News-Record.com

Mr. Patrick,

What are you talking about? The Constitution provides for separation of powers wich creates a system of checks and balance. The constitution created three separate branches of government to achieve that end.

How does that relate to a city manager taking action against the chief of police who reported to him? I don't see any separation of powers or checks and balances here. In truth, there is no checks and balances, as all of the power is in the hands of the city manager, and he wielded it against Mr. Wray. Sorry, but your civics lesson is misconstrued and falls flat. Your letter is full of bombast with no substance. I don't think that David wray supporters wlll be convinced or impressed with your letter.

Wow... what a novel idea. A government that executes checks and balances based on the fact that there are three branches of government, an Executive branch, a Legislative branch, and who could forget a Judicial branch.

Perhaps Greensboro could learn a thing or two about checks and balances from you Oak Ridge. Frankly, your response on the subject of checks and balances is one of the few things that's made sense in this whole charade. I'm glad there are still a few US citizens still remember how our government is supposed to work.

After reading the Sunday article, I must suggest again that the investigation of mismanagement is focusing on the wrong person. None of this needed to happen. And it certainly could have been stopped early on rather than allowed to snowball. It is taking on an air of a mean spirited coverup at this point.

There is also an amendment in the U.S. Constitution which allows for "due process" (Fifth Amendment), which apparently David Wray was not given, as he was forced out of office for the sake of political correctness, as a black officer was being investigated by a white police chief (totally unacceptable in the current climate in Greensboro with Skip Alston, the NAACP, and the "Truth and Reconciliation Council" calling the shots these days). And from my sources connected to the Greensboro PD, the black officer in question has some serious allegations of corruption of his own that he should answer to.

About a week ago, one of the posts about DAVID WRAY stated that he would probably sue the city, tying it up for months. Then another post says, and I am paraphrasing here, 'You just don't know David Wray, he would Never do that'. Well today Wray's right hand man did, so buckle up and wait for Wray to follow suit---no pun intended!

Well Deac, I admit it. I was wrong. I guess Wray's lawyer thought it would be better that the former chief could feed his family. For future referece, if you intend to paraphrase what I say, please do not quote it as well (note the quotation marks around what you posted). Also, please do not take things out of context.

In the 2-7-06 edition of the News and Record, we find out that the City of Greensboro is witholding $247,000 in retirement benefits owed to Officer Randall Brady, who retired last fall, pending the investigation into Brady's part in the David Wray "scandal". The above letter-to-the-editor uses the U.S. Constitution to justify the treatment of former chief David Wray. But, whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Isn't witholding Brady's retirement pay, which he EARNED, making a statement by Manager Mitchell Johnson that Brady is guilty before the officer has given a fair hearing?

I think Dr. Mary Johnson, in the “Ex-chief's resignation makes a statement” blog, has shed light on this whole debacle. It's not enough that the city has allowed Wray to be demonized as some sort of Nazi racist. He's already been tried in the media, and you'd be hard-pressed not to ask for a change of venue if anything ever went to a court trial (although a court trial would be absurd). After it became clear that Wray is not, and never has been a racist, all the naysayers changed their stories saying this charade was all because Wray lied to Johnson. To those individuals that insist on ruining Wray's good name, which is it? By that same token, Lt. Hinson was cleared of any wrongdoing, even though there was significant evidence that pointed to the contrary. Why would an officer's phone number need to be in a drug dealer's cell phone on speed dial (Sunday's article in the N&R)? If you're an up-and-coming hot-shot police officer, why get involved selling your house to a drug dealer (John Hammer's article in the Rhino Times)?

For some reason some folks have chosen to vilify Wray for doing what he believed was right. Honestly, it sickens me to see all the bellyaching letters in the Rhino Times from unidentified police officers who are too cowardly to sign their names. Yet Wray still offered his continuing support to these same officers on local TV. If that’s not enough, the City is now hiding behind personnel records as to why they can no longer comment on the matter. However, there are those who insist Wray was running when he resigned. Who’s hiding what from whom? People keep speculating on why Wray gave notice, if he were innocent after all. The former chief never signed the paperwork that would have admitted any wrongdoing. That should be enough for people. Wray turned down the retirement deal, compensation he had earned and deserved, because he had not done anything wrong and wasn’t about to admit to any wrongdoing. It never had to go this far. The city could have hidden behind personnel reports from the beginning, but they chose not to.

At my job, one of the determining factors of my compensation is how much I can bring into the company. But more importantly, I am compensated to a greater degree for my experience and professionalism which keeps the company, legally, out of lawsuits. The City Council might want to incorporate that line of thinking in their next City Manager appointment. An experienced City Manager would have been able to avoid this entire situation and still done all the 'housecleaning' that may have been necessary. Just think about all the programs, projects and such that will go unfunded so the city can pay lots of lawfirms and plaintiffs.

Bishop: It never was about RACE! That is the card Lt. Hinson chose to play and the media and pulpit forum followed suit! You continue to believe Wray never lied.. this thing really isn't happening.

YOU WIN! What did I tell you last week about the lawsuit? Either way you set yourself up to say you were right! You just don't know when to stop. You are the one who need to get a life and therapy! You accused me a while back about commenting on every David Wray article...but you know that is not true. I see you are a busy beaver commenting on just about every editorial--nobody wants to hear the garbage you spew. Why don't you attach your name to each and every comment you make?

Wray offered no support to the officer's at the GPD--other than empty political rhetoric! He went before the media with his press releases to play you like the badly tuned violin that you are--and you continue to be manipulated by him every time you speak out on this blog!

He resigned because he was advised to by his attorney! Right!! He resigned because he was about to be fired you moron!

Thomas: Brady resigned /"retired" abruptly after his polygraph! DO you get it? There is no "trial" or "innocent until proven guilty"! You have no clue how the supplemental retirement works! When you figure out how it is distributed...then make educated comments.

Here's the prediction: there will be criminal charges levied soon on the "dearly departed" from the GPD.

Realist,

*Clap, Clap, Clap* More name-calling from our favorite poster. You need to get your facts straight. I never accused you of replying to "every Wray article", check the previous posts. And for your information, Bishop is in fact my real name. Those who know me call me by it everyday. If there's a need for accountability typekey.com will let you know. Frankly, it's more telling than "A. Realist".

If this wasn't about race, then please explain the Hitleresqe posters plastered all over the city that depicted the former chief as a racist. You can call his support empty polical rhetoric, but he's the only one who's had anything positive to say about those who oppose him. And for the record I already admitted I was wrong, see the previous post in this blog. I think you enjoy beating a dead horse.

Bishop, don't get sidetracked by silliness and name calling from others. As this mess unfolds, and it began in the Sunday paper, we are seeing the 'machine' that manufactured it slowly falling apart. And regardless of what we want, the only winners here will be the lawyers.

Realist,

I'd like to see where it says the City is allowed to hold your retirement benefits. Nothing like that exists here:

http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/Departments/Police/Opportunities/employment/compensation.htm

I didn't see anything like that here either:

http://www.ci.greensboro.nc.us/perpolicy/index.htm

Could you provide me with the documentation that explains this policy? Obviously, you feel I'm a moron and Thomas is uneducated, so please for both our benefits provide a link explaining your latest comment.