The Washington Post quotes Delta Radio CEO David Fuss as saying he believes David Mueller’s side of the story.

A federal jury determined that Mueller assaulted and battered Swift��������grabbing her under her skirt as they posed for a photo. Mueller, who uses the last name “Jackson” on air, still denies that. He began co-hosting the “Jackson and Jonbob” show on Monday.

Mueller’s hiring comes as the #MeToo movement draws attention to sexual assault and harassment.

Fuss says Mueller sounds good on air, but allows that his decision also was “maybe a tiny bit” about publicity.

Neither party has responded to the newspaper’s requests for comment.

David Mueller provided a letter to The Associated Press showing the payment was sent Nov. 28. Mueller previously told the AP he intended the coin featuring a prominent Native American woman as a final jab at the singer in a case her side called a win for all women.

Swift was among the .

In a story published Wednesday, .

Mueller had sued Swift claiming she falsely accused him of groping her and sought up to $3 million. A federal jury in Denver ruled for Swift.

Music superstar Taylor Swift tells Time magazine that a former Denver radio disc jockey who  against her in federal court in Denver has yet to hand over the symbolic $1 fine a jury ordered him to pay.

“When the jury found in my favor, the man who sexually assaulted me was court-ordered to give me a symbolic $1. To this day he has not paid me that dollar, and I think that act of defiance is symbolic in itself,” Swift told Time magazine, which included her as .

In 2015, a former KYGO radio host sued Swift in federal court claiming her allegations that he grabbed her butt during a meet and greet before a Pepsi Center concert led directly to his firing. David Mueller had sought up to $3 million. But on Aug. 14, a jury ruled against him and ordered him to pay the $1 Swift had sought as a symbolic penalty.

Swift issued a statement at the time that thanked her attorneys “for fighting for me and anyone who feels silenced by a sexual assault.”

“I figured that if he would be brazen enough to assault me under these risky circumstances and high stakes, imagine what he might do to a vulnerable, young artist if given the chance,” Swift responded by email to a Time question.

She told the magazine that in the process of angrily replying to Mueller’s questions,

“I’m told it was ,” she told Time.

Mueller told the Associated Press on Wednesday that he mailed Swift a Sacagawea coin last week. Mueller provided a letter to AP showing the payment was sent Nov. 28. He said he intended the coin as a final jab at the singer.

The singer sent the team at Craftsy, an online site for crafts, an assortment of flowers Tuesday with a note thanking the company for “brightening my day for every day I was in Denver.”

A spokesman at Craftsy said they are “absolutely thrilled.”

Craftsy posted a photo of its employees posing with the flowers on its official Twitter account.

Thank you ! We're so happy our messages brightened your day as much as your flowers brightened ours!

— Craftsy (@therealcraftsy)

Jurors in U.S. District Court in Denver deliberated fewer than four hours to find that ex-radio host David Mueller assaulted and battered Swift during a pre-concert meet-and-greet in June 2013. Per Swift’s request, jurors awarded her $1 in damages.

, the former KYGO morning host continued to maintain innocence.

“I didn’t do it. I never grabbed her,” he said. “I never had my hand under her skirt and I can pass a polygraph.”

He said the infamous photo he and his former girlfriend took with Swift looked awkward because he jumped into the shot at the last minute. The information matched his . But .

When asked why Swift, her mother and her radio promotions manager, Mueller said that he initially “asked for something in writing which stated that there was a misunderstanding,” about the groping incident so that he could pursue future employment at another radio station.

Swift and her team denied that request. During her trial testimony, .

Muller now is considering whether to file an appeal.

The jury also found that neither Swift’s mother nor her radio promotions manager interfered with David Mueller’s employment contract when they reported the assault.

A statement from Swift called the verdicts a victory for all women.

“I want to thank Judge William J. Martinez and the jury for their careful consideration, my attorneys Doug Baldridge, Danielle Foley, Jay Schaudies and Katie Wright for fighting for me and anyone who feels silenced by a sexual assault, and especially anyone who offered their support throughout this four-year ordeal and two-year long trial process,” Swift said in the statement, which was reported by TV station Denver7.

Mueller, a former KYGO radio host, sued Swift, her mother and her radio promotions manager, Frank Bell, in 2015. He claimed that they interfered with his employment at KYGO after Bell reported to the station Swift’s claims that the host had groped her and said it could have “grave” consequences on the relationship between the singer and the station. Mueller had sought up to $3 million, saying the allegation cost him his job and reputation.

Swift countersued and sought the $1 in damages. She said she wants to serve as an example to other women who have been sexually assaulted.

“That dollar is of immeasurable value,” Swift’s attorney Douglas Baldridge, said after the verdicts were read.

He said Swift had a lot of courage to come forward, and he called her an inspiration to others.

“The right thing happened,” Baldridge said. “I think it is a new day because Taylor said this is it. The line is drawn.”

The jury — six women and two men — rejected Mueller’s claims as it considered six questions during deliberations in the federal civil trial, which began last week. Three of the questions dealt with Mueller’s claim and three dealt with Swift’s counter-claim.

With their three answers to the counter-claim, jurors found that Mueller assaulted and battered Swift, and then they awarded her the damages she sought.

The jurors had to reach a verdict based on a preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt as required in criminal trials. A preponderance of evidence is “more probably true than not.” Their decisions had to be unanimous.

Two teenage Swift fans were among those who watched on a video monitor from an overflow room as the verdicts were being read.

“I could tell Taylor was extremely excited,” said Abbey Shaw, 16. “She is putting out message for women like us: Stick up for yourselves.”

“I am so happy because I knew she was right,” said 16-year-old Lizzy Howard, speaking of Taylor. “Taylor Swift is my idol, and I want to meet here.”

Both girls said they were moved by Taylor hugging her mother after the verdict as her mother cried.

“You could tell the love in there,” Howard said.

Last week, Swift used blunt language to describe the assault during a meet-and-greet photo session with fans and others before a June 2, 2013, concert at the Pepsi Center.

“He did not touch my rib, he did not touch my hand he didn’t touch my arm, he grabbed my bare ass,” she said.

Jury deliberations were interrupted earlier Monday so jurors could ask the judge whether Swift needed to have apprehension before being groped in order for it to be considered a sexual assault.

Baldridge said the apprehension could happen during or after the assault to qualify. He said jurors were wrong if they believed the apprehension could only happen before the assault for it to qualify in the context of this civil trial.

U.S. District Judge William J. Martinez took a short recess to give Mueller’s attorney Gabe McFarland an opportunity to respond. Martinez later declined to answer the jury’s question and ordered jurors to continue deliberating. Last week, Martinez dismissed Mueller’s claims against Swift but allowed his claim against Swift’s mother and promotions manager to go forward.

The question came at 3:18 p.m., nearly three hours after the jury began deliberations. They reached a verdict at 4:26 p.m.

In his closing argument, Baldridge said Swift spoke on behalf of all women when she testified that “no means no.”

“He lost his job because he grabbed her butt and he got caught,” Baldridge said. “Now he’s trying to save his butt.”

But McFarland told jurors that Swift falsely accused Mueller of assaulting her and that accusation destroyed his career.

“Why would Ms. Swift lie? I don’t know,” McFarland said. “I’m sure she thinks it’s true, but the photograph says otherwise.”

McFarland told jurors that Swift’s mother and Bell used their influence to pressure KYGO into firing Mueller.

During closings both sides offered dramatically different versions of maybe the most important piece of evidence during the trial: a photograph of Taylor Swift taken during the photo session.

McFarland crouched down almost like a baseball catcher while demonstrating how low Mueller would have had to go to reach underneath Swift’s skirt and grab her. “He would have had to bend down like this.”

“Look at Ms. Swift’s face. Is that the face of someone who just had a strange man grab her butt?” McFarland said, referring to a smile on Swift’s face. He said there was no shock because nothing happened. He said her body was aligned just as it had been during each of the numerous photographs taken of her with various fans.

During his closing argument, Baldridge showed numerous pictures of Swift posing with other fans, most of whom were women with young daughters. He asked the jurors if there was any doubt who the perpetrator had been.

“Boy, she must have confused one of these little girls with Mr. Mueller … I think it’s crystal clear Ms. Swift didn’t misidentify this man in that lineup,” Baldridge said. They only other adult couple in the group included a young man with long red hair with his arm around Swift’s upper back, he said.

The photograph shows Swift moving away from Mueller, who had his hand directly behind her bottom. Baldridge asked jurors to look at the smile on Mueller’s face when the picture was taken.

“That is a man who is very proud of what he was doing at that moment,” Baldridge said.

He said Mueller was upset that he was placed in the kiddie line and not with his peers and radio executives at another meet-and-greet session earlier.

“I thought we saw a man of fragile ego on the stand,” Baldridge said. “They tried to get out of the kiddie line …This man — the prominent on-air personality — was embarrassed.”

The jury also found that neither Swift’s mother nor her radio promotions manager interfered with David Mueller’s employment contract when they reported the assault.

Swift issued a statement thanking her attorneys and the judge “for fighting for me and anyone who feels silenced by a sexual assault, and especially anyone who offered their support throughout this four-year ordeal and two-year-long trial process.”

Mueller, a former KYGO radio host, , Frank Bell, in 2015. Mueller claimed that they interfered with his employment at KYGO after Bell reported to the station Swift����ap claims that the host had groped her and said it could have “grave” consequences on the relationship between the singer and the station.  saying the allegation cost him his job and reputation.

Swift countersued and sought the $1 in damages. She said she wants to serve as an example to other women who have been sexually assaulted.

“That dollar is of immeasurable value,” Swift’s attorney Douglas Baldridge said after the verdicts were read.

He said Swift had a lot of courage to come forward, and he called her an inspiration to others.

“The right thing happened,” Baldridge said. “I think it is a new day because Taylor said this is it. The line is drawn.”

The jury — six women and two men — rejected Mueller’s claims as it considered six questions during deliberations in the federal civil trial, which began last week. Three of the questions dealt with Mueller’s claim and three dealt with Swift’s counterclaim.

With their three answers to the counterclaim, jurors found that Mueller assaulted and battered Swift, and then they awarded her the damages she sought. The verdicts came only hours after the jury began deliberations.

The jurors had to reach a unanimous verdict based on a preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt as required in criminal trials. A preponderance of evidence is “more probably true than not.”

Two teenage Swift fans were among those who watched on a video monitor from an overflow room as the verdicts were being read.

“I could tell Taylor was extremely excited,” said Abbey Shaw, 16. “She is putting out a message for women like us: Stick up for yourselves.”

“I am so happy because I knew she was right,” said 16-year-old Lizzy Howard, speaking of Swift. “Taylor Swift is my idol, and I want to meet her.”

Both girls said they were moved by Swift hugging her mother after the verdicts as her mother cried.

“You could tell the love in there,” Howard said.

Last week, to describe the assault during a meet-and-greet photo session with fans and others before a June 2, 2013, concert at the Pepsi Center.

“He did not touch my rib, he did not touch my hand, he didn’t touch my arm, he grabbed my bare ass,” she said.

In her statement after the verdicts Monday, Swift spoke about helping other victims.

“I acknowledge the privilege that I benefit from in life, in society and in my ability to shoulder the enormous cost of defending myself in a trial like this. My hope is to help those whose voices should also be heard. Therefore, I will be making donations in the near future to multiple organizations that help sexual assault victims defend themselves.”

Last week, U.S. District Judge William J. Martinez dismissed Mueller’s claims against Swift but allowed his claim against Swift’s mother and promotions manager to go forward.

During closings both sides offered dramatically different versions of maybe the most important piece of evidence during the trial: a photograph of Taylor Swift with Mueller and his former girlfriend taken during the photo session.

In his closing argument, Baldridge said Swift spoke on behalf of all women when she testified that “no means no.”

“He lost his job because he grabbed her butt and he got caught,” Baldridge said. “Now he’s trying to save his butt.”

But Mueller’s attorney Gabe McFarland told jurors that Swift falsely accused Mueller of assaulting her and that accusation destroyed his career.

“Why would Ms. Swift lie? I don’t know,” McFarland said. “I’m sure she thinks it’s true, but the photograph says otherwise.”

McFarland crouched down almost like a baseball catcher while demonstrating how low Mueller would have had to go to reach underneath Swift’s skirt and grab her. “He would have had to bend down like this.”

“Look at Ms. Swift’s face. Is that the face of someone who just had a strange man grab her butt?” McFarland said, referring to a smile on Swift’s face. He said there was no shock because nothing happened. He said her body was aligned just as it had been during each of the numerous photographs taken of her with various fans.

During his closing argument, Baldridge showed numerous pictures of Swift posing with other fans, most of whom were women with young daughters. He asked the jurors if there was any doubt who the perpetrator had been.

“Boy, she must have confused one of these little girls with Mr. Mueller. … I think it’s crystal clear Ms. Swift didn’t misidentify this man in that lineup,” Baldridge said. The only other adult couple in the group included a young man with long red hair with his arm around Swift’s upper back, he said.

The photograph shows Swift moving away from Mueller, who had his hand directly behind her bottom. Baldridge asked jurors to look at the smile on Mueller’s face when the picture was taken.

“That is a man who is very proud of what he was doing at that moment,” Baldridge said.

He said Mueller was upset that he was placed in the kiddie line and not with his peers and radio executives at another meet-and-greet session earlier.

“I thought we saw a man of fragile ego on the stand,” Baldridge said. “They tried to get out of the kiddie line …This man — the prominent on-air personality — was embarrassed.”

U.S. District Judge William Martinez determined Friday that the pop star could not be held liable because David Mueller failed to prove that she personally set out to have him fired after the 2013 photo op. But jurors will consider his identical allegations against Andrea Swift and Frank Bell.

Mueller sued Swift after her team reported the alleged assault to his bosses at a country music station. He is seeking up to $3 million, saying the allegation cost him his job and reputation.

Swift countersued and is seeking a symbolic $1. She says she wants to serve as an example to other women who have been assaulted.

Here’s a look at the key elements in the he-said, she-said trial that began Tuesday in federal court in Denver.

The photograph

Swift’s lawyers called the image “damning” proof that Mueller inappropriately touched her. Mueller argues it shows him trying to jump into the frame.

Entertainment news outlet TMZ obtained and published the photo, which has been sealed by the court.

Swift’s business manager, Jesse Schaudies Jr., said her side did not want the picture in the news.

“We did not want copycats and one-uppers abounding. And that happens in our world,” he testified last year. “These people all tend to escalate. I’ve watched what happens with these files and individuals.”

The encounter

Swift took the stand for about an hour Thursday, testifying that Mueller grabbed her bare backside and held on for a long time during the meet-and-greet. She used explicit language that seemed designed to avoid sugar-coating what she described as a sexual assault when she posed for the photo.

“He stayed attached to my bare ass-cheek as I lurched away from him,” she said. “It was a definite grab. A very long grab.”

Other key witnesses:

• Andrea Swift, the singer’s mother, was involved in the decision to contact Mueller’s boss and not call the police.
• Frank Bell, a member of the singer’s team, contacted Mueller’s bosses at the station KYGO. Bell and Andrea Swift are also defendants in Mueller’s lawsuit.
• Shannon Melcher, Mueller’s girlfriend at the time, was standing on the other side of Swift when the photo was taken. She testified that she saw nothing happen during the brief encounter and that she and Mueller were rudely confronted and escorted out of the arena that evening. Melcher said Mueller was devastated by the accusation.
• Greg Dent, Swift’s bodyguard, was standing a few feet away during the photo op. He testified Friday that Mueller groped Swift under her skirt a moment before a staff photographer took a photo of the singer. But he did not take any immediate action because he generally took his cues from Swift and she gave him none.

Her attorney Douglas Baldridge said the apprehension could happen during or after the alleged assault to qualify. He said jurors were wrong if they believed the apprehension could only happen before the assault for it to qualify in the context of this civil trial.

U.S. District Judge William J. Martinez took a short recess to give KYGO radio host David Mueller’s attorney Gabe McFarland an opportunity to research the issue and respond. Martinez later declined to answer the jury’s question and ordered jurors to continue deliberating.

The question came at 3:18 p.m., nearly three hours after the eight-member jury began deliberations and following closing arguments.

In his closing, Baldridge said Swift spoke on behalf of all women when she testified that “no means no,” her attorney told jurors shortly before they began deliberating Monday afternoon.

“He lost his job because he grabbed her butt and he got caught,” Baldridge said, referring to Swift’s claim that Mueller groped her before a 2013 concert at the Pepsi Center. “Now he’s trying to save his butt.”

But McFarland told jurors that Swift falsely accused Mueller of assaulting her and that accusation destroyed his career.

“Why would Ms. Swift lie? I don’t know,” McFarland said. “I’m sure she thinks it’s true, but the photograph says otherwise.”

McFarland told jurors that Swift’s mother, Andrea Swift, and her radio promotions manager, Frank Bell, used their influence to pressure KYGO into firing Mueller.

McFarland asked the jury to award Mueller $257,500. Baldridge asked jurors to reject Mueller’s case and award $1 to Swift in her counterclaim.

“That single dollar is of immeasurable value in the scheme of things,” Baldridge said. “It says no means no for all women.”

The jury — six women and two men — will decide whether Mueller is liable for damages to Taylor Swift and whether Andrea Swift and Bell are liable for damages to Mueller.

The jurors must reach a verdict based on a preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt as required in criminal trials. A preponderance of evidence is “more probably true than not.” Their decisions must be unanimous.

from the lawsuit that claimed she interfered with Mueller’s career when she alleged the former radio host groped her during a pre-concert event.

Martinez ruled that Andrea Swift and Bell could be responsible for the from his two-year employment contract, but they cannot be found responsible for future lost wages.

, claiming they interfered with his employment at KYGO after Bell reported to the station Swift����ap claims that the host had groped her and said it could have “grave” consequences on the relationship between the singer and the station. Mueller is seeking up to $3 million, saying the allegation cost him his job and reputation.

. She says she wants to serve as an example to other women who have been sexually assaulted.

During closings both sides offered dramatically different versions of maybe the most important piece of evidence during the trial: a photograph of Taylor Swift taken during a meet-and-greet photo session shortly before a concert on June 2, 2013.

McFarland crouched down almost like a baseball catcher while demonstrating how low Mueller would have had to go to reach underneath Swift’s skirt and grab her. “He would have had to bend down like this.”

“Look at Ms. Swift’s face. Is that the face of someone who just had a strange man grab her butt?” McFarland said, referring to a smile on Swift’s face. He said there was no shock because nothing happened. He added that her body was aligned just as it had been during each of the numerous photographs taken of her with various fans.

McFarland pointed out that only a fraction of the photographs had been kept and that if Taylor Swift had been assaulted it was by one of the other men attending the event.

During his closing argument, Baldridge showed numerous pictures of Swift posing with other fans, most of whom were women with young daughters. He asked the jurors if there was any doubt who the perpetrator had been.

“Boy, she must have confused one of these little girls with Mr. Mueller … I think it’s crystal clear Ms. Swift didn’t misidentify this man in that lineup,” Baldridge said. They only other adult couple in the group included a young man with long red hair with his arm around Swift’s upper back, he said.

The photograph shows Swift moving away from Mueller, who had his hand directly behind her bottom. Baldridge asked jurors to look at the smile on Mueller’s face when the picture was taken.

“That is a man who is very proud of what he was doing at that moment,” Baldridge said.

He said Mueller was upset that he was placed in the kiddie line and not with his peers and radio executives at another meet-and-greet session earlier.

“I thought we saw a man of fragile ego on the stand,” Baldridge said. “They tried to get out of the kiddie line …This man — the prominent on-air personality — was embarrassed.”

McFarland criticized the credibility of several eyewitnesses, telling jurors that each of them offered details that conflicted with Swift’s version of events. He said it was unbelievable that the bodyguard would not have immediately responded when he saw a man grab Swift.

But Baldridge said every one of the witnesses were in a different area during the photo session and the only way that anyone would have had the same perspective that Swift had would be if they were directly beneath her on the floor.

But in terms of credibility, there was no comparison, Baldridge said. The eight witnesses who corroborated Swift’s version of events have never changed or augmented their stories while Mueller’s version has changed. He said Mueller also destroyed numerous electronic devices with recordings of the 105-minute meeting in which he was fired.

The photograph

 that Mueller inappropriately touched her. Mueller argues it shows him trying to jump into the frame.

Entertainment news outlet TMZ obtained and published the photo, which has been sealed by the court.

Jesse Schaudies Jr., Swift’s business manager, testified that Swift’s team did not want the picture publicized.

“We did not want copycats and one-uppers abounding. And that happens in our world,” he testified last year. “These people all tend to escalate. I’ve watched what happens with these files and individuals.”

The encounter

Swift took the stand for about an hour Thursday, testifying that Mueller grabbed her bare backside and held on for a long time during the meet-and-greet. when she posed for the photo.

“He stayed attached to my bare ass-cheek as I lurched away from him,” she said. “It was a definite grab. A very long grab.”

Other key witnesses:

• Andrea Swift, , was involved in the decision to contact Mueller’s boss and not call the police.
• Frank Bell, a member of the singer’s team, at KYGO.
• Shannon Melcher, Mueller’s girlfriend at the time, was standing on the other side of Swift when the photo was taken. during the brief encounter and that she and Mueller were rudely confronted and escorted out of the arena that evening. Melcher said Mueller was devastated by the accusation.
• Greg Dent, Swift’s bodyguard, was standing a few feet away when the photo was taken. He under her skirt a moment before a staff photographer took a photo of the singer. But he did not take any immediate action because he generally took his cues from Swift and she gave him none.The Associated Press contributed information for this report.

U.S. District Court Judge William J. Martinez granted part of Swift’s legal team’s motion to dismiss Mueller’s case.

The federal court jury, however, will decide whether Swift’s mother, Andrea Swift, and her radio promotions manager, Frank Bell, used their influence to pressure KYGO into firing Mueller, Martinez ruled.

Swift smiled at her lawyers when hearing that she was removed from the suit. When the court day ended, she hugged each of her lawyers before hugging her brother and father. Her mother had left court earlier in the day because of illness.

The jurors were not in the courtroom when Martinez heard motions from lawyers for Swift and Mueller on Friday afternoon.

Swift lawyer Douglas Baldridge filed the motion to remove his client, saying Mueller’s team had not proven his claims. “I would ask you right now, please, after this ordeal, please remove Ms. Taylor Swift from this case.”

Mueller’s lawyer, Gabe McFarland, disagreed.

The standard of proof for the judge to approve the motion — known as a Rule 50 — is one of the highest standards of law in civil cases, Martinez said, explaining that if he were to take the case from the jury, it would be on the basis that no reasonable jury could rule in Mueller’s favor.

Swift still has a counterclaim of assault and battery by Mueller, but has the option to drop it.

The jury is set to return to U.S. District Court on Monday morning when they will hear closing statements and decide whether Andrea Swift and Bell are liable for damages.

Martinez ruled that they could be responsible for the wages Mueller lost when he was fired about five months into his employment contract, but they cannot be found responsible for future lost wages.

Mueller sued Swift, her mother and Bell in 2015, claiming they interfered with his employment at KYGO after Bell reported to the station Swift’s claims that the host had groped her and said it could have “grave” consequences on relationship between the singer and the station.

“Mr. Mueller’s beef is with KYGO. It’s not with my clients,” Baldridge told Martinez during the motions hearing. “That’s the problem with this case and that’s why it’s presented on its head.”

Baldridge went through Mueller’s claim and explained why not enough evidence had been presented.

Among those reasons he cited was that Swift believed Mueller had groped her and informed her mom, who was on the singer’s senior management team, 13 Management, and the equivalent of her human resources department. On the stand, Mueller had agreed that someone who believed they were sexually assaulted had the right to inform their employer.

In defense of his case, McFarland argued that Swift knew Mueller did not assault her but accused him nonetheless. Swift was visibly outraged by the claim, glaring at McFarland, throwing her arms in the air and looking back toward her father, brother and publicist, who were seated in the gallery.

The judge asked McFarland what motivation Swift would have to falsely accuse Mueller, and if he proved it in his case. He responded by asking what would be Mueller’s motivation to throw away his dream job by groping the singer. The judge said the burden of proof was on Mueller, not Swift.

Additionally, Baldridge argued that Taylor Swift cannot be liable for the actions of Bell and Andrea Swift as their employer because they were not her employees. Instead, they were employed by 13 Management, which was not named in the suit.

Baldridge unsuccessfully argued for the removal of Andrea Swift and Frank Bell from the suit. He pointed out that Andrea Swift never spoke to KYGO and similarly that Bell never specifically told KYGO what to do. Instead, Mueller’s bosses had come to their decision based on their own investigation. And if that investigation was flawed, that’s KYGO’s fault, Baldridge said.

But the judge disagreed that there was no scenario where a jury could find them guilty.

Andrea Swift had testified that she “absolutely” wanted Mueller to be fired. When explaining the incident to KYGO, Bell had said the family was extremely upset and expected the station to do the right thing.

The station’s market manager, Robert Call, testified that two of the three reasons he fired Mueller was because of his phone conversation with Bell and the photo from the meet and greet that the Swift team sent to the station.

Additionally, Martinez noted that Mueller’s girlfriend had reported two similar incidents of sexual assault by a KYGO employee to the company, but that employee was not fired.