Grace Pryor and Stepp family react to District Attorney's removal
The voice of victims has been heard.
District Attorney Greg Newman has been removed from office in only the third case of its kind in North Carolina history.
Superior Court Judge Robert C. Ervin issued his order April 27, permanently removing the top criminal prosecutor for Henderson, Polk and Transylvania counties from his elected office, finding Newman engaged in “willful misconduct in office” and “conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the office into disrepute,” under N.C. General Statute 7A-66.
The decision was made nearly two weeks after a three-day removal hearing April 12-14 in Henderson County Superior Court.
"Finally, justice was served," said Grace Pryor, one of the so-called "Newman victims," who claims she was sexually assaulted while a student at Brevard College and Newman refused to prosecute the two men. He instead blamed her for what she was wearing, she claimed.
"We were put first today, and I think that's the most important part. Victims just want to be put first and we want to be heard," she said.
Under the law, Newman was required to vacate his office immediately April 27, and his $137,000 salary is now ceased. Gov. Roy Cooper is tasked with appointing an acting district attorney until the next election in November 2022.
The term “willful misconduct in office” has been defined as “the improper or wrongful use of the power of his office by a judge acting intentionally, or with gross unconcern for his conduct, and generally in bad faith,” Ervin wrote in his 30-page order.
“Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice,” is defined as “conduct which a judge undertakes in good faith but which nevertheless would appear to an objective observer to be not only unjudicial conduct but conduct prejudicial to public esteem for the judicial office,” Ervin wrote in his order, citing multiple instances presented in the hearing with which he agreed.
The rare removal process started when a grassroots group of families of victims in cases of alleged child rape, murder and other serious crimes, filed an affidavit Feb. 11 in Henderson County Superior Court under the little-known state law G.S. 7A-66.
Working for removal: Families of alleged rape, murder victims try to remove DA Greg Newman for 'unrepentant misconduct'
It sought to have Newman removed from office due to his alleged pattern of “chronic and unrepentant misconduct,” claiming he mishandled cases and failed to prosecute felonies.
“Mr. Newman is proud of the fact he has been able to serve the people of Henderson, Polk and Transylvania counties since 2013. His office has done great things while he has served as the elected DA,” David Freedman, one of Newman’s defense attorneys, said April 27.
When asked if Newman had anything to say regarding Ervin’s finding in the 30-page decision, Freedman said, “Mr. Newman has always had great respect for the judicial system of North Carolina.”
Those who started the petition to remove Newman from office feel otherwise.
Peggy McDowell filed the G.S. 7A-66 affidavit without a lawyer, but she was supported by more than a dozen families who said they were seeking justice on their own because Newman had been acting out of self-interest rather than in the best interest of the public.
One was her daughter, Joanne McDowell, a former UNC law student, who now lives in Canada. Joanne McDowell claimed she had to flee the country to protect her child from sexual abuse by his father and four years later was charged by Newman with felony child abduction, which she calls a “vindictive charge.”
“Newman's expulsion proves that endemic corruption plagues North Carolina's legal system," McDowell said. "For years, Newman's victims begged for relief from the N.C. Attorney General, N.C. State Bar, and N.C. Court of Appeals, but these institutions repeatedly protected the wrong people. Now that ongoing harm has been established, N.C. must assist Newman's victims and investigate systemic corruption.”
Valerie Owenby, now 22 and living out of state, also supported the removal petition and was a witness at the hearing. She claims she had been raped from ages 5-12 by a Hendersonville neighbor, James Sapp, but Newman pleaded down the felony to a misdemeanor in 2015 without notifying her or her parents and without letting her face the accused in court.
 |
| Valerie Owenby |
That disciplinary order became a central pillar in the removal hearing, along with two other incidents of misconduct.
In a brief text April 27, Owenby wrote the Citizen Times, “I’m overwhelmed by how happy I am right now.”
“The justice system worked. The court carefully evaluated the evidence. And at the end of the day Mr. Newman's conduct warranted removal from office,” said James Cooney III, a Charlotte attorney, who with Isaac “Ike” Northup of Asheville, was appointed by Ervin to present evidence as independent counselors in the removal hearing.
“So while it was a good day for the justice system, it is tempered by the fact that there was conduct that led us to this point,” Cooney said.
How the removal happened
The rare removal hearing was neither a civil lawsuit nor a criminal inquiry, but rather an inquiry. While Newman hired defense attorneys Freedman and Stuart Brooks, Cooney and Northup did not volunteer and were not paid for their services, Cooney said.
“We have no dog in this fight,” Cooney told the courtroom in his closing arguments April 14 in response to claims by Newman that the hearing was politically motivated. “This is not being driven by politics of any kind. This is being driven by our duty to the law. That is the only thing that any one of us is concerned about.”
The start of the removal process: Removal process for District Attorney Greg Newman will move forward, judge rules
 |
| Independent counsel James Cooney speaks during opening statement - Newman removal |
He reiterated that any citizen has the ability to call for the removal of a district attorney outside of an election under certain conditions, including “willful misconduct in office.”
The list supporting the removal process included a wide range of “victims.” Donna Few, of Transylvania County, claimed Newman withheld evidence and did not conduct a proper investigation into the killing of her son, Hank Few, in 2012. Kim Shepherd, of Hendersonville, claimed Newman refused to convene a grand jury in the shooting death of her brother, James Stepp III, in 2019.
Newman, 59, a Hendersonville native and UNC Asheville graduate, had worked in private practice in Hendersonville and also served as mayor before he was appointed in 2013 by then Republican Gov. Pat McCrory to serve as district attorney for prosecutorial district 42. Newman was elected uncontested in 2014 and again in 2018.
“Now that ongoing harm has been established, NC must assist Newman's victims and investigate systemic corruption," McDowell said via email.
How rare is it to remove a DA in N.C.?
The hearing was unusual in that only two district attorneys had been removed in this process before.
In 1995, District Attorney Jerry Spivey, a white man, was removed from office in Wilmington after several petitions under G.S. 7A-66 were brought against him for using a racial slur against a Black man while drinking at a bar one night.
In 2012, Durham County District Attorney Tracy Cline was removed under the statute for making false statements against a judge.
Cline’s predecessor, Mike Nifong, was disbarred in 2007 after the N.C. State Bar found him guilty of multiple ethics violations in his handling of the notorious Duke lacrosse investigation, and then he resigned as district attorney.
By state law, the DA removal process must move quickly. The affidavit to remove Newman was referred out of Henderson County Superior Court by Judge Peter Knight, to Judge Ervin of Morganton.
According to his March 17 order, Ervin found probable cause for a public hearing to proceed on the grounds of “willful misconduct in office,” and “conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, which brings the office into disrepute.”
The three-day hearing April 12-15 centered on disciplinary actions against Newman, in which Ervin found “probable cause for believing that charges allege in the state bar proceedings may be true,” including:
- A Jan. 4, 2021 State Bar Disciplinary Hearing Committee’s three-year stayed suspension of Newman’s law license for lying to a judge and violating the N.C. Crime Victims’ Rights Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct in Owenby’s 2015 child rape case.
- A reprimand, or written warning, entered against Newman on May 4, 2019 by the State Bar’s Grievance Committee for being found in conflict of interest when he struck the guilty plea of drug charges against a person known as “C.B.,” someone Newman had represented previously when as a private defense attorney.
- A case involving “vindictive prosecution” that is now pending before the state Supreme Court. This case involved Leonard Schalow, who was charged in 2014 with the attempted voluntary manslaughter of his wife. It was declared a mistrial due to a technicality and Newman brought a new charge of attempted first-degree murder, under which Schalow was convicted, but it was overturned on double jeopardy violations by the N.C. Court of Appeals. The court called Newman’s actions “prosecutorial vindictiveness.” Schalow has been in jail since 2014 as he awaits his latest trial.
Those who signed on to the affidavit in part cited disciplinary actions against Newman by the N.C. State Bar as the basis for the need to remove him. These include the state bar’s disciplinary actions.
 |
| Defense attorney Stuart Brooks listens to testimony from district attorney Greg Newman |
Newman testimony: 'I would do it the same way again,' Newman doubles down in testimony
In their closing arguments, defense attorneys David Freedman and Stuart Brooks argued that the misconduct cited at the hearing, mainly from past disciplinary actions found by the state bar, don't rise to the level of "willful misconduct," that Newman's office is not in disrepute, and even if it were, the disrepute is not the result of that misconduct as the statute necessitates.
Citing the Spivey removal case in which that DA used a racial slur, Brooks said that was a clear case where the conduct resulted in the prosecutor losing the faith of the public and was clearly “prejudicial to the administration of justice.”
But in Newman's case, Stuart said, “there’s no evidence that the citizens of this county have lost the trust, confidence and respect of Mr. Newman.”
Brooks said, too, that the underlying facts were public record and members of the public or any political opponent could have uncovered them.
More hearing coverage: DA Greg Newman defense: Any misconduct not 'willful,' no disrepute for office
 |
| District Attorney Greg Newman and his wife, Kim, following the third day of Newman removal |
But in his closing comments, independent counsel James Cooney III pointed out several facts that weren’t public knowledge at the time of the 2018 election, including the reprimand from the state bar and the conflict of interest that have been focuses of the case.
Cooney also said that after the court heard Newman admit in the first day of the removal hearing that he admitted to willful misconduct, the hearing could have concluded.
“We have undisputed facts,” Cooney said of the State Bar’s Disciplinary Hearing Committee order issued in January against Newman regarding his false statements in the Valerie Owenby case.
“Defendant's statement that Valerie Owenby had been advised of the plea and did not want to be heard, was false,” Cooney said, citing paragraph No. 37 of the DHC order.
The next paragraph states: “Defendant knew his statement to the court was false.”
“Not should have known, not made a mistake, not was negligent. He knew it was false,” Cooney said, adding that the order states that Newman did not correct his error, and lied about it again in his May 2017 response to the state bar’s letter of notice.
“What is also undisputed is this – Mr. Newman admitted from the witness stand on cross-examination that if he made a false statement to the state bar, knowing it was false, that's willful misconduct. He said that to Mr. Northup directly. It surprised me, but that's what he said.
“The bar has found that as a fact. He has admitted that constitutes willful misconduct. You can stop right there.”
In his April 27 order, Ervin wrote that “the district attorney’s office shall notify the victim of the date, time, and place of all trial court proceedings of the type that the victim has elected to receive notice,” according to state law.
 |
| Click to View |
The state bar’s DHC found Newman did not do that, nor did he allow Owenby the opportunity to consult with the prosecuting attorney to give her views about dismissal, plea or negotiations or sentencing; in short, she was not allowed to have her voice heard.
Ervin further cited comments from Angelica Wind, executive director of Our VOICE, a rape crisis prevention center in Buncombe County, who testified at the hearing about the importance of the victim’s role in cases involving alleged sexual offenses.
 |
| Angelica Wind, executive director of Our Voice, testifies during second day Newman removal |
“Wind opined that it was important for victims to feel involved in the process … part of a victim’s sense of obtaining justice is having their day in court and being able to speak,” and that this opportunity “involves having some recognition that a harm was done to the victim and letting the offender know what he has done to the victim … this is important to the victim’s perception of the administration of justice.”
But Cooney went on to give a timeline of the cases in which Newman undertook acts of willful misconduct, which only became public after the 2018 election so that the public would not have known about them before casting their votes.
He also admonished Newman for victim-shaming a witness the previous day who had testified that Newman did not bring charges against two men she claimed raped her while she was a sophomore at Brevard College, telling her because she was wearing a crop top and was not a virgin that she wouldn’t be believed.
Closing remarks: Greg Newman removal hearing closing remarks: DA showed 'willful misconduct,' poor character
Editorial: Greg Newman's actions should be sufficient for removal
“What (Newman) said about her yesterday before the court was essentially it was her fault. She had made choices in her life. She had put herself into positions where men could take advantage of her. She had done things that led to this, and she needed to change her life,” Cooney said at the hearing.
“What about the men? Why not make a statement about the men that it is not acceptable, simply because a woman has sex with someone on your team to assume that you can have sex with her anytime you want?” Cooney said, angrily pointing at Newman.
Cooney also said on opening day of the hearing that Newman “mischaracterized” the state bar DHC decision that found Newman had lied in the 2015 child rape case – and also found he showed no remorse – by citing a Nov. 25 Citizen Times article in which Newman showed further unrepentance by saying, “I think the panel really doesn’t believe I lied to the court.”
Shea Denning, professor of public law and government for the UNC School of Government and director of the N.C. Judicial College, said while removal of a district attorney under G.S. 7A-66 is unusual, DAs do leave office midterm more frequently to retire or move on to other positions.
In any of those cases, she said, the governor will appoint an acting district attorney until the next election in 2022. The office will continue to be staffed by that appointee and the assistant DAs. Denning said there is no timeframe listed in state statute on when the governor must appoint an acting DA.
Where does this leave those who claim their cases were not properly handled by Newman and his office?
 |
| Shea Denning |
“And there may be instances where it may not be possible because there is a legal barrier or a practical barrier. The legal barrier could arise from principles like double jeopardy. And that might occur even if the case was not resolved by an acquittal in a previous trial.
“The practical barriers are the things, for example, the inability to present the evidence, the lack of witnesses or the lack of physical evidence, all of the practical things that you can think of would make it more difficult to prosecute a case years after it occurred,” she said.
Denning also said that Newman's removal does not preclude him for running for another elected office or from practicing law.
No comments:
Post a Comment