News-Record.com

"Say what you will about Johnson (and who doesn't?), at least he has been willing to address the situation front and center. With the press. The public. Bloggers. Even Bledsoe. Wray -- for whatever reason -- hasn't."

Bloggers? You mean when he lied about 10 times at that Mitch meeting w bloggers? What was good about that? Mitch is willing to lie? I have known that for years.

http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2007/02/mitch-meet-up.html

But that was not news was it Mr.J?

"Say what you will about Johnson (and who doesn't?), at least he has been willing to address the situation front and center. With the press. The public. Bloggers. Even Bledsoe. Wray -- for whatever reason -- hasn't."

Bloggers? You mean when he lied about 10 times at that Mitch meeting w bloggers? What was good about that? Mitch is willing to lie? I have known that for years.

http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2007/02/mitch-meet-up.html

"Say what you will about Johnson (and who doesn't?), at least he has been willing to address the situation front and center. With the press."

I think you left out part of the last sentence. It should have read:
"With the press staunchly beside him to champion his cause no matter what the truth is."

As has been pointed out before, the N&R had an open highway to Chief Wray and he was commenting on this entire issue until (according to Chief Wray) Lorraine Ahearn lost her credibility with him by misrepresenting his words. Ahearn is single-handedly responsible for shutting down any chance of Chief Wray's side of the story being told by the N&R. Way to go, Lorraine.
It's also been pointed out that Lorraine Ahearn was the person who initially told Chief Wray that Hinson was "dirty" and then Ahearn subsequently pilloried Wray for investigating Hinson! I believe a serious conflict of interest existed with Ahearn reporting on a story she helped to create.

Funny, as we live in a "right to work" state the City never needed to make a big deal of Wray's leaving but they did anyway. Resigned, fired, whatever the City of Greensboro committed a mistake for which I have successfully sued former employers-- raking my name through the coals after the fact.

Why is the City so quick to risk what could well become a muliti-million dollar EEOC lawsuit? Anyone working in the GSO HR department can surely tell you how they would have never allowed this to happen had it been left up to the HR Department. Why did Johnson, Miles and others attempt a public lynching of David Wray's reputation?

Smoke and mirrors... smoke and mirrors. It's not about David Wray it's about dirty little secrets Miles, Johnson and others hope to hide.

http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2007/10/johnson-on-johnson.html

Allen,

Did you mention the Walt Jones letter? What about the contract issues Mitch failed to expalin honestly? Don't think those mean looks are strictly from Bledsoe? The reporting on Willow Oaks and Bryant Electric have really exposed Mitch as the bumbling manager he is. Did you ask him about Linda Miles? I did not see it in the article.

http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2007/10/n-margaret-banks.html

Eh, Billy the Blogging Poet!: To use such words as "public lynching." Gee, not so good to use
those words, these days. Them old terms. It's now referred to as, NOOSING!

So let's see, we have;

#1 Hacking a computer. Who authorized this is open to question.

#2 Watercooler chat of how to help the chief get rid of a crazy lady who is driving him crazy, which probably in all honesty takes place around many watercoolers on many days

#3 A black book that apparently it can be proven was a line-up book. However there may or may not be ANOTHER black book who some unidentified person may have been told to hide in some safe place that is probably destined to possibly become a holy grail. Does anyone know what the RMA had to say about the black book? It wasn't really clear from todays RMA article whether they thought it existed, probably existed etc. Did they consider it may be a legit book?

#4 Allen Johnson now proclaims that race never has been the main issue, but lack of competence, political, and communication skills are more worrisome. Obviously this statement was either consciously disingenuous or an attempt at humor. If one decides that Allen is indeed serious there are many pols in GC that should be running for the hills because the N&R is coming for you.

Hate to see when the smoke clears after this crusade.

http://thetroublemaker.blogspot.com/2007/10/johnson-claims-city-is-done-releasing.html

"It's a shame, however, that David Wray has been so thoroughly vilified based on shreds of truth liberally mixed with rumor and innuendo." Who said that?

Allen, this newspaper has lost all sense of its honor and professionalism on this case. You've become hopeless shills for Mitch Johnson. And, today, you had to have a story by Wireback to attempt to convince us of the professionalism of RMA and clear their name. Why is it now so important that RMA's professionalism be defended? Wasn't their role to just investigate and report to Mitch Johnson? As I read your reportage, I get the impression that Michael Longmire and his investigators made the decision and had to convince Mitch to go along. Is Michael Longmire and RMA running the city now?

Ben:
After your "Boss Nigger" video on Youtube, I'm not quite sure how much reason and credibility you bring to any discussion.

Allen,

Now that is hiding from the truth. What a little man you are.

Another point that needs to be clarified is this whole thing about allegedly dirty cops is an Internal Affairs matter or at least would be under most police depts. (This may or may not have been covered in the Rhino)

Where was the GPD I.A. on this?

They appear to have been out of the loop.

The question is why;

?#1 The Chief possibly thought they were compromised due to pre-existing relationships with the officers being investigated

?#2 The Chief wanted to keep control of this situation for himself so he put it under the Special Investigations unit so he could maintain power over what went on.

#1 would be understandable
#2 would be more of a problem for what turned out to be many reasons

Good questions, Savage.
It would be nice to have Wray come forward and address them.

So Allen, since you're on the line, who's the next incompetent pol or civil servant with poor communication skills the N&R is going to help get rid of for us?

We could all come to appreciate this.

You Go, Guys!

A hint for the News-Record, Allen. Don't publicly participate in trashing someone's reputation, then expect that they will happily grant you an interview and answer your questions. Why should David Wray even give you the time of day, much less "come forward and address" your questions. You've been spinning this against Wray for a long time. I suspect that you've done a good enough job, though, that a sufficient number of Greensboro residents will vote to re-elect current members of the city council. After Tuesday, you can drop the charade, and return to trashing David Wray.

I would disagree that we have trashed Wray. We have reported the allegations and the responses of his attorneys.
In the columns I have personally written about Wray, I have noted that it seems so out of character that he would do the things that are alleged for racial reasons.
For instance, I noted how he had handled the incident involving the arrest of an Egyptian woman at Wal-Mart with such sensitivity.
I also quoted the Rev. Albert Pim-Pong, who had accompanied him to Israel and found the same qualities.
I don't know what you base your description of our "trashing" him on.

I think they would be referring to Lorraine's column.

You didn't write it, but she was apparently given greenlight by the editors and must have cleared legal to be allowed to run with the black book thing and some other racist innuendos.

The whole premise was ridiculous from the start. Why would a police chief in a town that is 40% black want to get rid of good policeman just because they are black, which was the assertion made. You can deny this all you want to, but this is the thrust of the Pulpit Forum involvement etc and you know it.

I can't speak for the Pulpit Forum, but if the officers who are alleging that they are targeted happen to be black, that would raise some attennae, wouldn't you think?
And again, I wish Wray would talk. I requested an interview through his attorney, Locke Clifford, months ago.

Skeet Club Savage and Allen,
Chief Wray has answered the questions you pose in The Rhino Times series where he addresses the reasons. Nothing sinister there, it was just the way they were doing things then.
If Lorraine Ahearn had not destroyed Chief Wray's confidence in the N&R to accurately quote him and report the story then the answers might have been in the N&R and not The Rhino.
When you pursue an agenda rather than the truth there are consequences.

Right. The Rhino clearly has no agenda. What was I thinking?

Allen listen to yourself. You just said that if a dirty cop is investigated and he happens to be black, then he is being investigated not because he is dirty, but because he is black. In otherwords, you are taking the Pulpit line?

One difference, Anonymous, is that the N&R printed the reporter's interpretation of what she believed Chief Wray was saying. The Rhino Times is printing Wray's own words. Hmmm...I'll have to go with the words directly from Wray, not what a biased reporter is trying to convince me that Wray "really" said.
If Ahearn hadn't botched her relationship with Wray by misreporting what he said then we might not have had to read The Rhino Times to get Wray's side of this. The N&R shot itself in the foot, it wasn't "scooped" by the Rhino.

Allen,
You state:
"Yet if he didn't know what was going on, why?"
This is an unusually accusatory question and have you used the same line of thinking on Bellamy's knowledge of David Moore's embezzlement or Christopher Smith's solicitation of prostitution charge?
That is a slanted question just like the question to the cafe owner about what color patrons she approaches to sign the petition to remove Mitchell Johnson.
I have always looked forward to reading your column but your recent attempts to defend LA and the N&R on the David Wray matter fall way short.
From an outsider looking in with no advantage of taking sides it is clear that Bledsoe's quality reporting far exceeds the N&R's columnist/ turned reporter for a major local news story.
It is becoming more apparent that you guys just...don't...get it.

Allen, just trying to reach some understanding here with regard to the statement above about The Rhino's agenda. If you can, could you please spell out what you think the Rhino's agenda is?

To tell a story that is consistently sympathetic to, and supportive of, Chief Wray.

To tell a story that is consistently sympathetic to, and supportive of, Chief Wray.

Anon,

You said "I would disagree that "we" have trashed Wray", so are you Allen Johnson answering here or someone else?

And for the record, Allen, you regard the News&Record (in contrast to The Rhino) as telling the story straight down the middle, at least insofar as is possible given Wray's (inexplicable?) refusal to talk with you?

As much as it is within our power to do. It would be helpful to be able to interview David Wray directly, instead of through surrogates, or the soft filter of the Rhino.

You mean sort of like the N&R in regards to Terry Grier, or the TRC, or Dot Kearns etc.

Allen, you had the opportunity to talk to Chief Wray directly and Lorraine Ahearn did that early on in this story.
Chief Wray says that his words were taken out of context and misquoted by Ahearn which resulted in Wray losing confidence in the N&R's objectivity.
You blew it.

And you believe that because Wray said so or because you know what he said to be true?

In other words, what guides you in taking Wray's word over others'?

So Allen, let's go deeper. Why would you think the Rhino would want to support Wray?

"So Allen, let's go deeper. Why would you think the Rhino would want to support Wray?"

Obviously it's just one big conspiracy against the Rhino and Jerry Bledsoe to "get" the N&R.

JR has suggested this about Bledsoe many times.

The paper's snarking directed at the Rhino is also well established.

So, Allen, your position is that the words that come out of Chief Wray's mouth are lies but Lorraine Ahearn's characterization of those same words when viewed through her journalistic goggles are the truth??
That's a pretty big stretch there, my friend.

Why would the Rhino support Wray? I wouldn't know. You'd have to ask them.

I didn't say that Wray is a liar. My point was that you seem naturally to assume that Wray is telling the truth and that Johnson isn't.
If Wray says he was misquoted, you take it as gospel. Why?
I thought you guys were naturally skeptical.

The "circle the wagons" mentality by the newspapers' two senior editors on this subject defies common sense.

What will it take on the readers' and the advertisers' part to get this message across?

That was deep, Allen. Thank you.

See Allen, you are an enigma. You put threads on your blog saying stuff like "Can" t We Get Past This" and then when people try to, you revert to this evasive, disingenuous sparing. You are just as guilty, if not more than the people who post here, especially in light of the fact you're supposed to set the tone because it's your blog.

I don't get you.

Allen, a lack of skepticism on the part of your readers isn't nearly as big a problem as the lack of skepticism on the part of the N&R, which has, IMO, demonstrated an incredible credulity toward the words of Hinson and Johnson, most conspicuously in its early reporting of this episode. Sure, there's a knee-jerk response to defend everything Wray did, but the people so jerking aren't professional journalists. You guys are, and so puff pieces like your column, which never asks any of the hard questions and orients itself explicitly toward the Mitch-is-a-victim perspective, just look like the same-old-same-old. Of course, you're a columnist, and that's a legitimate angle on the story. Fine.

But the same perspective orients the reporting, not least by Lorraine Ahearn, who (I gather) is sort of a columnist, sort of a reporter. (A problem from day one.) We would all be shocked to see reporting that looks critically at Hinson or Johnson.

This is why the N&R needs an ombudsman: your reporting has simply lost credibility with a substantial chunk of your readership.

Allen, why not have Doug, as the N&R's in-house conservative editorial/columnist (you know, your column last week on "balance") do his version of the Wray affair.

Now, for obvious reasons, Doug may be reluctant to do this. You know, little things like; oh, say, continued employment at the N&R, or not wanting to have Joe Williams storm into the office saying: "Robbie, what the f---'s with this Clark guy?" ,or Nelson and the Pulpit Forum picketting the N&R building, but maybe it's worth a try?

What do you think?

This is not good guy bad guy

We have three individuals who have convoluted this mess in the extreme. All three have some culpability.

The Chief David Wray: Lost control of his dept and was for one reason or another not up to the job.. He was convinced that Hinson was a crook and was going to prove it.He (Wray ) was not well liked by many in the Dept black and white.. Not unusual lots of places are like that He was not able to handle it. People told me he never paid his dues moving up . I have no idea. He certainly did not surround himself with a brilliant staff. Why they would tape each other is beyond me.

Lieutenant Hinson. Simply put; Less then a model cop. The bachelor party kind of says it all. Police departments don’t need that kind of publicity. Any way Hinson decided to play the so called race card. They are after me because I’m black. As with Wray I bet if you asked people in the Dept about Hinson you would get a good deal of “oh him”. How was it put to me? “He could not possibly be a drug dealer he is to lazy. As far as the charities are concerned I doubt they made enough money to steal” They were for image. But he smells money now.

We get to Mitchell Johnson City Manager, .Oh my God, black books, racism what will the council and business leaders think. Al Sharpton will come to Greensboro. Oh the shame. ( he is coming )

Wray finally resigns. Hinson gets an apology. from Johnson. The city is saved.
Hardly.. The fight begins. Johnson says I never pressured Wray to resign. Now here is where I really get confused. That’s exactly what he should have done. For both, Wray and Hinson. You offer graceful ways out. Early retirement extended years of service, grade and pay, and everyone resigns for the good of the community. It’s called crisis management. No, Johnson request a full confession and disgraceful exit of Wray. He ignored Hinson’s less then appropriate behavior. We manage to get a crisis.

Ask people ( city employees ) about Johnson and the response often is “can’t believe a word he says”

Johnson’s job in this was to get signatures on graceful resignations. Sometimes crises management means bring it to an end not opening the flood gates with private detectives.

All three have what the Buddhists call bad Karma
I think we need three resignations.

Yep, that's about right.