Owens should have let sleeping dogs lie

Mooresville citizens ousted Frank Owens from the town board in 2005 after two terms, the last of which was wracked by controversy and scandal.

He was sent packing rather quietly, considering the political atmosphere and sentiment at the time.

But now, eight years later, he has tossed his hat back in the ring, targeting the Ward 3 seat currently occupied by Mac Herring.

Owens has claimed that he is running for office because Herring voted to saddle Mooresville residents with MI-Connection, a $92.5 million cable company that Owens says the town had no business purchasing. And I fully agree with him on that.

But then Owens decided to get a little nit-picky. He recently went digging through his opponent's 2012 county vehicle-tax records and then broke his neck tattle-telling to the Mooresville Tribune about a $88.86 delinquency on Herring's part, which even a county collections official called “very common.” The Tribune contacted Herring, who paid the tax bill before the article was even published in the paper.

Owens attempted to use this as a chance to show, even further, that Herring is irresponsible with money, stating in the Tribune: “What does it say about a commissioner that uses tax dollars from the town and the county and does not pay all of his county tax dollars?” 

Herring's delinquent tax bill was $88.86. If Herring's vote for MI-Connection is Owens' only real talking-point during this campaign, which seems to be the case, then we need to compare apples to apples.

In 2005, Frank Owens rubber-stamped handing a $25 million engineering contract on what would later become an estimated $150 million project to a town-board friend, voting against the recommendation of town engineers who said the expansion of Mooresville's wastewater treatment plant should be completed by a more qualified (and overall less costly) firm.

At one point in Mooresville's history, such a decision would have slid right through, possibly without the public even knowing. But decades of backwoods dealings and good-ol'-boy politics came to an end in the early- to mid-2000s in Mooresville, when the sleepy town was rocked by one scandal after another, all while Owens sat on the town board. With support from the local media and new blood on the board, a new plan was created for the wastewater treatment plant expansion, which meant the overall price was lowered. And the firm that had originally been deemed most qualified by town engineers was given a supervisory role over the former board's choice of CH2M Hill.

But that didn't happen before the town's manager – apparently based primarily on commissioners' persuasion, including (by then former) Commissioner Owens – fired the town's engineer and utilities director, both of whom had vehemently stood up for the best interest of the town's taxpayers against Owens and his ilk … and in spite of personal risk. One commissioner said that the personnel files of the two employees were “completely empty” of any prior disciplinary action at the time of their firings. For more on the CH2M Hill scandal, click here and here. 

But the CH2M Hill controversy was just the tip of the iceberg.

Also during Owens' last four years as commissioner:

• In 2001, Mooresville's librarian was indicted and later pleaded guilty to embezzlement for using public money for her private use. But her indictment came in spite of an apathetic Mooresville Town Board and only after an activist blew the whistle and persistently demanded that something be done about it. She also went to the press. An independent review by the Mooresville Tribune raised the possibility that tens of thousands of dollars in cash and merchandise had been stolen from or through the library for half-a-dozen years before the indictment. 
• In 2003, the town's former internal auditor, whose job it was to help prevent financial mismanagement and possible theft like that which had occurred at the library just a couple years prior, stated publicly for the first time that the town lacked financial controls and that her detection of those deficiencies – and her insistence that the town institute change – is likely what led to her firing after only eight months on the job. 
• In 2004, the then-town manager fired the new town librarian, supposedly for spending more than town policy allowed for a meal. This resulted in another black eye on the town because of widespread scrutiny from newspapers and local television news about the overspending habits of Mooresville's government, primarily via travel and dining expenses. 
• In 2005, despite the town having a full-time auditor, a finance director and an outside accounting firm that annually conducted an audit of the town's books, it once again took a concerned citizen – through his own volunteer financial probe – to identify a shortage in the inventory at the Mooresville Municipal Golf Course, which was already operationally bathed in red ink. A follow-up audit of the golf inventory showed about $5,000 of missing merchandise from the golf course pro shop. An editorial in the Mooresville Tribune stated: “The litany of mismanagement gets longer and longer, our town commissioners say little about it, and you, the taxpayers, foot the bill.”
• Also in early 2006 - just after Owens was voted off the town board - the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) visited the Town of Mooresville and confiscated town computers. To date, no one knows what the FBI was looking for, but most assume it had something to do with the town board, against procedure, granting its friend's engineering firm the lucrative $25 million engineering contract for the wastewater treatment plant expansion. One former commissioner said the FBI told commissioners that the agents were looking into actions of prior town-board members. He said he was specifically asked by the FBI if he thought former commissioners were receiving “kick-backs” for preferential awarding of contracts. “I don't believe they received money for it,” he said, “but it certainly showed poor judgment.”

And now word is finally public about a 2001 FBI investigation into Owens for public corruption, following a state probe into a Mooresville gambling hut. 

One former public official, during an interview about the investigation, said: “Frank Owens has a pattern of abusing power, whether it's as a police officer or a commissioner.

“We have gotten past the yahoo-style of government and crookedness and the 'you-aren't-my-friend-anymore' high-school politics.”

I could not agree more. A vote for Frank Owens on Tuesday is a vote to move Mooresville backwards. It's really just that simple.

Two years ago, commenters on this blog resurrected the issue of Owens' gambling and the 2001 FBI investigation. Owens contacted me via private message on Facebook at that time, asking me to remove the comments and to contact him. I did call him, and while stating that he was "just trying to lead a good, Christian life," he insisted that the gambling accusations were false. He offered to meet with me and tell “the truth” about what "had really happened." I saw no need; after all, he was a private citizen at the time, which meant that whatever had gone on in his private life was no longer the public's concern. Still, his behavior while he was a commissioner was and is fair-game for public scrutiny.

Now that he's running again for public office, the fact that he was investigated by the FBI for public corruption has become relevant for reporting; Owens' personal character is once again the public's business.

But Owens has clammed up again. He apparently doesn't want to talk about the scandal anymore; he still has not responded to Report questions sent in mid-October about his involvement in illegal gambling and the 2001 FBI investigation and grand jury. And the only thing that has changed from two years ago, when he wanted to talk about it, until now is that he's eyeballing a seat on Mooresville's town board.

Yes, Mac Herring, the Ward 3 incumbent, voted for MI-Connection during his first term on the town board. He made, in my opinion, a multi-million-dollar mistake. And I don't take that lightly. But if Herring's vote was so heinous, why did no one challenge him when he sought (and won) re-election in 2009? If Owens' motivation is to remove Herring from office to, as he claims, protect the taxpayers from a tax-and-spender, why did he wait another four years to do it? He could have run against Herring in 2009, but he didn't. In fact, no one did. Herring ran unopposed.

I was here, with a front-row seat, when Owens was last a commissioner. He and other board members gave the town one black eye after another. Far from being apologetic, they banned together and thumbed their noses at the public, over and over. Visits from SBI and FBI agents became almost commonplace. Shameful reports by newspapers and television news stations were plentiful; in fact, the material that Owens and other town-board members gave the Mooresville Tribune was enough to fill a wall with awards for investigative reporting and community service. The town became a laughingstock, notorious for scandal and controversy.

It was an ugly, politically restless period in Mooresville's history. I don't want to see it repeated, nor do I believe that anyone who was on the board at that time deserves a second chance to govern and shape policy in this town.

Herring voted for MI-Connection. But the SBI has not been in Mooresville since he's been a commissioner. The FBI hasn't visited, either, except – in the first few months of Herring's first term – to look into the actions of Owens and his fellow town-board members.

The public is smart enough to draw its own conclusions about that. And come what may on Tuesday.

Feds once targeted Owens for public corruption

Frank Owens, who is once again seeking a seat on Mooresville's town board, was investigated by state and federal authorities for public corruption during his last term as town commissioner.

According to several current and former law-enforcement and public officials, all who asked their names to be withheld, Owens was first investigated by Alcohol Law Enforcement (ALE), in combination with the Mooresville Police Department (MPD), then the case was sent to the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2001.

The case apparently went before a federal grand jury either the day before or after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on America. And that's where the story seems to end and speculation begins.

Owens is now challenging incumbent Mac Herring for the Ward 3 seat on Mooresville's town board. Election Day is Nov. 5.

State begins gambling probe

The public-corruption investigation began with ALE and the Mooresville Police Department in late summer 2001. The state agency asked for local assistance when it began investigating reports of illegal gambling at a bingo hut on Timber Road in Mooresville. Owens, a 30-year veteran of the Mooresville Police Department who retired as captain in 1996, was at the end of his first of two consecutive terms as an at-large town commissioner. He served from 1997 to 2005, when he lost his seat to Frank Rader. The seat is currently occupied by Rhett Dusenbury, who is being challenged this year by David Coble. 

Mooresville had a specialized unit that assisted ALE with the 2001 public-corruption investigation.

“There was legitimate bingo in one part of the building, but the back of the operation held real, poker-related gambling,” one officer recalled.

As part of their undercover operation, two ALE officers, driving an unmarked, white Mitsubishi Eclipse, made their way into the Timber Road bingo/gambling establishment. According to several accounts from people close to the investigation, Owens was inside the bingo hut when the undercover state agents walked in.

Owens apparently decided to use his connections as a high-ranking official to determine the identities of the undercover agents by calling the Mooresville Police Department with the Mitsubishi's license-plate tag number. He was connected to Dispatcher Sheila Caldwell, at which time he asked her whether the call was being recorded. Caldwell then switched him to a line that was not being recorded.

Owens asks dispatcher/officers to violate law

Within minutes, the Eclipse's tag number was run for the first of several times through the N.C. Division of Criminal Information (DCI). It is illegal to access systems such as DCI for purposes not specifically authorized in the law and by people who don't have specific authorization. As explained by one officer, all law enforcement personnel must acknowledge, via certification, that they understand it is illegal under state and federal law to use DCI for purposes other than law-enforcement business.

The Town of Mooresville, at the time, apparently did not have a policy regarding police officers running the plates of vehicles for non-law-enforcement people and purposes. That policy became effective on Sept. 18, 2001 – shortly after the ALE officers busted the gambling operation and a grand jury was convened – according to public records obtained by the Report. Still, say current and former law-enforcement personnel, officers and dispatchers knew that running tag numbers for non-law-enforcement personnel for non-law-enforcement purposes was illegal.

Mooresville police were almost immediately notified that the the license-plate number of the vehicle the ALE agents were driving had been run through DCI. “Since undercover tags are flagged, DMV (Division of Motor Vehicles) quickly alerted the police department to the tags being run,” recalled one officer.

Though Caldwell – who did not respond to e-mailed Report questions this week – provided Owens with the information he requested of her, in the hours after the initial time the tag was run, the then-commissioner also called on other law-enforcement officers to run the tag number. Those officers were later interviewed by the FBI and subpoenaed to testify to the federal grand jury.

Owens 'outs', chases state agents
Upon learning that the license-plate on the Mitsubishi Eclipse was registered to government agents, officers say that Owens, who was still inside the gambling establishment, outed the two ALE agents, verbally identifying them as “cops” to those who were present.

“It was almost as if Frank Owens was working security for the gambling house,” said one officer.

The two ALE officers, once identified, immediately exited the building and fled in the car registered to the town.

But Owens wasn't letting it go that easily, said sources in interviews with the Report. Instead, the then-commissioner trailed the ALE agents down NC 115 toward Davidson – sometimes at high rates of speed – until they finally made their way onto I-77. That's when Owens finally backed off.

Undercover Mooresville police officers witnessed the entire event, including the car chase. They were stationed along Timber Road in unmarked cars and were wearing transmitters, which provided constant communication with the ALE agents. The Mooresville officers followed Owens as he chased the ALE agents down NC 115.

Why didn't they pull Owens over, especially knowing what had just transpired and considering he was an easy target for speeding while chasing the agents? Simple, said one source close to the case: “They didn't want him to follow them back to the police department. They were trying to keep from having their cover blown.”

FBI launches public-corruption probe, federal grand jury convened

It wasn't until a follow-up visit to the Mooresville Police Department that the ALE agents positively identified the man who outed them as “cops” inside the gambling hall and then took it upon himself to chase them down NC 115. They were able to identify Owens in a photo of town commissioners hanging on a wall at the Mooresville Police Department.

The case was handed to the SBI to investigate. Considering the sheer number of people who helped Owens by calling in the tag number of the undercover vehicle, the case began to appear much more complex than a case of mere gambling. That's when the FBI became involved and started investigating a possible public corruption case: “I was contacted by the FBI and told they were investigating the corruption of a public official,” said one former law-enforcement officer who later became a federal witness.

At least two Report sources say they were interviewed by FBI agents.

“I told them the truth: Owens asked me to run the license plate," said one source. "There was no rule in place for us not to do that. Owens told me it was on a suspicious vehicle parked at BJ's (where he worked at the time); I had no idea it was an ALE agent that was monitoring the gambling house. If he did that, shame on him.”

The late Capt. Leon White, a loyal friend of Owens', apparently told federal authorities the same story about the tag being on a suspicious vehicle at BJ's.

“Obviously, they had gotten their story straight,” said one former officer. “So the FBI just decided to put the case in front of a grand jury and let them offer that lie there, with no lawyers present.”

Said another: “I testified in front of the grand jury. I told the truth because it was the right thing to do.” However, he said, “The FBI is very secretive. They didn't share any information with me.”

The case stops
The grand jury was convened, and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks occurred at the same time. That's where the story essentially stops. Any information after that is speculative at best:

“After 9-11, it was clear they weren't going to follow up,” said one source. “I was a federal witness, and they never called me back. They said the reason they didn't continue with the case is because the gambling never met the threshold; the house didn't make enough money to make it a federal crime.”

Other law-enforcement personnel say while federal officials may have suggested that the dollar-amount was the reason for dropping or closing the case, it wouldn't have likely been the actual cause. “When it comes to public corruption,” said one source, a dollar-amount made at the gambling house would not matter. The fact that a commissioner would be involved in illegal activity and then interject himself in a criminal investigation “undermines people's trust in government,” he said. And that would have been more pressing to law-enforcement investigating public corruption than a specific dollar amount made at a gambling house.

After all, said one former officer, gambling was just “an instrument” of the bigger public-corruption case.

A former federal official said it is plausible that federal authorities dropped the case because the amount of money did not meet a threshold for white-collar fraud and embezzlement or criminal enterprise. “With too few federal representatives, the bigger players – the more sexy cases – were going to get the action,” he said. “The dollar amount (made at the gambling house) would be a legitimate consideration in making the determination” of whether to pursue the public-corruption case.

But he said it is more likely that the public-corruption case was no longer pursued because of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. “There was a wholesale realignment of investigative priorities” after 9-11, he said.

Before the terrorist attacks, the FBI had “investigative priorities, and terror and counterterrorism weren't even on the list,” he said. “Federal agencies were turned on their head because of September 11th.”

What was happening in Mooresville, he said, “could have been a federal crime, but the concept is you go after the bigger fish. It's piranhas versus sharks.”

One of several sources speculated that perhaps federal authorities did not have a strong enough case against Owens. “I don't know if the FBI couldn't put all the pieces together for a federal case or what. I feel if (the grand jury) thought they could have indicted him, they would have. I think it just stopped at the grand jury, and (the FBI) didn't present a strong enough case.”

However, he said, “They (FBI agents) are secretive. They don't share information. They wouldn't tell why it stopped.”

'Systematic retaliation' and unanswered questions

No matter the reason for the case being “dropped” or “closed” or “stopped” – and despite the lingering question of why the state didn't pick the case back up when the federal government's attention was directed elsewhere – the fact that the case was not followed through meant local officers involved in exposing and investigating the gambling house suddenly became sitting ducks. The top brass at the police department, including then-Police Chief John Crone, had been largely kept in the dark about the state's investigation. And the target of their probe – a town commissioner in part responsible for overseeing the operation of the government, including the police department – had been investigated by the FBI, and his friends had been forced to testify in front of a federal grand jury, yet he was clearly not being held accountable. Owens was free to move on with his life – and, if he wished, to make things very uncomfortable for police-department employees who participated in the investigation.

At the police department, the specialized unit that worked with the ALE agents was immediately disbanded.

“They started systematically getting rid of people and demoting people after the FBI called off the investigation,” one former officer said. “It was systematic retaliation.”

One source said Owens approached Crone, telling him to terminate at least one of the officers involved. The Report asked Owens about that in an e-mail of questions sent on Oct. 16 and 17 to three different e-mail addresses he owns. To date, Owens has not responded to any of the questions.

We asked Owens to point out any discrepancies or possible misinformation in the detailed accounts provided by Report sources. He did not respond.

We asked him: if the police dispatcher had already provided him with the information he was seeking on the tag, why did he ask several other people to run the tag, too? Owens did not respond.

We asked Owens if he has ever been involved in illegal gambling in Mooresville and, if so, if he was involved while he was a police officer and/or a town commissioner. He did not respond.

We asked him if he was ever interviewed by the FBI while it was investigating him for public corruption. Owens did not respond.

We have offered, in another e-mail, to post his response(s) if he ever changes his mind.

If you enforce the law, are you above the law?

What happens when law enforcement officers behave as if they're above the law? At the Iredell County Sheriff's Office, the answer to that question apparently depends on who you are.

Take the employment of Tommy Adams for example.

Redmond violated his own policies when he hired Adams, a private citizen, in the early 2000s. Applicants considered for employment at the sheriff's office, among other requirements, must “be of good moral character” and “have not committed or been convicted of a crime or crimes as specified in 12 NCAC 10B.0204 & .0307 (felony, certain misdemeanors),” according to http://www.co.iredell.nc.us/departments/sheriff/employment.asp.

At the time Redmond hired him, Adams' former employer – a major retail store in Winston Salem – had charged him with felony embezzlement. Adams pleaded the charge down to a misdemeanor, which remained on his record when Redmond hired him to work at the Iredell County Sheriff's Office.

Adams worked as an unsworn employee at the sheriff's office before enrolling in Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) in or around 2004. Iredell County paid Adams' tuition and fees, according to the county's finance department, even while many rookies have paid their own way through BLET, taking classes while working at the sheriff's office at opposite times of the day.

But Adams' luck didn't end there. Redmond violated his hiring policies – again – when he promoted Adams to detective sergeant straight out of basic training.

Detective-applicants at the sheriff's office should have a minimum of “3 to 5 years of experience in law enforcement; or any equivalent combination of training and experience,” states a recent job posting at http://www.co.iredell.nc.us/departments/sheriff/employment.asp. While Adams had worked at the sheriff's office for a while before enrolling in BLET, he had never been a sworn law-enforcement officer.

Such a promotion – fresh out of rookie school with no prior training as a sworn officer – is virtually unheard of in the law-enforcement community, according to several North Carolina police chiefs and one sheriff-hopeful that responded to recent Report questions.

“It is highly unlikely that someone would go straight in to investigations right out of BLET,” said Wilkesboro Police Chief Robert Bowlin. “They may possess the education at that point, however, they would not possess the 'street smarts' knowledge or just basic law enforcement skills to be effective as a criminal investigator.”

The Raleigh Police Department requires an applicant for detective to have four years of law-enforcement experience with two years of continuous experience at the Raleigh PD. Applicants for sergeant must have six years of law-enforcement experience and two years of continuous service at the department.

Beaufort Police Chief Steve Lewis, as many chiefs contacted by the Report, said one exception may exist to the general rule: “Sometimes there are officers that have years of law-enforcement experience, leave the profession for various reasons, and then return having to pass through BLET again.”

However, Lewis said, he “definitely” would not promote “a rookie without any experience.”

Perhaps experience would have kept Adams from making the mistake he made in or around 2005.

Adams, accompanied by then-Det. Sgt. Ron “Duck” Wyatt, arrested a convicted felon who was living in a dwelling with firearms, which is a felony in North Carolina. Adams collected two guns, cases and ammunition from the felon's residence and signed an evidence sheet indicating he had submitted all of it to the sheriff's office evidence room.

Approximately one year later – after the defendant in the case had pleaded guilty to the charges against him – it was discovered that the guns were not in the evidence room, after all.

Upon learning that the guns were missing, or had never been turned in, two of Redmond's top cops, Capt. Jimmy Craven and Capt. Darren Campbell, questioned Adams, who initially denied any knowledge of the handguns' whereabouts. Adams later said that he and Wyatt were planning to keep the firearms, but, responding to questions, Wyatt told Craven and Campbell that besides being there when the guns were seized, he knew nothing about the firearms' whereabouts. With Adams' acknowledgment that he was in possession of one firearm, Campbell escorted Adams to his residence, where Adams retrieved the gun and turned it over to Campbell.

Adams was told that Wyatt's house had been searched for the second firearm and that Wyatt did not have the gun. Only after that did Adams retrieve the second firearm from his personal vehicle. He turned it over to Campbell.

In an August 2008 Statesville Record & Landmark article about the strength and security of Iredell County's police evidence rooms, Redmond referenced the years-old incident. Though he never mentioned Adams' name, the newspaper quoted Redmond as saying that “a deputy … didn't follow the right procedures in submitting those weapons to the evidence room.”

In a clear attempt to make light of the situation, Redmond said in the article that “the weapons were not evidence in any case.”

That's simply not true. The guns were, in fact, evidence in a criminal case. While the defendant had already pleaded guilty in the case, his firearms should have been handled in accordance with a Superior Court judge's ruling; in this particular case, a judge had ordered the guns destroyed. Adams and/or the sheriff's office could have submitted a request through the district attorney for the guns to be turned over to the sheriff's office for use or training purposes. But they didn't. The guns, therefore, were to remain as evidence until destroyed or a Superior Court judge changed his or her disposition to allow for other actions to be taken.

Redmond said the deputy “got in trouble” for his actions. Sheriff's office personnel dispute that. They say Adams wasn't punished at all for converting evidence to personal use.

Regardless of whether or not he was punished, the fact that the sheriff's office employs him to this very day indicates that he did not receive the punishment that he apparently would have at many other law-enforcement agencies in North Carolina.

“I would fire that officer fast, quick and in a hurry,” said Monroe Police Chief Debra Duncan, responding to Report questions asking how chiefs and sheriffs would respond if an officer, with no extenuating circumstances and no permission from a supervisor, converted evidence – guns, drugs or money – to personal use.

Said Statesville Police Chief Tom Anderson: “I would hope this would not happen at any agency, but I assure you that if this were to happen at my agency, swift and proper action would follow.”

“This is public trust 101,” Anderson said. “I would initiate an internal investigation immediately. I would review the general information with the District Attorney and initiate a separate investigation due to what would look to be a felony larceny and possible obstruction of justice."

Apparently following a tip, the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) became involved quite some time after the incident occurred. At some point during its "investigation," Adams' criminal record was expunged, permanently removing the misdemeanor charge that had been on it.

Steve Wilson was the SBI agent in charge of the case. His investigation included interviews with several people, at least one of whom has said that the intent of the investigation was to clear Adams and the sheriff's office by finding no criminal misconduct in the handling of the evidence.

Wyatt, who has since retired from the sheriff's office, initially declined to comment on the matter. But when asked if he retired because of the Adams incident and the resulting SBI investigation, Wyatt laughed and said no.

He confirmed speaking to Wilson on several occasions as part of the investigation, and “I asked if I was being interviewed as a suspect or a witness," Wyatt said. At that time, Wilson said he was not sure if there was a criminal investigation and he simply needed clarification on a few matters, Wyatt added.

Wyatt was asked if he outranked, supervised, trained and/or assigned cases to Adams or if he signed off on Adams' work. Wyatt said he did not.

Wilson took notes during the interview and told Wyatt that he would prepare a written statement from the notes for Wyatt to sign, but Wyatt said he never received that statement from Wilson.

Wyatt said he did, however, meet with Wilson and another agent in the summer of 2009. At that time, they again discussed the Adams case but also Wyatt's participation in golf tournaments to raise money for the re-election bid of Redmond for Sheriff. When asked if that investigation was linked to former sheriff candidate Mark Nicholson's recent reference to an SBI investigation of Redmond and his top cops for using county equipment on county time to campaign for Redmond in 2006, Wyatt declined to comment, citing his need to speak with his attorney before responding to additional questions.

"I'm concerned about my family's welfare," he said, referring further Report questions to the SBI. "If the SBI was doing an investigation they should be able to answer your questions."

An e-mail to Attorney General Roy Cooper went unanswered.

Both Redmond and Campbell also declined to answer Report questions. The sheriff responded through Campbell, citing personnel and saying: “Our attempt to craft an answer to each question presents practical and legal difficulties for us.”

However, they issued this statement: “The Iredell County Sheriff's Office and SBI conducted a proper and thorough review of this matter. Sheriff Redmond is satisfied that North Carolina law has been followed in all respects, and professional law enforcement standards and practices continue to be applied and enforced for the benefit of Iredell County citizens.”

When asked if the “proper and thorough review” had been completed, and if the state had cleared Adams of any wrongdoing, Campbell did not respond. He also didn't respond when asked why the sheriff wouldn't answer the questions if he was “satisfied” with the results of the “proper and thorough review.”

Sheriff's office 'immoral, unethical, corrupt,' says former detective/sheriff candidate

Mark Nicholson, the former Republican candidate for Iredell County sheriff, is speaking out, calling the sheriff's office, under Phil Redmond's leadership, "immoral, unethical and corrupt."

A 19-year veteran of the sheriff's office, Nicholson ran against Redmond, his boss, for sheriff but fell short in the primary five months ago. That same week, Nicholson turned in his two-week notice to the sheriff's office. Working at another law-enforcement agency – which hired him almost immediately upon his resignation from the ICSO – Nicholson recently sat down with the Report to tell all.

Why did he feel compelled to run for sheriff against his boss? Why take such a risk? Why, after losing the primary, did he resign from the sheriff's office? Where is he now, and what are his future plans?

“I observed and worked with the current sheriff, Phil Redmond, for almost 16 years,” said Nicholson. “He is not the type of person who should be running the most important law-enforcement agency in the county.”

Citing inappropriate and criminal behavior – including private use of county time and equipment – and “bullying tactics” employed by the sheriff and his top brass toward those who question or don't follow the status quo, Nicholson said he resigned from the sheriff's office because he could no longer tolerate the “unethical, immoral and illegal behavior [he] observed there.”

Criminal use of public time, equipment

Nicholson said Redmond has acted illegally in his use of county-jail inmates for personal jobs and favors. In one instance, said Nicholson, a passerby observed inmates building a fence at the sheriff's house. Nicholson said the inmates have also been used to wash the vehicle of the sheriff's wife.

On another occasion, said Nicholson, “The sheriff sent [then-jailer, now-sergeant] Joel Hepler and jail inmates in a county vehicle, on county time, using county money, to spread gravel on Phil Redmond's home lawn.”

“Joel Hepler told me that out of his own mouth,” said Nicholson, adding that he remembers exactly where he was – “a KFC, eating an all-you-can-eat-buffet with another sheriff's detective” – when Hepler told both men about the incident.

Nicholson said a sheriff using jail inmates for personal use is not only against the sheriff's office “standard operational policies,” it is also against state law, classifying as “misapplying and wrongfully converting to his or her own use other property that's held in trust by the public.” And that, Nicholson said, is a felony, according to N.C. General Statute 14-92 (click on the documents to enlarge):

Nicholson also said – and other sources have corroborated – that Redmond and a few of his top cops illegally used county equipment on county time to campaign for Redmond for Sheriff in 2006. They say the State Bureau of Investigation looked into the matter but no one has heard anything from the agency since it investigated.

“I don't have a bit of use for the SBI,” said Nicholson. “I used to want to be an SBI agent. I looked up to them. But the SBI is pathetic. They've literally had things handed to them on Redmond, but they don't do a thing with it.”

When asked if he had ever been asked to participate in criminal behavior during his 16 years under Redmond, Nicholson said: “He knew better than to ask me to participate.”

Intimidation, bullying tactics

At least two Nicholson supporters have stated they were bullied by Redmond and at least one of his sergeants during the campaign season before the May primary. In one instance, the sheriff apparently pulled into the driveway of a man who had a large Nicholson campaign sign in his yard. According to that man, the sheriff said: “I hope you have everything tied down around here.”

Another man with a Nicholson sign in his yard said a sheriff's sergeant visited him and stated: “If your house is broken into, who's going to come out and investigate?”

But if Redmond and his top brass are such bullies, why did Nicholson continue working at the sheriff's office, under Redmond, for so many years?

Nicholson said he loved his job as an ICSO detective but he felt suffocated by the atmosphere that the current administration creates there. He said he also has immense respect for the people that he worked beside at the sheriff's office. “I've watched employees get stepped on around there while the ones that should've been in trouble got by with whatever,” Nicholson said. “The good ones were severely reprimanded or fired for some reason.

When he began to campaign for sheriff, Nicholson asked his colleagues not to publicly support him. “Most people there are job-scared,” he said. “I asked them not to support me publicly because of fear of retaliation.

“As expected,” Nicholson added, “that fear came true.”

He is referring to Redmond's decision, immediately after the primary, to drop the certifications of several part-time/reserve officers who supported Nicholson during the campaign. (See “Sheriff on collision course with Constitution?” at http://thegattonreport.blogspot.com/2010/06/sheriff-on-collision-course-with.html.)

“I hoped if I resigned it would take some of the heat off some of my friends and supporters who either worked there or used to work there and their certifications were being held by the sheriff,” Nicholson said. “Redmond has a reputation of using bullying tactics against anybody that opposes him in any way, shape or form.”

But if that's true, why didn't Redmond fire Nicholson? That's simple, said the former candidate for sheriff: “Federal law states that a person can't be fired because of … political reasons.” However, Nicholson added, “when re-swearing comes back around in November, he could have chosen not to swear me in. He can do that for any reason.”

Nicholson said when Redmond first took office in 1994, “he didn't re-swear 15 people, but two of them were re-hired due to public outcry.” Of the 13 others, Nicholson said, “two of them were arguably the hardest-working, most honest and fair men there. And they were let go for no other reason than to make room for Redmond and his cronies coming with him.”

So why now? Why didn't Nicholson take this strong of a public stance when he was running for sheriff? “The public needs to know what's going on at the sheriff's department,” Nicholson said. “My hope was that Redmond could be removed without a bunch of embarrassment to the county and at the expense of the county and other people.”

Staying more in the background and running a more above-board campaign, Nicholson said, “was the decent way to try to get it done. But since that failed,” he added, “the sheriff's department needs to be exposed for what it is.”

Nicholson said he wants Iredell taxpayers to know how their money is being spent. “The taxpayers are are paying for everything that's getting done – legal and illegal,” Nicholson said. “And they need to know.”

Nicholson said the sheriff is in the office “for two hours, tops, most days – usually from 9 or 9:30 a.m. to 11 or 11:30 a.m..” He said it is frustrating to watch Redmond claim the glory for the work of the rank-and-file at the sheriff's office.

“I'm sick and tired of Redmond taking all the credit when he knows hardly a thing about what's going on,” Nicholson said. “He wouldn't have a clue what he said until he reads it in the newspaper. The Record & Landmark knows that's going on but does it anyway.” In doing so, Nicholson said, “they're printing a bunch of falsehoods.”

Nicholson pointed to one instance in particular that he said demonstrated the height of Redmond's narcissism. While detectives were interviewing a suspect in the murder of four Iredell residents, “the sheriff interrupts the interview to get a picture of himself, leading the suspect in, for the newspaper," said Nicholson. "He interrupted an interview with a murder suspect,” Nicholson repeated, this time growing visibly more frustrated, “for a photo opp.”

What's worse, said Nicholson, when the suspect was taken back to the interview, “she had clammed up.”

Nicholson said he firmly believes the detectives were on their way to securing a confession, but they didn't get it because of the sheriff's desire to have his face in the newspaper.

When asked about the remaining candidates for sheriff – Redmond, Democrat Bill Stamey and Unaffiliated Skip Alexander – Nicholson said he likes both Stamey and Alexander. But he wouldn't comment on the candidate that has earned his vote. What Nicholson made clear, however, are his plans to run for sheriff in 2014 when the seat is again up for re-election. “You've got to stand up for what's right,” Nicholson said. “If everybody who knew something would stand up and talk, Redmond would be gone from office.”

The Report has sent Redmond a list of Nicholson's allegations, asking for responses. His response, if provided, will be posted here.

SBI misconduct may not be limited to crime lab

The ongoing revelations of the N.C. State Bureau of Investigations' questionable (and possibly criminal) conduct should come as no surprise to Mooresville.

As an area that has been rocked by one scandal after another, prompting the SBI to visit several times in the past eight years – then in most cases waiting, to no avail, for the results – the Town of Mooresville is no stranger to the SBI sweeping cases under the rug.

Attorney General Roy Cooper recently ordered an independent review of the SBI's crime lab. The results, released late last week, were damning, revealing that the SBI “withheld or distorted evidence in more than 200 cases at the expense of potentially innocent men and women” (http://%28http//www.newsobserver.com/2010/08/19/635632/scathing-sbi-audit-says-230-cases.html#ixzz0x52LRIZc%29.).

Countless lives have clearly been sabotaged by the very “investigators” who are supposed to be protecting the public's interest. Of the cases that must now be reviewed, three of the defendants have already been executed. Five have died in prison. And 80 are still serving sentences – four of whom are on death row.

On the other hand, it's only natural to speculate that despite botched evidence and investigations, prosecutors perhaps tried and convicted the true criminal. But because of the crime lab's questionable lab practices, those cases now have a real chance of being appealed and overturned, potentially leading to the early release of violent criminals back into society.

After all is said and done, the taxpayers will pay a hefty price. And the cost is sure to be enormous.

But with the exposure of the SBI's misconduct, we have identified only a symptom of the real disease plaguing the bureau and thus our state: the absence of open, honest, accountable practices within the agency and our government itself.

The SBI blood analysts, arguably, are not incompetent. They didn't withhold information, or fall down on their duties, because they are stupid. At least we should hope not. The only way those agents were able to get away with their misconduct is because someone else has allowed, or endorsed, it to happen.

The SBI serves under a director – until recently, Robin Pendergraft. That director is appointed by the Attorney General, an elected position. What's more, the SBI crime lab – as indicated by the Raleigh News & Observer – is charged with using science to prove cases built by district attorneys, also elected positions.

In this sort of arrangement, if one person – just one – is corrupt, or chooses to turn a blind-eye to corruption, the entire judicial system crumbles, and the people left to suffer are the very ones the system was created to protect and serve. Essentially, people’s freedom – their lives – are caught in the crosshairs of law enforcement and politics. And it appears as though the SBI has somehow been ordained to decide if a person is worthy of their freedom. And only after that determination is made will the agents use “science” to fit it.

Even in the midst of public humiliation, politics and favoritism are apparently still at work among the bureau's ranks. Even while the attorney general, Roy Cooper, removed Pendergraft from her position as SBI director – moving her to another unit with no change in pay – he praised her work as the bureau's director, saying, as reported by the News & Observer: “'I think Robin has done an excellent job at the SBI.'”

The problem is clearly deep-rooted in the political structure. And perhaps the most unsettling question is this: if it has been this easy for SBI agents to botch life-and-death cases, just how easy has it been for them to ignore cases of public corruption?

In Mooresville, we're in a unique position – perhaps more so than any other city in North Carolina – to help shed some light on that.

A brief review:

• In 2002, the SBI was called in to Mooresville after a private citizen, earlier in 2001, brought to light financial inconsistencies at the Mooresville Public Library. Town officials allowed the town librarian to resign and she later pleaded guilty to felony embezzlement. Though the SBI was supposedly called in to review the matter, the public, seven years later, has not been informed of the review's outcome.
• Three years later, in 2005, the SBI was called in after yet another private citizen conducted his own well-documented financial investigation of the Mooresville Golf Course which revealed a substantial loss of inventory, and perhaps cash, from the golf course pro shop. The citizens' efforts prompted town officials to call for an outside audit of the golf course, which showed thousands of dollars in merchandise missing from the pro shop. The SBI was called in to investigate, but five years later, the public has not been informed of the outcome of that investigation, either.
• In 2008, the SBI was called in to investigate former Mooresville Police Chief John Crone's Cops for Kids program. Once again, private citizens conducted their own investigation of the program and uncovered, among other questionable items, a receipt for a deposit of $361 in “loose change” from the evidence room into the Cops for Kids account. One month later, the town fired the police chief and called in the SBI. But it took two years – and a new Iredell County District Attorney – before the public would hear anything about that investigation. Crone has been indicted and his next court appearance is scheduled for Nov. 8. Town commissioners, from the beginning, expressed skepticism about involving the SBI, citing their lack of confidence in the agency conducting a thorough, timely review. And in fact, when the initial SBI report was complete, town officials said the bureau indicated in its report that it had nothing on which to follow up. At the same time, however, Sarah Kirkman – who was elected Iredell's new district attorney at the same time the Cops for Kids story was breaking – told the Report in February that while she had received a copy of the SBI's report, she still had questions for the investigating agent. Only after that were charges produced by the SBI's “investigation.”

Interestingly, however, when Crone himself called the SBI to Mooresville in November 2002 to investigate $4 of missing money from the police department's evidence room, the SBI moved quickly. The Mooresville Tribune first reported on Nov. 6, 2002 that Crone had called in the SBI. Within seven months, the SBI had investigated the matter, a grand jury had indicted the former evidence-room custodian, and the custodian had pleaded guilty to embezzlement. It took seven months, start to finish, for the case to be opened and closed when the police chief called in the SBI. But when the town called the bureau in to investigate that same police chief for misappropriating $361 of money from the evidence-room – as opposed to the custodian's $4 - it took two years and a new DA for the SBI to produce results.

Such inconsistencies beg the question: Is it less about what you know, and more about who you know, when dealing with the SBI? Does the SBI use selective leniency and favoritism depending on a person's political influence and/or his or her perceived community status?

Unfortunately, we may never know the answers to those questions.

But thanks to the tireless efforts of a few dogged reporters in Raleigh, what we do know is that the SBI has at least been consistent the past decade. Whether “investigating” violent criminals or public corruption, the agency has demonstrated – consistently – laziness, incompetence, neglect or, worse yet, corruption … and perhaps a combination of them all.

Unfortunately, long before the Raleigh News & Observer began asking questions – and long before Cooper ordered an audit of the SBI crime lab – the people of Mooresville had learned to distrust the SBI, an agency they used to rely on as being legitimate, credible and trustworthy.

While people in this community worked courageously and tirelessly to uncover and expose corruption, the SBI repeatedly dragged its feet and used its authority to employ delay tactics and provide loopholes for those who enjoyed membership in the dwindling political patronage system of Mooresville.

The SBI’s stubborn refusal to do its job in Mooresville led to a community unnecessarily divided and polarized. The intangible harm that resulted from this monumental failure will be difficult, if not impossible, to measure.

While these new revelations about the SBI confirm the long-standing suspicions held by many in Mooresville, this is nothing to celebrate. The truth has now been exposed that the largest investigative agency in this state has dropped the ball on some 200 criminal cases. What remains unknown is how many public-corruption cases the agency has approached and treated with the same careless and reckless attitude.