Guarino

GPD Mediation, and Johnson's 30 Day Plan

The News and Record reported this morning that City Manager Mitchell Johnson had submitted his report to the City Council.  This was in response to the Council's demand that he develop a plan within 30 days to address certain issues.  The News and Record posts a link to his report here.

City Councilman Mike Barber, who reportedly had been in favor of replacing Johnson, brokered a deal to keep him in office a couple of weeks ago-- in a manner strikingly consistent with an editorial published by the local paper.

His response to the new plans submitted by Johnson? "They are grounds to have a new start," Barber said.

But deeper in the article, we find the following:

Councilman Barber said Johnson needs to stress to his department heads that problems will no longer be tolerated.

"I am not convinced we are turning this ship," Barber said.

I am not sure I completely understand all that Barber is saying.  Is the councilman buttering his bread on both sides once again?

The plan by Johnson claims a component to improve communications; but the response to the records request submitted by Sam Spagnola, Roch Smith and me has continued to be underwhelming.

In any event, the Johnson plan is merely talk.  It will not remedy all that has been out of order in the recent past. 

Meanwhile, the News and Record also reports that the city has begun a mediation process to arrive at settlements with the 50 black officers who have outstanding EEOC complaints against the city in connection with the GPD matter.  We are told that Simkins machine politicians Sandra Anderson Groat and Yvonne Johnson have been meeting with the officers' attorneys. 

Of course, there is no mention of the remedies being afforded to David Wray or any of his men who have been unjustly accused, investigated, demoted and pushed out.

In any event, there are a couple of ways to view the city's handling of the EEOC complaints. 

The first approach would be to advocate fighting these complaints because subsequent information proved they are without merit.   Attorney Sam Spagnola takes this position; and has an excellent post on the same subject.

The second approach? Some would assert that the city should just give the officers what they want.  Why?  Because the city two years ago presumed the charges against Wray and his men were true.  An in-house legal report was prepared that asserted the city had discriminated against black officers severely and repeatedly.  The city then acted in accordance with these presumptions.  So why not wave the white flag and open the checkbook?

Recall what we were told in the early days of the GPD fiasco. We were advised that handling the matter as Mitchell Johnson did would reduce the city's legal exposure.  Soon thereafter, of course, more black officers joined the legal action against the city.

Rest assured that there will be an attempt to paint the mediation process as some kind of victory.  But it will not be. 

Governor: Restrictions on Well Water Use

Governor Easley has issued some water restrictions that include the ability to limit use of private wells:

If local systems stand to lose some independence, they could also win new authority — over well users.

Easley’s proposals would let water systems impose on well users in their area the same conservation measures — bans on lawn watering, for example — that they require of their own customers.

Agencies could restrict individual well owners as well as the community well networks that already fall under state conservation mandates, said Diana Kees, a spokeswoman for the environment department, who noted the proposals do not include monitoring small private wells.

A Madison County Democrat who has been a point man for House leadership on drought issues applauded Easley for laying out a plan but called for caution and plenty of consultation with local water systems.

“I think we’re going to have to be very careful in how we craft anything that gets involved in these private wells,” Rep. Ray Rapp said.

It appears that the governor is on some shaky ground.  Enabling the restriction of private landowners' drawing from wells seems excessive; and I wonder about whether this constitutes interference with property rights.
 

Revolving Doors, Crime and Murder in Greensboro

Revolving doors are a source of entertainment for kids.  I remember as a child, when going into "the city", that entering buildings with revolving doors was an opportunity for tomfoolery.

But in the world of criminal justice, revolving doors are a big problem.

We learned of this reality in the case of Eve Carson, who was murdered in Chapel Hill.  Her transgressors, from Durham, had previously been arrested and charged with breaking and entering, felonious larceny, firearms violations, and now one faces charges of murder in another case.

A cop shooting in Charlotte last year was committed by a previous offender.

In Greensboro, Officer William Symmes is under intense media scrutiny for shooting an assailant.  This particular criminal stole tens of thousands of dollars in jewelry, led the officer on a chase to evade arrest, and otherwise assaulted him.  The criminal had been in and out of prison many times; and Symmes should never have been exposed to this situation.  But the local political/media culture places the spotlight of implied blame on the police officer more than on the criminal.  Recall that this particular criminal came from Raleigh.

One of Greensboro's recent murders was committed by a gentleman who had been previously arrested and imprisoned.  His crimes were in connection with a high speed chase that began in southern Virginia and extended into this part of North Carolina.

The common thread in these four instances?  Previous offenders were free to commit more heinous criminal acts.  This is a blatant failure of our criminal justice system.  We are oh-so-concerned about being "fair" to the transgressor.  But the past and future victims of these criminals apparently do not matter.

Revolving door justice occurs because of failures at various critical points in the system.  Yes, inadequate policing can be a part of the problem.  But it can also be a problem at the District Court level, or in the Department of Corrections, or in the office of the District Attorney.  It can be reflective of a problem in the laws that govern how things must be handled.

It can be a failure of coordination.  But there also can often be a failure to monitor previous offenders adequately, or to imprison them for sufficient time periods.

It's interesting that the Eve Carson case was impacted by the way things were handled in the city of Durham.  Why?  Because the recent history of Greensboro is that we have strived to emulate Durham in many ways.  We have the same guiding principle of identity group politics that heavily influences decision-making.  Indeed, our own city manager out-Nifonged Nifong during the course of the GPD fiasco.

The natural consequence of this type of politics is a criminal justice system that coddles criminals, that creates an ideal environment in which they can flourish, that disregards victims, and that spins revolving doors.  That is what we have in Greensboro and in other parts of North Carolina. 

The esteemed Thomas Sowell touched on this debate in a column earlier this week.  He was discussing the left's ambivalence regarding keeping criminals in prison, citing New York Times writers who had lamented incarceration rates:

"For more than two centuries, the political left has been preoccupied with the fate of criminals, often while ignoring or downplaying the fate of the victims of these criminals...Then, as now, liberals seem to find it puzzling that crime rates go down when more criminals are put behind bars."

That is the type of political thinking we have in Greensboro, in Durham, and even in our state capital; and it fully explains the crime phenomena we are currently observing.  There is a reason Greensboro has high crime rates.

Bledsoe/Hammer Special Reports on Fulmore and the Missing Boxes

Jerry Bledsoe has a special report in the Rhino Times today.  He reminds us of the allegations made by the Pulpit Forum a couple of weeks ago regarding the 50 boxes of 1979-related files that were ordered to be destroyed or disposed of.  He reminds us that Julius Fulmore was the officer who shared this information with the Pulpit Forum. 

He then goes into a detailed account of Fulmore's activities.  I will only summarize in shorthand fashion, because we have heard significant chunks of this story during earlier segments of the Cops in Black and White series.  He points out, however, that it is impossible that Fulmore could have witnessed the disposal of boxes of files as the Pulpit Forum alleged because he had been suspended around that time, and was later transferred to patrol duty after his suspension.  John Hammer reports that then-Sgt. Craig McMinn ordered the disposal of six or seven boxes of files; but this had occurred before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission became active.  In fact, it appears that it occurred while Robert White was chief.  In addition, the boxes only apparently contained photos and media reports.  It would therefore be inappropriate to label this episode as an attempt to keep records from the commission. 

Also, McMinn by the time TRC was requesting records had been promoted and transferred out of Special Intelligence; and the department had moved to new offices.  This further undermines the story related by the Pulpit Forum, as conveyed by Fulmore.

Bledsoe's account reveals an interesting detail.  He says that at the time Fulmore was being investigated for his activities, then-Sgt McMinn was called to the scene of one of his alleged transgressions.  He says that McMinn at that time was Officer Scott Sanders' supervisor; and Sanders was involved in these investigations.  Remember that Fulmore alleged that McMinn had ordered the disposal of the 50 boxes; and the Pulpit Forum made the implied allegation that this was somehow an effort to conceal information about 1979.

Bledsoe goes into considerable detail regarding the various investigations and alleged activities of Julius Fulmore that led to his suspension.  He relates visits to motels where rooms were rented, prostitutes were stationed, and illegal drugs and drug paraphernalia were used and/or found; sexual contact occurred with these prostitutes, sometimes without issuing payment, and sometimes providing goods, small amounts of cash, or even assistance getting out of criminal charges.  He also relates allegations regarding Fulmore receiving repeated communications of various types from these prostitutes; and advising one of these prostitutes she might be an informant against drug dealers, but failing to register her as an informant-- while simultaneously suggesting she could be later charged.

Fulmore alleged that in one of the cases above, he was not present-- but instead it was his friend he was trying to help that was present (who happened to have a long criminal record).

An allegation is also made regarding his possible involvement with the prostitute-- "Bambi"-- who was involved in the later investigation that led to use of the "black book".

Ultimately, the DA's office decided not to prosecute Fulmore citing insufficient evidence.  Internal Affairs' administrative investigation was managed by Levester Thomas and Trey Davis-- two black officers.  Fulmore, Bledsoe reports, had a polygraph in Winston-Salem that was interpreted as showing deception.

Fulmore was suspended for nine months, fully paid, and later was reassigned to patrol upon his return to duty.  He only received a first level reprimand internally, which is considered a slap on the wrist.   Internal Affairs found insufficient evidence to support the charge that Fulmore had associated with criminals, in spite of all the above.

This, in a nutshell, is a snapshot of the alleged activities of the person who told the Pulpit Forum about the missing boxes.  The story was reported with great fanfare two weeks ago, with an ensuing media drumbeat that was all-too-predictable.  But the story had been debunked by local bloggers within 24-36 hours of its emergence-- yet the local media continued to run with it.  Bledsoe and Hammer make the story appear even more silly.

Dr. Mary Johnson's Story

Over a year ago, I had linked to an extended post over at Dr. Mary Johnson's blog that details her ordeal down in Asheboro.  Follow the links to learn more about her story, or visit her blog which is listed to the right.

I said then that I found her account to be credible, and I still do.  I think it is entirely appropriate to empathize with her situation, because she clearly feels wronged; and she has a justifiable basis for feeling that way.  Her career has been severely impacted by that which took place; and it appears that should never have happened.

I agree with Meblogin that her account should be heard.  If we are truly interested in "speaking truth to power", this is a legitimate story-- because Mary turned out to be essentially powerless in this instance as a physician-employee.  She says she was trying to stand up for what was right. 

Elliot Spitzer

Ramesh Ponnuru warned us nearly four years ago that he may not exactly be a good guy.

Addendum: Here is another article-- a complete one-- that details the case against Spitzer when he was Attorney General of New York State. 

Increasing Use of Mass Transit, and the Politics of Gas Prices

Many Democrats will be running this November for Congress; and of course we also have a presidential election this year in which Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton will likely be the party nominee.

Some economic indicators now are less favorable than when George W. Bush assumed the presidency.  One of the most visible among these to consumers is gasoline prices, which have nearly tripled.  We are now hearing predictions of $3.40 - $4.00 per gallon.

It will be very tempting for Democrats running for office to demagogue the matter of gas prices, as if this is one of the things wrong with Republican governance.  Unfortunately, however, markets set prices-- not political parties.

But another interesting dynamic is revealed in an article published on the web today.  Apparently, the rise in gas prices has caused a spike in mass transit usage to its greatest level in a half century.

Ordinarily, progressives would consider this a good outcome.  Less people are using cars, more people are using mass transit, less pollutants are being emitted, less greenhouse gases are being generated, less finite resources are being consumed.

In fact, at the federal level some progressives have felt so passionately about incentivizing reduced automobile use that they have previously advocated a stiff gasoline tax.   At the state level in North Carolina, they succeeded in transferring  unrelated costs of state government to automobile users through high gasoline taxes.

Of course, market forces have achieved what progressives would have wanted to impose via taxation-- higher gas prices.  The question is whether Democrats will be so brazen as to use it as a political issue this campaign season.  It does, after all, help achieve the societal objectives they want.

One postscript: We were previously told by some progressives that the war in Iraq, and other military measures in the Middle East, were planned to gain control over oil in the region.  If that were the case, it would be counterintuitive that gas prices should rise so dramatically.   If we controlled the oil-- if that were our true objective-- we would be able to influence prices, boost production and increase supply from that region.  Obviously, that has not been the focus of our military efforts.

In any event, watch for the campaign rhetoric on gasoline prices.