Fayette Searchlight

On August 22, 2011, Fayette County Common Pleas Judge Ralph C. Warman heard the petition challenge to the Referendum Petition of State Rep. Timothy S. Mahoney.

In his ruling dated August 25, 2011, Judge Warman recognized violations of the Pennsylvania Election Code and issued an Order sustaining the objection to the Referendum Petition.

The Order struck the Referendum Petition.

Warman Ruling Excerpts:

Warman Ruling Page 7

Initially, Mahoney attempted to file the Referendum Petitions at the Election Bureau without an affidavit being attached.  After being informed by Election Bureau Director Larry Blosser that the office required affidavits be attached to all petitions, Mahoney left with the Referendum Petitions and a copy of an affidavit for a nominating petition.  Mahoney returned to the Election Bureau with the Referendum Petitions.  A sworn affidavit of Mahoney was appended to each of the Referendum Petitions and read as follows:
I do swear (or affirm) that I am a qualified elector of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; that my residence is as set forth below; that the signers to the foregoing nomination paper signed the same with the full knowledge of the contents thereof; that their residences are correctly stated therein; that they all reside in the county specified in number one below; that each signed on the date June 1 - Aug 8, 2011 and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the signers are qualified electors of the electoral districts designated in this nomination paper.

(Petitioner's Exhibits "1" - "42").

Warman Ruling Page 9

Mahoney changed that affidavit from reading "on the date set opposite his name" to "on the date June 1 - Aug 8, 2011" because none of the Referendum Petitions contain any date, despite being required by 25 P.S. § 2868, and the date range represented the time period the Referendum Petitions were given to the circulators.  At the hearing held before this Court, Mahoney was asked if he himself circulated the Referendum Petitions.  Mahoney testified that he distributed the Referendum Petitions to a little over forty people for circulating.  Once filled, the circulators returned the Referendum Petitions to Mahoney.  Mahoney never indicated that he witnessed any of the Referendum Petitions being signed.  Therefore, we find the Affidavits attached to the Referendum Petitions violated § 2869 of the Election Code and are thus invalid.

Judge Warman's Footnote 2 cites the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Flaherty.

See In re: Nomination Petition of Flaherty, Pa. Supreme Court (2001).  

In order to validly attest to the criteria in the oath on the circulator's affidavit, one's presence is a requirement.  The case precedent was set by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court some 10 years prior to the circulation of Mahoney’s Referendum Petition in 2011.

To see the ruling in its entirety, click Warman Ruling.

Highly astute readers of this blog will note the signature of then-Prothonotary Lance Winterhalter appearing on pages 17 and 18 of the Warman Ruling does not match any of the signatures of "Lance Winterhalter" signed by multiple hands in the notarization section of State Rep. Tim Mahoney's Affidavits of Circulator. 

For comparison, here is the link to review the Affidavits of Circulator and eight (8) extra Affidavits of Circulator -- withheld from the Referendum Petition challenge by the Fayette County Election Bureau, and (although stamped as valid) unattached to any Referendum Petitions.

By executing and officially filing altered and falsely sworn Affidavits of Circulator in his attempt to place a question on the election ballot in Fayette County, did State Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-51) understand what he was doing?

Listen here for his answer.

UPDATE:

Lance Winterhalter was District Attorney Richard E. Bower's campaign manager when Bower was a candidate for office.  An astute poster ("conflict") on the Fay-West Discussion Board raised the salient issue of conflict of interest regarding Bower's refusal to investigate the 3rd Referral.  In the opinion of the poster, the conflict raised by District Attorney Bower's campaign manager's notarization of the Mahoney Referendum Petitions was such that Bower should not have rendered a decision on the case but that he should have recused himself.  This space agrees with the poster's assessment.  

Subsequently, the post was erased (10/17/2016) by the Fay-West Discuss powers that be.