Instead, Smith complained to a supervisor and posted her comments about the May 22 incident on her Facebook page that got nearly 5,000 views, more than 8,000 shares and more than 100 comments as of Wednesday morning. Smith also posted photos of the figurine, Anderson's desk and some of his Facebook posts about the incident.

One of the photos shows Anderson's messages with a friend in which it appears he shared the member's name. While Anderson admits to discussing the incident with his friend, he denied sharing the member's information, WNCN reported.

Anderson said he was sorry if anyone took the figurine in the wrong way. He also said he would have also apologized to Smith immediately had he been given the opportunity before she walked out of the branch, according the local news station report.

Anderson did not return a CU Times message seeking comment.

More than 200 people commented on WNCN's Facebook page about the controversy, and many thought Anderson should not have been fired.

Some of the comments included the following by different Facebook users:

• “Yes, maybe he shouldn't have had the collectible on this desk. It can be seen as gruesome, making it unprofessional and not work appropriate. But….to lose his job because someone assumed the meaning of the figurine…..that's too much.”
• “Even if it was part of the show, today's culture is easily offended. He should have been spoken to but not fired.”
• “I'm offended that he was fired over one of my favorite characters in the Walking Dead.”
• “This man could have simply been asked to remove the toys from his desk and everyone could have moved on,” she wrote. “Instead, he's lost his job and is receiving threats over a total misunderstanding on the customer's fault.”

Others, however, pointed out that Anderson most likely lost his job because he allegedly shared Smith's name with another person violating her privacy, which the former SECU employee has denied.

In a prepared statement released May 23, a day after the incident occurred, SECU said it takes the privacy of every member seriously and that the actions of one of its employees fell far short of expectations. The credit union said it took immediate steps to address this personnel matter, but declined to say what specific steps were taken.