Files gone

I, too, received the ominous, emailed, announcement posted over at Cone’s from Rev. Nelson Johnson et al.

With such a titillating teaser, that’s one meeting I don’t think I’ll be able stay away from. 

Update: N&R’s Margaret Banks apparently asked David Wray’s attorney Locke Clifford for a comment.  Clifford replied to Nelson Johnson’s expansive email contact list (which I have saved in my archives) with this curt response:

“When a specific allegation is made we will make a specific response.”

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

8 Comments

  1. MyTwoCents
    Posted February 25, 2008 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

    “The pastors will also share the circumstances surrounding the destruction of the files and their view of the broader implications of such conduct.”

    The “pastors” will share the circumstances surrounding the destruction….???? Were they there? They know first hand, and can therefore “share” the circumstances?

    Something smells a little fishy.

  2. Posted February 25, 2008 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

    David,
    Do you know the normal procedure for 30 year old closed cases?
    I’m sure there’s a guideline in place but I have no idea what it is.

  3. Posted February 25, 2008 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    If there was anything of value in those boxes it would bury the likes of Jim Melvin and the GPD officers involved that day and there is no way ANY officer could go public without the approval of GPD and the City Manager’s office being involved.

    So apparently someone is trying to put up yet another smoke screen and blame it on Wray.

    And finally, who’s to say these 50 boxes haven’t already been copied and placed in databases and FBI files somewhere? Could there really be 50 boxes of unknown evidence never before seen by the FBI? Somehow I doubt it.

    And yes, how long are documents kept after a case is closed?

  4. meblogin
    Posted February 25, 2008 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

    Does Mitch know anything about this or was this another failure to communicate? (…quick David…give him a call… :) )

    I would hope that there are digital copies of all data.

  5. Posted February 25, 2008 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

    Digital copies would have been prudent move, meb. It was a historical event, after all, and such things ought to be preserved.

    No, Tony, I don’t know about such protocals. This wasn’t exactly your run-of-the-mill case.

    Billy, The hand of Melvin works in mysterious ways, but I’d like to wait and see what happens tomorrow before heading to where you have already arrived.

    TwoCents asks: “Were they there? They know first hand, and can therefore “shareâ€? the circumstances?”

    Again, I’ll wait and see the evidence… but I don’t think they were there or have first hand knowledge of anything…

    Is “first hand knowledge” now to be the ‘litmus test’ – the gold standard – for what we are to believe? If so, then all of us need to stop professing how sure we are of matters relating to Mitch Johnson and David Wray. Agreed?

  6. Posted February 26, 2008 at 8:41 am | Permalink

    David,
    I meant just the opposite. I don’t think Melvin is behind this event, he’d be crazy to do so. There were lots of people who felt Melvin and company had a hand in the events of 1979 and if there was anything of value in those boxes Melvin would want them suppressed.

    Truth is: I doubt there was anything in those boxes that isn’t already spread around the globe.

    I think someone lower on the food chain is panicking and trying to cloud the issues. Mitch Johnson, Mayor Johnson, Goldie Wells, DBS, Linda Miles, City Legal, dirty cops, Robbie Perkins, the Pulpit Forum, Nelson Johnson– they’re all suspect in my mind and I suspect the Bobblehead is pretty well PO’d about this latest turn of events as he just wants this whole thing to disappear from public view.

    No, at this point Melvin is worrying about negative publicity and a possible boycott of his beloved golf tournament, he never authorized this.

  7. MyTwoCents
    Posted February 26, 2008 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    Is “first hand knowledgeâ€? now to be the ‘litmus test’ – the gold standard – for what we are to believe? If so, then all of us need to stop professing how sure we are of matters relating to Mitch Johnson and David Wray. Agreed?

    In lieu of spouting off and claiming to have first hand knowledge – perhaps they could have worded their statement better. They (the “Pastors”) make it sound as though they are going to present fact, or first hand knowledge surrounding the destruction…Unless they were present during the destruction of said documents; how can they share the circumstances surrounding the same?

    Perhaps I’m being petty, but this very kind of statement is probably what led to the entire Wray/Johnson fiasco to begin with. Our leaders need to stop mincing words and speak in plain laymens terms.

  8. Posted February 26, 2008 at 1:26 pm | Permalink

    Beau,

    How about some quotations marks?

One Trackback

  1. By Hogg’s Blog » Blog Archive » Focus people on February 26, 2008 at 4:53 pm

    [...] the way… it looks like David Wray’s lawyer won’t have to answer any “specific allegations” leveled toward his client, because, as far as I know, none [...]