Jim Giles is actually hostile to Frazier Glenn Miller. He has felt very strongly that Frazier Glenn Miller was guilty, as alleged in mass-media, of having been caught in a lewd act with a Black transvestite prostitute sometime in the 1980s. But the fact that the accusation appeared dubious due to lack of documentation troubled him. Giles therefore contacted the source* of the lurid accusation, former federal prosecutor and current North Carolina Judge Doug McCullough, hoping to get confirmation of the claims about Miller, but the result is more nearly the opposite. In fact, by seeking the truth, Jim Giles has done us all, including Frazier Glenn Miller, a great favor.
Apart from the Black transvestite prostitute accusation, recent news-reports attributed two other deceptive statements to former federal prosecutor Doug McCullough. The initial report from WTVD-TV in Raleigh includes this quote:
"We secured a number of convictions with his assistance...." [Doug McCullough, quoted by Steve Daniels, WTVD-TV, 24 April 2014]
"A number of convictions" would generally be understood to mean many convictions. It is a well known and easily verifiable fact, however, that none of the defendants were convicted in the Fort Smith Mass-Sedition Trial, and Frazier Glenn Miller's associates Douglas Sheets and Robert Jackson were not convicted of the Shelby III Adult Bookstore murders. Those are the two cases where Miller testified as part of the plea-agreement that enabled him to get out of prison after only three years instead of dying behind bars. (McCullough's other misrepresentation is that Miller would be a free man by now anyway even without the plea-agreement.) There has been criticism (e.g. from Leonard Zeskind) of the fact that McCullough ultimately gained nothing from his deal with Miller, and that is precisely because of the dearth of convictions.
Giles asks McCullough if it is true that there were no convictions made with the cooperation of Frazier Glenn Miller. McCullough responds that there was "at least one person who was convicted. I think he was convicted of contempt of court, and that Miller assisted in that prosecution."
McCullough probably has in mind the conviction of Robert Eugene Jackson for failing to appear in court. Glenn Miller's testimony was clearly not necessary to secure that conviction, since Jackson either had appeared or had not.
After the acquittal of all 13 defendants at the Fort Smith Mass-Sedition Trial, after the acquittal of Douglas Sheets for the mass-murder at the Shelby III Adult Bookstore in a trial lasting only 5½ hours, and after charges were dismissed against Robert Eugene Jackson in the same case, all that former federal prosecutor Doug McCullough can claim for a success to justify his plea-agreement with Frazier Glenn Miller is a conviction for something along the lines of contempt of court.
The fact that McCullough was clearly being deceptive about the value of his plea-agreement with Frazier Glenn Miller encouraged skepticism about his other, more bizarre claim.
Giles asks McCullough if it is true that Miller was caught in a lewd act with a Black male prostitute:
"I am not going to say he was in the act. I don't have any recollection of that. He was in the company of this person, is the way I have consistently stated it. If anybody has said that I described him as being engaged in an act, that would be erroneous. He was in the company of a person who was known to the police to be engaged in that kind of activity for money, but to say that they were engaged in that act at the very moment that the police-officer pulled him over, I don't think that would be accurate, and I've never said that." (Doug McCullough, 30 April 2014)
McCullough surely knows that WTVD-TV has indeed claimed that Glenn Miller was caught in the act. This is from WTVD's report, which was picked up by the ABC Television Network and then traveled around the world:
The ABC11 I-Team has also learned something stunning about Miller's time in the Raleigh area. In the 1980s, Raleigh police caught him in the backseat of a car engaged in a sex act with a prostitute - a prostitute who was a black man dressed as a woman. [Steve Daniels, WTVD-11, 24 April 2014]
Context implies that McCullough, who claimed to have seen the incident-report in question, was also responsible for the claim that Miller was "caught in the act." Now McCullough says that this is not true. McCullough also denies knowing the related detail about being caught "in the backseat":
"I don't recall. I don't recall if it described where the two parties were sitting." (Doug McCullough, 30 April 2014)
Since McCullough refers to Miller's being "pulled over" -- which would mean that he was driving his vehicle -- the probability that Miller was in the back seat at the time seems very slight.
So here we have the former prosecutor, the ostensible source of the scurrilous tale about Frazier Glenn Miller and the Black transvestite prostitute, denying knowledge of much of what has been reported, and implying that WTVD's reporter Steve Daniels, or some source that Daniels was using but did not name (McCullough implies the SPLC), substantially invented the story.**
McCullough proceeds to complain about how mass-media distorted his account, but then lets slip that he has in fact misrepresented his own knowledge about the matter. He claims that there were "salacious" details which he told reporters he did not wish to discuss, even though he now admits that there could not have been any "salacious" details, because according to what McCullough now says, no lewd act was recorded in the alleged incident-report.
McCullough refers to the incident-report that is alleged as the basis of the whole scandal as a document of "marginal significance." That is McCullough's explanation for the fact that neither he nor anybody else seems to have retained the document. Given the nationwide notoriety of Frazier Glenn Miller in the 1980s, and the sensational nature of the accusation, such an incident-report would not be a document of marginal significance, and it does not seem like something that would be discarded.
Frazier Glenn Miller, in an interview with the SPLC's Heidi Beirich last year, admitted that there was some incident with a Black transvestite prostitute, but maintains that his intentions toward that person were violent. The details of the story as reported by television-station WTVD and subsequently repeated by news-media around the world, especially the claim that Miller had been caught in the midst of a lewd act, made Miller's version of the story seem untenable. At this point however, the man who says that he actually saw the incident-report, who is also the only source for the story mentioned by WTVD, former federal prosecutor J. Douglas McCullough, has disavowed all alleged details that contradict Frazier Glenn Miller's account.
This is in no way meant to justify Frazier Glenn Miller's or anybody else's actions in random "coon-conking" or "fag-bashing." This kind of activity was perhaps common at one time among skinheads and klansmen, but, although it may offer some immediate gratification, the ultimate effect of such uncivilized behavior, while law and order are still somewhat in effect, is counterproductive.
The point is that former federal prosecutors and mass-media should not be lying or elaborating vivid accusations around an ambiguous grain of truth -- even about a person that they are confident nobody will try to defend.
* McCullough is the only source that Steve Daniels named regarding the accusation about the male prostitute, and is thereby indicated as the source for all alleged details of the incident. Context also implies it. If McCullough was not the source for the claim that Miller was caught in a lewd act with a male prostitute, then Daniels has written a very misleading report.
** Steve Daniels was contacted and informed of the falsity and credibility-problems of some of the claims in his report, but no correction has been made. Even if McCullough did all the lying and Daniels accurately represented what McCullough had said, Daniels and whoever edits WTVD's news still bear responsibility for not being skeptical about wild claims, and for not bothering to check facts -- especially after they have been informed that there is a problem.
PEACHES PEACHES PEACHES PEACHES PEACHES