Jump to content
Paulding.com

Senate 31 candidate Carruth residency challenged


Recommended Posts

I was just reading the blog by Jim Galloway who moderated the Senate debate last night for District 31.

 

Someone has filed a complaint against Bill Carruth now - relating to his residency not being the same place that he holds homestead exemption. It's pretty common knowledge that he changed his Voter registration this year to the home purchased within Senate District 31's new lines (which is near his mom's home).

 

Anyway - if you know enough to know that he bought a new house (which happened to be months before qualification) you should think this move would be challenged.

 

The other issue brought up is that the citizen complaint says Mr. Carruth owes the FDIC over $2 million dollars for a loan. I can't prove or disprove this, but the article mentions it. See below.

 

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/06/06/can-a-candidate-be-barred-because-of-his-debts/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That is the martyr syndrome I was talking about.

In light of all of this, I believe Mr. Rogers is the only logical choice.

Carruth Judgment Summary.pdf Carruth Personal Residence Homestead Exemption - 1400 Paul Aiken.pdf Carruth Judgment Opinion.pdf Writ of Execution Against Carruths.pdf

Wow! I guess we will also see how this one shakes out. I've watched some of the video from last night's debate and I'm even more impressed with J.K. Rogers so I'm hoping he wins the election. Carruth is right, we don't need career politicians in that office, but given his past history on the Paulding Board of Commissioners, I think he may be stepping on his own toes...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way Jim Galloway put it in his column ... that Carruth was deliberately removed from the 31st District with the road his original home was on being the dividing line of the district.... forcing him ... giving his long time intent to run for that senate seat ... the option of establishing residence at a secondary home.

 

And as far as the owing money ... I'm wondering if that rule might disqualify Tom Graves given his banking/loan problems that came out in the special election before he became the sole candidate in the new 14th district.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to ask this on last night’s thread about Christ's residency challenge...

 

 

My understanding is Carruth claims he lives with his mom who rents the home she lives in. However, he has quite a nice home somewhere else where he has lived for some time. :unsure:

 

People were actually joking about where they have "heard" he lives now. :nea:

 

I guess I see why he needs to get back into politics and hold office so he can SQUEEZE more money out of "We The People." It seems too many politicians are parasites. They only thrive while sucking the host to death.

 

Since he has a 2 million debt he defaulted on... the TAXES on that will make quite a sizable bill. You know when you default on a loan... it is considered earned income, and Uncle Sam sends you a bill for the tax on the earned income?

 

We don't need another politician who can't manage his own money and would default on personal debt... I won't vote for him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way Jim Galloway put it in his column ... that Carruth was deliberately removed from the 31st District with the road his original home was on being the dividing line of the district.... forcing him ... giving his long time intent to run for that senate seat ... the option of establishing residence at a secondary home.

 

...

 

pubby

 

Gerrymandering at its finest... ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The very first question was on this topic.

 

Here is about a one-minute clip of that debate (over 1:20 minutes without closing statements) in which Carruth denies owing the government any money whatsoever.

 

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

The very first question was on this topic.

 

Here is about a one-minute clip of that debate (over 1:20 minutes without closing statements) in which Carruth denies owing the government any money whatsoever.

 

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/aw4ppdGUpdM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

pubby

 

So…. He’s “allegedly” a deadbeat…. If he actually defaulted on 2.3 million dollars to the FDIC then in my book ... he IS deadbeat!!!!

 

Per the below article he owes money ....Then ....he ... is .... a ..... liar… and Pubby has it on tape! :clapping: :rofl: :rofl: :nea:

 

NOT NOOOOTTTTT, Not.... NOT vote'n for a LIAR!!!!! Can't do it .... :nea: I guess it does not really matter where he lives! ;)

 

 

<snip>

"Attached to this letter are two documents confirming that Mr. Carruth and his wife, Laura, owe the federal government, and thus the taxpayers, $2,351,661.86. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) sued Mr. Carruth in federal court for his default on a loan. Judge Stephen Jones issued the default judgment against Mr. Carruth and his wife on April 27, 2012. On May 30, 2012, Judge Jones also issued a writ of execution directing the U.S. Marshall’s Office to enforce and satisfy a judgment for payment of money owed to the FDIC, a federal agency that is insured by the taxpayers of the United States of America."

 

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/06/06/can-a-candidate-be-barred-because-of-his-debts/

Link to post
Share on other sites

And all this time I thought he was my neighbor.

 

What makes a politician think he can just push "oversights" under the rug?

 

Afterall, I'm sure it was an oversight.

 

Politicians need to learn the taxpayers are tired of their money being spent unwisely and it appears that a lot of voters are more willing than ever to investigate a candidate. AND HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see a copy of the original suit filed--with all the info (exactly what type of loan, collateral, etc). I would venture to say that it was some sort of real estate that was foreclosed upon???

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The PDF of the challenge letter was too large to attach. The text of the letter is below:

 

June 6, 2012

 

Honorable Brian Kemp

Secretary of State

Election Division

2 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, SE

802 West Tower

Atlanta, GA 30334

 

Secretary of State Brian Kemp:

 

Please accept this letter as a formal written complaint challenging the qualifications of candidate William Alton Carruth, Jr., to run Senate District 31, in the July 31, 2012 primary or November 6, 2012, general election. This challenge is based on the fact that Mr. Carruth has not been a legal resident of the territory embraced within Senate District 31 for at least one year prior to the election as required by the Georgia Constitution, Article III, Section II, paragraph III(a). It is also based on the fact that Mr. Carruth is the holder of public monies illegally in violation of the Georgia Constitution, Article II, Section II, paragraph III.

 

Mr. Carruth's legal residence is a home which he owns and for which he claims a homestead exemption at 1400 Paul Aiken Road, Dallas, Georgia 30157. Georgia law is clear that "the specific address in the county or municipality in which a person has declared a homestead exemption, if a homestead exemption has been claimed, shall be deemed the person's residence address." O.C.G.A. Section 21-2-217(a)(14). I am enclosing a copy of the 2011 ad valorem tax notice for this property reflecting that he has claimed a homestead exemption for this property and as of this date, no change has been made in this regard.

 

Therefore, it appears that William Alton Carruth Jr., does not meet the constitutional and statutory requirements for seeking and holding the office of State Senator from the 31st Senate District due to the fact that he is not a resident of the district which he seeks to represent as required by O.C.G.A. Section 21-2-5( b ). Furthermore, he will not have been a legal resident of the territory embraced within the 31st State Senate District for at least one year immediately preceding the date of his election, November 6, 2012, as required by Article III, Section II, Paragraph III(a) of the Constitution of the State of Georgia.

 

In addition to his ineligibility due to his permanent residence being outside of the 31st District, Mr. Carruth is also ineligible to seek or hold public office in Georgia due to his holding of federal taxpayer funds in violation of Article II, Section II, Paragraph III of the Georgia Constitution. Attached to this letter are two documents confirming that Mr. Carruth and his wife, Laura, owe the federal government , and thus the taxpayer, $2,351,661.86. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) sued Mr. Carruth in federal court for his default on a loan. Judge Stephen Jones issued the default judgment against Mr. Carruth and his wife on April 27, 2012. On May 30, 2012 Judge Jones issued a writ of execution directing the U.S. Marshall's Office to enforce and satisfy a judgment for payment of money owed to the FDIC, a federal agency that is insured by the taxpayers of the United States of America.

 

In sum, Mr. Carruth is the holder of public monies illegally, and, unless he can demonstrate the ability to satisfy this debt to the federal government in full or that a payment plan has been established with the FDIC, he is ineligible to hold or seek public office in Georgia.

 

Please contact me if you need additional information to assist you in confirming that Mr. Carruth has not resided in District 31 for the requisite length of time or that he is the holder of public monies illegally and thus ineligible to run.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pauldingman93:

 

I'm not going to state that the documents you proffer are not legitimate but I can say that I find their authenticity worthy of question on the basis that they are not photocopies, have no internal security, and could be forgeries.

 

I've been in contact with Mr. Houston and he is seeking the original documents. It really tests my credulity - I think that if the federal court is taking and distributing PDF's in this editable form using none of the tools for authenticity available in the pdf format, every one of those folks should be fired.

 

Said a little differently, I trust the federal court clerk is not so incompetent as to distribute easily editable documents as official court documents.

 

While I'm not saying these documents are forgeries, they definitely are questionable.

 

See my 'edited version' of the writ...

 

was the Writ of Execution Against Carruths faked.pdf

 

Oh, and given Mr. Heath's history of inventing crap like sex shops in Downtown Dallas ... this is believable effort at 'legal slander.'

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

Liar!!!

 

In his statement, he did say he owed no taxes whatsoever.

 

The note to Silverton Bank, however, became - if this is a true statement at all - was federal debt only through the receivership of the bank by the FDIC. That allegation is apparently based on documents that IMHO have some real issues (possible forgeries).

 

I can't say definitively that these are forgeries as the copies I got were not questioned (or appeared questionable) until after 5 p.m. meaning that verification of them would not be possible until tomorrow. However, the failure to use security for the documents makes it quite feasible that the documents could be fakes as the copy I doctored so easily proves.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure it is all just a big misunderstanding . And a non issue and we should all just move on. Seems a lot of people who run can not figure out where they live so it is no big deal ....as per PCOM know it alls.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In his statement, he did say he owed no taxes whatsoever.

 

The note to Silverton Bank, however, became - if this is a true statement at all - was federal debt only through the receivership of the bank by the FDIC. That allegation is apparently based on documents that IMHO have some real issues (possible forgeries).

 

I can't say definitively that these are forgeries as the copies I got were not questioned (or appeared questionable) until after 5 p.m. meaning that verification of them would not be possible until tomorrow. However, the failure to use security for the documents makes it quite feasible that the documents could be fakes as the copy I doctored so easily proves.

 

pubby

 

 

Pubby you actually believe that? Come one now, you honestly think that a voter would go out of their way to make up something so damaging as that? You can't trust him (Carruth) either. Apparently he doesn't know where he lives neither. Even if this wasn't happening, Crist and Carruth would never received my vote. I don't like sneaky/ crooked people. Gee's, kinda reminds me of the school's Central Office. IMHO of course!!! Now if these are forgeries that you think they might be, I feel sorry for the person that brought this to everyone's attention.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a honest canidate?Or just not in trouble,does it just come with the turf. Our elected officials have to be some sort of honest don't they? maybe.......:unsure:

 

 

 

 

That's Paulding for ya! No wonder the news people come here so fast when it's negative. This whole county is crooked. LOL, now watch I get the heat for that one. And no, I'm not generalizing EVERYONE, just the crooked politicians/school system in this town.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do look into the legitimacy of these documents. When you do receive proof that they are legitimate, I expect you to boldy state these are legit. All you have to do is call the federal court clerk in Atlanta.

 

Pauldingman93:

 

I'm not going to state that the documents you proffer are not legitimate but I can say that I find their authenticity worthy of question on the basis that they are not photocopies, have no internal security, and could be forgeries.

 

I've been in contact with Mr. Houston and he is seeking the original documents. It really tests my credulity - I think that if the federal court is taking and distributing PDF's in this editable form using none of the tools for authenticity available in the pdf format, every one of those folks should be fired.

 

Said a little differently, I trust the federal court clerk is not so incompetent as to distribute easily editable documents as official court documents.

 

While I'm not saying these documents are forgeries, they definitely are questionable.

 

See my 'edited version' of the writ...

 

was the Writ of Execution Against Carruths faked.pdf

 

Oh, and given Mr. Heath's history of inventing crap like sex shops in Downtown Dallas ... this is believable effort at 'legal slander.'

 

pubby

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was after 5 p.m. and I will be seeking whether they are legitimate.

 

I do find it silly that the federal court would distribute documents with no security protections, no digital verification, etc. The reason is that the courts, for years and years chose to snub PDF's - I've been a user of Acrobat PRo since 1995 and I've seen the gradual acceptance of digital documents in court cases over that time.

 

Given that the courts were critical in establishing the need for security regarding forgeries, I find it appalling and almost absurd that these documents would be so easily changed with absolutely no security at all.

 

Frankly, I'd be ready to can those in the pool who didn't know enough as to use security.

 

Also, as documents, these should come from the 'pacer' system and as such should be marked with that documentation some how.

 

Now, I will accept the possibility that these are not forgeries ... but why distribute documents that are so obviously questionable?

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

A 'secure' digital text document in a commonly available format that does not require an encryption program to open? It does not exist. A 12yo could extract the text on any un-editable 'secure' document and recreate it on a blank document in 5 minutes if they had nefarious intent. The only way to get secure documents is the old way, paper copy in person with a raised seal. I have seen hundreds of Federal court motions and judgements and they all look just like this.

Edited by Ugadawgs98
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pubby you actually believe that? Come one now, you honestly think that a voter would go out of their way to make up something so damaging as that? You can't trust him (Carruth) either. Apparently he doesn't know where he lives neither. Even if this wasn't happening, Crist and Carruth would never received my vote. I don't like sneaky/ crooked people. Gee's, kinda reminds me of the school's Central Office. IMHO of course!!! Now if these are forgeries that you think they might be, I feel sorry for the person that brought this to everyone's attention.

If you think back in history, potentially untrue statements of legal issues generally go "Poof" but this topic hasn't... That should tell you something... Just sayin....

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think back in history, potentially untrue statements of legal issues generally go "Poof" but this topic hasn't... That should tell you something... Just sayin....

 

 

Checkmate!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see a copy of the original suit filed--with all the info (exactly what type of loan, collateral, etc). I would venture to say that it was some sort of real estate that was foreclosed upon???

 

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

 

Information, location, description of foreclosed property and etc...ALL missing from this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think back in history, potentially untrue statements of legal issues generally go "Poof" but this topic hasn't... That should tell you something... Just sayin....

 

We have to challenge it because it is a credibility issue.

The document is in a changeable form. We require copies on the desk before we release this type of thing. A member posted it, posted the documentation in what could be an easily manipulated format. It would be irresponsible for us not to point that out to the people reading it.

We are not claiming it to be a fake only that in this form the possibility exist.

This is a serious matter, we are anxious to verify it also. Our intent is not even to discredit the OP, we simply found ourselves in this position.

 

We honestly try to make sure that information of this magnitude is true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to challenge it because it is a credibility issue.

The document is in a changeable form. We require copies on the desk before we release this type of thing. A member posted it, posted the documentation in what could be an easily manipulated format. It would be irresponsible for us not to point that out to the people reading it.

We are not claiming it to be a fake only that in this form the possibility exist.

This is a serious matter, we are anxious to verify it also. Our intent is not even to discredit the OP, we simply found ourselves in this position.

 

We honestly try to make sure that information of this magnitude is true.

No duh it's a serious matter. And topics have made invisible until verified before but not in this case. That is the point made to Lucky and it is a valid point. Sorry if you disagree.

Edited by All I Hear is Blah Blah Blah
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

No duh it's a serious matter. And topics have made invisible until verified before but not in this case. That is the point made to Lucky and it is a valid point. Sorry if you disagree.

It is a very valid point, we also understand these forms and what programs are used to view them, it is more likely that this is exactly what it appears to be.

We would be remiss if we did not point it out. I give it a 90% chance that it is presented in it's authentic form therefore it stays.

We pointed out the slight possibility and allowed it to remain as is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pauldingman93:

 

I'm not going to state that the documents you proffer are not legitimate but I can say that I find their authenticity worthy of question on the basis that they are not photocopies, have no internal security, and could be forgeries.

 

I've been in contact with Mr. Houston and he is seeking the original documents. It really tests my credulity - I think that if the federal court is taking and distributing PDF's in this editable form using none of the tools for authenticity available in the pdf format, every one of those folks should be fired.

 

Said a little differently, I trust the federal court clerk is not so incompetent as to distribute easily editable documents as official court documents.

 

While I'm not saying these documents are forgeries, they definitely are questionable.

 

See my 'edited version' of the writ...

 

was the Writ of Execution Against Carruths faked.pdf

 

Oh, and given Mr. Heath's history of inventing crap like sex shops in Downtown Dallas ... this is believable effort at 'legal slander.'

 

pubby

 

But you're fine with having someone with the screen name of "Chainsaw," and identifying them as such in your reporting, accuse a candidate of malfeasance in another race?

 

So it's OK for someone who is basically anonymous to make claims against one candidate, and then allow those claims to be printed unchecked, but when another set of claims against another opponent is supported by that target's opponent, then you question their motives and their evidence? And you expect us to trust the anonymous source in the first case, and not the more public source in the other?

Link to post
Share on other sites
But here’s the thing: If Carruth is excluded from politics because of his debts, who else might qualify for such a ban?

 

Interesting question.

 

Didn't the AJC print a list of Congresscritters and Gold Dome inhabitants that had not paid fines or taxes just a while ago? Isn't a fine owed the state public funds? Hmmmmmm....

 

Seems like people could sue to get them out of office because of that and really screw up the elections.

 

Ah, I found one of the articles from May 8th 2011: AJC Link

 

Forty-seven Georgia legislators, about 20 percent of the General Assembly, owed the state money as of Friday morning because they were late filing campaign finance reports — or didn’t file the reports at all, according to an Atlanta Journal-Constitution review of state records.

 

The sums involved are relatively small, but some of the late fees among legislators date back almost a decade. In total, legislators owe about $11,000 in late fees, according to state ethics commission records. These are the same legislators who write ethics laws and fund the ethics commission.

 

As of the end of 2010, the commission said, $300,000 in late fees was owed by more than 2,000 officials, candidates and committees, ranging 
from former Gov. Sonny Perdue to small-town city councilmen

 

Two thousand politicians swept from office... I like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...