 (1967). We noted probable jurisdiction of appellant’s claim that the Illinois statute permitting his dismissal on the facts of this case was unconstitutional as applied under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.1 389 U.S. 925 (1967). For the reasons detailed below we agree that appellant’s rights to freedom of speech were violated and we reverse.

LongTimeReader | April 21, 2021 at 10:12 am

From here forward, every politically tinged donation I make with a left over gift card balance will be using the name and email address of a spineless police chief or anti-police politician.

    MajorWood in reply to LongTimeReader. | April 21, 2021 at 11:50 am

    I used to sign AA attendance slips with the name of the current governor of the state.

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to MajorWood. | April 21, 2021 at 12:30 pm

      If I am REQUIRED to sign in for something where I believe my name or email is really not there business, I cook something up. Robert (Bob) Sledd. Sheldon Rostead. Phil Durdt. Nunah Bizness.

      Anecdote: Years ago, my boss asked me to make up a dummy sample of the sort of reports we would issue our customers when conducting lighting energy surveys. I chose two: Johnson Flour And Sawdust Company: supplier of ingredients to high-fibre bread-bakers world-wide. The other was the Noodyazah Fruitcake Company.

      Not one single solitary customer or potential customer tumbled to what I did, and it took the boss MONTHS to catch on.

      I love being nuts!

        I once had to design and make a mock-up of a new award for firefighters. I didn’t leave the mock-up blank, I wanted it to look like it would when actually presented to a firefighter. My mock-up was awarded to Michael O’Hallorhan, SFFD 5th Battalion Chief, for his actions at the Glass Tower, with the award dated December 14, 1974.

        Nobody got it.

If this poor cop had donated to the racist, terrorist group, “Black Lives Matter,” no doubt he’d still have his job. This guy was fired for donating to the “wrong” cause, and, for holding the “wrong” beliefs.

We’re living in a totalitarian state, folks. My head is spinning at the alacrity with which the vile Dhimmi-crats have consolidated their control over the entire country and all spheres of American society.

This outcome has been in the works, for decades, but, the speed with which events have been accelerating and coalescing is truly frightening.

    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to guyjones. | April 21, 2021 at 11:07 am

    “If this poor cop had donated to the racist, terrorist group, “Black Lives Matter,” no doubt he’d still have his job. This guy was fired for donating to the “wrong” cause, and, for holding the “wrong” beliefs.”

    Undoubtedly true, but he gave his employer an opening IF he used his work computer and resources.

    I would not want him making donations to BLM using his work computer and resources, either.

    Again – firing seems over the line. He did not state the donation was from the department. Counseling seems the appropriate course of action, which is why this smells of politics. But we do not know what is in the man’s personnel file, just to be fair.

      Sure, the cop gave his superiors an opening by using his work computer, but, the larger issue is that there wouldn’t be an issue, at all, if only he had donated to an “approved” Leftist cause. It’s the issue of double standards that’s so galling. There’s one set of lenient/non-existent rules for Dhimmi-crats who promote Dhimmi-crat causes, even if they fall afoul of laws and regulations, and, another set of harshly-enforced, zero-tolerance, totally rigid laws and regulations for conservatives and anyone who makes common cause with conservatives and conservative causes.

        Is there any indication at all that he used his work computer? (hint: the answer is “no”)

          guyjones in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 21, 2021 at 12:54 pm

          My mistake, Fuzzy. I had mis-read Sir Robbin’s post as stating that the cop had used his work computer. Duly noted. 🙂

          Most companies have “Limited personal use” policy for their resources, so you can call the garage or babysitter without getting into trouble, but also have “No political or business use” which means you CAN’T give an interview to a political radio show in favor of a candidate, or run your real estate business from your work phone/email. (There’s also a “Can’t use your position or title in political stuff” restriction so you can’t give a speech for a candidate WITH your title/office but that’s aside.)

          This is 100% the Norfolk office finding their officer guilty of Wrongthink and trying to stash him somewhere until the heat dies down. They would have done exactly the same (as you said) if he used his personal email and personal phone. Sue ’em until they bleed money.

        henrybowman in reply to guyjones. | April 21, 2021 at 3:05 pm

        “It’s the issue of double standards that’s so galling.”

        What people are missing here is that this is everyday work for the police.
        Think the black dude has weed? Stop him for “weaving within his lane.”
        Don’t like the officer’s politics? Fire him for using a work email address.
        Cops operate in the pretextual universe. Expect it.

I’d like to know more about the breach and who was behind it. Is there an investigation?

    MarkSmith in reply to pmpalmiero. | April 21, 2021 at 11:13 am

    Or if the data is valid. Geez, you could smear anyone with the data. Just change the email and bingo. Likely not the case here, but you can see where the communist state is going.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to MarkSmith. | April 21, 2021 at 6:34 pm

      Smearing is exactly what needs to happen.

      One adversary had deficiency’s, one being an electrocution hazard and many more impacting operation in a factory environment. I wrote a 5 page article for a trade publication talking about common system problems, most of which were common to the target’s installations.

      For a year and a half I was receiving calls, where those problems were running over half a million, and up about $5 million, to fix, over a dozen of those cases.

      The CEO was living in interesting times.

      Start thinking about what can be done. Off hand, the best approach might be to engineer them turning on each other. I guarantee that there is plenty of petty personal dislikes and envy in their ranks.

    henrybowman in reply to pmpalmiero. | April 21, 2021 at 3:09 pm

    Thank you for calling the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Sorry, most of our special agents are busy at the moment investigating white supremacists terrorists who attempted to overthrow the Federal government this past January, and the rest are finishing up paperwork on the recent racial terrorism discovered in NASCAR garages. Leave us a message, and we’ll get back to you if you’re a Democrat. Beeeeeeeep.

CaliforniaJimbo | April 21, 2021 at 11:03 am

My question is what department policy did the lieutenant violate? If the policy was using an official email address in an unofficial capacity then I would like enforcement to be universal. All those who sign petitions, give money or use their professional account for private usage in the department should be disciplined in the same manner.
Not knowing the details, I suspect a wrongful termination may be in the cards. Usually, a Police union defends an officer.

Real American | April 21, 2021 at 11:12 am

notably absent from those “values” – the rule of law, due process, and self-defense.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Real American. | April 21, 2021 at 11:02 pm

    Above, georgfelis mentions “No political or business use” of government email accounts. But since when is support for due process a “poltical” matter? If it is a political matter, it’s only because support for due process is incumbent upon all state officials.

    (I should note that georg was not supporting the city’s decision based on this standard.)

So I can eff with a lot of lefties by donating in their name?

Game on!!!!!!

2smartforlibs | April 21, 2021 at 12:13 pm

How far are we from Crystal night?

    DaveGinOly in reply to 2smartforlibs. | April 21, 2021 at 11:03 pm

    We’ve been having it for over a year. It’s just the current crop of Nazis is incapable of discriminating between the shops of those who support them and those who oppose them.

I wonder if the officer’s position in the police force impacted the decision – “the department reassigned Kelly, who worked as the Internal Affairs Division’s executive officer. ” It seems that he should have known better about using a work email.

I understand that the sleazy Guardian got the information from hackers, and then distributed it, and the sleazy media just couldn’t contain themselves. And, of course, the wimpy politicians just had to give in to the mob. While I generally don’t advocate such things, it’s time to just jam it back at the lefties, including the media–forcing them to live by their rules. So I’m all for doxxing the idiots who reported on this officer and the idiot in Utah who outed a first responder. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Another issue in using the work email, regardless of if he used the office computer and network, is that normally it makes you very easily identifiable; your name and your work’s domain. Makes it not too difficult to discern who someone is when looking at a list of “anonymous” email addresses.

It’s truly a sad state of the world we’re living through. When the position that “everyone accused of a crime deserves the best defense possible” becomes controversial, we are truly heading into dark times.

Anyone donating money to a legal defense fund for an accused who is not a member of an “approved” class should take steps to protect themselves. Set up an email account with a random character user name with a privacy focussed email provider like proton mail or similar. Use that address for making donations. Go buy a pre-loaded visa gift card for the amount you wish to donate and pay cash. Then, go make your donation anonymously.

There’s a very apropos quote by G. Michael Hopf that sums up what our society/culture is experiencing:

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

We are clearly seeing the transition from past good times creating weak men and those weak men are in the process of creating hard times. How we get back to producing strong men, and when, is anybody’s guess.

    DaveGinOly in reply to RayCL. | April 21, 2021 at 11:10 pm

    The formula expounds the solution – hard times create strong men. They will come unbidden, but they will come.

I agree that it may have been “against policy” but certainly not fireable.

The Mayor says the donation is “not consistent with the values of our city or the standards set for our employees.” Where exactly are those “values and standards” written down and is where is it written that employees forfeit their constitutional rights to have their own “values and standards” when they become employees?

Maybe it’s time to audit the outbound email logs on the city’s email server, too, to see who else might have used their work computer/email address for “non-government business” like ActBlue, for example, right?

If Rittenhouse is found not guilty, is the Norfolk Police Dept. going to be required to rehire Kelly?

Give Rittenhouse credit in defending himself against those three Hitler Jugend.

Kyle Rittenhouse is a hero, and deserves a medal, not to be in jail and facing trial. Any parent should be proud to have a son like him.

    Meganinvegas in reply to Milhouse. | April 22, 2021 at 11:01 am

    Two wrongs don’t make a right ,as they say ,so to “Dox” people who released the names of people who donated is not going to help. I also disgusted with our media they are literally the cause of 99.9% of our problems if they would stop pushing their personal agenda and actually act like journalists everything would change , but I fear it is way to late for that . Our media with a few exceptions is the equivalent of the media in communist China, something has to change

      henrybowman in reply to Meganinvegas. | April 22, 2021 at 9:23 pm

      I likewise disagree, but for a totally different reason. When Marxists doxx patriots, it’s page one news nationwide for a week. When patriots doxx Marxists, Twitter and Facebook pull their postings, the MSM pretends it never happened, and you get less than friendly visits from the FBI.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend