FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 29, 2008
For more information: 717.383.3025
DIAMOND: Court Decision Only Raises More Questions
“It has always been my practice to review the nominating papers and petitions of my political opponents. I believe every candidate should do the same. After examining and investigating the filings of my opponents this year, I was shocked to learn that voters who purportedly signed a petition the incumbent claimed to have circulated denied having signed it at all. Frankly, I believe forgery was committed.
“To be clear, we found other problems with the petitions, including wives signing for husbands and corrections of voter municipalities by another hand. Although these are technical violations of the law as written, I consider them minor and undeserving of a legal challenge to a candidacy. However, multiple instances of forged signatures on a petition – especially when the petition’s circulator is the candidate – is a very serious situation.
“After a legal team put the formal complaint together, we notified the incumbent in advance of filing the case due to the severity of our findings. We also notified – through various channels – prominent members of the Republican Caucus in Harrisburg. I believe notifying the Caucus and the incumbent was only fair to afford everyone an opportunity to conduct a private review, do the right thing and facilitate a withdrawal from the race. No such action was taken and they decided to go to court.
“Although Judge Keith Quigley believed the incumbent when she said she didn’t know how forged signatures made it onto her nominating petition, the fact remains that many forged signatures do appear on her petition. Our claims of peculiar irregularities on the petition were not imaginary. In fact, during the Commonwealth Court hearing the facts became even clearer: The incumbent’s nominating papers contain dozens of forgeries (far more than we originally alleged) on a petition she signed as circulator and testified under oath was in her possession at all times.
“This raises the question of identity theft and the victims of the 101st district deserve some answers. Who forged the names? Where was the incumbent when it happened? Why did she sign as circulator if she didn’t witness the signatures? Why did she make a bogus petition part of her filing? Who are the victims supposed to call on for justice in this case – their State Representative? Last week the incumbent told the media she was looking into the problem. I believe it’s time for her to let everyone know what she’s discovered.
“I cannot imagine ever allowing anything like this to happen in my campaign. I entered the 101st race with integrity as the cornerstone of my platform, and I will continue to insist on integrity in every aspect of this campaign.”
Diamond Kicks Off Campaign in Annville
The Russ Diamond for State Representative campaign officially kicks off on Friday, February 29 with a meet-and-greet event at campaign headquarters, 109 West Main Street in Annville. The event begins at 6:00 p.m. and will end at 9:00 p.m. Light refreshments will be served and the public is invited.
From people & vips
For more information: