My newspaper column is about the public's need to know more facts about the David Wray case and the mess at the Greensboro Police Department. There are constraints on the release of detailed information, but the City should be looking for ways to get as much as possible out in the open.

Public has right to know more on Wray case

by Edward Cone
News & Record
1-29-06

A little learning is a dangerous thing, said Alexander Pope, and such seems to be the case when it comes to the mess at the Greensboro police department.

What little we have learned about the circumstances leading up to the departure of former Chief David Wray has done more to fuel speculation than to quell it, with charges and countercharges of racism and political gamesmanship flying through a largely fact-free environment.

Pope himself identified the remedy to this problem of limited learning, and that solution is more information, or, in his poetic terms, a deeper drink at the spring of knowledge. "Shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again," he wrote. There is little doubt that Greensboro could use a good stiff drink to sober us up right about now.

City Manager Mitchell Johnson did share a bit more data with the public last week, providing a scorecard of the various investigations under way and completed (two done, one in progress, one promised by the FBI). Johnson said in a prepared statement that documents had been improperly altered by senior police department management, that officers were intimidated if they spoke up, that minorities were targeted, and that the internal affairs and special intelligence units were not bound by normal standards of process or procedure.

Johnson also acknowledged public frustration with the lack of information but said the release of facts is a delicate process given the ongoing investigations and various laws about privacy. And as Councilwoman Sandy Carmany put it at her blog, which has been one of the best sources of information on the whole subject to date, the reports "contain detailed information about numerous specifically named officers, their actions that precipitated personnel/disciplinary investigations, the findings of those investigations, and disciplinary actions taken in each case."

Carmany, a no-nonsense type who is married to a retired cop, has stated at her blog that after reading the investigative reports she fully supports Johnson and his decisions regarding Wray. That means a lot, as does the support of the rest of the Greensboro City Council (reiterated in a public statement on Wednesday), but in the long run it is not enough. As Carmany writes, "More citizens may eventually agree with this conclusion if and when more facts of this case become publicly available."

It's time for the City Council to focus less on the "if" and more on the "when."

Given the explosive nature of the charges surrounding the "black book" and related issues, which have brought all sorts of unflattering national media attention to a city still trying to reconcile itself over past racial woes, the people of Greensboro deserve more details. We need to know what did -- and what didn't -- happen at our police department and what will be done to fix the specific problems.

Wray's own deep roots and good reputation in our community confuse the situation even further. Personal loyalty so far seems to trump the meager facts known to the public, which undermines confidence in the system, or at least sows confusion about what's going on downtown. Witness the letter to this newspaper from U.S. Rep. Howard Coble, who wrote that he knows "nothing about the facts and circumstances surrounding said resignation," but at the same time "remain[s] convinced that Chief Wray is indeed fit to serve as our chief of police." Reading that would make my head hurt even if it wasn't from a serious local politician commenting on a matter of grave importance.

Caution must be exercised in releasing any or all of the investigative reports, and obviously they will have to be heavily redacted before we can see them. City attorney Linda Miles is awaiting word from the Justice Department to see if they can be released while under grand jury subpoena as part of the FBI investigation. But see them we must. One of the statutes covering this kind of thing says city officials can release such information if they deem that doing so is "essential to maintaining public confidence" in city services.

We've crossed that threshold of essentialness, and we need to know more facts. Soon.

Edward Cone (www.edcone.com, efcone@mindspring.com) writes a column for the News & Record most Sundays.

Comments

[Lex]

If we're still arguing about this case in five years, then the city's leadership will have failed us, plain and simple.

[Sandy Carmany]

Excellent article, Ed! And thanks for using some of the information in my blog and appropriately citing it.