Judge Hears Election Case

While saying he did not see how the outcome of the election could change, Judge L.A. “Buster” McConnell said, “We’ll sit on it until we hear something from the Secretary of State. Right now it doesn’t look like enough evidence to overturn the election.”

Judge McConnell was the special judge for the hearing last Friday in Jasper Superior Court in the case of Martha S. Pompey, as Candidate for At-Large, Monticello Mayor Pro Tem vs. Bobby Jacobs, Jr., as Candidate for At-Large Monticello Mayor Pro Tem; and Linda Mock-Keller, in her capacity as Election Superintendent of Jasper County, Georgia and Carol Norris, in her capacity as Registrar of Jasper County.

Judge McConnell presided over a very casual courtroom as several would-be voters testified that they were not allowed to vote in the run-off election held December 6, 2011.

The Probate Judge and Registrar served as rebuttal witnesses several times, with one of them taking the witness stand then stepping down and the next one stepping up to the stand. Before the hearing was over, some testimony was given from the defendant’s table rather than walking back and forth.

{{more}}

The hearing was interrupted for some time because of a tornado warning and everyone was urged to go to the basement of the building.

Mrs. Pompey represented herself in court, although she had frequent input from spectators Jacqueline Bell Smith and Doris Moore.

Representing the defendants Mmes. Mock-Keller and Norris was Joe Reitman, the attorney who represents the city of Monticello, as they were conducting the city election at the request of the city. Phil Shinall was there representing the county. In addition, Mr. Jacobs was represented by local attorney W. Dan Roberts who, although present, did not take an active role in Friday’s hearing.

Basically the suit was contesting the way voters were handled, and Mr. Jacobs was only party to the suit because he was the opposing candidate. Mrs. Pompey did not allege Mr. Jacobs violated any rights.

Mr. Reitman, in his opening remarks, said he had witnessed numerous elections and his mind this was one of the “cleanest” he had ever seen.

Mrs. Pompey said that Angilette Barron was denied the right to vote because her identification says she lives in the county, not in the city. The election was only for city voters.

Rebuttal witnesses showed that indeed Ms. Barron was registered to vote, but she had never changed her address to reflect her move into the city three years ago.

Mrs. Pompey maintains that Ms. Barron should have been offered a provisional ballot until the issue could be resolved. Mmes. Norris and Mock-Keller basically ascertained there was no issue to solve. Mrs. Norris further said that Ms. Barron was still not registered to vote in the city, nearly three months after she was denied the opportunity to vote in the city election.

Another would-be voter, Terri Robinson, said she was not allowed to vote. She said she went to the poll, filled out the paperwork, and went to the machine to vote. However, she said, after she put her card in the machine, it was ejected before she could cast her vote.

The defendants answered that they counted the number of people who were included on the “express poll” list to the voter certificates to the number of ballots that had been cast, and all the numbers were equal, indicating Ms. Robinson had voted.

There was testimony as to the checks and balances that are in place to be sure an accurate vote total is obtained, as well as how the machines are tested.

Frederica Moore said she presented a photocopy of her voter registration card and was denied the right to vote because it was not an original and she had no other appropriate identification. Ms. Moore had visited the registrar’s office before the election to have an I.D. made, but at the time the basement of the Courthouse had flooded and Mrs. Norris was not able to accommodate her.

To get the voter I.D. card, a person must provide a photo identity document that includes the voter’s date of birth, evidence that the applicant is a registered voter, and documentation showing the applicant’s name and residential address. Apparently Ms. Moore had that identification when she was seeking a voter I.D. card last summer when the Courthouse was flooded.

When the judge asked Ms. Moore Friday if she had a driver’s license, she answered affirmatively, but said her pocketbook was lost.

Acceptable forms of identification to vote include a driver’s license, a valid Georgia voter identification card, a passport, a valid employee identification card containing a photograph of the voter and issued by any governmental entity, a valid military I.D. or a valid tribal identification card containing a photograph.

A voter who is denied the right to vote because of the lack of acceptable identification is to receive a letter that outlines his or her options.

Mrs. Pompey maintains Ms. Moore should have been allowed to vote provisionally.

The next voter in question was Iesha Nix. according to testimony, Ms. Nix’s mother, Patricia Nix, brought her absentee ballot to the polls on election day. The ballot was not handed to the registrar, as required. However, only a disabled voter can have someone else deliver his or her absentee ballot on election day, and Ms. Nix’s request for an absentee ballot did not indicate she was disabled. Mrs. Norris attempted to call the number on the absentee ballot request, and reached an individual in Shady Dale who was not Ms. Nix. She said she did not know any other way to get in touch with Ms. Nix that day.

Lastly, Tonya Dennis is named on the complaint as a voter who voted, but her name is not on the voter’s list, apparently bringing into question the poll workers’ record-keeping. Ms. Dennis was not available to testify Friday.

Mrs. Pompey summarized her case by saying each of the witnesses should have been provided a provisional ballot to vote until a full investigation into their status was completed, but no one received a provisional ballot.

Mrs. Pompey has asked the Secretary of State to make a ruling on the use of provisional ballots and if those voters in question were properly handled.

The judge said he has set aside many elections through the years, but he does not think that will be the case. He also apologized for his demeanor, but said he tries to relax people on the stand.

He applauded Mrs. Pompey on her effort, saying it shows she cares about voting rights. He also thanked the voters coming forth in good faith.