Is she innocent or guilty? Is this blatant racism? Is this politics as usual or something else? As an ethics keynote speaker, ethics consultant and book author, I have heard all sorts of opinions.
The case goes back to 2011. By her own admission, as a tax preparer, at that time, she committed fraud (from a Dallas Morning News recap, March 29, 2018):
“I inflated returns,” Mason told the Star-Telegram, “I was trying to get more money back for my clients. I admitted that. I owned up to that. I took accountability for that. I would never do that again. I was happy enough to come home and see my daughter graduate. My son is about to graduate. Why would I jeopardize that? Not to vote. … I didn’t even want to go vote.”
Many believe the original five-year conviction was racially motivated
The saga
The case has gained greater notoriety and is being debated in front of the 2nd Court of Appeals in Fort Worth.
According to the Dallas Morning News (April 18, 2023):
“The Tarrant County district attorney’s office charged Mason with election fraud after she submitted a provisional ballot in 2016′s presidential election while on supervised release for a 2011 federal tax fraud conviction. Her vote was never counted.”
As with many states, a felon who is convicted is not allowed to vote. Mason was out on parole when she tried to vote. She was on supervised release. They immediately flagged the ballot. She was found guilty of parole violation.
In 2021, “a bipartisan effort in the House added a provision to a sprawling election law that requires prosecutors to prove intent in voter fraud cases.” Her attorneys want to overturn the conviction based on the election law changes.
But Mason could head back to prison if her voter fraud conviction is upheld. This entire case smacks of a Kafka novel. High-powered lawyers have lined up on both sides, especially as 2022 legislation is about to be considered that would essentially erase the “intent” language. In essence, no one would care one way or the other if there was intent, it was just illegal.
The political overlay
Crystal Mason has also become a captive to politics. Republican election committee lawmakers versus Democratic ACLU and left-leaning push-back. The Republican election committee is largely “law and order.” They feel Mason should have known.
Ironically, she has served all time and penalties for the original conviction. If the latest accusations are upheld, her penalties will be for parole violation.
Now what? There are those who point to the language on the ballot itself. They feel that it should have signaled a kind of “Stop Sign” to walk away from the voting. However, at the time she was voting, her jail time had been finished. Though she was still on parole it is doubtful her intent was to deceive the election process. Crystal Mason voted. In doing so, she set this legal wrangle into gear and it has turned ugly.
Is it necessary for the system to exact its pound of flesh at this point? Or, is it enough to acknowledge that a mistake was made on her part, have her pay a fine of some type and call it a day?
This entire case of voter fraud was set into motion following a fraud to the IRS. It is a good example of additional, unintended consequences on top of the original consequences. If the voting commission is seeking to make an example of Crystal Mason, it all seems over the top at this point.
The voting commission itself might let it go, and instead focus on prevention of fraud in the future. If ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law, As an ethics keynote speaker, ethics consultant and book author, I must ask why the language and even the penalties are not more obvious? At times, it almost seems as though the penalties for voters are more severe than those applied to politicians.
In any case, the legal battle over Crystal Mason, a woman convicted of tax fraud has taken to a national stage.
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS!
