Was there a threat of political violence against Ohio Democrat gubernatorial candidate Amy Acton over the Labor Day weekend? Or was it much ado about nothing? Acton was speaking to Democrats in a tent in Mahoning County when a man moving toward Acton caused several senior citizens to fall down.
Acton’s campaign put out a statement “praying for the recovery of those injured” and argued “This kind of violence has no place in Ohio.”
What was initially hyped as a serious threat by many liberal sources was later downgraded to just a man “moving forward.” The local district attorney has downgraded the charges to mere misdemeanor violations.
This lack of substantial charges against the person who allegedly attacked Amy Acton did not seem to sit well with the Cleveland Plain Dealer. In the first of their two articles about the attack that appears not to have happened, the Plain Dealer pretty much stuck to the facts in their online edition, Cleveland.Com, written by Lucas Daprile on Wednesday, “Prosecutor says suspect ‘never gets near’ Amy Acton at Canfield Fair.”
CANFIELD, Ohio — Private footage of an Amy Acton campaign event over the weekend does not support filing felony charges against a man accused of lunging at her, Mahoning County Prosecutor Lynn Maro said.
On Sunday, Acton’s campaign said an armed man “lunged” at her while she was holding an event at the Canfield Fair. Police arrested Patrick Havas, 38, of Canfield, following the event, which caused political leaders across the state to condemn partisan violence.
After a court hearing on Tuesday, Mahoning County Prosecutor Lynn Maro told reporters the investigation remains ongoing, but available evidence points toward misdemeanors, not felony charges. The Akron Beacon Journal captured video of her remarks.
“The information we’ve received is that the Acton camp requested individuals stop recording shortly before this incident occurred, so at this point, the only video we have is the defendant’s,” Maro said. “And what that’s showing certainly doesn’t support filing felony charges.”
Maro said video of the incident shows Havas “walking into the tent, recording and moving forward calling out her name.”
A member of Acton’s security “comes forward and then his phone is either dropped or tousled,” Maro said, citing the video.
“There’s never any close contact” with Acton, Maro said, adding that the suspect “never gets near her.”
Drat! So there’s no there there according to the prosecutor. And this seems to have irked Mr. Daprile to the extent that very next day, Thursday, he was already whining about it starting with the title: “No body cam and a heavily redacted incident report: Officials mum on key details of Amy Acton incident.”
Days after Amy Acton’s gubernatorial campaign said a man lunged at her during a campaign event, law enforcement is still refusing to release key information.
On Sunday afternoon, Acton was giving a speech at the Canfield Fair when Patrick Havas entered her tent and approached her, calling out her name, authorities said. Acton’s campaign said Havas “lunged” at her and was stopped by her security team after knocking over two elderly people. Havas was carrying two guns but did not brandish them, authorities said.
The incident happened in the Democratic party’s tent, and other members of Acton’s party have corroborated her account.
However, Mahoning County Prosecutor Lynn Maro, a Republican, has painted a different picture, saying Havas, 38, of Canfield, didn’t get near Acton.
Did you catch that? The prosecutor is now being identified as a REPUBLICAN as if to imply a political motive for stating that the defendant did not get near Acton.
Ohio’s public records law spells out that law enforcement agencies must provide the public with an initial police report, including a narrative of the incident, and body camera footage under most circumstances.
However, the sheriff’s office is not releasing the footage or the full initial report generated about the incident. The department has outright refused to provide cleveland.com and The Plain Dealer with the body camera footage.
As for the report, it contains heavy redactions, including blocking from public view descriptions of property recovered from the scene. It cuts off shortly after police attempt to interview Havas, who initially told officers “he wanted to tell his side of the story.”
An initial police report was released as required by state law but Daprile suggests something nefarious because a FULL initial report including video footage was not released.
The rest of the story continues much of the extended whine implying something amiss or even a coverup in a story that did not turn out the way that many liberals had hoped.
Discussion about this post