You are on page 1of 476
SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION INVESTIGATIVE FILE ALAN Wasson ATTORNEY GevERAL June 4, 2013 Chief Mark Keel S.C. Law Enforcement Division P.O. Box 21398 Columbia, South Carolina 29221 RE: Sled File # 32-12-0008 Dear Chief Keel: This Office has completed its review of the above-referenced report. Based upon this review, this Office is does not believe any further action is warranted. The report is being returned to your Agency under separate cover. With kindest regards and best wishes, Sincerely, MA W. Allen Sr. Asst. Deputy Attorney General Rewoanr C. Ds Buitoina + Post Omce Box 11549 + Couumsts, $C 20211-1549 + TELEPHONE 803-734-3970 + Facsumns 803-253-4121 SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION NIKKI R. HALEY MARK A. KEEL Governor Chief INVESTIGATIVE REPORT To: Case File # 32-12-0008 From: SIA Stephen L. Howell Date: May 11, 2012 Subject: Preliminary Inquiry — Alleged Dead Voter Fraud - 2010 SC General Election On January 13, 2012, South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) Chief Mark Keel received correspondence from South Carolina Attomey General Alan Wilson. In his letter (Attachment 1) dated January 11, 2012, Attorney General Wilson requested that SLED conduct a preliminary inquiry into allegations that votes were cast in the names of deceased individuals in the state election process. In response to this request, Chief Keel sanctioned the formation of a multi-regional task group within SLED, coordinated by Lt. William Littlejohn and staffed by Agents Elizabeth Corley, James Flowers, Stephen Howell, and David Williams, each representing one of the four SLED Investigative Services Regions. ‘On January 31, 2012, the SLED task group met with South Carolina Election Commission (SEC) Executive Director Marci Andino and SC Attomey General’s Office Special Investigator Pete Logan at the SEC Office in Cohimbia. It was noted that information provided by the SC Department of Motor Vehicles (SCDMV) indicated that a total of 953 votes had been cast in the P.O. Box 21398 / Columbia, South Carolina 29221-1398 / (803) 737-9000 / Fax (803) 896-7588 SLED Case No: 32120008 Page 2 of 7 names of deceased individuals. Special Investigator Logan stated that he had previously interviewed SCDMV Senior Applications Analyst Darl Neiswonger prior to this meeting in reference to the origin of the 953 listed votes (Attachment 2). Director Andino clarified that the 953 votes called into question by the SCDMV analysis were not the result of a single election, but rather the sum of questioned votes spanning seventy-four clections over approximately seven years (April 2005 to present). Director Andino further advised that, in an effort to provide substantive and timely answers to questions regarding alleged dead voting, she had directed her staff to begin the process of collecting information on the SC General Election held on November 2, 2010, in which 1,365,480 votes were cast. She noted that this election encompassed 207 of the 953 questioned votes and was considered by the SEC to be a representative sampling of any voting irregularities. Copies of the documentation collected, as well as a copy of Special Investigator Logan's interview of Director Andino (Attachment 3) and her written response (Attachment 4) to Attomey General Wilson referencing the SEC's intemal findings and conclusions were later provided to the SLED task group. The SEC concluded that 91 cases of the 207 questioned votes could be attributed to “name recognition errors” on the part of the respective poll managers. This clerical error would occur on the voter registration list for example when a father who was deceased but whose name still appeared on the list would be marked as having voted when his son of the same name had, in fact, cast the vote. Another example of this type of error would be a poll manager incorrectly marking the name of the person who voted. In these cases, the correct name typically appears on the poll list where the voter signs to indicate that they voted, The SLED task group reviewed the SEC documentation and identified an additional vote which appeared to belong in this category, bringing the total in this grouping up to 92 (Attachment 5). ‘The SEC discovered six cases (Attachment 6) of the 207 questioned votes which were the product of another form of clerical error. This ertor was produced when a poll manager began to mark the wrong individual as having voted, corrected themselves, but failed to completely remove the marks they had begun to make in the wrong location. ‘These marks would later be picked up in the scanning process and give a false indication that the individual associated with SLED Case No: 32120008 Page 3 of 7 that line had voted. The SLED task group reviewed the documentation provided by the SEC on these votes and noted the markings indicated by the SEC. ‘The SEC concluded that 56 cases (Attachment 7) of the 207 questioned votes were a product of what they termed “bad data matching”. It appeared to the SEC that the SCDMV ran only the social security number of the voter against the death file. The vote was considered to have been cast in the name of a deceased voter because the social security number of the individual voting matched that of a deceased individual. ‘The SEC stated in their conclusions; however, that the ‘names and dates of birth in the death file did not maich the names and dates of birth for the voter in question. Therefore, the SEC records for the living person who voted were inaccurate, because the social security number associated with a deceased person was erroneously entered as belonging to the living voter. The SEC election records, in these cases, showed that 2 living voter, with a name and date of birth not matching that of the deceased individual, did vote in the 2010 SC General Election. ‘The SEC identified five cases (Attachment 8) of the 207 questioned votes that resulted from a clerical error involving the poll manager marking the wrong individual as voting absentee. ‘The SLED task group reviewed the provided documentation and found that in three of the cases, Fequests for absentee ballots were made by individuals appearing next to the deceased person on the voting list who, in tum, was given credit for the vote. The two remaining cases involved deceased individuals given credit for voting absentee on the registration lists when no records could be located that absentee ballots were ever actually requested in their names. ‘The SEC discovered three cases (Attachment 9) of the 207 questioned votes where it appeared that absentee ballots had been issued in the wrong name. The SLED task group reviewed the documentation provided and found that in two cases, the voters signed their own names to absentee ballot requests that were issued in the names of other individuals. The remaining case involved an absentee ballot being issued in the name of a deceased person to a living voter of the same name. SLED Case No: 32120008 Page 4 of 7 The SEC investigation revealed that 32 cases (Attachment 10) of the 207 questioned votes were a result of “scanning errors". ‘The SEC stated that when the voter registration lists are scanned, voters are sometimes given credit for voting in error due to the sensitivity of the scanners used. In the cases involving votes attributed to “scanning errors”, there is no record in the SEC databases that the voter actually voted. ‘The SEC investigation revealed that three cases (Attachment 11) of the 207 questioned votes were the result of voters who requested absentee ballots, but died prior to the election. ‘The SLED task group looked at the supporting documentation and noted that, in two of these situations, the absentee ballots were never returned. In the remaining case, the voter died the day prior to the election, and their absentee ballot was retumed and counted. The SEC investigation identified ten cases (Attachment 12) of the 207 questioned votes as being “inconclusive”. Agents from the SLED task group investigated these votes further with the following results: Arthur E. Gose, Jr. (Attachment 13) ~ This vote was further investigated by S/A Howell who found that the deceased father was given credit for voting when his son of the same name, who was not registered to vote, actually cast the vote. Ed Johnson (Attachment 14) - This vote was further investigated by S/A Howell who. exhausted available leads and was unable to provide any additional information regarding this vote. Zeb Thomas (Attachment 15) - This vote was further investigated by S/A Howell who found that the deceased father was given credit for voting when his son, of the same name, actually cast the vote.