A copy of the RMA report is now available at Greensboro101.

Comments

[Jeffrey Sykes]

I seriously cannot believe that Hoggard, Cone and GNR have yet to report that Hinson's ongoing relationship with known prostitutes was a justification for his being under surveillance.

Hinson's objection to the surveillance started this ball rolling. RMA says so in the first sentence of section I, page 6.

In my opinion, that's what it boils down to. Just about every company involved in transportation monitors its vehicles these days.

For GPD to monitor its own, and hold them to the tightest restrictions, seems to be justified.

Wray's denial of the black book is a huge problem. But why are folks not incensed by the fact that a suspected dirty cop dethroned the chief of the department with the help of the Greensboro News and Record?

Who has the guts to monitor Hinson and hold him to the highest standards of police ethics?

Where is the Greensboro News and Record ethical concerns for someone who is suspected of abusing his power to surfeit all types of maniacal desires while wearing a police badge?

Shouldn't our cops have to toe the tighets line of them all?

[Ed Cone]

Jeff, There seems to be ample evidence that Hinson was not behaving well at all. Bledsoe has made that case most convincingly.

But a big problem identified by the report is that Wray claimed Hinson was being monitored as part of a big ongoing federal drug investigation, when he wasn't, and had been cleared on that stuff already.

The RMA report deals with allegations that Wray was not trusted by his bosses, and seems to offer ample reasons to believe that this lack of trust was grounded in facts.

The allegations against Hinson are disturbing, and point to a variety of other problems with in GPD. But the case against Wray is not necessarily derailed by those problems.

[Jeffrey Sykes]

Also, it seems logical to me that if Hinson wanted to continue to rise quickly through the ranks to become captain or higher, the department had a responsibility to be hard on him and hold him to higher standards.

I don't know Hinson or Wray, but it seems that we are missing the ultimate concerns of why he attracted such scrutiny to begin with.

Also, if the Wray era inherited the divisions and lack of oversight of the White era, it also seems logical from a management standpoint to tighten the reins quickly and bring the operation back under central authority.

I would also agree that Wray's made a huge mistake in mischaracterizing the Hinson investigation as part of something it was not.

[Jeffrey Sykes]

Ed:

I posted before I read your reply.

It seems clear that David Wray erred in not being straight with Mitch Johnson.

The cause for that decision will be interesting to discover.

[meblogin]

Maybe Wray did not trust Mitch Johnson and others to keep the Hinson investigation secret.