The offices of Wagoner County Sheriff Chris Elliott and District Attorney Jack Thorp launched an investigation into the organizers of a failed grand jury petition that sought to bring criminal charges against the two, according to documents obtained by KJRH. Elliott’s and Thorp’s offices allege that some signature gatherers lied to citizens, and the pair requested that the district court compel the court clerk to provide their offices with “copies of all paperwork, including voter signature pages” for the proposed grand jury “with no redactions.”
Thorp also sent a letter to Attorney General Gentner Drummond invoking Title 19, Section 215.9, a provision of state law which allows the attorney general to appoint “a district attorney or assistant district attorney from another district “to oversee “a particular matter” when an entire district attorney’s office is conflicted from handling a case.
Thorp indicated his office’s investigation had found violations of Title 38, Section 104, or the misdemeanor offense of making false statements to induce a grand jury petition signature, as well as “nearly 600 violations of [Title 22, Section 311.1], a felony.”
Grand jury petition failed
On Friday, June 20, organizers behind the Wagoner County petition announced the submission of 3,730 valid signatures, which was 569 signatures shy of the signature threshold.
That statute is a criminal procedure provision which requires the outer page of every grand jury petition to contain a warning that it is felony to sign someone else’s name more than once or to sign the petition if you are not a legal voter of the county. The statute does not, itself, specify a penalty for violating the procedural provision.
Thorp’s letter also indicated he had been reviewing a civil claim against potential defendants under Title 38, Section 108. It is unclear if the evidence seized by Thorp’s office for his criminal investigation will also be available to him for his civil suit.
On July 21, Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office Lt. Danny Elliott — who is of no familial relation to Chris Elliott — filed the affidavit for the search warrant seeking “under cover audio/visual recordings from citizens that will prove that at least one petitioner was caught on recording telling multiple, salacious lies about the allegations within the petition in order to obtain signatures.” The affidavit does not explain the relevance of all unredacted signature pages for every petitioner to its investigation, but District Judge Douglas Kirkley approved the warrant the same day it was requested, and it appears to have been executed almost immediately.
Elliott’s affidavit claimed some signature gatherers lied while soliciting signatures for their petition, a felony crime under Title 21, Section 1593.
“During this process, reports of salacious lies were reported being told by petitioners about the allegations in the petition in order to coax citizens into signing the petition,” Danny Elliott wrote. “According to Oklahoma statutes, it is a felony to falsely obtain signatures on a grand jury petition by lying about facts that pertain to the allegations of the petition. According to Oklahoma statutes, to intentionally give false information to obtain a signature is committing fraud.”
Complicating matters further, the Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office made a Facebook post Monday that included a letter sent by Danny Elliott to KJRH expressing frustration with how the TV station reported that the sheriff’s office was investigating the validity of petition signatures. In his letter, Elliott claimed that “The Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office is not conducting investigations related to the petition,” although he acknowledges that he filed a search warrant, and a return of service filed with the court indicates that he picked up the documents requested. Elliott wrote that it “would be inappropriate” for him or his Wagoner County colleagues to investigate the situation, arguing that his search warrant to obtain documents was simply done for “proximity reasons.”
“A citizen made an allegation, and presented an audio/video recording of the crime alleged by someone collecting signatures for the petition. The information, and recording are being held if another agency is assigned to investigate the case. The allegations and evidence appear to be elements of a crime in Oklahoma,” Danny Elliott wrote. “Documents were collected, and a search warrant was executed in the most official way for the signature pages to be handed over to another agency, if one is assigned. This was gathered by me for proximity reasons. Nothing else. If another agency does in fact investigate a crime, you can contact them for comment.”
A spokesman for Drummond said Monday that his office does not comment on whether it is investigating specific matters. On Wednesday afternoon following the publication of this article, however, Drummond did release a statement.
“My office has been in contact with the Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office as well as District Attorney Thorp. Any further investigation or action will be conducted by the Attorney General’s Office or another state agency at my direction,” Drummond said. “I understand the concerns expressed by many in the community and want to assure them no one with a vested interest in the outcome will be involved going forward.”
‘No one would ever hire you again’: Federal suit alleges retaliatory firing
The unusual search and seizure situation comes while Wagoner County is being sued by former interim 911 coordinator Misty Burke for alleged retaliatory termination.
In March, Burke filed a petition in state district court against Wagoner County Commissioner James Hanning, the board, and Judy Elliott alleging wrongful termination and civil rights violations. The suit is still pending, has a docket page both in both state and federal court, and has not received a ruling on the validity of any of its allegations. (Although, Burke agreed to drop her Open Records Act claims in the federal suit).
Burke alleges that several employees filed written complaints with the county’s HR department “regarding a hostile work environment created by (former 911 coordinator) Judy (Elliott),” which led the Board of County Commissioners to review Elliott’s employment during the executive session of a meeting March 11, 2024.
“The gist of the complaints were that Judy was not paying overtime or compensatory time, was harassing employees who were on or needed leave, was verbally abusive to employees, was monitoring employees social media posts, telling some employees to take posts down etc.,” Burke’s first amended petition alleges. “Nevertheless, despite the prohibition in the (Wagoner County Personnel Policy) Handbook and applicable law, Hanning, during the executive session, texted Judy the names of the people who complained against her. A flagrant violation of the handbook and itself a form of retaliation. Hanning is beholden to the Elliotts because they have buried his numerous acts of criminal conduct through the years.”
The petition provides no details or evidence in support of the claim that “Hanning is beholden to the Elliotts.”
Burke alleges that, immediately after the March 2024 meeting, Elliott instructed her to change the work schedule of one of the employees who complained against her from nights to days.
“Judy told plaintiff that this would cause the employee to lose her second job. Plaintiff was a supervisor and the one who makes the schedule. Plaintiff told Judy she was not changing the employee’s schedule and was not going to be responsible for this employee losing her second job,” the petition alleges. “Judy told plaintiff that she had to because Judy was the boss.”
Burke alleges that Judy Elliott retaliated against her for her conduct the following day.
“Judy told plaintiff to get the leads’ files [of three coworkers.] Judy said to get their laptops and radios and that plaintiff was going to do all their work and that plaintiff would not get paid overtime because she was exempt from overtime. Judy told plaintiff that she was punishing her for running her mouth,” the petition alleges. “Judy threatened to tell people falsely plaintiff was an addict. Plaintiff told Judy this was retaliating. Judy said ‘sit your ass down, I can make it to where no one would ever hire you again.’”
An emergency meeting of the Wagoner County Board of Commissioners was held that day, and Judy Elliott was placed on administrative leave. Before going on leave, the petition alleges that Elliott instructed the IT department to “delete all files off of Judy’s computer which was done” under the observation of Sheriff Chris Elliott and Undersheriff Mark Secrest.
On March 13, Burke was made the interim coordinator for Wagoner County E-911. In June, she underwent “major spine surgery” and went on FMLA leave.
During a special meeting of the Wagoner County Board of Commissioners on June 28 — five days after her surgery — Burke alleges that Hanning called her, placed her on speakerphone and “demanded to know who [she] had informed about her surgery, when she would be returning to work, and who was covering her position during her absence” while she was still recovering and on pain medication.
Judy Elliott officially retired in September. In December, Burke submitted Open Records Act requests asking the county to provide “all emails or text messages” between Thorp and any county commissioner regarding herself and “all emails or texts” between Hanning and Elliott since March 12. Burke said she was fired Jan. 21.
Burke filed her lawsuit against Judy Elliott, Hanning, Wagoner County E-911 and the Board of Commissioners. E-911 was later dismissed as a party to the suit, which alleges seven causes of action including violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Fair Labor Standards Act, Family Medical Leave Act, contractual claims and violations of the Oklahoma Open Records Act. Attorneys representing Judy Elliott and the county have filed motions to dismiss, with Elliott’s attorneys arguing she was not employed by the county at the time of Burke’s firing. The county has argued the timing of her firing had no relation to her complaint against Elliott or the open records request.
“Nearly an entire year after [Burke]’s complaints about Judy Elliott, which resulted in [her] promotion, [her] employment with Wagoner County was terminated by vote of the board,” the county’s attorney wrote. “[Burke] fails to include any allegations specifically or plausibly showing why the reason for her termination was pretext, improper or unjustified. Rather, her first amended petition merely asserts conclusions that her termination was in retaliation for her complaints about Judy Elliott almost a year before in March of 2024 and her request for medical leave, which had been approved nearly seven months prior to her termination.”
Potential for criminal charges against petitioners worry residents
The investigation by the Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office and the Wagoner County District Attorney’s Office appears to be focused on the campaigners for the grand jury petition that were gathering signatures for their petition. The search warrant does not indicate a general investigation into signers of the petition. However, at least one elected official in Wagoner County is concerned about the potential chilling effect of the seizure.
“This week, Detective Danny Elliott of the Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office obtained a warrant to investigate the petitions gatherers, alleging possible criminal activity. This action has raised significant alarm among constituents in my district, many of whom now fear retaliation for exercising their constitutional rights,” freshman Rep. Gabe Woolley (R-Broken Arrow) wrote in a July 25 letter to Drummond requesting that his office review the investigation. “In my opinion, this appears to be a clear case of government power being weaponized against the people. Rather than respecting the lawful and constitutional process of petitioning a grand jury, this response seems designed to intimidate and silence citizens who are seeking accountability from their elected officials. I am deeply concerned that such actions undermine public trust, chill civic engagement, and violate the principles of transparency and accountability that should guide all levels of government.”
Woolley has been a vocal critic of both Elliott and Thorp since the pair investigated and charged his parents over his nephew’s death from sudden infant death syndrome. The charges were later dismissed. Another of Woolley’s nephews was taken from the family after the charges were filed and was not returned after they were dropped. Signs and billboards encouraging residents to research the case appear throughout Wagoner County.
In the 21st century, it would be highly unusual for criminal charges to be brought for defamation of a public official, but it was not unheard of in Oklahoma’s 20th century. During the Socialist Party of Oklahoma’s brief inclusion in the Legislature, Rep. Neal Pritchett (S-Snyder) faced criminal libel charges for accusing — with racist language — his Democratic opponent, Guy Parham, of cheating on his wife in the Philippines. Both Pritchett and Parham were newspaper editors. With the allegation published in his newspaper, criminal libel charges were filed against Pritchett, and he was arrested before the general election. After Pritchett lost reelection, he divorced his own wife and left the state with the case unresolved.
Criminal libel is still technically a charge under Oklahoma’s criminal code that carries a one-year sentence and a potential $1,000 fine, but it is unclear when that provision was last charged since civil libel suits are much more common. Spreading “false rumors of a slanderous nature” has also been criminalized since at least 1928, carrying a $100 to $500 fine and between 30 to 120 days in county jail, if the nearly a century old law can still pass constitutional muster.
(Update: This article was updated at 4:50 p.m. Wednesday, July 30, to include a comment from Attorney General Gentner Drummond.)
