Greensboro police officers Scott Sanders and Tom Fox have filed suit against the city of Greensboro and a host of former and current employees, including former City Manager Mitchell Johnson and former Chief Tim Bellamy in Forsyth County Superior Court.
The officers, who were part of a special intelligence section under former Chief David Wray that was accused of racially motivated investigations of black officers, claims malicious prosecution, abuse of process and civil conspiracy. A federal judge threw out a similar lawsuit last August.
The lawsuit argues that Forsyth County Superior Court is the proper venue for the complaint to be heard “as several parties reside or have their principal place of business in Guilford or Forsyth counties and the events underlying this lawsuit occurred in Guilford County.”
The complaint lists only one of the parties, Greensboro police Officer Norman O. Rankin, as being a resident of Forsyth County. All the other defendants, including retired Assistant Chief Gary Hastings, retired Capt. Martha Kelly, Officer Ernest L. Cuthbertson and Officer John D. Slone, are referenced as residents of Guilford County. The city of Greensboro is located in Guilford County.
The more recent lawsuit was filed last month. Sanders and Fox are represented by John Vermitsky, who also represented them in the federal case, and Michael P. Crowe. Vermitsky and Crowe work out of law offices in Winston-Salem.
The city of Greensboro is also defending lawsuits brought by 39 black officers, Capt. James Hinson, Officer Julius Fulmore and Wray himself.
Sanders and Fox alleges that in June 2005, Rankin, a black officer assigned to special intelligence approached the city legal department and began giving false statements about Fox and Sanders, and that Johnson as city manager directed an “improper investigation” into special intelligence, specifically targeting Fox and Sanders.
The complaint alleges that all defendants provided “misleading, incomplete and/or inaccurate information” about Sanders and Fox to the State Bureau of Investigation. The two were indicted in 2007, and Sanders stood trial in Guilford County Court in 2009. A jury found Sanders not guilty of accessing a government computer without authorization, and shortly afterwards a state special prosecutor dropped all charges against the two.
The complaint filed by the two officers alleges that “after Sanders was found not guilty, a newly promoted officer of the police department provided the SBI with statements that had been suppressed by the defendants that led to all remaining charges against Scott Sanders and Tom Fox being dismissed by the SBI.”
US District Judge Thomas D. Schroeder addressed claims that the defendants mislead the State Bureau of Investigation or withheld exculpatory investigation in an opinion released when he threw out the previous suit.
“The amended complaint does not explain the significance of these alleged actions, however, much less how they affected the grand jury proceeding or could have caused the grand jury to find probable cause where none allegedly existed,” Schroeder said at the time.
Showing posts with label Tim Bellamy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tim Bellamy. Show all posts
Knight, race, police and job qualifications
Charles Cherry, a former Greensboro police captain, made some remarks during the speakers from the floor portion of last week’s city council meeting about the racialized cast of some statements made by city officials about police administration.
He took direct aim at Mayor Bill Knight, quoting him as stating, “Former Chief Tim Bellamy got his job because he was black.”
The mayor interrupted Cherry, and contradicted him.
“That is incorrect, sir,” Knight said.
Cherry shook his head in disbelief.
“Well, I don’t know what the newspaper said, but that is incorrect,” Knight said. “That is incorrect.”
Knight is technically correct in that he did not say verbatim that Tim Bellamy got his job as police chief because he was black. In fact he did not mention the former chief by name or use the word “black.”
The statement made by Knight during a well-attended candidate forum hosted by the League of Women Voters of the Piedmont Triad at Holy Trinity Episcopal Church on Sept. 15, 2009 was this:
“I would like to be sure going forward that as we select new administration into the police department command group that we’re doing it based on ability and qualifications. We have one chief selected because of race. We had another interim chief — don’t know what his situa — We have another chief who was basically forced out on racial issues. And we have a chief today who, in my opinion, is there primarily because of race.”
At the time, Tim Bellamy, who is black, served as chief of police. Prior to that Bellamy, had served as interim chief following the resignation of David Wray, who is white, in January 2006. Prior to that, Anthony Scales, who is black, served as interim.
There is no doubt that Knight was referring to Bellamy when he said, “We have a chief today who, in my opinion, is there primarily because of race.” And Bellamy's race is undoubtedly black.
Cherry is correct in essence in saying, "Mayor Bill Knight stated that former Chief Tim Bellamy got his job because he was black."
I had the opportunity to further confirm that the remark was directed at Bellamy in a phone conversation with Knight the following Sunday, when he told me: “It does not appear to me that he might have been the most qualified person for the job.”
I have left a phone message to Knight to ask him to explain his disavowal during last week’s city council meeting. I hope he will take the opportunity to clarify the matter.
GPD captain to city manager: 'Lead this city'
Greensboro police Capt. Charles Cherry, who commands the patrol bureau of the Eastern Division, has been officially deemed fit for duty more than a month after Assistant Chief Dwight Crotts, the man who will lead the department beginning on Aug. 31, recommended him for evaluation.
Another assistant chief, Anita Holder, informed Cherry this morning that he is still on administrative duty, and with pay, but "pending the outcome of current administrative investigations."
The reason given for Cherry's recommendation for fitness-for-duty evaluation was a series of grievances that he had filed on behalf of himself and other officers. Now that two psychologists have confirmed that the captain is indeed fit for duty, the department is investigating the truthfulness of statements in the grievances.
In this memo, Cherry expresses his belief to City Manager Rashad Young that Assistant City Manager Michael Speedling, Chief Tim Bellamy and Assistant Chief Dwight Crotts are incompetent, discriminatory, retaliatory, harassing and creating a hostile work environment "for me and other officers."
I encourage you, readers of this blog and engaged citizens of Greensboro, to read the memo in its entirety and make up your own minds as to whether Cherry's allegations are factually supported, or, alternately, whether they raise sufficient concerns as to necessitate full and candid response from the city government.
Memo From Capt. Charles Cherry to City Manager Rashad Young
Rashad Young's response was succinct when I asked him if he would be inclined to comment on this memo: "No."
Another assistant chief, Anita Holder, informed Cherry this morning that he is still on administrative duty, and with pay, but "pending the outcome of current administrative investigations."
The reason given for Cherry's recommendation for fitness-for-duty evaluation was a series of grievances that he had filed on behalf of himself and other officers. Now that two psychologists have confirmed that the captain is indeed fit for duty, the department is investigating the truthfulness of statements in the grievances.
In this memo, Cherry expresses his belief to City Manager Rashad Young that Assistant City Manager Michael Speedling, Chief Tim Bellamy and Assistant Chief Dwight Crotts are incompetent, discriminatory, retaliatory, harassing and creating a hostile work environment "for me and other officers."
I encourage you, readers of this blog and engaged citizens of Greensboro, to read the memo in its entirety and make up your own minds as to whether Cherry's allegations are factually supported, or, alternately, whether they raise sufficient concerns as to necessitate full and candid response from the city government.
Memo From Capt. Charles Cherry to City Manager Rashad Young
Rashad Young's response was succinct when I asked him if he would be inclined to comment on this memo: "No."
A public apology from Rev. Cardes Brown to Mayor Bill Knight
Statement made by the Rev. Cardes Brown at a press conference held at New Light Missionary Baptist Church in Greensboro on June 24:
"I think I want to apologize to Mayor Knight. Please put this down. I want to apologize to him because he made a statement sometime ago, and I challenged the statement. He made the statement that the chief was only made chief because he was black. And I stood up against that statement. And I have to really apologize to Mayor Knight because the more I research this the more I’m inclined to agree that, in part, he was right. He was only made chief because he was black and would show favor to the majority of officers on the force.”
The majority of officers on the force, it should be noted, are white.
Chief Tim Bellamy is scheduled to retire on July 31.
"I think I want to apologize to Mayor Knight. Please put this down. I want to apologize to him because he made a statement sometime ago, and I challenged the statement. He made the statement that the chief was only made chief because he was black. And I stood up against that statement. And I have to really apologize to Mayor Knight because the more I research this the more I’m inclined to agree that, in part, he was right. He was only made chief because he was black and would show favor to the majority of officers on the force.”
The majority of officers on the force, it should be noted, are white.
Chief Tim Bellamy is scheduled to retire on July 31.
Greensboro police Chief Tim Bellamy's retirement memo
Rev. Gregory Headen, Pulpit Forum: June 24: “We are very concerned that we don’t get to the point where we bring in another chief without addressing these systemic and cultural evils. So I want to say that it would be a great mistake to assume that the retirement of Chief Bellamy would resolve the Greensboro Police Department’s problems. It is not one or two people that we’re engaging; it is a deeply entrenched culture. Additionally, it would be unwise, unworkable and unfair to bring another chief in on top of the corruption and double standards that now exist.”
Bellamy Retirement Memo to Young 011910
Bellamy Retirement Memo to Young 011910
Pulpit Forum letter to Greensboro police Chief Tim Bellamy
Pulpit Forum, June 24: "On January 2010, the Pulpit Forum sent a letter to police Chief Timothy Bellamy with 97 specific questions and requested a response. The city manager, the mayor and all council members were copied. A meeting with City Manager Rashad Young was held in January; he promised to insure a response to these questions. To this date we have received no response."
The Pulpit Forum Letter to Tim Bellamy 2010
The Pulpit Forum Letter to Tim Bellamy 2010
Arguments of law in the civil matter of alleged violations of the civil rights of Sgt. Tom Fox and Officer Scott Sanders
Federal civil rights complaint filed by Sgt. Tom Fox and Officer Scott Sanders against the city of Greensboro, Chief Tim Bellamy, former Assistant Chief Gary Hastings, Officer John D. Sloan, Officer Ernest L. Cuthbertson, former City Manager Mitchell Johnson, former Capt. Martha Kelly and Risk Management Associates: “Mitchell Johnson, in his official capacity, and the city of Greensboro have discriminated against Scott Sanders and Tom Fox based on their race (Caucasian) and have deprived Scott Sanders and Tom Fox of their right to make and enforce contracts guaranteed by the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 USC § 1981 for, among other things, the purpose of appeasing a segment of the African-American community and discrediting and discharging David Wray’s ‘good ole boys.’ Mitchell Johnson, unjustifiably and without good cause, took actions adverse to Scott Sanders and Tom Fox, communicated inaccurate information, and directed investigations to justify discrediting, suspending the plaintiffs for more than one year without pay, and caused unfounded criminal charges to be brought against Scott Sanders and Tom Fox.”
Mitchell Johnson’s motion to dismiss, June 10: “Plaintiffs’ § 1981 claims against Johnson should also be dismissed for failure to plead racial discrimination. Instead of pleading racial discrimination, plaintiffs have pled that Johnson had them wrongfully arrested to appease an unidentified segment of the African-American community. However, plaintiffs do not claim that this unspecified group of people harbored any racial animus. Thus, instead of pleading that they were wronged because they were Caucasian, plantiffs have instead pled that Johnson responded to perceived wrongdoings by the Greensboro Police Department and sought to appease an unidentified segment of the community that plaintiffs do not allege any racial animus.”
Complaint: “With the forced resignation of David Wray, the Federal Bureau of Investigation on January 12, 2006, mounted an investigation into charges of alleged violations of federal civil rights by David Wray and members of [the special intelligence section], including Scott Sanders and Tom Fox. The FBI found no evidence of any violations of federal law by SIS, Scott Sanders, Tom Fox or David Wray.
“After the FBI found no basis for adverse action against Scott Sanders and/or Tom Fox, at the direction of Timothy Bellamy, the city requested that the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) investigate Scott Sanders, Tom Fox and SIS.”
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: “Plaintiffs claim that Bellamy requested that the SBI investigate them after the FBI found no evidence that plaintiffs violated federal law. But plaintiffs make no allegations about whether Bellamy requested the SBI to investigate the same federal law the FBI had already covered or potential state law violations that the FBI had not covered.”
Complaint: “Upon information and belief, although Mitchell Johnson knew or had reason to know that an investigation by the SBI was unfounded he backed Bellamy in initiating an SBI investigation into SIS through his conduct, including inter alia:
“a. Giving the City Legal and RMA reports to Bellamy to read with the instructions to Bellamy to see if the issues in the report were true and accurate and to report back to Johnson and tell him what he was going to do about it.
“b. By directing Bellamy, after he came back to Johnson and reported that the issues were true, to request and start an SBI investigation.
“At the request of Mitchell Johnson and several members of the Greensboro Police Department, including Timothy R. Bellamy and Gary W. Hastings, SBI conducted an investigation and interviewed numerous Greensboro Police officers including Timothy R. Bellamy, Gary W. Hastings, John D. Sloan and Ernest L. Cuthbertson.”
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly: “Plaintiffs allege that Bellamy and Hastings, along with Johnson and ‘several members of the Greensboro Police Department’ requested that the SBI interview police officers. Not only does this collective allegation fail to explain why such a request was unwarranted, plaintiffs fail to explain how the information the SBI gained from the interviews caused it to bring criminal charges.”
Complaint: “During this investigation, Captain Martha Kelly conspired and agreed with defendants Hastings and Bellamy to deprive the plaintiffs of their constitutionally protected rights and to maliciously and without probable cause, initiate and continue criminal charges against the plaintiffs. During this time period, Ms. Kelly withdrew evidence at the specific request of Hastings which was destroyed and which pertained to the criminal investigation of the plaintiffs and which, upon information and belief, had been created by Hastings and titled ‘Memorandum #9.’"
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: “Plaintiffs allege that Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly conspired to initiate criminal charges against them. In support of this legal conclusion, plaintiffs allege that Kelly destroyed a document that had been created by Hastings titled ‘Memorandum #9.’ Although plaintiffs allege that Memorandum #9 ‘pertained to the criminal investigation’ they do not allege what information this document contained or whether it would have prevented the SBI from bringing criminal charges against plaintiffs.
Complaint: "Additionally, during this time in furtherance of her illegal agreement Kelly failed to notify the SBI of false criminal and administrative allegations brought forth by Gary Hastings which concerned plaintiff Sanders.”
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: “Plaintiffs also claim that Kelly failed to inform the SBI about false criminal and administrative allegations Hastings had brought against plaintiffs. However, plaintiffs fail to specify what these criminal and administrative allegations concerned, whether they covered the scope of the SBI’s investigation, or whether they would have prevented the SBI from bringing charges against them."
Complaint: “During the SBI’s investigation into SIS, Hastings was in command of the Special Investigation Division which included SIS.
“Upon information and belief, Hastings had a personal vendetta against David Wray stemming from disciplinary actions David Wray had previously imposed on Hastings. Hastings’ vendetta extended beyond Wray to include members of SIS that Hastings perceived as Wray’s ‘good ole boys’ including Scott Sanders and Tom Fox."
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: "Plaintiffs note that Bellamy [SIC] was in charge of SIS during the SBI's investigation and claim that Bellamy had a personal vendetta against Wray that extended to plaintiffs. But plaintiffs fail to allege how Bellamy used his power over the SIS or directed his personal vendetta to have criminal charges brought against plaintiffs."
“Upon information and belief, Bellamy, Hastings, Sloan and Cuthbertson provided the SBI with false, incomplete, and/or misleading statements and information in an attempt to discredit and bring charges against Scott Sanders and Tom Fox.
“On May 31, 2007, Julius Fulmore, an African-American police officer employed by the city of Greensboro, filed suit in Guilford County Superior Court against Scott Sanders and others…
“Without probable cause and as a result of the false, malicious and misleading evidence presented to the SBI by the defendants, Tom Fox was indicted on one count of felonious obstruction of justice and one count of felonious conspiracy. Based on the same information and without probable cause, Scott Sanders was indicted on one count of accessing a government computer, two counts of felonious obstruction of justice, and one count of felonious conspiracy. These charges were based solely on the investigation by SBI that included false, incomplete and misleading information provided by defendants Bellamy, Hastings, Johnson, Sloan and Cuthbertson in their official capacities.”
Fox and Sanders were acquitted of all charges by a Guilford County jury in February 2009.
Brief in support of Johnson’s motion to dismiss: “Plaintiffs allege that their indictments were ‘based solely on the investigation by the SBI that included false, incomplete and misleading information by defendants Bellamy, Hastings, Johnson, Sloan and Cuthbertson in their official capacities.’ These allegations say nothing about what information Johnson provided the SBI or whether the information was false, misleading or incomplete. In fact, plaintiffs do not even allege that the SBI interviewed Johnson but rather that he backed the initiation of an SBI investigation. Absent allegations of what information Johnson provided the SBI, it would be pure speculation to conclude that Johnson caused the SBI to indict plaintiffs.”
The Johnson brief is referenced by Sloan and Cuthbertson as a response to allegations by the plaintiffs that "provided the SBI with false, incomplete, and/or misleading statements and information in an attempt to discredit and bring charges against Scott Sanders and Tom Fox."
Mitchell Johnson’s motion to dismiss, June 10: “Plaintiffs’ § 1981 claims against Johnson should also be dismissed for failure to plead racial discrimination. Instead of pleading racial discrimination, plaintiffs have pled that Johnson had them wrongfully arrested to appease an unidentified segment of the African-American community. However, plaintiffs do not claim that this unspecified group of people harbored any racial animus. Thus, instead of pleading that they were wronged because they were Caucasian, plantiffs have instead pled that Johnson responded to perceived wrongdoings by the Greensboro Police Department and sought to appease an unidentified segment of the community that plaintiffs do not allege any racial animus.”
Complaint: “With the forced resignation of David Wray, the Federal Bureau of Investigation on January 12, 2006, mounted an investigation into charges of alleged violations of federal civil rights by David Wray and members of [the special intelligence section], including Scott Sanders and Tom Fox. The FBI found no evidence of any violations of federal law by SIS, Scott Sanders, Tom Fox or David Wray.
“After the FBI found no basis for adverse action against Scott Sanders and/or Tom Fox, at the direction of Timothy Bellamy, the city requested that the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) investigate Scott Sanders, Tom Fox and SIS.”
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: “Plaintiffs claim that Bellamy requested that the SBI investigate them after the FBI found no evidence that plaintiffs violated federal law. But plaintiffs make no allegations about whether Bellamy requested the SBI to investigate the same federal law the FBI had already covered or potential state law violations that the FBI had not covered.”
Complaint: “Upon information and belief, although Mitchell Johnson knew or had reason to know that an investigation by the SBI was unfounded he backed Bellamy in initiating an SBI investigation into SIS through his conduct, including inter alia:
“a. Giving the City Legal and RMA reports to Bellamy to read with the instructions to Bellamy to see if the issues in the report were true and accurate and to report back to Johnson and tell him what he was going to do about it.
“b. By directing Bellamy, after he came back to Johnson and reported that the issues were true, to request and start an SBI investigation.
“At the request of Mitchell Johnson and several members of the Greensboro Police Department, including Timothy R. Bellamy and Gary W. Hastings, SBI conducted an investigation and interviewed numerous Greensboro Police officers including Timothy R. Bellamy, Gary W. Hastings, John D. Sloan and Ernest L. Cuthbertson.”
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly: “Plaintiffs allege that Bellamy and Hastings, along with Johnson and ‘several members of the Greensboro Police Department’ requested that the SBI interview police officers. Not only does this collective allegation fail to explain why such a request was unwarranted, plaintiffs fail to explain how the information the SBI gained from the interviews caused it to bring criminal charges.”
Complaint: “During this investigation, Captain Martha Kelly conspired and agreed with defendants Hastings and Bellamy to deprive the plaintiffs of their constitutionally protected rights and to maliciously and without probable cause, initiate and continue criminal charges against the plaintiffs. During this time period, Ms. Kelly withdrew evidence at the specific request of Hastings which was destroyed and which pertained to the criminal investigation of the plaintiffs and which, upon information and belief, had been created by Hastings and titled ‘Memorandum #9.’"
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: “Plaintiffs allege that Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly conspired to initiate criminal charges against them. In support of this legal conclusion, plaintiffs allege that Kelly destroyed a document that had been created by Hastings titled ‘Memorandum #9.’ Although plaintiffs allege that Memorandum #9 ‘pertained to the criminal investigation’ they do not allege what information this document contained or whether it would have prevented the SBI from bringing criminal charges against plaintiffs.
Complaint: "Additionally, during this time in furtherance of her illegal agreement Kelly failed to notify the SBI of false criminal and administrative allegations brought forth by Gary Hastings which concerned plaintiff Sanders.”
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: “Plaintiffs also claim that Kelly failed to inform the SBI about false criminal and administrative allegations Hastings had brought against plaintiffs. However, plaintiffs fail to specify what these criminal and administrative allegations concerned, whether they covered the scope of the SBI’s investigation, or whether they would have prevented the SBI from bringing charges against them."
Complaint: “During the SBI’s investigation into SIS, Hastings was in command of the Special Investigation Division which included SIS.
“Upon information and belief, Hastings had a personal vendetta against David Wray stemming from disciplinary actions David Wray had previously imposed on Hastings. Hastings’ vendetta extended beyond Wray to include members of SIS that Hastings perceived as Wray’s ‘good ole boys’ including Scott Sanders and Tom Fox."
Brief in support of motion to dismiss by Bellamy, Hastings and Kelly, June 10: "Plaintiffs note that Bellamy [SIC] was in charge of SIS during the SBI's investigation and claim that Bellamy had a personal vendetta against Wray that extended to plaintiffs. But plaintiffs fail to allege how Bellamy used his power over the SIS or directed his personal vendetta to have criminal charges brought against plaintiffs."
“Upon information and belief, Bellamy, Hastings, Sloan and Cuthbertson provided the SBI with false, incomplete, and/or misleading statements and information in an attempt to discredit and bring charges against Scott Sanders and Tom Fox.
“On May 31, 2007, Julius Fulmore, an African-American police officer employed by the city of Greensboro, filed suit in Guilford County Superior Court against Scott Sanders and others…
“Without probable cause and as a result of the false, malicious and misleading evidence presented to the SBI by the defendants, Tom Fox was indicted on one count of felonious obstruction of justice and one count of felonious conspiracy. Based on the same information and without probable cause, Scott Sanders was indicted on one count of accessing a government computer, two counts of felonious obstruction of justice, and one count of felonious conspiracy. These charges were based solely on the investigation by SBI that included false, incomplete and misleading information provided by defendants Bellamy, Hastings, Johnson, Sloan and Cuthbertson in their official capacities.”
Fox and Sanders were acquitted of all charges by a Guilford County jury in February 2009.
Brief in support of Johnson’s motion to dismiss: “Plaintiffs allege that their indictments were ‘based solely on the investigation by the SBI that included false, incomplete and misleading information by defendants Bellamy, Hastings, Johnson, Sloan and Cuthbertson in their official capacities.’ These allegations say nothing about what information Johnson provided the SBI or whether the information was false, misleading or incomplete. In fact, plaintiffs do not even allege that the SBI interviewed Johnson but rather that he backed the initiation of an SBI investigation. Absent allegations of what information Johnson provided the SBI, it would be pure speculation to conclude that Johnson caused the SBI to indict plaintiffs.”
The Johnson brief is referenced by Sloan and Cuthbertson as a response to allegations by the plaintiffs that "provided the SBI with false, incomplete, and/or misleading statements and information in an attempt to discredit and bring charges against Scott Sanders and Tom Fox."
Human smuggling and human trafficking bills before NC legislature
Two bills currently before the NC General Assembly tackle the related but different phenomena of human smuggling and human trafficking.
Create Crime of Smuggling Human beings, sponsored by Rep. Curtis Blackwood (R-Union) and cosponsored by Rep. Dale Folwell (R-Forsyth), would make it “unlawful for a person to engage in the smuggling of human beings for profit or commercial purpose,” with “smuggling of human beings” meaning “the transportation, or procurement of transportation, by a person or entity that knows or has reason to know that the persons transported, or to be transported, are not United States citizens, permanent resident aliens, or persons who are otherwise lawfully present in the United States.”
Guilford County Sheriff BJ Barnes told a predominantly Latino audience at an April 1 forum in Greensboro: “This law is too vague, and I personally don’t think they’ll end up getting it passed. I, for one, am not an advocate for a bunch of more laws.” He added later: “I will definitely be calling [legislators] tomorrow to tell them not to [approve the bill]”
Greensboro police Chief Tim Bellamy added, “I think it’s very broad. I would be scared of the police because it’s going to give some police the idea that every time a truck or van goes down the road to stop it and say, ‘Let’s detain someone and question them.’ I have a lot of issues with this legislation.”
The critical difference between smuggling and trafficking persons has to do with consent.
The Justice Department defines human smuggling as “the facilitation, transportation, attempted transportation or illegal entry of a person(s) across an international border, in violation of one or more countries’ laws, either clandestinely or through deception, such as the use of fraudulent documents.” A section.” A 2005 Justice Department report adds that “human smuggling is generally with the consent of the person(s) being smuggled, who often pay large sums of money” and that “the vast majority of people who are assisted in illegally entering the United States are smuggled, rather than trafficked.”
In contrast, the United Nations defines human trafficking as “the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, or abduction, of fraud, of deception, of abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.”
The NC Human Trafficking Commission bill sponsored by Sen. Eleanor Kinnaird (D-Orange) serves an entirely different purpose and addresses a different issue.
The bill would create a state commission to, among other things, “explore the specific ways trafficking is occurring in North Carolina and the links to international and domestic trafficking” and “to contribute to efforts to inform and educate law enforcement personnel, social service providers, and the general public about trafficking so that traffickers can be prosecuted and victim-survivors can receive appropriate services.”
Cosponsors from the Guilford County delegation include Sen. Katie Dorsett and Sen. Don Vaughan, both Democrats, and Sen. Stan Bingham, a Republican.
More on this from Ben Holder, AKA Troublemaker.
Create Crime of Smuggling Human beings, sponsored by Rep. Curtis Blackwood (R-Union) and cosponsored by Rep. Dale Folwell (R-Forsyth), would make it “unlawful for a person to engage in the smuggling of human beings for profit or commercial purpose,” with “smuggling of human beings” meaning “the transportation, or procurement of transportation, by a person or entity that knows or has reason to know that the persons transported, or to be transported, are not United States citizens, permanent resident aliens, or persons who are otherwise lawfully present in the United States.”
Guilford County Sheriff BJ Barnes told a predominantly Latino audience at an April 1 forum in Greensboro: “This law is too vague, and I personally don’t think they’ll end up getting it passed. I, for one, am not an advocate for a bunch of more laws.” He added later: “I will definitely be calling [legislators] tomorrow to tell them not to [approve the bill]”
Greensboro police Chief Tim Bellamy added, “I think it’s very broad. I would be scared of the police because it’s going to give some police the idea that every time a truck or van goes down the road to stop it and say, ‘Let’s detain someone and question them.’ I have a lot of issues with this legislation.”
The critical difference between smuggling and trafficking persons has to do with consent.
The Justice Department defines human smuggling as “the facilitation, transportation, attempted transportation or illegal entry of a person(s) across an international border, in violation of one or more countries’ laws, either clandestinely or through deception, such as the use of fraudulent documents.” A section.” A 2005 Justice Department report adds that “human smuggling is generally with the consent of the person(s) being smuggled, who often pay large sums of money” and that “the vast majority of people who are assisted in illegally entering the United States are smuggled, rather than trafficked.”
In contrast, the United Nations defines human trafficking as “the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, or abduction, of fraud, of deception, of abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.”
The NC Human Trafficking Commission bill sponsored by Sen. Eleanor Kinnaird (D-Orange) serves an entirely different purpose and addresses a different issue.
The bill would create a state commission to, among other things, “explore the specific ways trafficking is occurring in North Carolina and the links to international and domestic trafficking” and “to contribute to efforts to inform and educate law enforcement personnel, social service providers, and the general public about trafficking so that traffickers can be prosecuted and victim-survivors can receive appropriate services.”
Cosponsors from the Guilford County delegation include Sen. Katie Dorsett and Sen. Don Vaughan, both Democrats, and Sen. Stan Bingham, a Republican.
More on this from Ben Holder, AKA Troublemaker.
Surveillance of black leaders
I rarely make common cause with the Rhino and the Troublemaker. But in at least this instance, they're right to demand an accounting from Greensboro City Manager Mitchell Johnson and police Chief Tim Bellamy.
Ben Holder has been showing up at council meetings and making a scene about this lately. And Rhino Editor John Hammer picks up the story this week, writing:
"On Tuesday, Holder brought up the "police surveillance" matter the council should have dealt with a long, long time ago, but instead the council handled the issue as it has so many and just hoped it would go away. The council does have a problem because in dealing with this issue, councilmembers will have to confront the fact that City Manager Mitchell Johnson and police Chief Tim Bellamy mislead the council. The question the council will have to answer is, was the misrepresentation deliberate or not."
What's surreal is that the facts of this case have been in the public realm for sometime. Mitchell Johnson admitted in a press conference in November 2006 that the reason black community leaders were recorded by a nonsworn police employee was because a fellow task force member was, as he put it, "doing something inappropriate."
The background of the story has been amply reported in YES! Weekly, the Troublemaker blog and the Rhino. The trouble is, not everyone in the community faithfully reads, YES! Weekly, the Troublemaker or the Rhino. Several prominent citizens remain persuaded that the Greensboro Police Department under former Chief David Wray deliberately targeted black leaders for surveillance, based on a press release put out by the department in April 2006. I know because I had to explain what really happened to the Rev. Nelson Johnson, one of the black leaders who was recorded, last spring. If all you know is that black leaders were recorded, but you don't know that the reason for the recording was to gather information about a task force member who led a wired nonsworn police employee around to the offices of various black leaders, it looks sinister.
When I interviewed Chief Bellamy in December 2006, he said the recordings could not be released to those who were recorded because they were part of an administrative investigation. It sounded ridiculous to me then — eight months after the disclosure that the recordings had been made. So it's aggravating to read today in the Rhino that Bellamy wrote in a Jan. 29 memo to City Attorney Terry Wood that "this matter is included in an administrative investigation which is being completed at this time," and that "this information is protected."
It's time for all involved — Mitchell Johnson, Tim Bellamy — to come clean, and Mayor Yvonne Johnson should insist on a full airing of the facts.
Ben Holder has been showing up at council meetings and making a scene about this lately. And Rhino Editor John Hammer picks up the story this week, writing:
"On Tuesday, Holder brought up the "police surveillance" matter the council should have dealt with a long, long time ago, but instead the council handled the issue as it has so many and just hoped it would go away. The council does have a problem because in dealing with this issue, councilmembers will have to confront the fact that City Manager Mitchell Johnson and police Chief Tim Bellamy mislead the council. The question the council will have to answer is, was the misrepresentation deliberate or not."
What's surreal is that the facts of this case have been in the public realm for sometime. Mitchell Johnson admitted in a press conference in November 2006 that the reason black community leaders were recorded by a nonsworn police employee was because a fellow task force member was, as he put it, "doing something inappropriate."
The background of the story has been amply reported in YES! Weekly, the Troublemaker blog and the Rhino. The trouble is, not everyone in the community faithfully reads, YES! Weekly, the Troublemaker or the Rhino. Several prominent citizens remain persuaded that the Greensboro Police Department under former Chief David Wray deliberately targeted black leaders for surveillance, based on a press release put out by the department in April 2006. I know because I had to explain what really happened to the Rev. Nelson Johnson, one of the black leaders who was recorded, last spring. If all you know is that black leaders were recorded, but you don't know that the reason for the recording was to gather information about a task force member who led a wired nonsworn police employee around to the offices of various black leaders, it looks sinister.
When I interviewed Chief Bellamy in December 2006, he said the recordings could not be released to those who were recorded because they were part of an administrative investigation. It sounded ridiculous to me then — eight months after the disclosure that the recordings had been made. So it's aggravating to read today in the Rhino that Bellamy wrote in a Jan. 29 memo to City Attorney Terry Wood that "this matter is included in an administrative investigation which is being completed at this time," and that "this information is protected."
It's time for all involved — Mitchell Johnson, Tim Bellamy — to come clean, and Mayor Yvonne Johnson should insist on a full airing of the facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)