FORUM
Mr. Cooper, end
your obstruction
of justice
Virginia
Parnell
Guest
Columnist
We, the Silk Plant
Forest Truth Committee
and Concerned Students,
call on North Carolina
Attorney General Roy
Cooper to end his consis
tent, knee-jerk reactions
that prevent every effort
made for a court to learn
the true facts of the wrong
ful 1997 conviction of
Kalvin Michael Smith.
Not only should Cooper
not oppose Kalvin's recent
ly-filed petition, Cooper
should join in it.
Background: On
Friday, March 11, attorneys
for Kalvin Michael Smith
petitioned the North
Carolina Supreme Court to
instruct the Forsyth superi
or court in its review of a
particularly ugly episode in
the long-running Silk Plant
Forest case. At issue is the
creation of a false affidavit
by local prosecutors and its
subsequent use by state and
local prosecutors in 2008
and 2009. Tfiough he tries
to hide in this matter,
Attorney General Roy
Cooper is at the center of
this now.
According to the peti
tion's attached transcrip
tion of a November 7,2014
conference in a Forsyth
superior court judge's
chambers, the judge was
about to order a hearing on
the matter until Cooper's
prosecutors told the judge,
"Depending on which wit
nesses (Kalvin's lawyers)
are going to call, we may
need to get out of the
J Jet
? Hollander
. Guest
\Columnist
case."l
In other words,
Cooper's prosecutors
admitted to the judge that
they would likely be called
to testify on what they
knew about how the false
affidavit was used against
Kalvin. When the judge
heard that, he abruptly shut
down further review.
Kalvin's petition asks the
N.C. Supreme Court to
order the hearing.
Cooper's prosecutors must
not continue to oppose (as
they have to date) holding
an evidentiary heating in
which they admit they are
likely to be called as fact
witnesses.
Neither Cooper's
lawyers nor anyone else
has denied the affidavit
was materially false, or that
prosecutors used it against
Kalvin in various ways.
Indeed, it is public record
that the false affidavit was
used to influence WSPD
detectives reviewing the
case, a city council empan
eled review committee, and
Christopher Swecker, the
former Assistant FBI
Director independently
reviewing the case.
Though Cooper's lawyers
repeatedly argue the false
affidavit itself was not used
in court, they have never
denied that it was used to
prepare witnesses who tes
tified in court or used with
members of the court.
Cooper's lawyers admitted
to a conflict of interest on
November 7, 2014, and
those same attorneys have i
been actively working on 1
the case, under Cooper, j
against Kalvin Michael i
Smith, possibly protecting |
themselves from exposure i
of their misconduct. ,
The issue now: If
Cooper s prosecutors
engaged in no misconduct,
the evidentiary hearing will
lift the cloud over his
office. But if Cooper's
prosecutors or local prose
cutors unlawfully used the
false affidavit, let the full
truth be known and justice
result. Cooper should also
repudiate and discipline
local prosecutors for
procuring and filing the
false affidavit in the first
place. Mr. Cooper must
stop hiding behind his staff
attorneys and his press
spokesperson, who has
argued, "(O)ur office has a
duty to represent the state
in this particular matter.
2 'Actually, in opposing a
court's review of how pros
ecutors procured and used
the false affidavit, Mr.
Cooper is expending tax
payers' resources to shield
his prosecutors.
Cooper's spokesperson
further disingenuously
argues, "(N)o court has
found cause to overturn the
conviction despite numer
ous appeals."3 Cooper's
spokesperson conveniently
omits that since taking the
case in 2008, due to allega
tions of misconduct against
local prosecutors, Cooper's
office has vigorously
opposed Kalvin's every
appeal, arguing procedural
technicalities to avoid a
court s honest and open
review of the facts. Cooper
portrays himself as an ?
innocent bystander as he
champions injustice and
protects impropriety in this
case - thus
far succeed
ing. We note
that no fewer
than forty
four judges
denied the
late Darryl
Hunt's (
appeals - an
innocent
man to
whom, like
Kalvin, no
physical evi
dence of the
crime was
ever linked.
Cooper's
cynical
abuse of the
state
resources
and the
courts must
stop now! If
he once
again reflex
tveiy oppos- ?
es Kalvin's
latest North Carolina
Supreme Court motion, it
will tell the courts and the
public all they need to
know about Cooper's moti
vations. Attorney General
Cooper, join in Kalvin's
petition; do not oppose it.
Let the courts and the pub
lic know the facts of
Kalvin's wrongful convic
tion.
For more information:
Jet Hollander,
Co-chair, Silk Plant
Forest Truth Committee
jet@pre-eminence ?om
Tel: 336-760-3369
or
Virginia Parnell
Concerned Students
'7' " . ......
Virginia parnell @fede *
m .edu910-876-5520;., ?.. >, , j
>f
Addendum:
"Only a court of law?
not the attorney general?
can release Kalvin Smith
from prison. Attorney
General Roy Cooper met
with local ministers con
cerned about the case this
afternoon, and our office
has previously reviewed the
independent report and
discussed it with Mr.
Swecker. While we agree
that there are systemic
issues in the criminal jus
tice system that must be
addressed, our office has a
duty to represent the state
in this particular matter
and no court has found
cause to overturn the con
viction despite numerous
appeals.
Noelle Talley
?s iPahltc*?' ' Tftformatjon
Offieefc- >*>?!.?Iff-'SI, . . .?<n.u;
?v Attorney General Roy
Cooper
N.C. Department oj
Justice
Desk: (919) 716-6484
After hours: (919) 218
1255
email:
ntalley@ ncdoj .gov
wwwncdoj.gov"
1 Transcript of in cam
era Meeting at 75, State v.
Kalvin Michael Smith (Nov.
7, 2014) (97 CRS 6593
94). Filed with the petition
2 Press statement Mr.
Cooper's spokesperson
issued Wednesday after
noon, February 10, 2016
(See addendum for full
statement). ?
3 Ibid
You Decide: Why are people
angry?
I Dr. Mike
[ Walden
I Guest
Columnist
Political
pundits fol
lowing the
presidential
campaigns of
the candi
dates have
agreed on one
???????conclusion ?
many people appear to be angry. Experts
offer this as the reason, voters are backing
non-traditional candidates - or outsiders.
If the analysts are correct, then the fol
low-up question is, why? Why are so
many people angry?
Of course there can be many reasons,
such as fears over foreign threats, worries
about personal safety, or concerns on spe
cific costs like health care or education.
While all of these reasons could be part
of the explanation, I think another answer
lies at the bottom of the frustration. Very
simply, most people have seen their annual
income - when adjusted for inflation -
drop in the last decade. Stated another
way, based on what they earn, most people
are poorer today than they were ten years
ago. In short, the standard of living has
fallen.
Let me focus on North Carolina and
provide numbers to back up this claim. But
first, a little background on comparing
income trends is required. Our economy
goes through a pattern termed the "busi
ness cycle." When times are good and
businesses are expanding (the "up" part of
the cycle), workers generally see their
incomes rise. But when times are bad with
I ' *
I
unemployment rising (the "down" part of
the cycle - also known as a "recession"),
worker pay is cut. Thus, in comparing
incomes at different years, it is important
to know where the years are in the busi
ness cycle.
So let's first compare incomes in 2006
- which was an "up" year in the business
cycle and just prior to the Great Recession
- to incomes in the most recent year for
which data are available - 2014 - which
was also an "up" year. Let's also adjust the
incomes to account for the general rise in
prices - also known as inflation. We now
have an apples-to-apples comparison.
On average, all North Carolina work
ers experienced a 7 percent drop in their
annual earnings between 2006 and 2014.
But there is a distinct difference by educa
tional level of the worker.
Those with advanced college degrees
(master's, PhD., or professional degree)
did the best - losing only 3 percent of their
inflation-adjusted income. Those with an
associate's degrees lost 12 percent, high
school dropouts were down 10 percent,
and high school grads and workers with a
bachelor's degree had a cut of nearly 8 per
cent.
Perhaps even more disconcerting are
the trends in incomes between the bottom
of the Great Recession for workers in 2010
and 2014. This would normally be a time
when incomes rise as the economy is
recovering. But only one educational
group of workers - high school dropouts -
had an increase in their inflation-adjusted
income. All other workers saw a drop. And
? v
the modest (3 percent) gain for high
School dropouts was largely because this
group experienced the largest (13 percent)
fall in their income during the Great
Recession among all the educational
groups.
It should be pointed out these numbers
only include what people earn from work
ing. They don't include public resources or
programs (food stamps. Medicaid) people
may use to help meet day-to-day expenses.
Still the numbers paint a disturbing
picture of most people in North Carolina
not getting ahead based on their own work
efforts. Also, it should be stressed the same
picture emerges from looking at national
data. Most people in the country seem to
be in the same economic boat!
Three big reasons are causing these
trends for worker income - international
competition, a slow-growing economy,
and an ability of technology to do more of
the jobs performed by humans. .
More so than in the past, companies
today have the ability to perform work vir
tually anywhere in the world. This means
domestic workers are no longer only in
competition with their counterparts in the
country, but they also are often inter
changeable with similar workers in other
countries. In economics, more supply - in
this case, of workers - means lower pay
ments to workers.
The Great Recession was the deepest
downturn in over 60 years, but the subse
quent recovery has aJso been one of the
slowest. Translation - the economy of the
last decade has been underperforming. For
businesses, this means weaker revenue
projections and relatively fewer funds to
pay workers.
Maybe the greatest threat to worker
pay in the future is technology. As empha
sized in the recent Emeiging Issues Forum
at North Carolina State University, tech
nology is rapidly becoming more sophisti
cated and expanding its capacity to per
form work tasks. Plus, the work technolo
gy is increasingly able to do includes not
just routine jobs (putting the right front
fender on a vehicle moving down an
assembly line), but also cognitive jobs in
research, teaching, retailing and medicine.
One estimate forecasts technology ulti
mately will replace humans in almost half
of today's occupations.
So many individuals are angry and
upset, and a simple reason is declining
incomes. Can this situation be reversed,
and how? These are questions the political
candidates are addressing and that we
through our vote - may help decide!
Dr. Mike Walden is a William Neal
Reynolds Distinguished Professor and
North Carolina Cooperative Extension
economist in the Department of
Agricultural and Resource Economics of
North Carolina State University's College
of Agriculture and Life Sciences. He teach
es and writes on personal finance, eco
nomic outlook and public policy. The
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
communications unit provides his You
Decide column every two weeks.
*