Over analysis?

Regarding Joe Gaurino’s guess and analysis as to why police association lawyer William Hill pointed fingers at and challenged Rhino editor John Hammer as reported in yesterday’s N&R; Joe might be over-thinking the thing.

Although the facilitator at the meeting quickly redirected all parties to the subject at hand, it could be that Hill was simply lashing out at Hammer because he believes that Bledsoe’s ‘Cops in Black & White’ series is not giving a balanced view of the officers he represents.  Hill might also have some legal problems with all of the supposedly confidential and highly sensitive information that Jerry B. is imparting.

Speaking of which.

City Manager Mitch Johnson’s retrospective response to those critical of him locking Wray out of his office is telling.  Johnson says his actions didn’t do much good because the sensitive information he was trying to secure had already been removed from the office by the time the locks were changed.

But hey, the contents of Wray’s office sure is helping make for an interesting weekly read in the Rhino, isn’t it?

This entry was posted in Greensboro Politics. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

13 Comments

  1. Posted November 15, 2006 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    “But hey, the contents of Wray’s office sure is helping make for an interesting weekly read in the Rhino,
    isn’t it?”

    If indeed those ARE the contents of Wray’s office. OR it could be somebody thinking that it maybe, might could possibly be what perhaps could have been in Wray’s office? I’m just guessing, of course.

  2. Posted November 15, 2006 at 9:46 am | Permalink

    Hogg,

    Nobody ever told you that you over thunk stuff. That is for sure!

  3. John D. Young
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    David,

    You seem to defend the way in which Mitch Johnson handled the lock-out, indirect firing or “resignation” of David Wray. It seems that many options existed for addressing issues concerning David Wray. I think other managers have figured out better procedures than those used by Mitch Johnson.

    Many more facts are needed before this story becomes clear but it seems a hard stretch to actually defend the way that David Wray was treated. We always have a whole bunch of choice for how we treat one another. I would hope that the City of Greensboro has learned a lot about the need to look at many options and not be trapped into thinking — our behavior was ideal.

  4. Posted November 15, 2006 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

    “…..but it seems a hard stretch to actually defend the way that David Wray was treated.”

    Well said, John.

    Unfortunately, too many people are rationalizing the stretch.

    Apparently, they “guess” it’s the right thing to do.

  5. Posted November 15, 2006 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    Help me un”rationalize” guys.

    You’re the city manager and you have just been handed a report that corroberates a previous investigation by your city attorney’s office. This report indicates that your police chief hasn’t been truthful with you, the city council, and the public.

    What would you “guess” that you would do?

  6. Posted November 15, 2006 at 8:57 pm | Permalink

    Were those that gave information under oath would be my very first question?

    If they were not under oath…do you think some of them had reason to set Wray up?….then I just might ask why the heck not….sigh…. Why were the information givers not deposed?

    How about you? Are you comfortable firing the man that promoted women and blacks on multiple occassions? I don’t have enough information…do you?

    David- You may be exactly correct….then again….how would you know given the corruption in our police department? It would be a real shame if Wray winds up having been set up. What will you say if that is the outcome?

  7. John D. Young
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    David you ask — “What would you “guessâ€? that you would do?”

    Well I would not declare war on David Wray. I would use conversation, dialogue and diplomacy. If that failed I would try again and again. I would treat him as a human being who, like us all at times, is very worthy and at other times very unworthy.

    I think most of us realized during the first reports of Wray being “locked-out” that something was strangely wrong with this picture.

    Again there are almost endless ways for dealing with David Wray. The choice used by the City was harmful and damaging for all concerned. I do not know enough about the facts but I do know that anyone and everyone deserved better treatment than that handed out to David Wray.

    When Jerry Bledsoe finishes his articles in 2009 and we gain access to a lot of other diverse information maybe we will better understand the chain of events.

  8. Posted November 16, 2006 at 6:09 am | Permalink

    “…if Wray winds up having been set up. What will you say if that is the outcome?”

    I would publicly apologize to Wray and then rail against those who did the setting up.

    John,

    At this point, we are all just guessing. But I guess I just trust Johnson and the city council more than most who comment here.

    When Jerry finishes (I hear April of ’10) we will have more info but we will have other info as well. By that time the lawsuits will have at least started which is the only place where our divergent opinions will be confirmed or ousted. “Under oath” is good for such outcomes.

    I’m just not willing to accept everything Jerry is writing and inferring as the last word.

  9. Posted November 16, 2006 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    “I’m just not willing to accept everything Jerry is writing and inferring as the last word.”

    Equally, I am hopeful that you are not willing to accept everything that the RMA report inferred.

    Neither report was attained under oath.

    I trust the city council also…that they are making the best decisions they can with the information provided to them. I wish the RMA report did not read like fiction.

    Most of us in the blogging world do not have enough information to make a sound conclusion.

  10. Posted November 16, 2006 at 9:19 am | Permalink

    Was the office-locking a punitive reaction to the findings of the RMA report, a reaction to Wray’s account of events to the City Manager being contradicted by the RMA report or an attempt to secure documents suspected to be in Wray’s office?

  11. Posted November 16, 2006 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    I apologize for being late to this discussion, David. But I want to clarify that I was not intending to ascribe motives or reasons for Hill’s behavior at the meeting. The point of my post was to suggest that Hill’s statements at the meeting were ironic, and perhaps deserve less deference, given the content of the August, 2005 news article that revealed the deal Hill claimed to have made.

  12. Mr. Sun
    Posted November 18, 2006 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    Is it possible to quantify the number of open GPD internal investigations and determine the percentage of those involving African-American police offers then compare this metric under Wray’s leadership to historical GPD markers and national standards?

  13. Posted November 18, 2006 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

    …not without another $150,000 spent on research…sigh

    Maybe Percy would donate….nah….probably not…. :)