Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: abb

From the H-S:

Nifong said the three visitors apparently expected him to follow their advice "unwittingly."

However, Nifong did not specify the date, (March 3), of the meeting or the exact topic of discussion, except to say it was "a campaign matter."

Some listeners assumed he was referring to the lacrosse rape case, which arose on the night of March 13.

But Leary said Saturday that the meeting "had nothing to do with the lacrosse matter. We're not magicians or soothsayers. At that time, we had no way of knowing the lacrosse matter was going to happen. There were a variety of things discussed, a variety of campaign issues. It was not just one issue."


//

Nifong misleading the public AGAIN?!?


266 posted on 07/30/2006 5:49:40 AM PDT by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies ]


To: maggief
I forget what article it was, but the wording went "earlier in the year."

I took that to mean before the lax case, which is why I have been trying to align the players (Cheek, Leary and Pope) with their respective "teams" (for lack of a better word).

from my previous post

Nifong's presser :
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/465647.html

"....He said that during his primary campaign earlier this year, Cheek and two men who eventually backed Cheek's petition drive -- Ed Pope and Roland Leary -- visited him to give campaign advice. Nifong said he did not take the advice. He said that later he thought that Pope, a state juvenile justice official, and Leary, a former sheriff, wanted to control the district attorney.

"I realized that their concern had not been with the concept of a small group of people owning the District Attorney's Office but with the concept of it being owned by someone other than them," he said.

Cheek, Pope and Leary could not be reached Friday...."

I still think it was strange that all of a sudden Leary and Pope were thrown into the mix by Nifong.  I do wonder if it was some sort of warning shot against the bow.  Remember "They don't want to go up against me."

Important points from post 219


The News & Observer
December 3, 1992


 In move that caught many by surprise, veteran Durham County Sheriff Roland Leary announced his resignation Wednesday, saying he wants to pursue "other interests" but promising to stay active in public life.

"I think the time is right for me to step down," said Leary, 59, who has held the job for 10 years. "I'm confident now that I'm leaving the department in capable hands."

His departure, which takes effect Jan. 1, leaves the city and county without their two top law enforcement officials. The city is still looking for a police chief to replace Trevor Hampton, who left his job in June.

(snip)

"I'm not totally surprised," said William Bell, chairman of the county commissioners. "There have been some indications he might do something different. He feels he's been able to accomplish much of what he set out to do."

Leary's relationship with the commissioners, who control his department's purse strings, has not always been rosy. The sheriff and the commissioners have occasionally disagreed on policy matters, including how best to manage the jail, which has suffered from a highly publicized problem with overcrowding.

An increase in inmates during Leary's tenure has strained the county's already cramped jail facilities. It's been a constant curse for the Sheriff's Department, though the situation has eased in recent months.

(snip)

Already attention is centering on Chief Deputy Chet Dobies, Leary's second-in-command. And Dobies, who has overseen plans to build the county's new $43 million, 576-bed jail, has his boss's blessing.

"There's no one in the state of North Carolina more qualified to run the sheriff's department than Chief Dobies," Leary said.

Dobies also has impressed the commissioners.

"I've found him to be well-prepared, highly professional and highly competent," said Commissioner Ellen Reckhow. "He may prove to be an excellent interim replacement."

(snip)

Another possible contender is Al Hight, a former county commissioner and police detective. Hight, who served as a commissioner from 1984 to 1990, unsuccessfully challenged Leary in the 1990 Democratic primary.

Hight enjoys strong ties with the commissioners, stemming from his days on the board alongside Bell, Reckhow and Becky Heron.

Since then, he's generously supported the commissioners' re-election bids. According to campaign spending reports filed in late October, Hight contributed $500 each to the campaigns of Reckhow and MaryAnn Black this year and $200 each to Giles and Bell.

Hight said Wednesday he may seek the job but hasn't made up his mind.

(END EXCERPTS)

 

Al Hight went on to get the job.  Remembeer there were rumors that Hight and WILLIAM JOHNSON were partners, co-owning  only 3 or 4 massage parlors in Durham, which were never busted.

I was going to tie this into post 220 also, but rediscovered peice of info I had forgotten about.

brb
 

274 posted on 07/30/2006 6:32:36 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies ]

To: maggief
Nifong misleading the public AGAIN?!

Scum of the earth, isn't he? Is he going to stir up things enough to get Cheek plenty of votes?
301 posted on 07/30/2006 1:00:09 PM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson