Repository Collection 03

Documents show scope of Asheville's concealed evidence-room audit

SUPPLEMENTAL ARTICLE SOURCE ENTRY

Last Revised • July 6, 2026

This Source Verification Page documents a supplemental news article published by Carolina Public Press that examines court records and public documents related to the Blueline Systems audit of the Asheville Police Department evidence room. The article explains the contractual authority permitting portions of the audit to be withheld from public release and provides additional context regarding the District Attorney's request to redact information that could affect criminal investigations or prosecutions. It supplements the underlying affidavit and audit materials relied upon in Statement of Facts C.


Related SMAR Citation

“District Attorney Ron Moore to "excise information that could jeopardize criminal investigations or prosecutions"”


Source Name

Documents show scope of Asheville's concealed evidence-room audit


Author(s)

Jon Elliston


Publication

Carolina Public Press


Publication Date

April 23, 2012


Verification Source

Documents show scope of Asheville's concealed evidence-room audit


Source Location

Carolina Public Press


Highlighted Pages

1 - 5


Referenced in the Supplemental Motion

Page 22, Paragraph: 36


Source Status

✔ Article obtained and reviewed.

✔ Relevant passages highlighted.

✔ Publicly available source

✔ Included within the Source Verification Archive


Cited to Support

May's allegation that the contract governing the Blueline Systems audit granted District Attorney Ron Moore authority to excise, redact, withhold, or remove information from the final audit report when disclosure could jeopardize criminal investigations or prosecutions. The Carolina Public Press article is cited to document reporting on the audit contract and related records, which described the scope of the audit and the District Attorney's authority over the release of audit findings. May relies upon this information to support his claim that portions of the audit may have been withheld from public disclosure and that the absence of publicly available findings does not necessarily establish that no additional deficiencies were identified during the audit process.


Supporting Documents

Original Article

Link to the original article.

View Website →


Highlighted Research Copy

Working research copy containing the highlighted passages cited in the Supplemental Motion.

View PDF →


Continue Your Research

Return to Statement of Facts C

Continue browsing the sources cited throughout Statement of Facts C.

Browse Sources →

Return to Source Verification Archive

Return to the main Source Verification Archive and explore additional sections of the Supplemental Motion.

Browse Archive →