Repository Collection 03

NC Prosecutor Explains How Innocent Men Were Jailed for Murder

SUPPLEMENTAL ARTICLE SOURCE ENTRY

Last Revised • July 7, 2026

This Source Verification Page documents a supplemental news article published by WFMY News 2 concerning Buncombe County officials' public response to scrutiny surrounding the Mary Elizabeth Judd investigation. The article reports on District Attorney Ron Moore's review of the case and his submission of an eleven-page letter defending the actions of the Buncombe County Sheriff's Office and District Attorney's Office. It is included as a supplemental source providing additional context for Statement of Facts D.


Related SMAR Citation

“[Asheville Citizen Times]”


Source Name

NC Prosecutor Explains How Innocent Men Were Jailed for Murder


Author(s)

WFMY Staff


Publication

WFMY News 2


Publication Date

December 2, 2003


Verification Source

NC Prosecutor Explains How Innocent Men Were Jailed for Murder


Source Location

WFMY News 2


Highlighted Pages

1 - 2


Referenced in the Supplemental Motion

Page 28 - 29, Paragraph: 50


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 following public scrutiny of the Mary Elizabeth Judd investigation and the recantation of key witness Lynette Smith, Buncombe County officials were required to defend the conduct of the investigation and prosecution. The WFMY News 2 article is cited to document reporting that District Attorney Ron Moore reviewed the case and submitted an 11-page letter to Attorney General Roy Cooper defending the actions of the Buncombe County Sheriff's Office and District Attorney's Office. The article further reports Moore's position that Sheriff Bobby Medford committed no wrongdoing and discusses explanations offered for the lengthy incarceration of John Collins and David Hammack. May relies upon this source to support his claim that concerns regarding the handling of the Judd investigation prompted public scrutiny and official efforts to defend the conduct of law enforcement and prosecutors involved in the case.


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 D

Continue browsing the sources cited throughout Statement of Facts D.

Browse Sources →

Return to Source Verification Archive

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

Browse Archive →