From: Gary Hunt at theOutpost of Freedom in Andrews, North Carolina
Date: February 2, 1994 Phone: messages (407) 644-4086
NORTHPOINT TEAMS HEADQUARTERS #3
This morning I contacted the office of Ray Eastman, Director of Special Services for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation. When his secretary told me he was across the hall and that she would have him call me, I thought that I was getting a stone wall. Shortly thereafter, -however, Mr. Eastman called me in my motel room and I explained who I was and what I was calling about. He then made dear that a "need to know" was required before information could be given out regarding any specific investigation being conducted by the SBI. He acknowledged that the SBI frequently works with federal agencies (logically the Special Services branch, which I was directed to, even though the "crime" appears to have been marijuana related) in the course of investigations (MJTF?). He did state that they do not fly anywhere where they are not conducting an investigation into illegal activities, but he did not deny the overflight of Betty Lou"s home. He stated that he would respond to any specific allegation. However, he refused to respond to the specific allegation I was making in regard to the overflight. Interestingly, he made clear that the SBI can go "fishing" in search of marijuana fields by flying low and anywhere in the state. Why he brought marijuana into the conversation is beyond me.
I asked him whether the SBI would discipline a pilot if the investigation proved that there was a violation of flight regulations or not. His answer was beyond normal comprehension. However, he seemed to be saying that they would not discipline their people for anything. When he suggested that I was trying to put words in his mouth, I explained that I was trying to get words out of his mouth.
He then indicated that he didn"t know who he was talking to and I asked him whether it made any difference whether he knew who I was or not. I proceeded to suggest to him that a call from the public should be responded to with equal consideration to anyone.
I then contacted the flight operations office at the Harnett County Airport to get the tail number that would be necessary to file the complaint that Eastman had encouraged me to do. Mr. C. D. Holbrook answered the phone and made it clear that Eastman had just contacted him to tell him not to speak with me. I thought it rather interesting that though the normal pattern is to call "upward" as the agency shunts you up the ladder. Mr. Eastman obviously anticipated that I would be calling "outward" and called, at least, the flight operations people to "put a lid on" my investigation.
Although Mr. Eastman had said that only specifics of the investigation could not be discussed, he had then since decided that general information, such as the identification of a publicly owned aircraft, was also not to be discussed (NOTE: FAA needs the tail number to investigate alleged violations). So I called Eastman back. Again, he was out but did return the call, shortly. I explained that I was seeking general information regarding a publicly owned aircraft, and also that I was following up on his suggestion to file a complaint if that was the only means of acquiring answers to my questions. He then indicated that Nord Davis had acquired this information. He suggested that Nord had conducted "covert operations" against the SBI. I then suggested that vehicles, including aircraft, should be marked in such a manner as to identify them, as we are required to do with our cars. He stated that the aircraft was marked. I suggested that nobody could read grey on beige tail numbers on a flying aircraft. He suggested that divulging the tail number would, somehow, endanger his people. This I am still trying to figure out. I used the analogy of a trucking company refusing to divulge the identification of a truck that might have been in a given place at a given time. If it were involved in an activity that might be illegal, then they would possibly be charged with obstruction of justice. I told him that he was guilty of obstruction, a crime which he has probably charged and jailed many for. Mr. Eastman, assigned the responsibility of enforcing the laws of North Carolina, by virtue of his authority, is guilty of obstructing the investigation of a violation of both federal and state laws.
Go to Report #2
Return to Northpoint Investigation Page
Go to Report #4