Filed under: — tkm December 10, 2005 @ 12:0 pm

David Malone petitions for “RECALL”

The linked legal documents below were requested with a public records request to the Scioto County Common Pleas Courts and provided here for your information.

Also, a link below, 08-04-06, is a letter submitted to the Portsmouth Daily Times (PDT), by Russ Cooper, but never published by the PDT (sorry about the quality).

CLICK:  08-24-06 — Docket Sheet–Scioto County, Portsmouth

CLICK:  08-04-06 — Russ’ Letter of rebutal to PDT; not published  

CLICK:  08-01-06 — State’s Motion Contra Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

CLICK:  07-24-06 — Motion to Dismiss

CLICK:  05-17-06 — Supplemental Response to Defendant’s Request for Discovery

CLICK:  05-17-06 — Bill of Particulars  

CLICK:  05-17-06 — Supplemental Response to Defendant’s Request for Discovery

CLICK:  05-15-06 — Defendant’s Notice of Reciprocal Discovery

CLICK:  04-19-06 — State’s Response to Defendant’s Request for Discovery; and Reciprocal Request for Discovery

 posted by tkm 8-29-06


THE WHOLE STORY by the Shawnee Sentinel 1-13-06

The Russell Cooper Frame-Up
Russell Cooper Indicted!


Will Kuhn, Aeh, and Horner Take the Stand?

Remember Kuhn has notoriety for digging up Indian Graves!

A Scioto County Grand Jury, at the behest of County Prosecutor Mark Kuhn, has indicted Russell Cooper on six felony counts – two for forgery, two for perjury, and two for tampering with records.

Sentinel readers will no doubt remember that Cooper is the Native American municipal reform leader who helped spearhead this past summer’s recall petition campaign against Second Ward Councilperson David Malone. This morning, Friday, January 13th, Russell Cooper appeared before Judge Howard Harcha in the County Common Pleas Court and once again proclaimed his innocence. With his new lawyer, Jim Banks at his side and his wife and other supporters in the gallery, Cooper answered “Not guilty” to all counts.

Sentinel readers also no doubt remember the shocking Gestapo-like arrest of Cooper this past August when Portsmouth Police Chief Chuck Horner personally went to the Cooper family home, where, without a warrant and without reading him his rights, he had Cooper arrested and handcuffed. Then, after an extensive interrogation, Cooper was placed in jail on a $10,000 bond.

Just exactly what was Cooper suspected of having done? The City Clerk Jo Ann Aeh and the City Solicitor David Kuhn (the uncle of County Prosecutor Mark Kuhn) suspected that Cooper had committed perjury, claiming that Cooper had lied when he signed an affidavit on a recall petition that stated he had personally witnessed everyone sign the petition. During his interrogation, however, it was clear that Aeh, Kuhn (the Elder), and Horner wanted to charge Cooper with having forged signatures on the petition, but they could never prove such a charge.

Cooper’s arrest on charges of perjury enabled City Clerk Aeh to throw out one whole recall petition sheet, which saved Councilperson Malone from having to face a recall vote this past November. Aeh used Cooper’s arrest to invalidate all of the signatures, not just those she, Kuhn (the Elder), and Horner suspected were forged. Cooper’s arrest not only blocked the recall of David Malone it also enabled City Officials and the Portsmouth Daily Times to smear the municpal reform movement and their recall efforts.

Cooper’s arrest stank to high heaven as a political character assassination aimed at derailing and discrediting a recall movement that had also sought the recall of City Solicitor David Kuhn. In fact, at the time of his arrest and well known by Kuhn (the Elder) and other city officials, Russell Cooper was also passing petitions seeking the City Solicitor’s recall.

Worse, as Sentinel readers will remember, Kuhn (the Elder) is infamous for digging in Indian graves and trading Indian artifacts, while Cooper has long been active in protecting Native American sacred sites in the region; Cooper’s disaproval of Kuhn’s graverobbing was well known. For many in the local reform movement, it appeared that Uncle Kuhn’s backing of Cooper’s arrest was not just political, it was personal.

Cooper’s case was eventually handed over to the County Prosecutor – the nephew (Kuhn, the Younger) – for him to decide whether or not to seek a grand jury indictment. Ohio law stipulates that city governments and municipal courts can only prosecute misdemeanors. The case was thus placed in the hands of Mark Kuhn. Once the November 2005 elections had passed, Kuhn (the Younger) quietly announced that the original charges against Cooper had been dropped. At that point, Chief Horner’s arrest of Cooper looked more than ever like a political move by those current government officials who were oppossed to the recall efforts of the municipal reformers.

Mark Kuhn, however, was not done with Russell Cooper. With a possible civil suit against the city for false arrest and other violations of his civil rights, the Cooper case could not simply be dropped. Kuhn (the Younger), no doubt to the relief of Kuhn (the Elder) revived and revised the charges in December and succeeded in convincing a grand jury to indict Cooper.

Could it be more than a coincidence that Councilmembers David Malone, Howard Baughman, and Marty Mohr, along with Mayor Jim Kalb, and Portsmouth Police Chief Chuck Horner launched their campaign to overhaul the City Charter in order to virtually eliminate the citizens’ right to recall corrupt and incompetent officeholders, at this past Monday’s council meeting? Mark Kuhn had the indictment in hand on the 29th of December, a good week before City Council asked his uncle, City Solicitor David Kuhn, to draft a City Charter amendment that would tighten the people’s ability to recall elected officials.

Cooper is once again being used and abused by the corrupt officials of Portsmouth to further their political agenda – to smear the reformers as criminals.

Mark Kuhn apparently has no appreciation for what is commonly called a “conflict of interest.” Why didn’t Kuhn (the Younger) bring in a special prosecutor to handle the Cooper case? The rookie county prosecutor is looking increasingly corrupt. How will Kuhn (the Younger) handle Kuhn (the Elder) when Cooper and Banks call the City Solicitor to the stand to explain why he originally authorized the arrest and prosecution of Russell Cooper?

If one reviews the six felony indictments it is clear that Kuhn (the Younger) is hoping for a plea bargain – he stacked up the charges just so he has something to bargain with. Cooper, however, the Sentinel has been told, is not going to deal because he is an innocent man. Will Horner, Aeh, and Kuhn (the Elder) take the stand and be cross examined?
Doubt it.

Friday the 13th, January, 2006

CLICK: here to watch the video of court proceedings.

CLICK: here to watch video Russ Cooper’s post-arraignment response.


CLICK: 11-02-05 Russ Cooper

Court documents associated with charges filed against Russ Cooper related to the accusations made by JoAnn Aeh, City Clerk of Portsmouth, concerning forgery of petitions and the associated documents of the eventual dismissal of all charges by the Prosecutor’s Office.JoAnn, due to her past experience and involvement in the mutilation of petitions in 1996, must be considered an expert witness by our local Police Department and the City Solicitor’s Office, but by reviewing the following Supreme Court Case I myself consider her along the lines of a violator not an expert!!!!!


THE STATE EX REL. FITE ET AL. V. AEH, CLERK. (Cite as State ex rel. Fite v. Aeh (1997), _ Ohio St.3d _.)
Elections — Recall of city council members — Signatures on recall petition removed as result of signature withdrawal petitions — Applicability of R.C. 3501.38(H) and (I) — Clerk not entitled to remove signatures from recall petitions after filing — Writ and attorney fees granted.

After all, whenever any city taxpayer asks the question, “Why does our paid City Solicitor not handle the cases involving the City but instead out-sources the work?” The standard answer is, “That type of case involves a specialized attorney.”

My question is why do we continue to elect a City Solicitor that does not seem to have any other experience except for title searches? I don’t think the City should be paying or electing any attorney on a full or part-time basis to do title searches only–After all that seems to be all he does or is qualified to perform.

posted 1-5-05 by tkm

“a writ of mandamus issued to correct an abuse of such discretion by a nonjudicial public body or official”

CLICK: THE STATE EX REL. NORTH MAIN STREET COALITION ET AL. v. WEBB, VILLAGE CLERK. [Cite as State ex rel. N. Main St. Coalition v. Webb, 106 Ohio St.3d 437, 2005-Ohio-5009.]

Aeh exceeded her limited, discretionary authority by attempting to resolve substantive questions not evident on the face of the petition. This above case referenced a 1991 case:

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.