CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Politics is full of personal attacks that have little to do with whether someone can serve effectively in public office. The crimes of a spouse—or former spouse—are not automatically the responsibility of the person they married.
That is why this story isn’t about blaming State Senator Woodson Bradley for another person’s crimes.
It’s about judgment, disclosure and an unanswered question.
Records cited in a 2024 research dossier reviewed by Auxio.tv state that Bradley’s former husband, Gene Clayton Hair II, pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent liberties with a child in Cabarrus County. According to the dossier, the underlying offenses occurred in 1998 and 2001, and Hair became a registered sex offender.
Percipient-Strategies-LLC-Mary-Woodson-Gardner-Bradley-NC-SD-42-Research-Dossier.pdf
Bradley married Hair on November 5, 2005—years after both offenses occurred. The marriage continued until their divorce in July 2018.
Percipient-Strategies-LLC-Mary-Woodson-Gardner-Bradley-NC-SD-42-Research-Dossier.pdf
That timeline is documented.
What isn’t documented is perhaps the most important part:
When did Woodson Bradley know?
The records reviewed by Auxio.tv do not establish that Bradley knew about Hair’s convictions before marrying him. They certainly do not establish that she had anything to do with his crimes.
But Bradley is now an elected state senator. Questions about judgment and transparency deserve answers—especially when the underlying facts involve crimes against children.
Auxio.tv has made multiple attempts to contact Senator Bradley seeking her response, and as of publication, she has not responded.
Her silence doesn’t prove that she knew.
But it also doesn’t answer the question.
If Bradley did not know about Hair’s criminal history when they married, she should say so. If she learned about it later, voters deserve to hear when and under what circumstances. And if there is additional context that changes the picture presented by these records, she deserves the opportunity to provide it.
That’s what accountability journalism is supposed to do: ask the question rather than manufacture the answer.
There is another reason judgment is relevant here.
The dossier documents a separate chapter of Bradley’s professional history involving Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing, or FHTM. Bradley publicly promoted the company and described herself as one of its top earners, a Platinum Sales Manager and National Trainer.
Percipient-Strategies-LLC-Mary-Woodson-Gardner-Bradley-NC-SD-42-Research-Dossier.pdf
Federal regulators subsequently pursued FHTM, alleging that nearly all consumers who participated lost more money than they made. According to the dossier, an FTC court filing specifically referenced Gardner/Bradley’s promotional practices concerning recruitment bonuses and compensation claims. Percipient-Strategies-LLC-Mary-Woodson-Gardner-Bradley-NC-SD-42-Research-Dossier.pdf The FTC ultimately shut the operation down, and hundreds of thousands of refund checks were later sent to consumers.
Percipient-Strategies-LLC-Mary-Woodson-Gardner-Bradley-NC-SD-42-Research-Dossier.pdf
None of those facts establish that Bradley committed a crime. They do, however, make judgment a legitimate subject of scrutiny for someone entrusted with making laws for North Carolina.
And that’s ultimately where this editorial lands.
Woodson Bradley should not be held responsible for her former husband’s crimes.
But she can be asked to explain the decisions she made, what she knew when she made them, and why voters should trust her judgment today.
Auxio.tv has asked.
Senator Bradley has not answered.
Auxio.tv will update this story and include Senator Bradley’s response if one is received.