On November 21, 2008, The County Edge ran my Raleigh Report titled SBI is AWOL in Corruption Cases. Prior to the kangaroo kourt trial of Hugh Webster, the article was revised and reprinted and distributed to a good number of reporters. So far as I know, not a single media outlet in the state has had the nerve to report these facts documented in the article or made any attempt to refute them:

There is a Bridge to Nowhere in Anson County built with taxpayer funds apparently for the benefit of private individuals with the right political connections.

People still employed by the state knew what was happening and did nothing to stop it.

The SBI, though repeatedly reminded of the Bridge, has refused to investigate or to expose those responsible.

As for Webster’s trial, he predicted that if the DA didn’t get a conviction, he would himself be in trouble and sure enough, shortly after Webster was acquitted, an “investigation began in November 2009 based on allegations that the DA, Joel Brewer, “had engaged in obstruction of justice, misuse of authority, assaults on females, and various sexual assaults of females.”

What interesting timing, and how interesting that when “Attorney General Roy Cooper’s Special Prosecutions Section and the SBI Professional Standards Division charged Brewer” the charges were only misdemeanors. The proposed penalty for serious abuse of office is far less than that sought against Webster had he been convicted. (Quotes from

My comment before the trial was that the attempt to frame Webster was so inept those responsible should be embarrassed. I stand by that comment. It was a vicious political prosecution and all those responsible should be publicly pilloried for crimes against the entire concept of justice. In fact, they should be sued as individuals because they sure weren’t working for the public when they tried a case based on a laughably lacking investigation and the testimony of an individual who should have been charged for crimes clearly committed.

But who is really responsible? Look at the reporting this week concerning the SBI. Clearly, from the very first story, the fraudulent confession was the act of an unethical agent, possibly acting at the direction of other unethical individuals. The SBI crime lab had nothing to do with making up a confession and swearing under oath to a lie. Yet the stories focus on the crime lab and ignore the people who are still circling the wagons to protect the agent and his superiors.

The obvious question is WHY IS THAT AGENT STILL EMPLOYED? My guess is he has more dirt on his superiors than they have on him.

One thing is for sure: the MSM (mostly statist media) is still protecting their political pals at the expense of the public. Otherwise they would be asking the obvious questions like “Who knew the confession was a fraud and when did they know it?” “Why have no charges been brought against those responsible?” “Why are any of those directly responsible for providing false testimony and malicious prosecution still being protected by the top political leaders in the state?”

Instead of praising the MSM for printing old news, the obvious fact there’s an integrity problem in state government, I’d like to ask them when they’ll print, as Paul Harvey would say, “the rest of the story.”

Leave a Reply