A TRUCE

Not newspapers, but for what I know to be fact because I was there. The newspapers can only scratch the surface of what is really going on. You were NOT there, so your suppositions are made on what you’re told by others. Maybe in the future you will owe me a large apology if what I say has any merit.

I will make a deal with you. We will call it a truce and I will disappear if you ONLY answer the following questions to the best of your knowledge and honestly:

NO newspapers stories!

1) Show me proof that I am connected with any drug dealers?
2) Show me proof that I have ever been convicted of any drug dealing, or drug possession?
3) Show me one single crime I have committed, or been convicted of?
4) Likewise, the other people you attack in the forums, Mary, Ed, Mitch, show me the same proof if any?


Part two: Your sheriff:

1) Is he an honest, or dishonest person?
2) Has he ever been investigated for alleged misconduct with women while he was a trooper?
3) Has he suppressed truth, or mislead the media in order keep his perceived image intact?
4) Is there, or not a high turnover at the S.O.?
5) Has he or has he not made threats to forum moderators to sue them?
6) Does he not hire officers of questionable backgrounds, previously released by former sheriffs and pretends later to not know anything about it?
7) Why will the sheriff not open up his background, or take a drug test along with his department?
8) Does the sheriff keep close friends that are shady characters in our community?
9) Has the sheriff let deputies go and allowed them to resigned in lieu of criminal charges being filed? Does the sheriff have that authority to not charge his deputies for criminal offenses? Does he not have to run it first past the D.A.? At worst, if he does have that authority, is it ethical to allow them to resign?
10) Last, who is the deputy and the only deputy ever terminated by the sheriff and for what valid reason?

If you answer the above truthfully, I will disappear forever!

MOD –1, give this a chance and maybe this battle will end!

No newspapers? Afraid of the written word? I don’t blame you if you have something to hide.
A truce would be great. Your terms are fairly simple. Here goes:
Your 1 – 4: Since you have remained behind the cloak of anonymity I can not provide you an adequate answer to those questions. You ask that I show you the proof that you are associated with drug dealers. Drug dealers come in all sizes and shapes. You have the common street variety and then you have those that are of the professional variety such as doctors who over prescribe. If you had been a super vice cop like the Miami kind (you know Crockett and Tubbs) then of course you would have rubbed shoulders with them every day, or if you availed yourself of the services of the doctors mentioned above then you have been connected. Since you hide behind the cloak then I am not able to accurately say who you rub shoulders with. As far as Mary, and Mitch no one ever stated they were involved in drug dealing or having connection with drug dealers. Ed says that he was unrighteously treated at another time and place. Again, since you have not provided any positive proof of your true identity I am not able to go further except of what I have read from down south.

Part two: Your sheriff:

1) Yes
2) Not that I have knowledge of, but any law enforcement officer of any large organization will be investigated at some time
3) No
4) No. Normal for small departments
5) No threats, I believe he enlisted their assistance with slanderous/ and liabalous posts.
6) Only been two that I know of and they were dismissed, but no he does not hire officers of questionable character.
7) As with any public official his back ground and his life is an open book.
9) Since individuals work at the pleasure and discretion of the sheriff he can terminate whomever he wants.
10) See number 9
This probably wasn’t the answers you wanted but u wanted honesty. Go quietly in the night, and have a good life. God Bless

No newspapers? Afraid of the written word? I don’t blame you if you have something to hide.

No, not afraid of the written word, but you have shown to be ignorant in believing all that you read apparently. That is why I said leave it out. Your ignorance of the judicial system lacks considerably. You are very naive in that department, possibly because you have lacked true police experience in larger cities. Your exposure is limited to small towns, or traffic.

A truce would be great. Your terms are fairly simple. Here goes:
Your 1 – 4: Since you have remained behind the cloak of anonymity I can not provide you an adequate answer to those questions. You ask that I show you the proof that you are associated with drug dealers. Drug dealers come in all sizes and shapes. You have the common street variety and then you have those that are of the professional variety such as doctors who over prescribe. If you had been a super vice cop like the Miami kind (you know Crockett and Tubbs) then of course you would have rubbed shoulders with them every day, or if you availed yourself of the services of the doctors mentioned above then you have been connected. Since you hide behind the cloak then I am not able to accurately say who you rub shoulders with.

Well, you have eluded that you seem to know who I am. Once again, you make assertions to Miami Vice, why do you do that? I think you keep eluding to Ed, correct? You post on other forums and tell people its Ed the disgruntled one every time a negative post arrives, why?

As far as Mary, and Mitch no one ever stated they were involved in drug dealing or having connection with drug dealers.

I should have been clear on this one, why did you attack Mitch i& Mary in the past about Mitch always quiting his jobs every year, and that Mary and her deputies were causing problems here?

Ed says that he was unrighteously treated at another time and place.

That is true and he was totally cleared, so why do people attack him here, and why does the sheriff show such hatred towards him? Why does the sheriff spread false information about Ed? You said it yourself, anyone can get investigated working for a department, so whats the beef with Ed, other than he stood up to the sheriff on right and wrong issues? Furthermore, he was responsible for taking down a corrupt deputy sheriff under Lovin. Might that be the true reasons. Plus he show most the deputies up in his abilities? I think a little jealous by some is what I keep hearing.

Again, since you have not provided any positive proof of your true identity I am not able to go further except of what I have read from down south.

Once again, whats with this down south garbage?

Part two: Your sheriff:

1) Yes ................Yes he is dishonest?

2) Not that I have knowledge of, but any law enforcement officer of any large organization will be investigated at some time.

So True! So why do you pick on some? Ask your sheriff and he will tell you he was investigated, but cleared.

3) No

I think the media thinks otherwise.

4) No. Normal for small departments. Maybe.

5) No threats, I believe he enlisted their assistance with slanderous/ and liabalous posts.

I do not think so, If you check what goes on in other forums, this place is nothing compared to other places, Just check and you will see how ridiculous the Sheriff became other this stuff. Tell me what slanderous/ and liabalous posts? Tell him to stop whining!!

6) Only been two that I know of and they were dismissed, but no he does not hire officers of questionable character.

WOW!!!! Really......., how about Eddie Mathis that was fired for gambling on duty by the previous sheriff and DA did not want him? The reason this sheriff hired him and saved his butt was because he campaign heavy for the sheriff. How about deputies that have had a prior track record of quiting their jobs every year and bounce around department to department. Not illegal, but surely tells much of one's character, etc..

7) As with any public official his back ground and his life is an open book.

You did not answer this one honestly. The sheriff will not allow his former highway patrol I.A. records to become public. Also, he does not administer drug testing, or other testing for new employment, why? He hired Ray Bennett and thought he was the greatest and defends him to date, why? The background work here is a joke.

9) Since individuals work at the pleasure and discretion of the sheriff he can terminate whomever he wants. I understand, but is this ethically wrong when the sheriff will release an officer for a minor personality conflict, but allows others to resign that have committed a criminal act?

10) See number 9

This probably wasn’t the answers you wanted but u wanted honesty. Go quietly in the night, and have a good life. God Bless

You skirted the truth once again, but I expected that. You have been known to do this with friends and co-workers. You may have a clue to who I am, but I know for certain who you are and find it so dishonorable what you have become of yourself. Hey, if you can live with yourself, that is all that matters. Although somehow I know the day will come when you feel under appreciated again, and you quit, or stab another in the back. I for one do NOT have that character trait, or flaws. I may not be perfect, but will not do the things you have done onto others. I will honor my word and be gone for now. Unless you get bored in your sandbox and start attacking others again.

Later -


MOD -1, please leave this thread to the end of the month and delete it then. I will not be back, but I would like others to read the responses.

No newspapers? Afraid of the written word? I don’t blame you if you have something to hide.

No, not afraid of the written word, but you have shown to be ignorant in believing all that you read apparently. That is why I said leave it out. Your ignorance of the judicial system lacks considerably. You are very naive in that department, possibly because you have lacked true police experience in larger cities. Your exposure is limited to small towns, or traffic.

A truce would be great. Your terms are fairly simple. Here goes:
Your 1 – 4: Since you have remained behind the cloak of anonymity I can not provide you an adequate answer to those questions. You ask that I show you the proof that you are associated with drug dealers. Drug dealers come in all sizes and shapes. You have the common street variety and then you have those that are of the professional variety such as doctors who over prescribe. If you had been a super vice cop like the Miami kind (you know Crockett and Tubbs) then of course you would have rubbed shoulders with them every day, or if you availed yourself of the services of the doctors mentioned above then you have been connected. Since you hide behind the cloak then I am not able to accurately say who you rub shoulders with.

Well, you have eluded that you seem to know who I am. Once again, you make assertions to Miami Vice, why do you do that? I think you keep eluding to Ed, correct? You post on other forums and tell people its Ed the disgruntled one every time a negative post arrives, why?

As far as Mary, and Mitch no one ever stated they were involved in drug dealing or having connection with drug dealers.

I should have been clear on this one, why did you attack Mitch i& Mary in the past about Mitch always quiting his jobs every year, and that Mary and her deputies were causing problems here?

Ed says that he was unrighteously treated at another time and place.

That is true and he was totally cleared, so why do people attack him here, and why does the sheriff show such hatred towards him? Why does the sheriff spread false information about Ed? You said it yourself, anyone can get investigated working for a department, so whats the beef with Ed, other than he stood up to the sheriff on right and wrong issues? Furthermore, he was responsible for taking down a corrupt deputy sheriff under Lovin. Might that be the true reasons. Plus he show most the deputies up in his abilities? I think a little jealous by some is what I keep hearing.

Again, since you have not provided any positive proof of your true identity I am not able to go further except of what I have read from down south.

Once again, whats with this down south garbage?

Part two: Your sheriff:

1) Yes ................Yes he is dishonest?

2) Not that I have knowledge of, but any law enforcement officer of any large organization will be investigated at some time.

So True! So why do you pick on some? Ask your sheriff and he will tell you he was investigated, but cleared.

3) No

I think the media thinks otherwise.

4) No. Normal for small departments. Maybe.

5) No threats, I believe he enlisted their assistance with slanderous/ and liabalous posts.

I do not think so, If you check what goes on in other forums, this place is nothing compared to other places, Just check and you will see how ridiculous the Sheriff became other this stuff. Tell me what slanderous/ and liabalous posts? Tell him to stop whining!!

6) Only been two that I know of and they were dismissed, but no he does not hire officers of questionable character.

WOW!!!! Really......., how about Eddie Mathis that was fired for gambling on duty by the previous sheriff and DA did not want him? The reason this sheriff hired him and saved his butt was because he campaign heavy for the sheriff. How about deputies that have had a prior track record of quiting their jobs every year and bounce around department to department. Not illegal, but surely tells much of one's character, etc..

7) As with any public official his back ground and his life is an open book.

You did not answer this one honestly. The sheriff will not allow his former highway patrol I.A. records to become public. Also, he does not administer drug testing, or other testing for new employment, why? He hired Ray Bennett and thought he was the greatest and defends him to date, why? The background work here is a joke.

9) Since individuals work at the pleasure and discretion of the sheriff he can terminate whomever he wants. I understand, but is this ethically wrong when the sheriff will release an officer for a minor personality conflict, but allows others to resign that have committed a criminal act?

10) See number 9

This probably wasn’t the answers you wanted but u wanted honesty. Go quietly in the night, and have a good life. God Bless

You skirted the truth once again, but I expected that. You have been known to do this with friends and co-workers. You may have a clue to who I am, but I know for certain who you are and find it so dishonorable what you have become of yourself. Hey, if you can live with yourself, that is all that matters. Although somehow I know the day will come when you feel under appreciated again, and you quit, or stab another in the back. I for one do NOT have that character trait, or flaws. I may not be perfect, but will not do the things you have done onto others. I will honor my word and be gone for now. Unless you get bored in your sandbox and start attacking others again.

Later -


MOD -1, please leave this thread to the end of the month and delete it then. I will not be back, but I would like others to read the responses.

You wanted the truth but as always can not accept it for what it is. Lies and suppositions were what you wanted and I will not give it. You insinuate that I am dishonorable you have nothing to base that on.

If you are gone, go in peace. Let this board return to what it was supposed to be and that of a place for exchange of ideas between law enforcement folks instead of a breading ground for contempt. God Bless my friend and smooth sailing wherever you go.

You wanted the truth but as always can not accept it for what it is. Lies and suppositions were what you wanted and I will not give it. You insinuate that I am dishonorable you have nothing to base that on.

If you are gone, go in peace. Let this board return to what it was supposed to be and that of a place for exchange of ideas between law enforcement folks instead of a breading ground for contempt. God Bless my friend and smooth sailing wherever you go.

You did not answer his questions the second time, but you had the last word looks like. He seems to have beaten you at your own game and exposed who you really are 424. To bad we lost a really good person and a real agent of truth! You are the one who plays both sides of the fence and never have been an honorable person. You trash other people in your daily talks with others, but here you pretend to be righteous. We have not forgotten how you trashed Lovin and Tom's names when you were at MPD. Some know your real side and what you did to undermine others. How you bad mouthed your once partner and now you do it here.

Nice trick with the postings and misquoting. You copy and paste all too poorly, the purpose of a quote is to get the exact response not what you want it to be. I hope that in some way you are able to get over your issues.

If you have applied to this department and went through the entire hiring process then you are required to take a drug test, since it is a requirement of the hiring process? Check with standards and training which I am sure you have their address.

Your protest against posting involving certain people. It is amazing to me that all these posts come from the same sets of addresses even when you attempt to veil you identity.

I am not going to get into the Ed issue you try to lure us into. If you are not Ed then he has some real reason to inquire into why you bring his name and others to the table. If from what I say you infer that I am talking of Ed that is your prerogative but I will not give credence to that issue.

Could it be that you or someone close to you was in with the previous sheriff. It would seem that you are attempting to slander a deputy by putting remarks that can not be substantiated unless you had conversations with the previous sheriff. If so and he unjustly terminated Mr. Mathis for something he was not tried and convicted of I am sure Mr. Mathis would love to address the issue. This is what I am talking about liableous and slanderous postings. You post this garbage without any proof, unless you are the proof and then you have to come public to make it known but you never will.

As far as internal affairs records I give you this. Make the first step. Open yours if you have one. If you are from a department that has such an animal, and you have been out there doing your job, I can bet you claims were made against you that you feel were unjustified. Be careful what you wish for.

Your response to number 9 and 10 would lead us to believe that you feel you were terminated because of a minor personality conflict, at least that is what I infer from your post is that you have personal knowledge, but inferences can be misjudged and because I can not judge without being judged I will leave that to the higher authority.

The last word will come on judgment day. Like the old song goes, "are your garments spotless, are they white as snow, are you washed in the blood of the Lamb?" I can tell you that I hold to that hope for tomorrow for without it I am as lost as any other person. I hope this does not incense I only offer it as some real good advice. God Bless.

Nice trick with the postings and misquoting. You copy and paste all too poorly, the purpose of a quote is to get the exact response not what you want it to be. I hope that in some way you are able to get over your issues.

1) Once again you make assertions that are not true. Get over what issue, the fact you are causing trouble here? I have arrived at one conclusion: You have been baiting us in hopes to identify one individual and the same has gone both ways. You lack the answers to many of our questions, which tells us that you are not really from here, or you simply refuse to answer the questions because it reveals truth. I hope the readers can see the pattern evolving. Thus, it tells me two things, you are one of the moderators, or a deputy attempting put it off as a moderator. If you are a moderator, shame on you! You have NO dog in this battle, but you have been persuaded by inaccurate information as to whom the bad guys really are. If you are not the moderator and you believe in this sheriff, you have served your leader poorly! If you are one of the moderators and you somehow feel by serving the sheriff you will receive perks someday when you visit here, well, I have a surprise for you, not only will they lie to you and you will one day see the truth, but you will later be known for the one who fought for this sheriff and caused others headache needlessly.

If you have applied to this department and went through the entire hiring process then you are required to take a drug test, since it is a requirement of the hiring process? Check with standards and training which I am sure you have their address.

2) What we have said is random drug testing after hiring and psychological and polygraph testing. This does not exist. Furthermore, since there is no union, or anything else, the sheriff runs the department through fear. This is what makes me believe you are not from the department, or you would not make such outrageous statements.

Your protest against posting involving certain people. It is amazing to me that all these posts come from the same sets of addresses even when you attempt to veil you identity.

3) This is your best one yet! SAME SET OF ADDRESSES..WOW! Does this infer you are a Moderator? Only the Moderator is supposed to know that, right? Well, I will let you in on a little secret, this group has many users using the same proxy server to post, therefore it will have the same address. You do understand that?

I am not going to get into the Ed issue you try to lure us into. If you are not Ed then he has some real reason to inquire into why you bring his name and others to the table. If from what I say you infer that I am talking of Ed that is your prerogative but I will not give credence to that issue.

4) We say this about Ed because he has been a messenger of truth everywhere he has ever worked! He has always had the courage unlike others to stand for WHAT IS RIGHT, and help the weak and others being taken advantage of. If true, its very honorable! Can you say the same for yourself? Lets put it this way, many blame Ed for all messages negative in nature, because the angle is to destroy the messenger's creditability. But, lets assume for one minute that he is correct and maybe you are attacking the wrong person, than what have you done in the eye's of your Lord? Would you not hate to one day have a revelation that you have been attacking the wrong person! I can not even fathom the thought of that being a possibility, or being in your shoes if true. Do you want to really risk that possibility?

Could it be that you or someone close to you was in with the previous sheriff. It would seem that you are attempting to slander a deputy by putting remarks that can not be substantiated unless you had conversations with the previous sheriff.

5) Ahh, another mistake! You say that there is NO proof...Ahh. Okay, well, would a newspaper article for The Cherokee Scout, August 2001 tell the story of this officer who was fired? That the DA had a "NO confidence statement" to make about the officer. Would this be proof if true? How about an audio tape to the 911 center where the officer makes incriminating statements about his activities? How about this officer going before the county commissioners begging for his job back and being told they had NO say in the matter. This is all documented and true, but somehow we forget and forgive this without consequence. How about the two officers that committed criminals acts and were allowed to resign, do you want proof? Do we need to post articles to make our case, or do you concur? You see these are not assumptions, they're true and the readers now have something to validate.

If so and he unjustly terminated Mr. Mathis for something he was not tried and convicted of I am sure Mr. Mathis would love to address the issue.

He should, but the fact is it happen!

This is what I am talking about libelous and slanderous postings.

Its only libelous and slanderous if NOT true. Do you really think we would make such a comment without proof. You can ask the DA's office, they know this to be true.

You post this garbage without any proof, unless you are the proof and then you have to come public to make it known but you never will. AHH, nice try. There is just no way to get you to see what's going on here, amazing!

As far as internal affairs records I give you this. Make the first step. Open yours if you have one. If you are from a department that has such an animal, and you have been out there doing your job, I can bet you claims were made against you that you feel were unjustified. Be careful what you wish for.

First, I am not the sheriff, or running for office, or sheriff. The question here is about the integrity of our leaders, not a messenger's past. You attempt make us equals, but we are not!

Your response to number 9 and 10 would lead us to believe that you feel you were terminated because of a minor personality conflict, at least that is what I infer from your post is that you have personal knowledge, but inferences can be misjudged and because I can not judge without being judged I will leave that to the higher authority.

NO, what was said is that he was terminated unjust and for doing his job. I can say that because I was there and had first had knowledge of the situation. You only know what you have been told.

The last word will come on judgment day. Like the old song goes, "are your garments spotless, are they white as snow, are you washed in the blood of the Lamb?" I can tell you that I hold to that hope for tomorrow for without it I am as lost as any other person. I hope this does not incense I only offer it as some real good advice. God Bless.

I agree with the above and once again, would it not turn your stomach someday to know that you have been attacking a massager of God and not one of God's enemies? Lets assume for one minute, that you have been possibly misinformed and have acted on that information inappropriately to attack those whom are righteous in truth, what does that say of you. What damage have you done then? I sleep comfortably, do you?

More later but I want to know since you have thrown out the newspaper thing again as your sole source of truth should we start that war again? Would you like to see the news articles or can we just chalk those up as one persons view and not necessarily the truth but what they were told? Please answer that one for me. As far as newspapers I read them and only believe what I can ferret out. However, there are items that I am sure we can find under public record law. You post that it is strictly to expose the leader but you have attacked many of the department and maligned the integrity of the officers there. What else are we supposed to believe but this is an attack to remove the leader and as many as can be to set up a new kingdom with a leader that will listen to those that put him/her into power. Hmmmm.

On the other cyber crap that you want us to believe check out the electronic privacy laws and the exceptions that allow certain persons to gain access to your "proxy" and find the untold story but believe what you want.

I thought you were going to let it lay? I really believed that you wanted this to return to what the owners wanted it to be a place for exchange of honest information to assist law enforcement to do a better job. Have a Blessed Day.

More later but I want to know since you have thrown out the newspaper thing again as your sole source of truth should we start that war again? Would you like to see the news articles or can we just chalk those up as one persons view and not necessarily the truth but what they were told? Please answer that one for me.

I agree with your assessment of newspaper articles, but you are the one who attacked one of our former deputies for his past "down south", and you post garbage about the associations with drug traffickers which were unsubstantiated allegations, why? Your sheriff does the same and tells others falsehoods based on newspaper articles, why? Public records are not the same here as in other places, therefore not fair play, do you not agree? Mr. Lovin's background is not open for examination, true? In fact under North Carolina Law, all public employee personnel records are not open for public review. Is this not fundamentally wrong? Therefore, we are left to the newspaper and first hand knowledge of the events here.

As far as newspapers I read them and only believe what I can ferret out.

Maybe you can with some, but so far you have made grave mistakes and assertions grasshopper? Let me ask you this, do you believe everything that is reduced to writing on the internet, police reports, or intelligence reports? Do you ever assume that that information is subjective and may have hidden agendas? You seem to live in a world where your abilities to discern truth from reality is limited. I think the reason for this is your limited exposure in the world. Did you believe in WMD'S as a reason for WAR?. Did you believe the information the secretary of State was given by the CIA director? Do you believe the government is honest in all there dealings? That is why we have watchdog groups and people who are the true guardians of truth.

However, there are items that I am sure we can find under public record law. You post that it is strictly to expose the leader but you have attacked many of the department and maligned the integrity of the officers there.

No, only to exposed truth. There are many good officers here and there are still a few rotten apples.

What else are we supposed to believe but this is an attack to remove the leader and as many as can be to set up a new kingdom with a leader that will listen to those that put him/her into power. Hmmmm.

No we would like a Kingdom of integrity and a leader with moral principles. One who does what is right across the board and does not use selective enforcement. A place where people can speak freely, not fear their leaders. Why is it no deputy here will post their name to anything like in other forums, or departments? WHY?

On the other cyber crap that you want us to believe check out the electronic privacy laws and the exceptions that allow certain persons to gain access to your "proxy" and find the untold story but believe what you want. Not sure what you mean by this, can you please elaborate? Here is a good reference for you http://www.eff.org/

I thought you were going to let it lay? I really believed that you wanted this to return to what the owners wanted it to be a place for exchange of honest information to assist law enforcement to do a better job. Have a Blessed Day.

There you go again with "Perceived Honesty". This is why we have this debate, for others to make their own conclusions. This is actually a healthy debate. Just remember something you said, just like Mr. Mathis's case, why do you not apply the same fair play in other people cases? Accusations are always made and have underlining motivations at times. You were the first to strike with the assertions of the "Miami Vice" crap and you still today make inferences to people from the south.

Do me a favor and read some of the other forums and look at how they go after the administrations for unfair play, or they expose abuse of power. Do you see any of those posts being deleted, NO! So why here make a difference, because its NORTH CAROLINA? Is there a double standard for North Carolina? No, its because the sheriff is more obsessed about what is said about him online than doing his job.

I want the readers to notice one thing, we break-down all your posts and answer each sentence, or paragraph individually, but you seem to skip over some questions that are not convenient for you to answer. Hum...

I will write again when my MDT gets near another hotspot.