75.7 F
Charlotte Amalie
Friday, March 29, 2024
HomeNewsArchivesHansen’s Candidacy Still in Question After Court Hearing

Hansen’s Candidacy Still in Question After Court Hearing

Even after being ordered off the Nov. 4 ballot by the V.I. Supreme Court twice and mounting a write-in campaign that garnered a couple of thousand votes, Sen. Alicia “Chucky” Hansen is back in court arguing for status as a candidate and the right to a recount of her votes.

In the second day of testimony before Superior Court Judge Harold Willocks, attorneys Lee Rohn and Joel Holt argued for and against – respectively – Hansen’s right to have a vote recount.

One week before the election, Hansen was ordered off the ballot by the Supreme Court because she had been found guilty of willful failure to pay taxes for several years. The court deemed the crime one of “moral turpitude” and rendered her ineligible to run for the V.I. Senate again.

In August, the Supreme Court first ruled her ineligible and a few days later, Gov. John deJongh Jr. pardoned Hansen and asked the court to rehear the case, which it refused to do. Hansen had appealed earlier to the Superior and District Courts and at one time U.S. District Judge Wilma Lewis issued a temporary restraining order directing hear be placed back on the ballot.

The Supreme Court’s final ruling came Oct. 24, less than two weeks before the Nov 4 general election. Hansen’s name was ordered off the ballot and new ballots were printed. Hansen responded by printing small stickers with her name, and instructed supporters to use the stickers or write in her name on Nov. 4.

After the general election ballots were counted, Hansen accumulated abut 2,000 votes, well under Nereida “Nellie” Rivera-O’Reilly’s almost 4,900 for the seventh St. Croix senatorial seat.

The case now in Superior Court is Rivera-O’Reilly’s challenge of the Elections Board recounting Hansen’s votes, on the grounds that she was not a “candidate” and had no rights to a recount. Additionally, the board did not act within the designated time period for a recount, the suit contends. The complaint also alleges the board improperly counted certain ballots for Hansen – write in votes under 60 different names.

The V.I. Code, Title 18 allows a recount at the discretion of the Elections Board, usually in cases where a recount could alter the final results. Hansen, Capehart and Joseph were well behind their closest competitors.

Candidates must request a recount within seven working days after the election has been certified, according to the Code. The board has three days to advise the candidate and if a recount is approved they must count the ballots within 10 days. Hansen sent her petition within the correct timeframe.

Rohn and Holt tried to determine when the decision was made by the board to recount Hansen’s votes. Although, it was discussed Nov. 26 and the board voted to allow Hansen to speak during the meeting, the vote was not taken until Dec. 3.

The attorney’s agreed that the board did not react within the specified time, and Rohn said Board Chairman Adelbert Bryan did not notify the board when he received the petitions.

“What we contend is the reason the board didn’t act promptly is because of an improper motive by the chairman,” Rohn said. In the past months, Bryan filed several lawsuits to bar Hanson from running.

Holt agreed the board reacted beyond the time limit and should not have agreed to Hansen’s request since she was not a “candidate.” According to the V.I. Code, there is a difference between a candidate and a “write-in person,” Holt said.

Holt’s case is based on the board’s failure to adhere to the law, he said. Citing a similar case, he said the “public has a right to have their vote counted properly.”

“I’m in total agreement with what you are saying, but what are the consequences?” asked Willocks. “The candidate must suffer because the board didn’t follow the law?”

Holt said the statutes are in place for a reason and the Elections board should be held accountable. “They stopped the recount,” in the example case, Holt added.

“The bottom line is the board missed the three- and 10-day limit,” he said.

Rohn argued that if Hansen wins a seat she’s a candidate, but Willocks didn’t agree.

“That doesn’t follow. What we’re trying to find out is what it (candidate) means,” he said.

Board member Lisa Harris-Moorhead said she considered Hansen a candidate and believed Attorney General Vincent Frazer did also, by verbally agreeing to a recount after the deadline. Frazer followed up with a written opinion to that effect Dec. 4.

“Attorney General Frazer said OK, so I thought she was a candidate. And, because she was officially in the primary election and had valid ballots in the general election before she was removed from the ballot,” she added.

Rivera-O’Reilly’s lawsuit names the entire board and all were subpoenaed to testify Monday along with Elections Supervisor Caroline Fawkes and Deputy Supervisor Genevieve Whitaker.

Erica Scott, assistant Attorney General, represented the board, and Rohn was allowed to “intervene,” since her client, Hansen, had a legal interest in the matter. Holt represented River-O’Reilly.

Several board members and Whitaker testified about the chain of events leading up to the recount. Fawkes did not appear and was reportedly off-island. Willocks issued a “failure to show” arrest warrant and did not rescind the action even though Holt said he no longer needed information from her. According to the judge, Fawkes will be arrested when she returns to the territory.

The case will be continued at 9 a.m. Dec. 22.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Keeping our community informed is our top priority.
If you have a news tip to share, please call or text us at 340-228-8784.

Support local + independent journalism in the U.S. Virgin Islands

Unlike many news organizations, we haven't put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as accessible as we can. Our independent journalism costs time, money and hard work to keep you informed, but we do it because we believe that it matters. We know that informed communities are empowered ones. If you appreciate our reporting and want to help make our future more secure, please consider donating.

1 COMMENT