"Four people are registered to vote from 310 Ezzard Charles Drive - the Cincinnati Police Department's District 1 headquarters. All are Cincinnati police officers, according to city payroll records, and some have been voting at the West End precinct since the early 1990s.So, if Greg can identify these police officers and Sheriff Department Employees that would allegedly have knowingly submitted a false voter registration, then when will Joe Deters indite them for voter registration fraud? If they have voted from their work, isn't that voter fraud?
It's not uncommon. The Enquirer found similar examples in other police districts and with sheriff's deputies in Hamilton and Butler counties. Election officials said they would look into the police officers' registrations.
'There's some sort of urban legend or myth that police officers or certain persons don't have to put their home address on their voter registration form. Everybody is supposed to be registered where they live, not where they work,' said Sally Krisel, the director of the Hamilton County Board of Elections. She's a Democrat."
As Donald point out below, I will agree that Deters did do the right thing when he recused himself from this investigation, but would it not have been both proper procedure (or legal requirement) as well as the ethical thing for Deters to have referred the "pretty credible" allegations of voter fraud made to the BOE, who then could have evaluated the situation and then requested that he investigate? I believe Deters had no other choice than recuse himself. He did act unethically and I believe there are grounds to investigate his actions as an abuse of power. If Deters wants to use the evidence he finds as a challenge to Ohio law, then he clear has over stepped his bounds. If he wants to change the law, he can write his state legislator. Otherwise he needs to get out of the way of BOE.
From a purely legal perspective, isn't it also common for Prosecutors to wait until after an Indictment before they make a public statement of the "facts" which are unproven and unsubstantiated? In today's article Deters appears to have found wrong doing has happened even before the grand jury has spoken. I guess we can skip right to sentencing and leave the judge out of it.
I think Deters was caught with his hand in the cookie jar and he had no other choice but to step back. His actions appear to me to be intended to both intimidate voters as well as creating evidence for the GOP to use if they want to challenge all of those votes in line with a broader challenge of Ohio law allowing registering and voting at the same period.
What I don't understand, is that back when Deters was Prosecutor before going to into state government, Ohio law didn't require any ID when registering or voting. How many times did he office investigate alleged voter fraud then? It was "easier" to do it then, but there didn't seem to be a big problem of it.