Four Macomb County, Michigan, voters have been indicted for allegedly voting twice in the Aug. 6 primary, and three assistant clerks have been charged for knowingly letting it happen and then covering it up by allegedly altering election records.
The four voters, from the city of St. Clair Shores, a Detroit suburb, are accused of voting by absentee ballot and then voting again in person on Election Day.
The four are also charged with offering to vote twice.
The three election officials are accused of knowingly permitting the double voting and then allegedly changing the state’s Qualified Voter File to conceal it.
The alleged offenses levied against the seven defendants are felonies carrying possible sentences of up to five years in prison for each count.
Nessel said that it is unknown whether the defendants acted independently of one another and that no specific motives have been determined.
Allowed to Vote Twice Despite Warning
According to Nessel, the four went to their respective precinct polling places on Election Day, asked to vote in person, and were initially denied because the Electronic Poll Book notified the volunteer poll workers that they had already voted by absentee ballot.Three of the four allegedly signed affidavits falsely attesting that they had never received an absentee ballot and demanded to vote in person.
Seeking further guidance, the volunteer poll workers contacted an election-day helpline staffed by “highly trained assistant clerks,” all government employees, said Nessel.
Despite the “clear and obvious warnings by the Electronic Poll Books,” the assistant clerks “overrode and ignored” the warning and instructed the volunteer election workers to issue ballots to the four individuals, Nessel said.
All voted in person after voting absentee and every double vote was counted, but no race was impacted, according to Nessel.
In an apparent effort to hide their alleged violation of Michigan law, the three assistant clerks changed the Qualified Voter File record of the four absentee ballots from “received” to “rejected,” Nessel said.
The volunteer precinct workers were not charged because, according to Nessel, they followed their training and called the assistant clerks as directed, even though they were supposed to turn the voters away.
An investigation into the incidents began days after the election when the St. Clair Shores city clerk discovered she had more counted ballots than voters, Nessel said.
The city clerk reported the problem to the Macomb County Clerk and alerted the St. Clair Shores Police Dept., who, after an initial investigation, turned the matter over to the Macomb County Prosecutors Office.
When the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office investigated the incidents and declined to prosecute the four voters—believing they had not acted intentionally—the Office of the State Attorney General, working with the investigative arm of the Secretary of State’s Office, took up and expanded the case by including the three assistant clerks.
Nessel said that in the cases of the four voters, evidence was sufficient to support prosecution, and though she did not have to prove intent, their actions were “specifically intentional, clearly wrong, and not a minor mistake.”
She said that the three assistant clerks acted in “flagrant violation of election laws” and “criminally facilitated double voting.”
According to Nessel, 59 possible election integrity violations are currently being investigated or prosecuted statewide. They include forged signatures on absentee ballots, the breaking of the security seals on ballot containers by officials, and fraudulent entries being made on the state’s Qualified Voter File.
Nessel reminded Michigan voters that they cannot, by law, spoil their voted absentee ballots on Election Day and vote in person.
She also warned voters that it is their responsibility to know whether they voted and even the attempt to vote again on Election Day is a felony.
“We will not tolerate criminal manipulation of our elections in Michigan,” she said.
Macomb County Prosecutor Peter Lucido, a Republican, told The Epoch Times, “I respect the Attorney General’s jurisdiction and investigatory resources.
“It is not unusual for the Attorney General to charge criminal cases in which a local prosecutor did not. I expect justice will be served.”
Nessel did not respond to a request for comment.
