Goolsby upset with trooper allegations

Tags: , , , , , ,

Submitted: Tue, 07/05/2011 - 2:52am
Updated: Tue, 07/05/2011 - 3:10pm

WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) — North Carolina Senator Thom Goolsby released a statement, expressing his frustration with the letter from Hoyt Tessener and the allegations against state troopers Edward Wyrick and Andrew Smith, that has them on administrative duty.

Goolsby’s complete statement reads:
Like most of the public, I was shocked at the allegations recently made against two local North Carolina State Troopers regarding the DWI arrest of Gina Tessener. I was sent a copy of the letter to the Governor written by Tessener’s lawyer-husband. In the letter, the husband made numerous allegations of abuse and illegal conduct against our troopers.

I read the letter with interest and concern. As an attorney who practices in our local courts, I have known these troopers for the entire time they have enforced the law in southeastern North Carolina. I have never received any complaints about them. My personal experience was that they were professional, honest and forthright.

When I learned that there was a video tape from the Detention Center, I watched it with interest. I was shocked and angered when it was apparent that the video did not represent several of the allegations made in the letter.

I have personally spoken with the Governor, Secretary of Crime Control and Public Safety and the Commander of the Highway Patrol expressing my frustration over what I perceive to be false allegations. Further, because both of these troopers were immediately placed on administrative leave, our county will be short of law enforcement officers to protect the public from drunk drivers during 4th of July weekend.

It is time that someone spoke up and defended our troopers. I am doing so now.

Thom Goolsby,
NC Senator, District 9


  • Dharma says:

    This isn’t about good behavior, respect, or even right and wrong. When we give people badges and guns, we expect them to be the bigger men. These Troopers failed us big time.

    So the officer didn’t shout and throw things. So he let Gina make all the calls she wanted, and so he didn’t get in Hoyt’s face. The fact remains that after Gina blew a 0.0 on that breathalyzer twice, SHE WASN’T DRUNK and there was no evidence to say otherwise. Her refusal to do a sobriety test on the road no longer mattered.

    But after that? Keeping her in a drunk tank for blowing a 0.0? Taking her before a Magistrate for blowing a 0.0? Letting his friend, another Trooper to whom he complained pull over her husband, whom he knew to be following his police vehicle to the Magistrate…for blowing a 0.0?

    You and I, us regular folks, with law degrees and Lexuses, or with shovels and Fords, we get to be angry. Troopers, those with guns and police cruisers, do not. Why? Because we gave them the guns. Gina should have been RELEASED IMMEDIATELY after the breathalyzer.

    Oh, and her husband screaming about him being a lawyer? That’s because people in custody are ENTITLED to a lawyer.

  • Dharma says:

    Just to make it clear, I have a lot of love and respect for the police, who are generally respectful upstanding guardians of the law. However, I think this guy made a few good, ableit definitely biased, points. And for the most part, you did not.

    1. Point to the guy. Her tail light was, most likely, not out. As this guy points out, she was not ticketed for it and no warning was recorded. Now, I know cops sometimes let you go without official warnings, but if he’s actually taking her down to the station, there’s no reason not to ticket or official warn her for the tail light. That, coupled with Hoyt/Gina’s assertions, point to it being not out. If they got it fixed real quick, there would also probably be a record of that fixing since this story is so hot right now. And if that tail light wasn’t out, under the 4th Amendment, applicable to the states by the 14th, this entire stop/search was illegal.

    2. Your point. I agree with you that, given the situation, calling the police officer a liar for saying he thought he smelled alcohol on her breath was extreme. Even if we agree that this officer made up the tail light, and thus the stop was illegal, smelling alcohol later on simply wouldn’t make the stop any more legal. Her having Hoffa’s head in the car wouldn’t have made that stop legal.

    3. Point to you. Even if she didn’t want to perform a field sorbiety test, she should have submitted to a breathalyzer and, naturally, if you choose not to, you will be taken to the station to do so. She must have known that, but really, I don’t think that was what Gina/Hoyt had a problem with this situation.

    4. This point goes to the guy. Evidence suggests that the Trooper amended his report to include an allegation – that Gina had sipped alcohol at 6:30 pm – which was not on the initial report. That definitely supports her story, and moreover, saying “yeah, well, she should have just complied like a good girl with the field sobriety test” does not make the officer’s actions any more honest.

    5. Again, this point goes to the guy and not you. You’re getting off topic dicussing the rights of troopers generally to speed. The point is that Hoyt could not have been speeding any faster than the officer in front of him, who knew Hoyt was following him and for what purpose. He was pulled over by another office who was alerted by the trooper who had Gina in his car. No amoutn of love for the police could make such a situation anything less than completely intimidating – knowing your wife is in a car with someone else, whom you believe has no right to hold her there, while you are stopped by his friend from following them to where they are going.

    6. Point to the guy on this one because texts released show that the troopers were texting to each other en route, and beforehand. So this Trooper lied, both by omission and explicitly.

    7. Point to neither of you! First of all, accusing all troopers or police officers of being deviants with guns is completely disrespectful and out of line. Kind of like accusing all lawyers of being liars with degrees. Nonetheless, you can’t just pull the “we’re all people” card when it comes to officers. Police officers must show extra restraint and follow the law to the letter. Why the double standard? Because they have badges and guns. Something benign that any normal person off the street might say or do is something terribly intimidating and harrassing when coming from someone armed with both a firearm and a cloak of authority. You’all are right: we should trust the word of a police officer over that of your average citizen. That’s why when there’s evidence of lying and discrepancies on the part of police officers, to whom we naturally give the benefit of doubt, we average citizens get pretty damned pissed.

  • Guest 2343q634 says:

    You seem to know a lot about police procedure, so here are a few questions:

    1) can you just randomly pull over any vehicle on the road and ask for sobriety tests/breathalyzer tests, or do you need reasonable suspicion, such as a broken tail light.

    2) if there is no broken tail light, and you made that up, is the stop and search illegal?

    3) if you had nothing to drink (or had wine at 6:30 but it is now 11 p.m.), what are the chances that a police officer would smell alcohol on your breath?

    4) if you are a female who is pulled over by a police officer who you know just made up an excuse (broken tail light) to pull you over and then started saying that he smelled alcohol on your breath when you know that’s practically impossible, would you be scared and intimidated?

    5) if you are a police officer who made up a broke tail light excuse to pull over a car, then made up that the woman driving the care smelled like alcohol to have her step out of the car and do a field sobriety test in heels and a cocktail dress for you, does her refusing to do it make the stop and search any more legal? Does it make her arrest any more legal since it’s the produce of an illegal stop?

    …I think you know where I’m going with this. She shouldn’t have been stopped to begin with. All this lovely procedure regarding the right to unarrest should have been explained to her. And let’s not even start with her husband being pulled over for following her to the magistrate’s office!

  • OtherGuest says:

    Is this what they mean when they say someone is an opportunist?

  • SAYWHAT? says:

    She was pulled over for a faulty head light… not reckless driving, blows an 0.0 twice and is then arrested.
    If it is against the law to follow a Patrol Car, even if your spouse is in the car, it is simply an assanine law (like many). This is made especially bad since the trooper said to follow him since he was not a resident of Wilmington. He could have simply picked up the radio and told his brother officer to leave him be. The problem I have with law enforcement these days is the Jack booted mentality over the courtesy I used to know and respect. Everyone should do a job, especially those who protect and serve, as if their own mother were frgrading the manners in which they carried out their duties.

  • Guest5555555555555555555555555 says:

    Most everybody has been stopped before with a State Trooper. Think about how you felt, and what happened. I truly dont have a opinion, but I would like to see all the evidence. Even the txt messages during that time. On the Troopers personal cell phones.

  • SurfCityTom says:

    some people should not be allowed to reproduce.

    That has to rank as the most illiterate post to date in July.

  • Rocky Lane Moore says:

    After a brief cursory examination of the Star News Article, I respect the Senator’s decision to support the two state troopers. No matter how important we think we are, no one should be above the law. Following a Patrol car is a violation of State Law, even under the duress of having a spouse detained for suspicion of DWI. There are other factors other than alcohol that impair drivers. Some chronic diseases cause them to be dizzy. Brain parasites interfere with judgment and road rage causes some drivers to become instruments of destruction. Anger at a traffic stop is a form of impairment. From what little I have read, the troopers had little choice. Everyone wants the laws to protect them, but when the law is applied to them personally, they sometimes lack the grace to accept the consequences of their actions.

  • Mac says:

    While I agree that the Lawyers letter was much less then accurate I still have a concern with several of the Troopers actions:

    1. When the accused twice registered 0.00 from that moment there was no reason to handcuff her, my reasoning is since she was not intoxicated, was not being charged with a crime why would a proven innocent person be handcuffed?

    2. While I don’t pretend to know the rules of the Police procedure in NC, I am surprised that a person who did not commit a crime or even was charged with one, had to be transported to a Magistrate to be released. Why would a magistrate need to release a person who had no charges against them? wouldn’t it have made more sense for the person to be released at the police station and thus allowing the Trooper to return to patrol?

    3. The husband being pulled over! I guess that was a coincidence?

  • davie says:

    man dose cops b hatin on evybody tho. i had cop come up to me lst nite and yell at me for wlking on da street. they gt nothng to do so dey pik on u. an if my wify waz az hot az mr testiners wive i woud gt mad tew. dey so rasist

  • bobo says:

    Well Thom ,I understand your anger. But you also know that even good people can go bad.i also watched that video and i heard a lot of anger in the troopers voice because she passed the test twice 00.0 two times witch means he COULD NOT MAKE A DWI CASE AGINST he lost. so he needs to take his spanking and go find another job. because he realy does not need to be on the taxpayer payroll

  • Guestme says:

    Hasn’t this been asked and answered a million times? If she had offered to take the roadside tests, she would have been sent on her way. It was her refusal of those tests which caused the trooper to arrest her. The trooper then could not unarrest her by law. Please educate yourself on the law before telling the world how you think it should have been handled. Like it or not, the trooper did his job exactly as trained. Sorry you don’t like it. SHE put the ball rolling on this one. Plus, she admitted to sipping wine.

  • Guest789 says:

    Its funny, I didnt hear any anger in his voice after she blew a 0.00, He seemed a lil irritated when the husband wouldnt leave the room after he asked him to. The only one I seen angry was the husband and quite frankly the wife was all fine and dandy until hubby showed up. These people are just out for their 15 minutes of fame!

  • Guest789 says:

    Wow, thats what the sidewalks are for, maybe if you used one and stayed outta of the streets you wouldnt have that problem! How does it make them racist for stopping you because your in the street??

  • Sandra says:

    Thom Goolsby took the time to stand up for the officers, that is so sweet. I bet the story would be different if that were his wife or daughter. Since he has never had a complaint on these officers, they must be innocent. Of course, anyone who has been here for any length of time knows that it is pointless to have any kind of disagreement with NC law enforcement. Even if police are in the wrong, some politician will come to their rescue. Shame they do not feel the same way about the people who put them into office in the first place.

  • NC Rep Voter says:

    Thom I always supported you because I thought you had common sense. I think you should put your personal feelings aside in this case because you are wrong. The driver was not guilty of anything and should have been released immediately. If they are your fishing buddy’s then just say it. There is police abuse happening everyday just not to you and the privilege few. Did you forget you are innocent until proven guilty? You just lost my vote.

  • Another law abiding citizen says:

    No, she did NOT admit to sipping wine-that is what the trooper said. Cops can lie like anyone else especially to further their case.

  • Sthompson says:

    I wish the Patrol would step up and explain to everyone the actual law in NC and the way police procedure works. If they did half these comments would be null and void. In NC the moment anyone refuses a Field Sobriety Test and the officer suspects you are under the influence you are taken to the closest intox. To do this you are placed under arrest because a LEO can’t force you to go along with them otherwise. So enough with the He had no right to arrest her BS. Secondly she didn’t blow 0.00 twice and then was arrested. She was already under arrest. The Trp nor any other LEO doesnt have the legal capability to unarrest someone. Hence the rehandcuffing and transporting her to a magistrate. If you are under arrest and in a patrol vehicle – you are in handcuffs. That’s police procedure any where you go. The problem is the administration of the highway patrol won’t come out and explain the legal duties and policies governing the trps actions, therefore you all are left to quarterback what he did when you know nothing about the issue other than what an attorney is claiming. I find it funny so many are jumping to the defense of a career that besides law enforcement is the most ridiculed. Half of this couples story has already been proven a lie, but because it interests the rumor mill it keeps churning. Hopefully a secretary somewhere will start texting soon and we can all move on to the next drama.

  • SAYWHAT? says:

    Who’s the witness if it is just him and her??? dash board cams, like cams in police stations and jails, seem not to work at the most inappropriate (for LEO’s) times… I do not blame her for not doing those test with no other witness present. Afterall, she was pulled for a faulty headlight and not reckless driving or even an unsafe act. If only people gave a damn about justice instead of The Law. Where’s justice for Goldman Sachs or Lehman, there is none when the environment allows them to pay to have their own laws written.

    The creep of the factless, endless anti alcohol mentality posed by extremist groups or law enforcement agendas for gain that is very present when admitting to sipping wine earlier with a meal can even constitute an automatic perception of DWI.

    It’s a lawyers world, we’re just the ATM’s.

  • TwoSense says:

    I applaud Mr. Goolsby for standing up for these two law enforcement officers. Shame on those who prefer to paint the police with one broad stroke as bullying or crooked. Years ago I made a mistake and got behind the wheel after a few drinks. I was pulled over by a trooper for suspicion of driving under the influence. I politely refused a request to submit to a breathalyzer test and was taken down to Blue Clay Road for booking – as state law requires. Once at the booking station I once again politely refused testing. As the law states I received a suspension of my drivers license for one year. I learned my lesson from that mistake and I am adamant not to repeat that mistake – not even one beer if I’ll be driving any time soon after. I do not harbor any ill feelings toward the three or four troopers I came into contact with that night. All were, even after my refusals to submit, very professional and if I dare say even cordial. In fact, the trooper who was DOING HIS JOB that evening may have prevented me from hurting myself or someone else by pulling me over a few miles from my home. If you want to paint with broad strokes maybe we should have a conversation about ambulance chasing personal injury lawyers who think they are above the law because of the fact they have a degree and a little bit of money. I for one I’m glad we have citizens who go into law enforcement to protect our property and rights and who risk their very lives everytime they clock in to work.

  • tom march says:

    What do you expect from a geek that can’t even spell “Tom”. Listen up TOM, people that have a life or death decisons to make and carry guns need to have zero tolerance in their behavior. But then, fools like you who think that a kid is an adult at 16 shows what a geek you are. And what makes you think we give a damn what you THINK? You are to carry out the wishes of those who elected you not your personal opinions..which are really sophomoric.

  • Guest88 says:

    If you are an attorney, you should know that the issue here is not how the Tesseners were treated at the station, but why the stop occurred in the first place, why the trooper claimed someone who had not been drinking enough to even register on the breathalyzer was driving while IMPAIRED (that is, VISIBLY IMPAIRED to the Trooper’s satisfaction), and why the husband was set up to be stopped when the Trooper was supposedly only taking the Mrs. to the magistrate to turn her loose. I agree that it sounds like the procedure followed once she was arrested was correct, although I have never been exactly sure when she was actually arrested. I also agree that it sounds like they embellished and exaggerated several details. I don’t care about them personally though. It is the behavior of the SHP Trooper that outrages me, and that should at least concern a member of a citizen legislature. This whole mess started long BEFORE alcohol was an issue, when Wyrick passed a flashy blonde and decided to stop her and get a better look. (1) She was NOT stopped for alcohol. She was stopped for a headlight that WAS NOT out! If it had been, can’t we all agree he would have ticketed her for it? (Warning at least) This was an illegal stop from the git-go. (2) Knowing he had made up the headlight issue, how can we doubt he would have made up odor, unsteadiness and anything else he wanted to IF she had submitted to a field test with no one present but him? (3) Likewise, the cruiser’s alco-sensor does not produce a printout like the breathalyzer at the station, so he could have written any number he wanted to down on that. It would not have been admissible, but he was no longer trying to get a conviction by this point, he was just trying to manufacture some “reasonable suspicion” to cover his tail. (4) He initially wrote “Nothing” in the space for her statements prior to arrest (see DWI report, and clearly came back LATER and ADDED “I had a sip of wine around 6:30 but did not drink.” The stop was at 10:45. So what if she drank a whole glass of wine more than FOUR HOURS AGO? (5) The husband was following Wyrick and if he was going any faster than Wyrick he would have rear ended him. Why then didn’t Wyrick get pulled for speeding and get a ticket? (Rhetorical question. We all see Troopers whizzing past us on the highway with no apparent need and we know speed limits do not apply to them.)(6) Why was Wyrick so careful to say that he never made contact with Smith “WHILE EN ROUTE to the jail?” Is it because the contact he had with Smith was BEFORE they left the station when both Tesseners saw him texting on his phone? (7) With the things Troopers have been proved to have engaged in over the last couple of years, and under all the circumstances of this situation, the very first thing I would have asked MY wife would have been “Did he touch you?” and, if she said “no,” my second second question would have been “Did he proposition you?”

    I don’t know the husband, but he showed remarkable restraint. I would have probably said something that ticked the Trooper off enough that he’d beat the stuffing out of me and then charge ME with assaulting an officer. It happens all the time. The SHP always agrees to drop the false (but very damaging) criminal charges and transfer the Trooper if the victim of the beating will agree not to bring a civil (1983)suit. Hoyt was smart to keep his cool. If you are a lawyer and you say you don’t know that this happens, you’re lying. It just usually happens to less well-heeled citizens. If Smith had detained Tessener until Wyrick could have gotten him alone out of camera range it would probably have happened to Tessener too. Not only should Wyrick “be ashamed” (something he apparently is not capable of), but the entire SHP should be ashamed as well.

    Mostly, YOU should be ashamed for toady-ing up to an already discredited SHP and the people who think the SHP can do no wrong (until it happens to them, of course).

  • Alicia says:

    You can not be released immediately once you are arrested. A magistrate or a Judge is the only one that can “unarrest” you. She was placed under arrest when she decided not to take the roadside tests, that was her choice and her right. When she made that decision she had to follow the process like it or not. She was charged before she blew a 0.00 not after. These are all facts like them or not. If you have a problem with the way the law is do something to change it instead of bitching about it. The Troopers followed the law like it or not. Thank you for not letting my family get killed by a drunk driver.

  • Dysfunctional says:

    I never knew that we had so many dysfunctional, ignorant, one dimensional, unaccountable, and irresponsible human beings in this area. Its obvious from posts who is accountable for there actions and who is not….the good thing is society still won’t accept irresponsibility. If you can’t handle the consequences then don’t put yourself in the situation that put you there. Hold your breath because this person who some of you may refer to as “Mr. Tessener” is getting ready to have his true colors revealed… if there hasn’t been enough revealed thus far…..and those of you who are still in support of this derelict are only as good as this person. Unfortunatley, for you that believe that only dishonest law enforcement officers exist, it is because they don’t support your illegal activity. Just because you may have a good paying job, go to church, or volunteer doesn’t alone make you a upstanding citizen. Be a complete person….both in your professional and personal life…..not just when you think someone is watching. For the true believers……someone is always watching!!!!

  • Writing from Raleigh says:

    The law says that when she wouldn’t take the test, she is under arrest; it’s not something the trooper can or cannot decide; and a trooper can’t release her – it’s the law. The law also says that she must be handcuffed when she’s put into the squad car; it’s to protect the trooper.

    The husband was pulled over FOR SPEEDING on the way to the police department in a car he BORROWED from a friend, so just how did they “set him up?” Do you think they knew whose car he was going to borrow?

    BTW, anybody who ever goes to Wrightsville Beach knows that that street is loaded with police 24/7.

  • Writing from Raleigh says:

    …get in the way of your reply, huh?

    She was placed under arrested after she refused the test, not before.

    It’s the LAW in North Carolina.

    And he wasn’t stopped FOLLWING THE OFFICER; he was stopped on the way to the police station for speeding.

    But like I said, don’t let facts stand in they way of a good rant.

  • Writing from Raleigh says:

    ….this attorney pretty much proved he’s a liar — he even put it on paper and in videos.

  • Jason says:

    Lets just start with your numbers…. (1) Her headlight was out. How do you know it was not? The picture taken after they got a bulb from Advance Auto?? Oh was it the words of a man that lies for a living? (2)Yes, made it up… there is a shortage of impaired people in Wilmington so now he needs to make up impairment. Oh yeah we are a beach and college town. There is never anyone out drinking and driving. (3) Why would he have to cover his tail at this point? He had still not placed her under arrest. People take roadside tests everyday so they can go home. The rest of your statement makes no sense.. Oh yeah they are not cruizers here. They are patrol cars. (4) Then she should of just taken the test and gone home!!! (5) He would of rear ended him?? Makes no sense again. Yes the Troopers do speed. Do you think they might be going somewhere??? Trying to hurry?? Oh no they are just out for a Sunday drive because we never have accidents or bad driving here in New Hanover County. And there is never someone at the other end saying why did it take you so long to get here. (6) I did not know he was so careful to say that. Oh yeah he has not been able to defend himself because of the SHP’s policy. (7) Yes there has been bad Troopers that have done stupid things. Not like there are not bad people everywhere. So lets just go after them all. They are all out here to just to make up lies. Yes the SHP has had some problems in that past years, but none of that has had anything to do with the Troopers here.

  • Felicia says:

    Thank you Alicia for stating the facts. Everyone should have to have an IQ test before voting. Some people complain about things before knowing the facts.

  • Guestasis says:

    Here is how a politician plays it.

    Lay low on the issue for a few days while the facts and evidence trickles out. Once you get a clear sense of who was in the wrong, release a statement praising the other party.

  • SAYWHAT? says:

    She was pulled for a burnt out headlight, blew a 0.0 and all this CRAP happened to her!!! Too bad we are not all LEO’s and therefore not perfect. I suppose you support the militarization of Police Departments, no knock raids that bring volatility to a non volatile situation, bans on filming police in questionable arrest etc??? Why not become an who are supporters of non violence and the constitution or face the realities of a LEAP Why don’t you use the power of reason?

  • venting says:

    If you think that we dont have problems in the local SHP here, then you must not be listening to the people. I dont know about these troopers, but I do know this–Guilty of charges or not-People have a right in this country to be treated with respect. I have seen people being bullied and harassed by troopers more than once. I recently had a run in with one and he was totally out of line. He made comments to me about how I was apparently not raised right, by my father a vet who was shot for this country, Served 22 years in the army. Trust me I was raised right. I called him out on him breaking the law, I was respectful and his reaction was totally out of line..I was wondering why they can break the law and when you call them out on it,,,They get offended……I have seen them totally harass an older lady trying to park her car in a tight spot and got her out of the car and treated her like she had been drinking. I would have took serveral back ups to get in the spot straight too. He was yelling at her and had her very upset. i thought I was on the show “what would you do?” I walked over and asked him if all that yelling was really needed and he told me to shut up and mind my own business or I would be going to jail for involving myself in a police matter—I was horrified, that my tax dollars are paying his salary. He did let her go and she came up to me and thanked me. She said she was so scared and felt unsafe. I thought troopers should make people feel safe. I wont even go into the story of the trooper breaking the law, but I did file a complaint and nothing came of it… As taxpayers, we are paying this SHP to break the laws they should be upholding. Waht makes them any different than us, except for we are their employer!!!!I think maybe they need to remember that.

  • venting says:

    When voting time comes back around I will sure try to get this statement back out–especially if anything comes out of it. either way Senator looks like an ass. Dont defend the SHP without listening to the people of NC, most law abiding people have been or seen people mistreated by them, but complaining does no good when you have senator like these in office. They just defend.

    And if wrong doing does come out, I hope you resign!!!!!!

    Closed minded people should not be speaking for NC–Just because they are salaried by the state, doesn’t mean they are good at their job or even a good person for that matter..

  • Guestish says:

    Of course the troopers should be on administative leave. They’re involved in an investigation. Any stops/arrests they made between now and the resolution of this case would be placed in jeopardy.
    Posters complaining about “lawyers” and saluting Sen. Goolsby should be placed in “time out.” His legal practice includes Criminal Defense, Personal Injury, Traffic Tickets, DWI, Revoked License, and Workers Comp.
    In addition, hero worship of law enforcement is the first step to abuse by the police. Accept that they are individuals, and we can more easily sort the good from the bad.

  • Guest54321 says:

    It is all too familiar stories such as yours that account for the lack of support and benefit of doubt given to the SHP. It isn’t lowlifes and thugs on these boards voicing their criticism, but middle class ,suburban, SUV driving soccer moms and dads that are increasingly distrustful of troopers. People have seen and heard too many incidents of SHP abusing their authority or covering up for the child pornographers, wife beaters, deviants, and cat-killers that have managed to become troopers.

    It is an institutional problem; Virginia has many more state troopers and less than half the documented cases of misconduct the NCSHP has. Disband the agency and empower local LEA’s with SHP’s duties.

    Oh, and for Goolsby: He and Tessener were probably chasing the same ambulance. He was the one Republican I had to hold my nose to vote for.

  • Guest007 says:

    And God forbid that he jump to a conclusion without looking at all the evidence. I’m shocked that the majority of people are believing a lawyer over a law enforcement officer.

  • Tanko says:

    Yes! Pull this letter back out to remind me to vote for an attorney who knows these to officers and can attest to their character. I would take the word of our state troopers over an ambulance-chasing law bounty hunter any time.

  • Guest12546545 says:

    Thank you, for pointing out how dumb that person is for his comments. He obviously is ignorant about EVERYTHING. I think I may love you for standing up for Trooper Wyrick. You rock.

  • Tanko says:

    Let me get this straight – the person who starts an argument picking on how a guy spells his name actually ends the argument calling that person sophomoric? It’s posts like this that make these comments so much fun to read!

  • Guestdisisbs says:

    Senator you have really screwed up now. You have sided with the enemy. Those mean old troopers, his dare they accuse her of riding around in her 85k mile Lexus with a headlight out. That headlight went out after he stopped her. Alcohol?? That had plenty of time to get out of her system before he stopped her. Paved parking lot??? DOT went and paved it after the fact. I am so tired of these troopers doing a job that they are paid to do. Why can’t they just show up when we need them??All I gotta say is Hoyt should have punched him too. When the rest of the story comes out again I will say I told you so like I have so many times before. Mr ambulance chaser was so quick to jump on news stations the day after and now you can’t find. Come on Hoyt, where are your closing arguments? ?

  • GuestWILM says:

    Perhaps WWAY could do a story to remind Senator Goolsby what public office he was elected to serve.

    YOU ARE A STATE SENATOR … you are not the local booking agent for the Wilmington Convention Center and YOU ARE NOT an internal affairs investigator for the highway patrol.


    Now, if you were a smart state senator you would have refrained from making any public statements until the Highway Patrol had properly completed their investigation and presented their findings of fact to the Colonel of the highway patrol.

    I think Governor Perdue was clear when she stated, ““The policy of this administration is zero tolerance for unacceptable behavior.” “The Secretary of Crime Control and Public Safety and the Colonel of the Highway Patrol will take appropriate action upon completion of their investigation.”

    Today, even prior to the completion of their due process investigation the highway patrol has released chat transcripts between the two troopers that contains foul language and the threat of inappropriate behavior. And Mr. Senator, if the foul language isn’t inappropriate enough for you – Trooper Wyrick LIED when he stated, “”I never made contact with Trooper Smith while en route to the jail until after I verified he stopped her husband.” The recently released transcript proves otherwise.

    Again, I think someone should remind NC State SENATOR Goolsby of the position he holds and the authority he has been given to represent the people – equally, impartially and fairly. This position DOES NOT give him authority to run local venues or the entire state.

  • NCtrooper...not says:

    You are complete nut job.
    She DID NOT refuse to blow, you retard.
    YOU lost your license because you were drunk.
    You stated…. “I for one I’m glad we have citizens who go into law enforcement to protect our property and rights and who risk their very lives everytime they clock in to work”.

    I agree with that, except for the bad cops!!

  • Ridiculous says:

    Did everyone just turn a blind eye….I think so…..apparently the messages on the Troopers phone were saved and didn’t have to be. They could have been deleted but were not. Nothing to hide. Why hasn’t anyone asked what were the Tesseners whispering about to each other….was it the setup for a lawsuit? Was he telling her what to allege? Were they talking about there master plan to get a mans job? We will never know because the Tesseners are proven LIARS!!!!! On the other hand the Troopers save there text messages to be released for everyone to read…..Hmmmmm? Are you telling me no one in there work place has cursed about someone they had to deal with? Troopers are human, not robots…..come on people, raise your standards to the same level that you expect of others!!!!!

  • LindaKittrellGuest says:

    Frist of all most of you don’t know a damn thing about LEOS. You don’t get cursed out, spit on ,bit,kicked,shot at ,have to fight,for no reason,other than doing your job.And that is on a daily basis.And what the Troopers text on their personal phones is just that personal!!And the pay they get is a joke.They do this because not everyone can.It takes a very special person to wear the badge.All you people forget all the good these Officers do every day.But who is the first person you call when you need help?It is very easy for you to sit in your glass houses and throw stones.Why don’t you go to Law Officers and see just how many LEOs have been murdered this year alone trying to serve and protect your ignorant butts.You try dealing with murderers,rapist,robbers,child molesters,crack heads,meth heads on a daily basis and not knowing when the car you stop today might be the one that blows your brains out.These men and women leave home every day and nite not knowing along with their family if they are coming back or not…Maybe that will give you judges something to think about.Or the person you are trying to serve a warra

    nt on decides they would rather kill you instead of going to jail for something they are guilty of.

  • Concerned citizen says:

    Great opinion and absolutely accurate!

  • Dr Tim Smith says:

    It is very apparent to me that when people are in trouble they always want to blame someone else. We train these fine men and women to become the best and be the best under extreme conditions. Their lives are threatened daily and now with the public eye constantly on them, I wonder how they can come close to doing their job. When someone is in trouble along the North Carolina Highways, we don’t call Gov. Bev Purdue nor do we call the secretary of crime control and public safety, we call a trooper. A man or women who would give their life to help save others. But instead of writing the Governor about the thousands of great things the the NCSHP has done for the public, we humiliate, run down, disgrace and demean our troopers without finding out all the facts. I say lets support our troopers and lets get the Govenor out of the equation and let the Commander of the Highway patrol run the show. Morale is down and the troopers need your support.

  • dadof1 says:

    very well said! Thank goodness for this Senator. The trooper has no voice until the investigation is over and they need people to stand up for them. These claims by the Tesseners appears to be very bogus and full of lies and exaggerations. I hope in the end that the troopers sue them back as well as the Governor since she makes such quick knee jerk reactions to make herself look better.

  • venting says:

    Morale is low because they are being called out by people who pay their salary. I am sicken that my tax dollars go to these disrespectful, ego driven men, which a number of them break the law everyday.. Who is protecting us from them.

    That’s right no one—

  • Concerned Citizen says:

    Mr. Goolsby, I wanted to personally thanking you for stepping up and defending these two State Troopers. I have know several of the troopers in New Hanover County for years and they have been more than professional at all times. These allegations are clearly false and this is how law enforcement officers gets a bad name and a tarnished badge. The Highway Patrol always seems to immediately assume that their own are always guilty. This matter will be proven false! The Highway Patrol needs to step up to the plate and defend their own and rebuild the tradition and heritage that the North Carolina State Highway Patrol was built upon! Thanks Again!

  • Guestdisisbs says:

    Tell me its not so. They have intimidated the Senator too! Thanks Senator for speaking up for these guys

  • Joe says:

    I respect our law enforcement but that doesn’t for a second change the fact that tom goolsby is a moron.

  • Saywhat? says:

    It’s nice to know that Goolsby is for arresting people for blowing an 0.0 twice. It’s nice to know that he can justify the husband being pulled while he is following another patrol car. I also was disturbed to see the vido did not totally match the story but it is still one sorid tale because of the forementioned.

    It would also be very nice to know the real impact on tourism and real estate in this area due directly to “The Governors Highway Safety Program” with all those t.v. ads running checkpoints that 10 other states have deemed unconstitutional.

    The problem with regulating Law Enforcement is that Democrats fear their Unions and Republicans fear being perceived as soft on crime. It’s nice to have this issue on the forefront where politicians can let the public know their positions.

  • Helixx says:

    Read the FACTS.

    She admitted to “sipping but not drinking”. I’m sure every drunk driver says something similar just like every criminal says they didn’t do it. The officer smelled alcohol (and she admitted to sipping it – hence the smell). That is P.C. for a field sobriety test. She refused. Do you really think that refusing the field breathalyzer means you get to go on your way?

    It doesn’t. It means you are arrested and sent downtown. That is the law.

    Now – had she submitted to the field breathalyzer tests, blown 0.0 and THEN was arrested and taken downtown THEN your comments would have merit. That didn’t happen.

    My advice to her is to get another lawyer as the advice she got from hers made this a whole thing lot worse than it needed to be.

    These people are ridiculous.

  • anonemoose says:

    I don’t really care what 10 other states have done, but can you please name them? I get my Constitutional guidance from the the Fourth Circuit COA and the Supreme Court. IF there are 10 states that have deemed them unconstitutional, then it is because of the way that their STATE constitution has been written.

  • charmed says:

    They have it on film Tom..Quit sucking up.

  • SurfCityTom says:

    a politician and elected official, as well as an attorney, take a clear, no question as to where he stands, position on an issue.

    And once the dust clears, and the troopers are returned to duty, the Tesseners may wish to consider another beach for recreation.

  • Guest81 says:

    At least one person can see this situation for what it really is.

  • GuestMe says:

    Finally, someone is standing up for the troopers! I am ashamed that the Governor jumped the gun and suspended the troopers based on one man’s story.

  • Guest7969 says:

    I LOATHE our Governor…she did the right thing by suspending is NORMAL for that sort of thing to happen when an investigation is happening and the troopers KNOW that…Imagine if she HADN’T suspended them, the allegations were true and while on duty they did the same thing.

  • SayWhat? says:

    You are correct in the fact that they find fault within their own state constitutions… It’s a personal point of view and I could be wrong but I think people should care how other people do things, otherwise you will never evolve and improve.

    Jurisdictions that allow sobriety checkpoints often carve out specific exceptions to their normal civil protections, in order to allow sobriety checkpoints. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has found sobriety checkpoints to be constitutionally permissible, while admiting that it infringes on the 4th in majority opinion, ten states (Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming) have found that sobriety roadblocks violate their own state constitutions or have outlawed them. Two other states (Alaska and Montana) do not use checkpoints even though they have not made them illegal.

  • Guestlegs says:

    Well said “I say” well said. No one is protecting us from them.

Leave a Reply