Dead man’s voter fraud allegation leads to local county’s dispute with attorney general’s office

COLUMBUS, Ohio – After the Ohio Attorney General charged a dead man with voter fraud, Cuyahoga County officials are accusing him of playing politics before the election. We obtained documents that show the beginning of a communication breakdown.

It’s been a big week for Attorney General Dave Yost.

“Today we are talking about the non-citizen vote,” Yost said during a press conference Tuesday.

During his event, the attorney general boasted of six allegations of voter fraud in previous elections. Each of them is a green card holder and reportedly voted in previous elections.

Three were from Northeast Ohio and the remaining three were from the Columbus area. All were legal permanent residents or green card holders.

This investigation stems from the summer when Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose complained to Yost that local county prosecutors had not addressed his team’s potential voter fraud referrals.

Of the six people charged, one was a 68-year-old man from North Royalton who allegedly voted in 2014, 2016 and 2018.

“You will be held accountable in the state of Ohio,” Yost said.

Even if you’re dead?

It turns out that voter died two years ago. However, Yost accused him.

“This is one of the largest examples of fiscal overreach I have ever witnessed,” Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Michael O’Malley said in a tear-jerking statement Wednesday. “The practice of charging the deceased is draconian.”

O’Malley says he is “philosophically opposed to accusing deceased people who clearly have no way of defending themselves.”

Cuyahoga County prosecutor criticizes state attorney general for charging dead man with voter fraud

“This is not how we would have handled this case in my office,” O’Malley said. “I call on Ohio Attorney General David Yost to immediately dismiss this indictment.”

Once Yost’s team learned of the death, they told us they would “of course” dismiss the charges. On Friday we asked LaRose how this could have happened.

“Well, you know, actually, that’s a question for the county attorney because why did it take so long to not prosecute this case and we had to refer it to the attorney general?” LaRose responded.

Cuyahoga County has continued to steadfastly deny having a referral for this case, but we obtained some records from the attorney general’s office.

In a March 25, 2020, records note, a special agent with the Bureau of Criminal Investigation wrote that he sent the “complete investigative reports” related to the alleged voter to the former Cuyahoga County assistant prosecutor for review.

“No additional investigative efforts are needed at this time,” the agent wrote.

At the top of the record, mark the case as “closing.”

I followed up with Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office spokesperson Lexi Bauer. The team was not available for an interview, but they provided information each time we communicated throughout the week.

“We have searched our case management system and do not have any records of the case,” Bauer texted me.

In a previous text message, he told me that “they can’t explain why theirs was closed.”

He added that his APA left the office in early 2023.

“We have prosecuted multiple cases of voter fraud referred to us by the Ohio Attorney General’s Office, including one this week,” he said. “We work with the Ohio Attorney General’s Office on a daily basis. If there was any problem in this case, it was never communicated to our office.”

I asked the attorney general’s office for any documentation showing direct communication between their office and Cuyahoga County or a letter from the county refusing to prosecute. Their spokesperson told me they are working on my multiple requests.

Bauer, however, raised a point that many other officials in other counties raised: The timing is “suspicious.”

“We can only speculate why this issue arose two weeks before Election Day, but it appears to be politically motivated,” Bauer said. “A sincere prosecution of this matter would have included an investigation that would have quickly revealed that (the individual) died two years ago. Obviously, this investigation was not completed prior to its presentation to the grand jury.”

Case Western Reserve University nonpartisan election law professor Atiba Ellis was taken aback by the revelation of the allegation. He also questioned the timing and scrutiny of both Yost and LaRose.

“This seems more aimed at trying to demonstrate evidence where evidence has been scarce,” Ellis added. “By charging a dead person, it would at least increase the presumption that the Attorney General’s office or the Secretary of State’s office has not done the necessary due diligence to bring appropriate charges.”

Something that was noted in talking to different agencies and election boards is that every county that the Republican attorney general and clerk looked at has Democratic prosecutors.

Of the living accused people (that we know of), two were from Northeast Ohio. One was a 78-year-old woman from Hudson in Summit County who reportedly voted in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. The other was a 32-year-old man from Kent in Portage County who reportedly voted in 2016 and 2018.

The other three were based in the Columbus area. A 35-year-old man allegedly voted in 2008 and 2020; a 53-year-old woman allegedly voted in 2016 and 2020; and a 62-year-old woman allegedly voted in 2016 and 2018.

The indictment in Summit County is listed as “secret,” meaning it is confidential.

“Under the Ohio Revised Code, it is improper for anyone to comment on a secret indictment until the defendant is in custody or in court,” said Summit County Prosecutor’s Office spokesman James Pollack.

It is unclear how Yost was able to break the news about this on Tuesday before the individual was in custody or in court.

The Portage County Prosecutor’s Office never responded to repeated requests.

The Franklin County Prosecutor’s Office, which has an outside public relations firm handling its communications, said the cases were indeed referred to them.

“The office reviewed the cases and made the decision not to move forward with prosecution,” the public relations team said.

I asked their spokesperson why they didn’t prosecute.

“At this time they don’t want to share those reasons,” was the response I received.

Overall, Yost emphasized that six potential fraudulent voters out of 8 million registered is a minuscule number and shows that Ohio does not have widespread voter fraud.

“Voting irregularities like this are rare… We should all be confident that in the next election the laws are being applied and will continue to be applied,” the attorney general said.

Continue WEWS House reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.