🔥 | Popular | Latest

Chill, Respect, and Taken: 23 of 296 INVESTIGATIVE CONSIDERATIONS IN ELECTION FRAUD CASES G. When investigating election fraud, three considerations that are absent from most criminal investigations must be kept in mind: (1) respect for the primary role of the states in administering the voting process, (2) an awareness of the role of the election in the governmental process, and (3) sensitivity to the exercise of First Amendment rights in the election context As a result, there are limitations on various investigative steps in an election fraud case In most cases, election-related documents should not be taken from the custody of local election administrators until the election to which they pertain has been certified and the time for contesting the election results has expired. This avoids interfering with the governmental processes affected by the election.4 Another limitation affects voter interviews. Election fraud cases often depend on the testimony of individual voters whose votes were co-opted in one wayor another. But in most cases voters should not be interviewed, or other voter-related investigation done, until after the election is over. Such overt investigative steps may chill legitimate voting activities. They This non-interference policy assumes there is no evidence that local election administrators seek to retain or destroy the election records for a corrupt purpose or to further an ongoing election fraud scheme In cases in which physical custody may interfere unnecessarily with local election procedures, law enforcement may take reasonable steps to ensure that such records retain their integrity and are effectively made available to federal law enforcemen. Such steps may include the issuance of a grand jury subpoena, and formal and informal agreements concerning the custody control, and integrity of such records
Chill, Respect, and Taken: 23 of 296
 INVESTIGATIVE CONSIDERATIONS IN
 ELECTION FRAUD CASES
 G.
 When investigating election fraud, three considerations
 that are absent from most criminal investigations must be kept in
 mind: (1) respect for the primary role of the states in
 administering the voting process, (2) an awareness of the role of
 the election in the governmental process, and (3) sensitivity to
 the exercise of First Amendment rights in the election context
 As a result, there are limitations on various investigative steps in
 an election fraud case
 In most cases, election-related documents should not be
 taken from the custody of local election administrators until the
 election to which they pertain has been certified and the time for
 contesting the election results has expired. This avoids
 interfering with the governmental processes affected by the
 election.4
 Another limitation affects voter interviews. Election
 fraud cases often depend on the testimony of individual voters
 whose votes were co-opted in one wayor another. But in most cases
 voters should not be interviewed, or other voter-related
 investigation done, until after the election is over. Such overt
 investigative steps may chill legitimate voting activities. They
 This non-interference policy assumes there is no evidence that local
 election administrators seek to retain or destroy the election records for a corrupt
 purpose or to further an ongoing election fraud scheme
 In cases in which physical custody may interfere unnecessarily with
 local election procedures, law enforcement may take reasonable steps to
 ensure that such records retain their integrity and are effectively made available
 to federal law enforcemen. Such steps may include the issuance of a grand
 jury subpoena, and formal and informal agreements concerning the custody
 control, and integrity of such records