
President Trump, Kelly Ayotte, John Stephen, Michael Whatley (excuse informality) The best place to start is the tab "Summay" and then the tab "Motion to Dismiss" where the DA's response to an earlier Motion admits that my ex-wife lied about the PC ownership, making her guilty of a felony under NC Surveillance Act. The DA admits that she was guilty, but will not prosecute - says he can't get a "guilty" in that county. That is true because it blows the original case to bits. THEN READ THE CENTER COLUMN ON HOME PAGE
Wrongful Conviction 8/04/2004
New Evidence Uncovered January 2020 Proves Innocence
Twenty Years of a Highly Productive NC Citizen Destroyed by Corruption and Lies
Today the same DA Present in 2004 is Suppressing the Case and Refuses to Reopen Case
Contact Philip and Be Part of Returning His Life at Age of Seventy-Two
The North Carolina Justice Review
ONGOING CASE:
State of NC vs Philip R Whitney - 04CRS54237
A Registered NC Publication
Philip R. Whitney, CEO and Publisher
The SBI Searches and Lab Analysis of Defendant's PC Found
Zero Evidence of a Solicitation
The defendant and his ex-wife had known a couple, we will call the Smiths, for fifteen years. We gathered socially on many occasions, including at least five summer vacations together. Ms. Reece knew very well that Mr. Smith's children and the defendant got along great, with never a complaint. But, during their last trip to the beach, Ms. Reece claimed the defendant had misbehaved with the then thirteen-year-old. This lie is incomprehensible to the defendant. Ms. Reece’s purpose was clear: she was determined to end a twenty-year friendship. She knew Mr. Smith had invested $80,000 into the defendant's business, and if he called in his investment, the business would likely fail.
It is beyond comprehension that someone would drag a best friend and his thirteen-year-old daughter into such a mess, not caring about the potential trauma to the child. Mr. Smith told the defendant that after being interviewed by the SBI, his daughter said, “Miss Nancy did this, didn’t she?” Ms. Reece fabricated this accusation out of revenge, aiming to destroy a human being’s life, bankrupt a company, and end a dear friendship.
There is only one word to describe such an action:
EVIL, Such an act clearly shows Ms. Reece's disregard for morality and ethical behavior.
BEFORE READING ON IT IS CRITICAL YOU KNOW THIS. THE DEFENDANT, HIS ACCUSER, AND THE SMITHS HAD ESTABLISHED A NEW YEAR'S EVE TRADITION. THE DEFENDANT AND ACCUSER ON EACH OF THE THREE PREVIOUS HOLIDAYS WENT TO CHARLOTTE, N.C. WHERE THE SMITH'S ENTERTAINED THEM AND ONE COUPLE FROM THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
Click to enlarge letter.
A warrant to search the defendant's home was issued on December 8, 2003. Early in the morning on December 9, 2003, about fifteen combined SBI agents and Sheriff Deputies came to his home and business. In both sites, they found nothing, even after scanning the server at his office. No pornography of any kind, no complaints from employees. The same was true at his home.
You have seen where the accuser told the SBI, with almost certainty, that the Defendant had improperly behaved with his friend's daughter. This child lived at home in Charlotte, only ninety miles from the Defendant. This child could be "a smoking gun" for the entire case. YOU ALSO MUST REMEMBER I HAVE NOT SEEN THE WARRANT AS A COPY WAS NOT LEFT WITH ME.
But it seems logical, that the SBI would have gone to the house in Charlotte at the very same time to prevent the Defendant from calling and telling his friend what was going on and giving his friend a warning. But the Defendant was not aware that his ex had pointed to the child in Charlotte. They did not show up in Charlotte that day and the Defendant did not think anything about it, since he did not know what his ex had told the SBI. A letter from Mr. Smith is below discussing the surprise that followed later.
I have just promoted myself to Team Lead with the SBI. Our team reviews this warrant and sees Charlotte shows promise as a source of evidence. I am going to direct both teams to hit the front doors of these homes at the same time so neither person can warn the other.
But it did now work that way. Since the Defendant was not aware of his ex mentioning Mr. Smith's daughter, no warning could be given.
This is a very simple problem surely you can solve:
ON THE MORNING OF NEW YEAR'S EVE, WITH MY EX KNOWING I WOULD BE AT THE SMITH'S HOUSE LATER THAT DAY, THE SBI ENTERED MR. SMITHS HOUSE AND BEGAN FIRING QUESTIONS AT THEIR THIRTEEN-YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER ALONG WITH HER PARENTS.
GOT YOUR ANSWER YET?
In a coordinated effort by the outside influencers in this case, even though a case-clinching witness is only ninety miles away, the NC State Bureau of Investigation decides to wait TWENTY-TWO DAYS before going there. And lo and behold, it is New Year's Eve
Both Mr. Smith and the Defendant were swamped in year-end processing in their businesses. The Defendant decided to arrive several hours earlier to explain to Mr. Smith the problem that had arisen. Instead, at noon as he was leaving he got a very embarrassing call from Mr. Smith asking, "What in the hell is going on?"
The accuser, Ms. Nancy Peace Reace of Thomasville, NC committed one of the most evil deeds I have ever seen, including up to this day at age seventy-two.
EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE - EXHIBIT 1
The "Accuser" did not own the PC used by the Defendant.
As such, she Committed a Class H Felony Herself by Illegally Spying on the DEFENDANT
Notice Ms. Reece takes undue time explaining PC ownership and claims multiple PCs were in the home. She had to. Admitting the PC was mine, which it was, the SBI would have arrested her for committing a Class H felony, "illegally spying on another's PC without their knowledge." Conveniently, in a critical omission, the SBI never determined who owned the PC.
Click on left: Ms. Reece SBI Inventory of
claims she owned the Items Taken from
PC and that more than the Home - only
one PC was present in one PC.
the home.
Let’s break down these critical facts: CLICK ON ANY DOCUMENT TO ENLARGE
1. PC Ownership: The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) analyzed the PC and returned it to the defendant, not his ex-wife. This
establishes a crucial point regarding ownership.
2. Lack of Solicitation Evidence: The SBI found no evidence of solicitation on the PC. This absence of proof is significant.
3. DA’s Decision: The question remains: Why didn’t the District Attorney dismiss the case when informed that the PC belonged to the
defendant, not his ex-wife? This decision raises concerns about due process and fairness in the legal proceedings.
These facts underscore a dire need for further examination.
Conclusion: Ms. Reece's statement to the SBI was a "lie." None of her statements to the SBI were truthful and the spyware she used never produced any evidence of solicitation as was true in the extremely detailed SBI lab's analysis of the Defendant's PC.
EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE - EXHIBIT 2
A FABRICATED REPORT BY A PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR - Click to enlarge documents
PI's Statement to the SBI begins Signed Affidavit by the Child stating
in the Second Paragraph. No meeting occurred in West Manchester
The PI claimed he followed the Defendant to West Manchester, OH, the hometown of the child. He obviously assumed a meeting would occur in her hometown. But the meeting occurred in Greenville, OH, fifteen miles north. The defendant met the child in a public facility called Skate Zone 805. The child was attending a class party with parents and teachers present. The defendant met the child for the sole purpose of assessing how disturbed this child was. The meeting lasted no more than five minutes.
The Defendant also notes the absurdity of this PI's report that provides zero details. Here again is the PI's statement:
“I put a tracking device on Mr. Whitney’s car. I followed him to West Manchester, Ohio. As he left, I visually verified his car, and him in the car alone, returning to North Carolina. I followed him as far as West Virginia and stopped to get a room for the night.”
What is missing in this report? Where was the meeting? At what facility did Mr. Whitney stop for the meeting? Where is the child? Where is the defendant's auto brand, color, and license plate? Where are the times (times of departure, arrival, and leaving West Manchester)? AND WHERE ARE THE PICTURES? This report was completely fabricated. This PI's statement is “shameful." He never mentions seeing a meeting of any kind.
Here is the DA's response to a motion filed that corroborates the defendant's testimony: "In our interview with the child, getting a statement from the victim, we found that the defendant did in fact go to Ohio, and did meet the child at a skating rink where they were having a school function. The defendant actually went into the skating rink. The young child was there with her classmates. There was a group of teachers and parents there as guardians for the children."
Conclusion: The Private Investigator never followed the defendant at all. The defense finds it shocking that an SBI Special Agent with fourteen years of experience would accept such a ridiculous report. The DA's statement that the meeting occurred at a roller-skating rink proves no one was in West Manchester, a town with a population of 400+ that has never had a roller-skating rink.
EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE - EXHIBIT 3
SBI Behavior Proves EVIDENCE WAS WITHHELD
and Outside Influence was Involved
Please refer to the letter at right. This is a letter from the defendant’s friend Mr. Smith, whose daughter Ms.
Reece included in her statement. While still married, the defendant and Ms. Reece had established a
tradition of spending New Year’s Eve at the Greer home in Charlotte, North Carolina. With that said, Mr. Greer’s
letter supports one fact and one highly suspicious action by the SBI that seems impossible to be a coincidence:
(1). It establishes that the defendant was never given a copy of the warrant and never saw the statements
contained within it. If he had, the defendant would have called his business partner immediately to inform him
of what was going on and that Ms. Reece had named his daughter as a victim, and that he should expect a visit from the SBI. Mr. Greer had invested $80,000 into the business six months earlier. What fool would not give his business partner a heads-up on such a serious matter? As stated in his letter, Mr. Greer was caught off-guard when the SBI arrived at his home on New Year's Eve when Ms. Reece knew the defendant would be. Not knowing any of this, the defendant was planning to arrive in Charlotte earlier than usual to explain everything. Instead, while in his attorney’s office, the defendant received a phone call from Mr. Greer asking, “What in the hell is going on here?”
(2). The SBI has a victim right in Charlotte, WHY WOULD THE STATES LARGEST LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY WAIT TWENTY-TWO DAYS BEFORE GOING TO CHARLOTTE? Why did they not go to the Greers immediately on 12/9/2003 as they did the Whitney home and business? They were told they had a potential victim and a smoking gun at that. They knew they could wait that long because they knew the defendant had never seen the statements in the Warrant and their findings in Charlotte would not be tainted.
Conclusion: With the officials Ms. Reece and her brother had a great influence on, one can only conclude this was orchestrated to embarrass Mr. Whitney at his business partner's home and hopefully create an adverse effect on their friendships. And there is no question she had hopes of Mr. Greer calling his $80,000 investment which would have immediately bankrupted the company.



DA's statement in response to MAR. MUST CLICK ON TO ENLARGE







The Accuser, Ms. Nancy Peace Reace, was not happy with just a wrongful conviction, so she went for the jugular. PLEASE READ
Update on the past EIGHTEEN
months, given below,
IS VERY DISTURBING!
This is the battle currently underway.
After the motion to dismiss was declined, the Defendant contacted over forty attorney offices. Thirty-nine did not respond at all—no calls, no emails. The Defendant met with one attorney who highlighted all the elements indicating a wrongful conviction. However, when the Defendant tried to reach him again, the attorney disappeared and never spoke with the Defendant again.
It seems this case is being suppressed for political reasons, as obtaining representation in North Carolina appears to be impossible.
PLEASE USE THE CONTACT PAGE ABOVE TO END THIS JUDICIAL PERSECUTION AND GIVE LIFE!
Note Skate Zone 85 emphasizes attracting school groups to use the facility for class gatherings
ABOVE - Skate Zone 805,
Greenville, OH DA admitted the child said this
was where a brief meeting occurred.
BIG PROBLEM - is not in the town
the PI reported I drove to.
CLICK ON THE PICTURE TO ENLARGE
Still operates today, specialty is class parties

SUMMARY: Withholding of Evidence and Outside Influence on the Defendant's Attorney and the Court is Clear
-
The complainant and her brother, an attorney in this county for thirty-five years at the time, had very close relationships with the Judge, the District Attorney, and the SBI.
-
The Warrant Issued in December 2003 was ordered to be IMMEDIATELY Sealed "to HIDE the existence of the Search Warrant." ("hide" was the word used by the Court) without meeting the legal requirements to do so.
-
The Defendant was NEVER shown or told of any of the evidence then or at any time by anyone until he stumbled across it in the Clerk's Office in February 2020.
-
The ex-wife admitted to the SBI spyware was illegally installed to track her husband and gave the spyware data to the SBI which found zero evidence of solicitation or other crime.
-
The District Attorney, in his response to a motion submitted by the defendant in 2022, admitted the complainant lied to the SBI on the key matter of PC ownership and all other statements were lies as well. (Citizen Initiated Complaint). He declined to bring charges.
-
An extensive search by 20+ Agents plus Sheriff deputies of both the defendant's home and business found zero pornographic material as claimed by his ex-wife.
-
SBI analysis of the server at the defendant's business found nothing.
-
A four-week analysis of the defendant's home PC at the SBI Regional Crime Lab found zero evidence of solicitation or any other illegal activity.
-
A Private Investigator hired by the ex-wife fabricated his report to the SBI He never followed the Defendant as he told the SBI. The aforementioned DA's to the motion even proves so.
-
The SBI, very strangely, waited twenty-two days to interview a potential victim who happened to be the child of the Defendant's business partner.
-
The District Attorney, in his response to a motion submitted by the defendant in 2022, after seeing evidence for the first time, admitted the complainant lied to the SBI on the key matter of PC ownership and all other statements were lies as well. (Citizen Initiated Complaint). He declined to bring charges.
Dear Reader,
I want to share a quote from the first attorney I hired: "If they (Davidson County officials) will not make rulings according to the laws of North Carolina, I cannot help you.” He promptly resigned from the case.
Corruption has become alarmingly prevalent in North Carolina, mirroring issues in our federal system. Miscarriages of justice occur regularly, and those in Raleigh responsible for oversight are not making necessary changes. Judges often ignore our laws and Constitution for political and personal gain. In my case, it is almost certain that money changed hands, and there is no question that a politically influential person played a role. This is just one such case, and I believe it has become quite common, similar to what we see in Washington, D.C.
Even today, officials in Davidson County make rulings without regard for our laws or discipline from Raleigh.
Sincerely,
Philip Whitney
Why the Guilty Plea?
It was Classic "Railroading" Made Possible by Knowing I was a Naive Client
Railroading definition: to convict with undue haste and by means of false charges or insufficient evidence.
The first thing I said to my attorney was, ‘We have to get out of Davidson County.’ I explained that my ex-wife had worked in the District Attorney’s office just before these events. More importantly, her brother, an attorney in that county for over thirty-five years, was very influential among the law enforcement and judicial personnel in the small town of Lexington, NC, with a population of 18,000. In a small town like that, with a judge and DA who served for twenty-four years, you can expect a different kind of justice—often referred to as ‘wheeling and dealing.’ The county had that reputation for decades, and it still exists today. They do what they want, often based on the exchange of IOUs and/or cash.
After my attorney said he had not heard of my ex-brother-in-law, I almost demanded the trial be moved, again explaining the magnitude of his influence. Being his brother-in-law for ten years I learned his greatest asset was his checkbook. Once again my attorney assured me it would not be a problem.
I accepted my attorney’s response because he was considered one of the top three criminal defense attorneys in North Carolina. His high-profile cases sometimes made national news. Because of his reputation, I accepted his answer. As a computer analyst, I was very naive about our justice system, so I had only one choice: to trust this ‘god’ of an attorney. The word ‘god’ accurately reflected his reputation. After that, I stayed out of his way, and we rarely spoke. We knew it would be a while before my case would be called, so I didn’t think much of his not disclosing any evidence. I was not given a copy of the warrant when the SBI came to my home. Even so, I trusted him
On August 3, 2004, seven months after the SBI began their investigation, I went to Superior Court as required. As had occurred in the previous months, the Friday before my attorney's assistant called and told me my case would NOT be called. While sitting in the back of the courtroom, my attorney suddenly approached me and said the DA wanted to call the case that day, but he had avoided it and told me to be at his office at 2 PM that same day.
In his office, the first words from Mr. Freedman's mouth were, "The DA will accept nothing less than a guilty plea and you have no other options but to accept the plea. I FROZE UP TO A BREAKING POINT AND REMAINED THAT WAY FOR WEEKS. My return to the courtroom was set for the next morning. I was in a stupor and had no idea what was going on. The only thing I could think, HAVING NOT BEEN SHOWN ANY EVIDENCE, was, "Well, my ex-wife and her brother pulled this off and my attorney COULD NOT OVERCOME their influence. Hopefully, he will now appeal and move the case." Was I ever wrong? My attorney quoted me $50,000 to appeal and I assumed that was the end.
Within five hours I went from "your case will not be called" to "they will accept nothing less than guilty and you have no other options." SEE DEFINITION OF "RAILROADING ABOVE"
And I also had no clue of what options might be available. This is a technique used for centuries in a courtroom. It is called railroading a person.
In five hours I went from calm and confident because I had not committed any crime to being in a stupor, unable to think, and to the point that all you want to do is cuddle up in your bed.
It was not a surprise afterward that I learned that in 18% of all overturned convictions the defendant entered an unwarranted guilty plea. People have breaking points where they feel they are completely out of control of a situation, especially when authority is involved. When such an unexpected bomb is dropped on them they essentially do not realize what is happening. That is exactly what happened here and why the guilty plea was made.
It was a classic case of railroading executed on a defendant they knew was very naive in matters of the law.