Front Page
NMJ Search
Editorials
Commentary
Archive
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
Islamofascism
Progressivism
Books
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House
  Anti-Google






Officials in Washington are using dirty tactics to hide the investigation and decision not to prosecute David Gregory of NBC News for illegally possessing a "high-capacity" magazine in the District of Columbia.
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
Dirty Tricks Cover-Up in Gregory
Gun Crime Investigation

The Washington Times
Editor's Note: The Washington Times' Emily Miller is currently investigating why NBC's David Gregory hasn't been charged with possessing a high-capacity magazine within the District of Columbia.

Officials in Washington are using dirty tactics to hide the investigation and decision not to prosecute David Gregory of NBC News for illegally possessing a "high-capacity" magazine in the District of Columbia.

As I wrote in February, my requests to the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and the Office of Attorney General (OAG) to turn over the documents in Mr. Gregory's case were ignored. I finally had to use a Freedom of Information Act request, but the attorney general and police only turned over public documents.

So I wrote separate extensively-detailed FOIA request to the attorney general, MPD and Mayor Vincent Gray. The police and prosecutor responded with a large amount of documents -- 75 percent of them were useless to me (every public email and news story) and seemed to be an effort to bury me in paper. The rest was heavily redacted with big black marks.

On Monday, I got a press release from Judicial Watch announced it has filed a FOIA lawsuit against MPD and OAG on behalf of the Legal Insurrection blog. In reading through the documents that were not turned over, I noticed there was one that I had gotten -- the Jan. 9 letter from the NBC's lawyer Lee Levine to D.C. Attorney General Irvin Nathan.

I called William A. Jacobson, the lead author of the legal blog, to tell him I had that letter. "I am shocked that the D.C. attorney general would withhold from us the letter from David Gregory's attorney using a claim of FOIA exemption, and force us to go to court, when they already gave the letter to another person," Mr. Jacobson, a clinical professor at Cornell Law School, told me.

I emailed him the Levine letter. He sent back a Feb. 20 email from Victor Bonett in the attorney general's office that said, "OAG is withholding the Jan. 9, 2013 letter from Lee Levine and certain responsive emails between OAG and MPD, pursuant to D.C. Official Code Section 2-534(a)(3)(A)(i), (a)(4) and (e)."

Mr. Levine's letter provided new information, such as that the source of the "high-capacity" magazine. "Meet the Press briefly borrowed the empty magazine from a private citizen who lives outside of the District of Columbia and who 'Meet the Press' understood possessed the magazine lawfully," he wrote.

The NBC lawyer also claimed, "The magazine was immediately returned to its owner following the broadcast."

However, according to a police "property record" document, a Kay Industries 30-round magazine was recovered from Mr. Gregory (at a redacted address) as part of an active investigation. The document is signed on Jan. 9, two days after Mr. Levine said the magazine had been returned to its owner.

The lawyer's letter also sheds light on the way NBC blatantly violated the law.

On Sunday Dec. 23, Mr. Gregory held up the illegal magazine to illustrate the anchor's position in an interview with NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.

His lawyer's excuses to the prosecutor were that, "NBC incorrectly interpreted the information it received from [the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] and MPD. It believed that the display of an unloaded magazine not attached to any firearm during a news interview would not be objectionable."

The police documents show there was no confusion. At 4 p.m. on Friday, Dec. 21, a NBC producer, whose name was redacted, emailed MPD this: "Meet the Press is interviewing a person on the show this Sunday in studio -Producers for the show would liek [sic] to have a clip (standard and high power), without ammunition in studio to use on the show. There will be no gun, no bullets, just clips. Is this legal?"

At 9 p.m., someone at MPD -- again, the name was blacked out -- replied: "No, possession of high capacity magazines is a misdemeanor under Title #7 of the DC Code. We would suggest utilizing photographs for their presentation."

READ FULL SOURCE ARTICLE: 05/15/2013








The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on tax deductible donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a sustaining donation today.







Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of NewMediaJournal.us, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to NewMediaJournal.us.  NewMediaJournal.us is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations.  NewMediaJournal.us is not supported by any political organization.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by NewMediaJournal.us is copyrighted. NewMediaJournal.us supports BasicsProject.org and its goal: the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The Media Journal.us © 1998-2014    Content Copyright © Individual authors
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server