The source of these attacks on Miller's past was Douglas McCullough, a former federal prosecutor who is now an elected (Republican) judge. As an elected official -- in other words, a politician -- McCullough is not an uninterested party in this matter.
First, McCullough seems to exaggerate the value of Miller's cooperation under a plea-agreement that McCullough arranged with Miller in the late 1980s:
"We secured a number of convictions with his assistance and in our view we had removed him from a leadership role in the White Patriot Party, because now he was in jail," explained McCullough.
This is a puzzling claim from the former federal prosecutor, because there were no felony convictions in either of the trials where Frazier Glenn Miller testified, neither in the Fort Smith Mass-Sedition Trial nor in the Shelby III Adult Bookstore trial. What "convictions" McCullough has in mind is not evident.**
McCullough seems to be claiming past successes for himself, where in fact he failed.
The fact that McCullough is defending his own reputation becomes even clearer in this section of WTVD's report:
According to a 1987 sentencing memorandum from federal prosecutors, if Miller had not become an informant, and if the government had pursued all charges against him, he could have faced a 100-year sentence if convicted.
We asked McCullough if it's possible Miller would still be in prison and three people in Kansas would still be alive.
"Not possible. You have to take into context types of sentences that were actually being imposed and the types of offenses he had committed," McCullough explained.
He said Miller would have served no more than 10 to 12 years.
The former federal prosecutor may claim in 2014 that Glenn Miller would have served no more than 10 to12 years in prison if prosecutors had not made a deal with him, but that is closer to the maximum that Miller could have faced after the deal was made. The Associated Press reported in 1988 that Miller could have been sentenced to more than 100 years in prison if federal prosecutors had not offered him a plea-agreement (Associated Press, 4 January 1988).
That's two major misrepresentations that save the former prosecutor's reputation at Glenn Miller's expense. Then McCullough makes an innuendo of sexual perversion about Miller:
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. "It was pretty shocking," said McCullough. "...because of his personal stances that he had taken and what he was now accused of engaging in."
McCullough told ABC11 he read the Raleigh police report about the incident with the prostitute. "The facts speak for themselves, and people can draw their own conclusion about how incongruous something like that is," he offered.
Miller did not face charges in connection with the incident. McCullough explained that's likely because the government was pursuing the much bigger case against him.
While McCullough claims that that the facts "speak for themselves," he presents no facts. He does not even state the year in which the incident is supposed to have occurred. The claim that some crime was committed and discovered by Raleigh Police without any charge being filed also seems highly suspect. It is not clear how the federal government's alleged intentions toward Miller should have motivated local authorities in Raleigh to desist from prosecuting an alleged violation of a local law. McCullough's account is void of details and makes no sense on its face.
A spokesman for the Raleigh Police Department, responding to an inquiry on 24 April 2014, says that no record of the incident to which McCullough refers could be found. He is quoted here with permission:
Recent news articles have included a mention of an incident said to have occurred in Raleigh, N.C., involving F. Glenn Miller; however no police report of such an incident has been located and no record of and an arrest for such an incident has been found. [Jim Sughrue, Director of Public Affairs, Raleigh Police Department, 25 April 2014]
When giving permission to be quoted, Mr. Sughrue cautioned that there was some possibility that the documents relating to the incident (assuming that they existed) had been misfiled, since they would date from the period before RPD computerized its record-keeping.
However, since certain other elements of Doug McCullough's account of Glenn Miller seem to be false (especially the claim that convictions were secured with Miller's help), the most likely explanation seems to be that there was no such incident-report and no such arrest.
There are two discernible motives in McCullough's statements. One is to kill any sympathy that might exist for Miller and whatever he represents by branding him as a closet homosexual and hypocrite. These are typical themes of smear-propaganda that have been standard for many decades. Such accusations were even used in ancient times. The other is McCullough's exaggeration of his own record of success as a prosecutor, and self-justification in the question of whether federal prosecutors should have worked with Miller, since there has been general criticism recently of federal prosecutors' practice of seeking the cooperation of criminals.
This is not to justify the shootings that Miller committed recently. The premise here is that nobody is justifiably tarred with lies.
* Some news-sources are even adding baseless details to the story. The New York Daily News adds the detail that Glenn Miller "paid" to have sex with the alleged Black transvestite prostitute, a detail that does not appear in their source, the report from WTVD. The addition of a detail like that is not inconsequential: it cuts off much of the possibility for doubting the approved interpretation of what happened. With sufficient aggregation of assumed details like that, a completely convincing story can be created out of practically nothing.
** “His testimony was extremely weak,” complains Leonard Zeskind, “I believe that Miller was essentially playing a game with the feds. And I don’t think he had any intention of becoming a good witness.” Zeskind clearly opines that McCullough's plea-agreement with Glenn Miller was not worthwhile. (James Hill, ABC News, 24 April 2014) McCullough claimed on 30 April 2014 that he got a conviction for "contempt of court" with Miller's cooperation, but that is not a felony, and if he means the conviction of Robert Jackson for failing to appear in court, Miller's testimony was not necessary for that.