GRAND JUNCTION — Former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters’ decision three years ago to help breach her own county’s voting system made her a national hero in election-denier circles. But this week, a jury will decide if she is guilty of crimes that could send her to prison for decades.
Peters, 68, is being tried on seven felonies and three misdemeanors that allege she participated in identity theft, criminal impersonation, official misconduct and violating her duties as a county clerk. An indictment alleges she carried out a clandestine election-equipment scheme in May 2021 in the hope that she could prove voter fraud.
Peters denies all wrongdoing and refers to herself as a victim of a corrupt legal system.
Opening statements were delivered Wednesday afternoon.
Robert Shapiro, an attorney with the Colorado Attorney General’s Office who is part of the prosecution team, portrayed Peters as a mastermind of a criminal plot to steal election-computer information to satisfy her “obsession” with finding irregularities in voting systems.
“In actuality, this is a very simple case of deceit and fraud,” he told the jury.
Defense attorney Amy Jones spoke softly of Peters being a grieving mother who had lost her son, a Navy SEAL who died in a skydiving accident in New York City, but selflessly decided to run for the clerk’s position to help make the county offices operate better for citizens.
She said what Peters did by bringing in an outside consultant to access the county’s voting equipment software was not against the law at that time.
“She wanted to protect it,” Jones said as Peters sat nearby nodding her head.
Peters’ much-delayed trial comes after three previous trial dates were canceled. Peters discarded five attorneys over the past several years — some just days before scheduled trials. She repeatedly deployed legal stalling tactics, including hitting national, state and local officials with lawsuits in failed attempts to have charges against her thrown out or, at least, held up.
Her most recent attempt to avoid prosecution came two weeks ago when she unsuccessfully asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt her criminal case.
Two pretrial hearings and a day of jury selection over the past week have given a glimpse into what promises to be a tension-filled trial. Attorneys for the prosecution and defense have accused each other of lying and their arguments have grown testy over what evidence and witnesses should be allowed in the trial.
Outside the courtroom Wednesday, former child actor-turned-election denier and COVID-19 skeptic Ricky Schroder confronted reporters. He carried a Bible and recited prayers for Peters.
About three dozen other Peters supporters crowded the courtroom and the hall outside.
Twenty-first Judicial District Judge Matthew Barrett has admonished Peters supporters to strictly follow rules if they want to be in his courtroom.
Barrett loudly called out a Peters supporter Tuesday who audibly snorted about one of his statements.
“You will be ejected, or worse,” for such outbursts, he said.
The Mesa County Justice Center has federal, state and local law enforcement officers providing extra security after Peters’ supporters made threats of violence away from the courthouse. Plainclothes officers are augmenting a heavy uniformed police presence.
“I can tell you that law enforcement agencies are taking security very seriously,” said 21st District Attorney Dan Rubinstein, who is one of those prosecuting the case against Peters and one of those threatened with violence.
The rise of “Clerk Tina”
Peters’ rise as a national hero for right-wing stolen-election conspiracy theorists has placed her in a spotlight as a “whistleblower.” It has also given her a platform to fundraise for her legal defense.
Once a little-known, first-time office holder in Mesa County, Peters is now held up as “Clerk Tina” on national podcasts that promote stolen election theories that began with former President Donald Trump.
Those theories, rooted in skepticism about the efficacy and honesty of Dominion Voting Systems and about the integrity of elections in general, will not be allowed as part of her defense in her trial even though they were raised by the defense in pre-trial hearings.
Barrett has ruled that election conspiracy theories cannot be mentioned in front of the jury. He has told defense attorneys that they are not to refer to Peters as a whistleblower during the trial.
“This trial is not about whether voting machines accurately and reliably collect voter data,” Barrett wrote in an order.
☀️ READ MORE
Peters has not denied that she used election-conspiracy cronies to copy and disseminate confidential election information in 2021. But she claims she was acting in accordance with a federal mandate that requires county clerks to preserve election records. She claims that an election system software installation called a “trusted build” that is done in accordance with the Colorado Secretary of State’s office was going to change and delete some records from the county system, so she had to step in and take action to prevent that.
“It was her job to preserve the records,” one of her attorneys, Daniel Hartman, told Barrett in a pre-trial hearing last week. “It goes to the heart of her acting in her official capacity.”
Barrett didn’t buy that argument. He pointed out during a pretrial hearing that if Peters had suspicions about the voting equipment, she could have obtained a court injunction to have the system examined. He stressed that the charges against Peters have nothing to do with the functionality of the equipment and repeatedly said that arguments about voting-machines “are not to be made to the jury in any way, shape or form.”
Made copies of a Dominion hard drive
Peters landed in this legal jeopardy when she brought in a “consultant” to make copies of the Dominion hard drive in a Mesa County Clerk’s office secure room where the computerized brains of the election system are located, authorities said in an indictment. Video cameras that keep track of who is in the room were turned off days before the breach. Peters had obtained a pass for the out-of-state consultant by using a local man’s name and credentials. The consultant was former professional surfer turned self-described ‘data expert’ and 2020 election denier Conan Hayes, authorities allege.
The information Hayes obtained from the system was published on a QAnon blog after Peters and some of her fellow election deniers flew to South Dakota, with the Dominion data in hand, to a cybersecurity seminar hosted by MyPillow CEO and election denier Mike Lindell.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold tracked that leaked election material back to Mesa County and began an investigation into Peters’ actions. Peters went into hiding for nearly 40 days, saying she feared for her life.
Meanwhile, she was still on the payroll as the official Mesa County Clerk. Her absence and the county’s attempts to keep the office functioning without a clerk ended up costing the county millions of dollars that included legal fees and the purchase of new election equipment to replace the equipment that had been compromised.
An effort to recall Peters that was undertaken during the pandemic failed.
In March 2022, a Mesa County grand jury indicted Peters on the criminal charges she now faces in trial. That came a month after she announced that she would be a candidate for Colorado Secretary of State. She lost that race in the Republican primary.
Other employees prosecuted
Two of Peters’ former employees in the clerk’s office have already been prosecuted and will be witnesses for the prosecution against their former boss.
Former deputy clerk Belinda Knisley pleaded guilty to trespassing, official misconduct and violation of duty for her part in the election equipment tampering and was given two years of probation. She is permanently barred from working in elections.
Former election manager Sandra Brown pleaded guilty to attempting to influence a public servant and official misconduct and was sentenced to 30 days in jail.
Peters is currently under house arrest in a separate case for obstruction of a government operation after she illegally recorded a hearing for Knisley on an IPad and then refused to turn over the device to police who tried to serve her with a warrant. Her scuffle with the police took place in a local coffee shop when she kicked at officers who were attempting to arrest her. Videos of that incident went viral online.
In spite of being confined to home (except for her court appearances) and having to wear an ankle monitor, Peters has continued to use regular appearances on right-wing podcasts to gin up support for her trial, encouraging listeners to “Stand with Tina.” Recent posts on the platform X urge supporters to come to her trial to protest, wave signs, and publicly pray for her acquittal.
Schroder, who starred in the 1980s sit-com “Silver Spoons,” appeared to be the only supporter to take up the exhortation for public prayer on Wednesday.
Peters’ attempt to enhance her status as a nationally recognized election denier will continue outside the courtroom this week. She has scheduled a benefit concert and dinner at a Grand Junction bar that will feature presentations by election deniers Joe Oltmann and Mark Finchem. Top-tier tables ranging in price from $2,500 to $5,000 have sold out.
Peters has also been leaning heavily on scripture in her online postings. But some of her supporters, including Oltmann, have been making threats of violence on social media ahead of the trial. Oltmann, a right-wing provocateur who has been sued by Dominion for allegedly slandering the company, called for Peters supporters to take up arms during a speech at a local church two weeks ago.
Patrick Byrne, the former CEO of Overstock.com, has also made threats connected to Peters’ trial. He said on a podcast carried on X this week that those prosecuting Peters should be met with piano wire and blowtorches. He later said he was only speaking metaphorically.
Local authorities did not take it metaphorically. Courthouse deputies cited Oltmann’s and Byrne’s threats as part of the reason for the beefed-up security at the justice center.
Propaganda directed toward potential jurors
Potential jurors have also been targeted with propaganda.
Two electronic billboards have flashed messages along a heavily traveled highway in Grand Junction encouraging people to go to a “jury nullification” website that advises potential jurors they can reject the charges and acquit a defendant even if they believe that person is guilty. The website also gives those called for jury duty tips on how to hide their true feelings and even how to dress and act so they will be chosen.
Around 100 potential jurors were chosen for oral questioning in the Peters trial after hundreds were winnowed based on their written questionnaires. On Wednesday, questioning was attempting to narrow that group down to a dozen jurors and two alternates.
Many potential jurors had indicated in questionnaires that they are skeptics of fair elections, Dominion Voting Systems, the FBI and the Colorado Attorney General’s office. Some wrote that they don’t trust the government and believe the 2020 election was stolen.
Twenty-first Judicial District Attorney Dan Rubinstein, who is prosecuting the case, along with Colorado Attorney General’s Office attorneys Robert Shapiro and Janet Drake, sought to kick out those who said they cannot be impartial.
Peters is being represented by a team of four attorneys who have a contingent of clerks and consultants rolling large plastic boxes of files into the courtroom each day.
At least two of her attorneys have argued election-conspiracy cases around the state and country.
Denver attorney John Case represented Elbert County Clerk Dallas Schroeder and Douglas County Clerk Merlin Klotz when they followed Peters’ example and copied material from election hard drives.
Michigan attorney Dan Hartman is representing a case in that state involving officials who allegedly carried out a voter data breach. A judge recently delayed that case due to a legal challenge from Hartman. Hartman has been the target of ethics complaints in Michigan.
Peters is also represented by Michael Edminster of Carbondale, and Jones, a former judge from Ohio.
During the pre-trial hearing Tuesday, Hartman had to apologize to Judge Barrett for not having information about potential jurors organized.
He said that, with four attorneys, “We have a little problem of disorganization.”