Press Release — APnews.com 8:01 AM EDT, May 29, 2025
NEW CITY, NY / ACCESS Newswire / May 29, 2025 / A seminal case questioning the accuracy of the 2024 Presidential and Senate election results in Rockland County, New York, is moving forward. In open court last Thursday, Judge Rachel Tanguay of the New York Supreme Court, ruled that discovery must proceed, pushing the lawsuit brought by SMART Legislation into the evidence-gathering stage. The lawsuit seeks a full hand recount of the Presidential and U.S. Senate races in Rockland County.
“There is clear evidence that the senate results are incorrect, and there are statistical indications that the presidential results are highly unlikely,” stated Lulu Friesdat, Founder and Executive Director of SMART Legislation. “If the results are incorrect, it is a violation of the constitutional rights of each person who voted in the 2024 Rockland County general election.
A lawsuit filed by SMART Legislation, a non-partisan election watchdog, alleges serious voting irregularities in New York's Rockland County
Full offense and everything but if the “machines” hadn’t fucked up and switched Dem straight ticket votes to Cruz this election would probably be going the other way
The founder of the voting machine company Smartmatic has been indicted in the US on charges of bribery and money laundering.
If’s Roger Piñate is willing to risk prison over a $1M bribe in the Philippines election, what makes you think he didn’t do much worse in America?
Remember, Democrats and the media told you to trust this man with American elections. Clearly that’s a very, very bad idea.
We need to get all of these machines out of our election system and restore trust by returning to hand counted ballots, full oversight at the polls by all parties involved, no more long periods of early voting, limit mail in ballots to the seriously sick or elderly, install transparent recounts, clean the voter rolls and require MANDATORY voter ID!
In interviews with The AJC, Fulton County residents who served on an earlier special grand jury examining Georgia’s 2020 election gave their
One snuck glances at news sites throughout the day. Another stayed up late to watch Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ press conference. A third went to bed early and woke up to dozens of text messages.
That’s how three of the Fulton residents who served on the special grand jury that helped Willis examine evidence of interference in Georgia’s 2020 election found out that former President Donald Trump and 18 others had been indicted on racketeering and other criminal charges.
In exclusive interviews with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the three jurors, who requested anonymity out of concern for their safety and privacy, described the surreal experience of watching Willis and her team announce the charges late Monday. The 98-page indictment heavily references evidence and testimony the special grand jury had heard firsthand behind closed doors last year, they said.
“I’ve tried to just move on a little bit, but last night definitely put into perspective how different this indictment is compared to every other one that’s come across,” one juror said Tuesday. “I think it made me realize I was a part of something really unique.”
The special grand jury met for almost eight months beginning in May 2022. It approved subpoenas and legal summonses and also heard testimony from nearly 75 witnesses, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Gov. Brian Kemp and U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham. Unlike the separate, regular grand jury that voted on a “true bill” of indictment against Trump and others on Monday, the special grand jury essentially functioned as an investigative body for Willis solely focused on the 2020 elections investigation.ExploreEXCLUSIVE: Behind the scenes of Trump grand jury
At the end of its service late last year, the special grand jury authored a final report, which made a series of indictment recommendations to the DA. The bulk of its suggestions were sealed by a Fulton Superior Court judge early this year after Willis asked for time to make indictment decisions.
In the months since, the special grand jurors collectively decided not to speak publicly about their recommendations, even though they were technically allowed to do so under Georgia law. In a previous interview with the AJC, five jurors said they didn’t want to jeopardize the work of Willis and her colleagues, whom they said they immensely respect.
But in interviews on Tuesday, three jurors suggested the charges announced by Willis largely fall in line with what they had recommended.
“This is pretty on point,” one juror said.
Each said they were satisfied with the resulting indictment and Willis’ approach using Georgia’s sweeping racketeering law.
“When I woke up this morning and started looking at the news it was relief that I was feeling,” said another special grand juror on Tuesday. “It was like, ok, what we did and the time we spent meant something because (the DA) agreed with us. And now another group of people looked at all the facts and the information and they all came to the same resolution that we did.”
Said another, “I’m really proud of the work that we did and I can see the opinions and feelings of the jury in this indictment.”
It is the AJC’s policy not to publish the identities of jurors without their permission.
The jurors said they were mostly familiar with the information included in the indictment. But one said he was surprised at the extent to which the DA incorporated events that took place outside of Georgia to argue there was a broad criminal conspiracy. Another expressed surprise that only 19 people were charged in the indictment given the volume of evidence the jury heard about others.
“A lot of people aren’t named,” said the juror. She added that over the course of the special grand jury’s service, “we talked to a lot of people, so I’m actually impressed at how they got down to a list of this many people.”
The indictment makes reference to 30 unnamed, unindicted co-conspirators.
In the seven months since their service officially ended, the jurors have taken various levels of interest in the case. Some have disconnected, telling other jurors that they wanted to move on and didn’t want to be contacted. Others say they’re emotionally invested. Some stay in touch via a group text to share headlines and reaction.
The three jurors said they hope their final report will be released to the public soon. Not only so that the public can see what they recommended, but so they can refresh their own memories.
“Come on,” one juror said. “The indictments are out. Let’s show the work that we did.”
A coalition of media organizations led by the AJC has been pushing to unseal the full contents of the report, which it has argued is in the public interest. On Wednesday, the coalition renewed its push in a new filing in Fulton Superior Court.
“For the same reasons the Indictment is a public record, the Final Report should be published to permit the public to understand the scope and scale of the investigation that informed the Indictment’s charges,” the coalition argued.
Looking ahead, the jurors said they would like to see the legal system play out in this case.
“I just want to see justice done,” one said.
“I want it to not be ok to go on TV,” another said, “and spew lies to the media about fake elections... (so) people can have some sense of trust in the elections system again.”
“North Bruce Vote Echo In Court Today,” Border Cities Star. September 3, 1930. Page 13.
----
Kincardine Father And Son Face Charges Of Influencing
---
Liquor Mentioned
----
Case Resumes After Delay; Campaign in Riding Was Close, Bitter
---
WALKERTON, Sept. 3. - An aftermath of the federal election in the riding of North Bruce, the trial commenced here this morning of William McLeod and Mirrell McLeod, father and son, of the Township of Kincardine, charged with supplying liquor with the object of influencing votes.
BITTER CAMPAIGN
EVIDENCE of a sensational nature was promised to be heard before Magistrate F. W. Walker when the case came before him for the second time, there having been an adjournment previously at the request of the defense. North Bruce in the last election saw one of the bitterest and hardest-fought campaigns ever held in Ontario with a great deal of keen animosity on both sides.
The two McLeods were known as active workers for Hon. James Malcolm, former minister of trade and commerce, who won the seat from William Mitchell, manufacturer, by 83 votes. In 1926, 1925. and 1921. when Mr. Malcolm ran before and was elected, his majorities were always far above the 1.000 mark.
SEVEN WITNESSES
Information against father and son was sworn out by Inspector Rae, of the Kitchener detachment of the Ontario provincial police after an investigation which he personally carried out. Seven witnesses have been subpoenaed to give evidence as to the charge, which reads:
‘That on July 23 last, in consideration of the influencing and obtaining votes in the Dominion election, held on July 28, 1930, did unlawfully give and supply liquor contrary to the provisions of section 72 of the Liquor Control Act of Ontario. 1930.’
The evidence is expected to show that both father and son made large purchases of liquor during the last month of the campaign. When they came before him last Saturday the magistrate intimated that he desired that there should be no further delay. In view of the importance of the charges the magistrate has postponed arrangements for a holiday to hear them. Interest in the affair is keen throughout Bruce and Grey counties where the spectacular campaon in North Bruce has been watched closely.
