Witch Hunt

Earlier this week I pointed to the prosecutions of Doug Martin, David Petersen and the investigation of Terry Goddard as examples of prosecutorial over reach.  The full weight of law enforcement is falling on violations that seem to be trivial. 

The latest example of this trend was announced today. 

In order to get on the ballot, candidates have to circulate nominating petitions.  The circulator must sign the back of the petition and attest that he witnessed signing of the petition.  However, it's common for a candidate to take a clipboard to a District or Rotary Meeting and leave the it on a table in the back while he speaks.  He obviously doesn't watch every signature.  The confusion is compounded by the fact that the "circulator" of Clean Elections $5 forms does not have to witness the actual signing. 

Former Representative Russ Jones survived a ballot challenge that went all the way to the Supreme Court last summer.  Jones apparently signed nine petitions in which he wasn't the circulator.  The Democratic party called that forgery and said that he should be removed from the ballot.  There was never an argument that Jones needed the signatures on those pages in order to get on the ballot.  The argument was that since he didn't circulate them, they shouldn't just be thrown out, he should be removed as a candidate because of forgery. 

The Supreme Court dispensed with that argument very quickly.  You can't be convicted of "forging" your own name.  Jones remained on the ballot and was defeated in the General Election.  That should have been the end of the story.  But now we have this.

Today, County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced that a Grand Jury has returned an indictment charging former State Representative Russell L. Jones (R-Yuma) with nine counts of Presentment of False Instrument for Filing (class six felonies) and one count of Fraudulent Schemes and Practices; Willful Concealment (class five felony).  The case is the first indictment to arise from Operation MACE (Maricopa County Anti- Corruption Enforcement), a joint project of the Sheriff’s and County Attorney’s offices.

Law enforcement is criminalizing trivial procedural violations.  Candidates from both parties should fear this type of selective prosecution.  It is almost impossible for elected officials to follow every procurement rule, reporting requirement, disclosure form and administrative procedure.  Now instead of getting a nasty note from the AG, elected officials are facing indictment. 

Who is going to run for office?  The sacrifices--low pay, no privacy, public ridicule, long hours--are already significant, and now trivial violations are being branded as "corruption" elected officials are being hit with multi count indictments and are forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend themselves while risking significant jail time if they lose. 

This may be 21st century Arizona, but it's looking an awful lot like 17th century Salem. 

Comments

[Paul Srch]

As a candidate for city council in the city of Surprise, this is, frankly, a bit scary. Any opponent could bring this up and, as you stated, instead of simply discounting those contested signatures (which is the reasonable thing to do), someone could destroy my life and that of my family.

And if you don't think this kind of think happens in local elections, you haven't been to Surprise.

Lesson learned: make double-dang sure you dot your i's and cross your t's...

[Cindy]

It seems to me like this all started with some political enemies of Peterson deciding to go after him and got Goddard on the bandwagon which then led to Martin.

Then the Sheriff, not one to be out media whored, decided to jump on the bandwagon and pursue first Goddard (with little or no corroborating evidence) and now is going to ressurrect the Russ Jones suit all the quest for more media coverage.

It seems to me that this all stems with the sucess of Arpaio and the double losses to Goddard now in the AG races. They've taken the fact that Goddard has such high name ID that they need to generate equal amounts at any cost and that is indeed the wrong thing to be doing. It will create a downward spiral that will scare off good people for running for office.

[Ahwatukee Kid]

But they weren't interested in going after Deb Gullett for doing it? Its not like Russ Jones was the only guy who did it... So does anyone know why the Maricopa County folks are prosecuting it when it occured in Yuma County?

[John]

THAT is a great point. How do they have jurisdiction. The only way they would have jurisidiction if the defendent lives in the county or the crime took place here. Neither did or does.

[Mike]

Great reporting on this disturbing trend. This is quite troubling to watch because in many ways it is criminalizing politics. I am not condoning what any of these guys did, but I don't think you should face criminal prosecution for carelessness.

[Ann]

AK, I agree! When the news showed the press conference Thomas said something to the effect that these crimes will not be tolerated in Maricopa County no matter who you are. I thought then, how does a guy in Yuma offend the Maricopa County prosecutor?

I think this is how it works….The signatures on the back are an affirmation; the collector signs it to affirm the legitimacy of the signatures by virtue that they were the collector; to sign it and not be the collector and then file…..then it basically becomes a lie or fraud. If you collect signatures, don’t file, then they are of no consequence. But could it be that based on the filings for office where done at the Secretary of State's office, the filing being what made it fraudulent, and the SOS office is in Maricopa County that Thomas has jurisdiction? If so, then basically anything that happens anywhere in the state, if filed in or someway attached to Phoenix becomes the fodder of Andy & Joe.

[Tim]

Probably because I believe Jones admitted in open court what he did -- the felonies -- unlike others (Gullett?) who just decided to drop out when faced with the petition challenge from an opponent.

It's not really carelessness. Download a petition from the Sec State website and read the back right above where the circulator's signature goes. It's pretty clear, and if you can't get it right maybe you shouldn't be claiming to represent a couple hundred thousand people at the legislature.

"Filing a false instrument" is exactly that...and it's used to prosecute those who commit welfare fraud, get out of jury duty, violate other campaign filings (remember JD Hayworth's guy who forged his name on some otherwise legit paperwork?) and basically either cut corners or actually deceive the government for your personal benefit.

The key to the Jones case is likely the single Class 5 felony count, the willful concealment part. That's where the jury separates common mistakes from criminal behavior. Watergate, Clinton, Scooter LIbby...it's all about the perception of a coverup. That's the political corruption part.

Next summer I am going to slip over to the Dem headquarters, place some full but unsigned petitions in there for a bunch of candidates. Then, after the petitions are due, I'm going down to the Sec State office to look at whether they signed those petitions and turned them in. Then I'm going to get them all kicked off the ballot because I have affidavits from all 15 petition signers that the candidate was not the circulator. How's that for criminalizing politics...

[Evan]

Tim, you are a genius.

[Faith]

"Who is going to run for office?"

Maybe that's the point. What better way to eliminate the competition and score points with the electorate at the same time? Just watch both those guys thump their chests at election time about how tough they are on 'corrupt' politicians.

BTW, Ann is correct. Maricopa County has jurisdiction because Jones presented the documents to the Sec State in Phoenix.

[SonoranSam]

Guys:

It's REAL simple....If you write the laws of the state you need to live by the laws of the state.

If the law says you can't sign the back of a nominating petition, and you're a lawMAKER, you ought to follow the law.

And you CERTAINLY shouldn't go into court and swear - under oath - that you circulated the petitions, even though you were in Phoenix on the day in question.

I'm no Andrew Thomas fan, but I applaud him for taking on corruption wherever he sees it - even if he finds it in the Republican's "big tent."

I expect Terry Goddard to stand up to that same standard.

[BobH]

I agree with Sam -- it's the law, and lawmakers ought to be held to an especially tight standard.

A similar case is on display in New Jersey, where the governor was driving (or being driven by a state trooper, of all people) at an absurdly high rate of speed, endangering the lives of other motorists, and was not wearing a seat belt at the time of his crash.

While we should be sympathetic in regard to his injuries, he should still be punished for his misdeeds (but I doubt he will be).

PS: While some of us have some philosophical problems with seat belt laws in regard to adults, they still are the law, and he is the governor.

[Paul Srch]

Sam, I agree with you, to a point. If a candidate (or campaign worker) intentionally signs a petition verifying that he circulated the petition, but didn't, then the appropriate crime would be filing a fraudulent document.

On the other hand, if there was no intent to defraud but sheer carelessness, then there is a simple procedural process already in place - simply discount the signatures on those petitions, reducing the number of signatures turned in by that number. If the candidate has enough signatures anyway, he should be on the ballot; if not, not.

Where I have a small quibble is with what seems to be your assumption that carelessness isn't likely. As a city council candidate, I have to accumulate signatures equal to between 5% (minimum) and 10% (maximum that can be turned in) of the voters in the last election.

For my district, that means between 52 and 104 signatures. Shouldn't be much of a problem, right? Except that I have a number of people collecting signatures for me. At the end of a day, when everybody's at my house and we're gathering our stuff, I check the backs to make sure that they're all signed appropriately. Sometimes we forget, and my natural response is to sign the back, especially if I'm tired and in a hurry.

Fortunately, there are few enough petitions that I can easily double check what's going on. But if I had a lot of petition sheets per day coming in (say if I was running in a statewide election), it'd be easy to screw up.

Basically, what I'm saying is, mistakes happen. And, when signatures are challenged, they should be discarded as invalid as I mentioned above, instead of being used as fodder for felony violations, unless there is CLEAR intent to deceive.

That's what scares me - this case seems to involve an assumption of guilt and intent to deceive. If that can be proven in this case, well and good to convict - but that's where the bar should be set. Otherwise, Greg makes a good point - who the heck would want to run, knowing that a simple mistake could result in jail time, just because someone challenges your signatures.

Bottom line for me - assume there's been a mistake, and discount the signatures... unless you can prove intent to defraud.

[Gerry Mander]

This is absurd. For Arpaio and Thomas to raise the specter of "corruption" in the case of a candidate being sloppy with his petitions is way off base.

This cannot be a good use of the county prosecutor office's limited resources.

[SonoranSam]

Russ Jones testified - under oath in a court of law - that he circulated the signatures even though he was in Phoenix on the day they were signed.

That isn't carelessness.

[Gerry Mander]

So, to confirm, you want your county attorney to pursue this?

The position of county attorney is one of resource allocation. Is this how we want county resources allocated?

If you were tell me that a fine were to be imposed or something like that, then I'd pay it no mind.

But a press conference with the sheriff and a 10-count indictment and talk of being caught in a public corruption dragnet is a tad over the top, don't you think?

[Ann]

This is ridiculous. Nine petitions with 15 max signatures per page for a total of a max of maybe 135 signatures? What should be a campaign disqualification is now multiple felonies. The right to complain during the election was had, the election continued, guy lost, end of story. The reference to Deb Gullet is appropriate. Is it only those who are pursued that must be held to this standard? How many candidates have been found to be in error in their filings throughout the years?

If this is the best that MACE can come up with or all that they have to investigate, then maybe the real corruption is in the management of this tax dollar supported endeavor.

[Disenchanted]

I'm a Yuma resident & voter. I was appalled the first time they went after Russ Jones and in shock at this latest move. Is it any wonder so many QUALIFIED candidates shy away from even considering public office? I HAVE been involved in campaigns and when I circulated a petition I witnessed every signature & signed off on the back. However, when petitions are placed in public areas to obtain signatures, does everyone honestly believe that EVERY signature was witnessed by ONE circulator?The county fair here is probably the best venue for obtaining signatures, generally in booths rented by the political parties, manned by multiple volunteers in shifts. Petitions for multiple candidates are displayed on tables on multiple ciipboards. Now, what if the 'designated circulator' for a specific candidate leaves the booth? Do they remove the petition? NO. It continues to be circulated even in their absence. Circulators do their best to sign off on petitions they 'circulated' prior to leaving, but there have been occasions where they miss a couple of incomplete petitions. Then the next circulator signs off on them. I imagine it's the same statewide. Perhaps someone needs to go through every petition ever filed (by all candidates) and investigate every signature and circulator. Think of petitons you have signed. Did you always know the name of the circulator? Did the circulator always know you personally? Ever signed multiple petitions and they were handed to you by one person? When the issue with Jones first came up, he went to court and was subsequently allowed to be on the ballot. I'm under the impression Jones is the only (Az.)candidate who has ever been charged with offenses relating to petition circulation when my guess would be this is something EVERY candidate is "guilty" of. No I'm not advocating breaking the law but this is clearly a case of selective enforcement. If Jones is charged, then probably every candidate in the state should also be charged. And it doesn't rankle anyone else that the complainant in this matter is an official with the Demo Party? Who lives in Phoenix? I guess we Yumans need to start monitoring Phoenix petition circulation and elections. Do you think we could discover any offenses to file a complaint about? Do you think if someone from Yuma lodged a complaint in Yuma County, about a Phoenix election, that it would get any action? When has Maricopa County ever considered Yuma County anything but a red headed step child? This seems like something to put Operation MACE on the map. It IS something I'll remember come election time (remember, we red headed step children in Yuma are still allowed to vote in statewide elections.) How much is this witch hunt costing the taxpayers? Do the voters in Maricopa County really CARE about this issue? Want their tax money spent in this manner? Isn't there real crime out there to prosecute? I know Yuma courts are extremely busy, maybe Maricopa County isn't that busy and needs to create cases. I'd enjoy an investigative news series on petition circulation process. I'd also appreciate a recall effort against the officials who have once again created this havoc. And, tongue in cheek, perhaps Yuma should investigate how to secede from Arizona and become part of California?

[600RR]

Since Russ Jones wasn’t reelected, he is no longer a public official. The Maricopa County Attorney and Sheriff stated in their press release that they had formed a team to go after corrupt public officials, which he no longer is. So why did this even move forward? It would be interesting to get the public records and find out how much Maricopa tax money was used to investigate and prosecute Mr. Jones. What do they normally spend on class 6 felony investigations in Maricopa County? Also, there are those who mistakenly believe that Mr. Jones could not have circulated the petitions in Yuma simply because he was in Phoenix on the day in question. Mr. Jones owns and flies his own airplane and can be in Phoenix in less than an hour. He was in both Yuma and Phoenix that day.