Thursday, November 09, 2006

Who posted the most recent leak of the RMA report to the internet?

We know that the copy that was used for this most recent leak, published at Greensboro 101, came from Diane Bellamy-Small, but we do not know who actually posted it.

Could the copy have come from the original leak to the N&R, and have been posted by someone associated with the N&R?

I think the investigation into BOTH leaks is FAR from over.


  1. I disagree that both were "leaks", Bubba.

    The first time it left official hands and got out was a "leak", all the rest were simply a propogation. Let's call it a "flow".

    WFMY and Fox news had it before GSO101 - they were part of the "flow", but no one is calling them "leakers".

    Semantics, I know... but still...

  2. The effect of each occurrence was the same.

    The "who" and the "how" questions remain to be answered. I believe I understand a little about the "why".

  3. Just my thoughts/opinion:
    Dianne Bellamy-Small gave the RMA report to the News & Record, knowing they would help push her racist agenda against Chief Wray. I believe her elected position is due in part to help from Lt. James Hinson. She owed him.
    At some point, the N&R decided to pass on the RMA report to other outlets. Who did this and why is not clear. Was an investigation closing in on the N&R and they needed to deflect attention away from the newspaper? This would allow the N&R to say, "Heck, everybody has it now. Why bother us?"
    Or was some deal made between D. Bellamy-Small and the N&R to disclose it to deflect attention away from D. Bellamy-Small?

  4. "The effect of each occurrence was the same."

    Hardly. The effect of the first "leak" was that a single media outlet got to tell us what they thought was important in it.

    The effect of intermediate leaks meant more of the same, or in some cases, simple bragging that the report had been aquired.

    The effect of the posting to the Internet was that everybody had equal access and could make up their own minds.

    I mean, really, Bubba.

  5. Roch,

    Anyone asking you check the IP address and reveal who you think posted the copy at 101?

  6. Based on this post I think the list for suspects in the GSO-101-publishing-of-a-confidential-document caper narrows considerably.

    And MeB raise a good point.

  7. "I mean, really, Bubba."

    Really, Roch.

    You don't think there's a possibility that the motivation in both cases was to effect a slanted viewpoint designed to support some notion of political correctness?

    Or even worse, the motivation could possibly be to deflect attention away from potential criminal behavior in several different areas by employees of the city, or to set up a way to extort money legally from one or more of the involved parties or entities?

    I think your rationale may be WAY too simplistic and optimistic.

    There's an excellent possibility the motivation in at least the first instance, and perhaps in the second was NOT altruistic in nature.

    In the first case, it seems very likely that the designed effect may have been to present an inaccurate vision of Wray as a evil and racist chief.

    In the second case, it seems very possible that the Bledsoe series created awareness of how bad the situation had been misrepresented, and further reinforcement of the first effect was needed.

    At any rate, one of the actual effects was to bring this subject back to life.

  8. D. B-S. hasn't yet lied when she said that she did not give the RMS Report to the N&R, nor did she lie when she said she didn't give the report to the blogosphere. She seems disinclined to lie so why not ask her the one and only pertinent question, "Ms. B-S who did you give your ccopy of the RMS report to?" Or maybe you will have to be more specific and not give her any wriggle room and try "Ms. B-S who was permitted to take and/or read your copy of the RMA report?" Brenda

  9. Exactly the point I made over at JR's.

    We need to be asking those questions loudly and often.