By Rocky Mountain Voice staff | Commentary
Previously-elected Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters is facing seven felony charges and several misdemeanors in a trial happening this week on the Western Slope. She is accused of orchestrating a breach to prove election theft. Peters has pleaded not guilty, claiming to be a victim of lawfare.
The Colorado secretary of state’s office has refuted her claims summarized in three reports Peters has published, called the “Mesa [County] Reports.” State prosecutors allege that Peters enlisted software engineer Gerald “Jerry” Wood for IT contract work. Wood passed a background check, received his security badge, and allegedly returned it the same day. However, prosecutors claim his badge was used twice in May 2021 to access secure election facilities, capturing images of the election server’s hard drive before and after a “trusted build” update, which were then leaked online.
On Tuesday, the star of the trial was an employee from Dominion Voting Systems, who testified with his video off. This odd choice left everyone scratching their heads, especially when the judge kept interrupting his testimony by siding with the prosecution’s objections on relevance.
Adding more drama to the courtroom, Peters’ former chief deputy, who had taken a plea deal to testify against her, also took the stand. Peters is facing charges for recording a Dominion software upgrade, known as the “Trusted Build,” because she believed it might illegally overwrite election files.
David Stahl, Dominion’s customer success manager, admitted he lacked any technical knowledge of the company’s software, which didn’t exactly bolster his credibility. Peters’ attorney, John Case, tried his best to expose Stahl’s inconsistencies and lack of knowledge. Case questioned Stahl about Mesa County’s contract with Dominion, highlighting that the county was allowed to make a backup copy of the voting system database. Stahl, however, dodged the question, saying he’d need to defer to Dominion’s lawyers.
Case persistently attempted to ask Stahl about Dominion’s general counsel, David Frontera, but Judge Michael Barrett, appointed by Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, initially blocked these efforts. Interestingly, it turned out Frontera’s attorney had been in the courtroom the whole time, ready to testify. Eventually, Barrett allowed Case to question Stahl about Frontera.
When asked if he contacted his superiors about his concerns after watching the Trusted Build, Stahl claimed he couldn’t remember. But Case had a trump card: a transcript of an interview where Stahl stated he emailed his CEO and other executives immediately. This inconsistency was a significant point, casting doubt on Stahl’s reliability.
Stahl also admitted in his grand jury testimony that the Colorado Secretary of State decertified Mesa County’s Dominion software after the Trusted Build incident. Case read this testimony aloud, confirming that Stahl had indeed made these statements under oath.
Another key moment was when Case tried to show that the public is usually allowed to view logic & accuracy tests, arguing it wasn’t a problem for Peters to bring in a non-employee to view the Trusted Build. But once again, the judge sided with the prosecution. Stahl spoke about election integrity, stressing transparency and combating disinformation. Case pushed back, implying Stahl was more interested in protecting Dominion’s image than actual transparency. When Stahl was asked if Dominion’s software is fully compliant with laws and if no further information was needed, the prosecution objected and the judge sustained it. This pattern of sustained objections continued with questions about election records maintenance and the technical specifics of Dominion’s systems.
Stahl eventually conceded that many counties film their Trusted Builds with security cameras. Case argued that if Peters’ actions were illegal, Stahl should have spoken up at the time. Yet, the judge sustained the prosecution’s objections on these points, preventing Stahl from providing clear answers.
Peters’ former chief deputy, Belinda Knisley, testified she initially believed Peters was innocent. However, she changed her mind, thinking Peters’ post-incident actions were problematic. The prosecution reminded the court that Knisley had been charged in related cases, which she confirmed. During cross-examination, Edminister, Peters’ attorney, asked Knisley if Peters was concerned about her constituents’ questions and if she was a faithful public servant. Knisley affirmed both points, but the prosecution objected to this character evidence, and the judge sustained it.
As the day wrapped up, the judge gave his standard warning to the jury to avoid outside information, notably emphasizing avoiding social media. Judge Barrett’s handling of the trial could be questioned, he frequently sided with the prosecution and made preemptive declarations about Peters’ guilt. This echoed a previous case where Barrett was overturned by an appeals court for overstepping his role, showing a troubling pattern of judicial overreach.
On Wednesday, defense witness Sherronna Bishop strongly countered the prosecution’s key witness, Gerald Wood. Wood had earlier claimed he didn’t recall being part of a Signal chat group called “Tech Team” with Peters and Bishop. However, the defense presented Bishop with a screenshot showing Wood’s Signal account, clearly displaying his nickname “Trebuchet,” along with a photo of him and his wife. Bishop confirmed that the account belonged to Wood, even recognizing his phone number from past communications.
During the trial, tensions rose when the prosecutor requested that the judge reprimand one of Peters’ attorneys for allegedly violating pretrial orders. The defense repeatedly attempted to question Bishop about a crucial meeting she attended with Peters, which the prosecution had heavily focused on. However, the judge sustained the prosecution’s objections each time, limiting what parts of the meeting could be discussed in court.
Additionally, Bishop testified about her attendance at Mike Lindell’s symposium in South Dakota, where she encountered both Gerald Wood and Conan Hayes. She mentioned pointing out Hayes to Wood and expressed regret that Wood wouldn’t receive credit for his contributions due to keeping his involvement anonymous. Unfortunately, the prosecution’s objection prevented further discussion of Wood’s response.
The defense argued that Peters’ actions were justified, claiming she was trying to save vital files during a software upgrade. However, the judge dismissed this line of defense, calling it a strategy to influence the jury improperly.
The defense also accused the prosecution of collaborating with Dominion Voting Systems and tried to subpoena their general counsel, Mike Frontera, but the judge ruled against it, stating it was irrelevant to the case. The trial’s complex web of connections, including those to Mike Lindell and other high-profile figures, reflects a broader strategy to defend Peters and others involved in election-related controversies.
For those following the trial, WesternSlopeNow is live-streaming it, and the schedule is available on Peters’ website.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.