www.dadeinfo.com

MS. LAGRUA: The next case is actually an old case. It was 2007-13. It was previously before this Board a couple of years ago and was deferred to wait for the GBI investigation and the District Attorney's investigation. There were allegations of -- it all involved a recall petition, and the signatures on those petitions not being valid, as well as allegations that petitions were circulated were alcohol was sold, that the petitioners were harassed and that free food and drink were provided and there were dead people on the recall petitions. The allegations as to the alcohol being sold were not substantiated. They were in a parking lot outside a grocery store inside of which alcohol was sold. The problem in this case is that lthey're false signatures as well as signatures of dead people. The unfortunate part about this case, and I have spoken just recently to the GBI and confirmed with the District Attorney's Office, the GBI and the DA are not proceeding with this case. And, unfortunately, I don't think we can proceed, because while there were signatures that are not accurate signatures and signatures of dead people, we don't know who signed them. And the petitions that had those on there were withdrawn and they were not notarized and signed by a circulator. So, we don't even have a situation, where we found before, where we can even go back to a circulator to see how the names got on there. There were also petitions. A number of petitions were destroyed when they found out they couldn't get enough signatures to get the requisite amount. And so they had told the folks that if they didn't get the requisite amount, in order that they not be exposed to retaliation, those petitions would be destroyed. So some of those petitions were destroyed. There is no question here that there was some nefarious conduct. I can't tell you, and even more importantly, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation can't tell us who engaged in the conduct. Because of that, at least at this juncture, I recommend the case be closed.
SECRETARY KEMP: Any questions?
MR. EVANS: What about 21-2-562(a)? SEB Meeting - P a g e 17
Verbatim Minutes
MS. LAGRUA: I agree, Mr. Evans, completely, that 562 would apply if I could tell you who did it.
MR. EVANS: My only worry is that what I'm hearing is that we know there is a crime but because we don't know who did it, we need to let it go. On the flip side, we know who had the documents. It seems to me that person would be in a pretty precarious position of explaining under oath why it is they had these documents that contained fraudulent entries.
MS. LAGRUA: The document that contained the fraudulent entries had no circulator name on them and that person was interviewed by GBI. And the GBI felt there was insufficient -- we can go back and re-interview view that individual. I have no problem with that.
MR. EVANS: Didn't we get this from Mr. Pitman?
MS. LAGRUA: We did.
MR. EVANS: So, and from your prosecutor days, I'm sure that you were well aware that sometimes whenever you put the person who has the illegal and fraudulent certificates on the stand, they have a couple of bad choices, one is, I guess, they can always invoke the 5th amendment, the other is they can tell us where they got them. It would just seem to me that this is significant that dead people's names are appearing on petitions, that but for the fact that this all kind of got coiled in mid-stream could have resulted in a recall petition, which would have been a violation of our election process. I just think we have been very, very tough over the years of the State Election Board on fraudulent documents. We have been very unrelenting. I don't know that I would stop here. I think I would refer the matter over to the Attorney General for today. We obviously have to have a notice for the report, with a violation attached, to say we think you should prosecute this and the guy who had these can have one of two choices. He can either defend himself or give up who did it.
MS. LAGRUA: I'm not comfortable with the outcome of this, as you can imagine. I am happy to reissue notice, name Mr. Pitman as a respondent. I'll have one of our investigators re-interview him, see where it goes, and bring it back to the next SEB meeting for your referral to the AG, after hearing from him, if that's agreeable to the State Election Board.
SECRETARY KEMP: What's the story on the DA? They just wouldn't move on it?
MS. LAGRUA: The DA has declined to prosecute or take the case. That's correct. We did contact Buzz Franklin.
SECRETARY KEMP: Any other questions?
(NO RESPONSE).
SECRETARY KEMP: Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this matter?
(NO RESPONSE).
SECRETARY KEMP: Okay. Hearing none, do we have a motion? SEB Meeting - P a g e 18
Verbatim Minutes
MR. EVANS: I would move that we re-notice and name a respondent.
MR. WORLEY: I would second.
SECRETARY KEMP: Okay. We have the motion by Mr. Evans, a second by Mr. Webb. Any other discussion?
(NO RESPONSE).
SECRETARY KEMP: All in favor of motion will say aye.
(WHEREUPON THERE WAS A CHORUS OF AYES).
SECRETARY KEMP: All opposed, no.
(NO RESPONSE).
SECRETARY KEMP: The motion carries.