Fayette Searchlight

This afternoon, for nearly 45 minutes, Matthew Dowling, a candidate for the 51st Legislative District seat held by State Rep. Timothy S. Mahoney, was a guest on the Truth For America program heard on WMBS 590 AM in Uniontown, and hosted by Fayette County Republican Party Chairman David Show.

The subject of per diems versus paid reimbursement was covered at length, as well as budget votes, the Castle Doctrine, the Second Amendment, school localization, etc.

Although the issue of voter fraud entered last evening's third presidential debate/forum in the form of the candidates being asked if they'd accept the results of the election, and although the blogosphere and Twitter are abuzz with the discussion of fraud in elections, Mr. Dowling did not broach the issue of the non-investigation of the 3rd Referral of the Fayette County Election Board [allegations of election fraud against State Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-51) stemming from his filing of altered and falsely sworn Affidavits of Circulator and fatally defective Referendum petitions in his attempt to place a question on the Fayette County ballot].

For the record, this writer does not post at Fay-West Discuss under the pseudonyms "Jack Webb," "Loren Mazik," or as anyone else who reposts material from this blog.

That being said, do not these apparent supporters of Mr. Dowling -- who, by their numerous posts, must see the non-investigated allegations of election fraud against his opponent as a gross injustice -- want their candidate to address the issue and to take a stance?

Will Mr. Dowling do something now to stand up for equal justice under law by publicly calling for the investigation of the 3rd Referral, and by pledging (prior to November 8) to petition (win or lose the election) the next attorney general of this commonwealth to conduct the mandatory investigation required under Pennsylvania law, or will he remain silent?

Today, October 12, 2016, marks the 22-month anniversary of the sealing of the 5th Presentment of Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2. -- an Order issued by Presiding Judge Steve P. Leskinen on December 12, 2014.

To view the docket sheet entry of the Order Presenting SEALED Grand Jury Fifth Presentment, see the top of Page 7 of 8 of the Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2 Docket Sheet.

For approximately thirteen months of the former administration of then-District Attorney Jack R. Heneks, Jr., and now for more than nine months of the current administration of Fayette County District Attorney Richard E. Bower, the 5th Presentment of Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2 has remained sealed.

In a previous post in this space we pondered the possible reasons for the dormancy of the 5th Presentment.

Other presentments from Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2 have been prosecuted and penalties have been meted out.  Juxtaposing the prosecutions of other presentments and the 22-month sealing of the 5th Presentment raises serious questions.  While a previous post in this space covered some of those questions, it bears reiteration that the most serious question is the one which regards equal justice under law.

When the Fayette County Grand Jury No.2 issued a presentment, by law, it had to also be approved by Presiding Judge Steve Leskinen.  Thus, presentments are not issued haphazardly.  For a presentment to issue against an individual, evidence must exist that points to a crime.  Moreover, as the district attorney leads the grand jury in its investigation and in the issuance of presentments, the district attorney usually follows the recommendations of a grand jury.  In fact, the case where a district attorney refuses to follow the recommendations of a grand jury is virtually unheard of.  Why would a district attorney urge a presentment to be issued only never to bring an indictment?

This leads us to the heart of the matter:  It is inherently unequal justice under law to prosecute individuals under other presentments while the individual named in the sealed (for 22 months!) 5th Presentment remains unnamed, unindicted, and unprosecuted.

Grand jury secrecy laws are in place to elicit testimony and to shield witnesses from threats; grand jury secrecy laws are not in place to shield district attorneys and judges from public scrutiny and accountability.

It's high time the public received some answers on why the 5th Presentment has remained sealed for 22 months and when it will be unsealed.

After 22 months, it's time for Fayette County Grand Jury Presiding Judge Steve P. Leskinen and Fayette County District Attorney Richard E. Bower to be held accountable to the public which paid for the grand jury and which has every right to know what is being done/what will be done with the sealed 5th Presentment of Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2.

Last evening, an interesting conversation took place on the Fay-West Discuss Uniontown thread.  The posts below in bold were subsequently removed from the discussion board. 

The posts demonstrate the ability of regular people to harness the power of the Internet to facilitate discussion, ferret out truth, and expose fraud and corruption.

The posts below are self-explanatory; however, what they demonstrate is that the brief discussion from last evening was more of an investigation into the alleged election fraud of Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-51) than the non-investigation (Heneks) and refusal to investigate (Bower) which has emanated from two consecutive administrations of the Office of the Fayette County District Attorney.

Gentle readers, read the posts from the Fay-West discussion below to see for yourself if something isn't rotten in Fayette.


The following post initiated the discussion:

After previous, multiple contacts with the Fayette County Office of District Attorney, on Wednesday, August 31, 2016, the writer of this blog was informed by Fayette County District Attorney Richard E. Bower that he would not investigate/prosecute the 3rd Referral  
of the Fayette County Election Board -- i.e., allegations of election fraud against state Rep. Timothy S. Mahoney (D-51) which were referred to the Fayette County Office of District Attorney "to be reviewed and a determination made by the district attorney's office" on May 24, 2012, by a unanimous vote of the Fayette County Election Board (Ambrosini, Zapotosky, and Zimmerlink), and which the Pennsylvania Election Code mandates be investigated.

Because the Fayette County Election Board did not exercise its power and perform its imposed duty to investigate (but instead referred the matter to DA Heneks [now DA Bower]), the law, through the requirement to investigate, takes the 3rd Referral out of the realm of "possible exploration" and firmly places it into the realm of mandatory investigation.  The district attorney's prosecutorial discretion does not supersede the law to which it is subject, and grand jury secrecy laws do not exist so that district attorneys can shield themselves from public scrutiny, lest the citizenry find out that the requirement of mandatory investigation has been turned into non-investigation.

Today, July 12, 2016, marks the 19-month anniversary of the sealing of the 5th Presentment of Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2. -- an Order issued by Presiding Judge Steve P. Leskinen on December 12, 2014.

To view the docket sheet entry of the Order Presenting SEALED Grand Jury Fifth Presentment, see the top of Page 7 of 8 of the Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2 Docket Sheet.

For approximately thirteen months of the former administration of then-District Attorney Jack R. Heneks, Jr., and now for more than six months of the current administration of Fayette County District Attorney Richard E. Bower, the 5th Presentment of Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2 has remained sealed.

In the previous post in this space we pondered the possible reasons for the dormancy of the 5th Presentment and we showed that the prosecutions of at least two of the presentments issued by Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2 are yet proceeding through the Fayette County Court of Common Pleas with the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General taking over the prosecutions at the request of District Attorney Richard Bower.

While there is much more to say on those prosecutions, gentle readers, let us pause to reflect upon the meaning of the sealed 5th Presentment.  Other presentments from Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2 have been prosecuted and penalties have been meted out.  Juxtaposing the prosecutions of other presentments and the 19-month sealing of the 5th Presentment raises serious questions.  While the previous post in this space covered some of those questions, it bears reiteration that the most serious question is the one which regards equal justice under law.

When the Fayette County Grand Jury No.2 issued a presentment, by law, it had to also be approved by Presiding Judge Steve Leskinen.  Thus, presentments are not issued haphazardly.  For a presentment to issue against an individual, evidence must exist that points to a crime.  Moreover, as the district attorney leads the grand jury in its investigation and in the issuance of presentments, the district attorney usually follows the recommendations of a grand jury.  In fact, the case where a district attorney refuses to follow the recommendations of a grand jury is virtually unheard of.  Why would a district attorney urge a presentment to be issued only never to bring an indictment?

This leads us to the heart of the matter:  It is inherently unequal justice under law to prosecute individuals under other presentments while the individual named in the sealed (for 19 months!) 5th Presentment remains unnamed, unindicted, and unprosecuted.

Grand jury secrecy laws are in place to elicit testimony and to shield witnesses from threats; grand jury secrecy laws are not in place to shield district attorneys and judges from public scrutiny and accountability.

It's high time the public received some answers on why the 5th Presentment has remained sealed for 19 months and when it will be unsealed.

After 19 months, it's time for Fayette County Grand Jury Presiding Judge Steve P. Leskinen and Fayette County District Attorney Richard E. Bower to be accountable to the public which paid for the grand jury and which has every right to know what is being done/what will be done with the sealed 5th Presentment of Fayette County Grand Jury No. 2.