St. Croix Elections Board Removes Hansen from Ballot

"No board member expressed support for Hansen but members Barbara Jackson McIntosh and Raymond Williams indicated that they thought it would be wiser to turn the matter over to an investigative agency such as the Attorney General’s Office to determine if any fraud had been committed."

I very much doubt it's "Bye Chucky" as I doubt the name discrepancy amounts to the legal definition of fraud. The Board should have done exactly what these two members opined and sought a qualified legal opinion before jumping the gun. More wasted money.

Who wants to bet me come November she is not only on the ballot but wins?

Alicia "Chucky" Hansen doesn't legally exist.

i dont know why such an uproar for her name. i am no fan of her but good grief, just let her run. she has always been on the ballet as Alicia Chucky Hansen. other people have ( from what i hear ) used nick names when running.

this seems to be just a witch hunt

It's a matter of law.

It's a matter of law.

(tu)

So why isn't she being charged?

Based on what is being reported, Chucky has a US Passport in the name of Alicia Hansen, while her legal name is Alden Alicia Pickering.

It must be a federal offence to apply for and receive a passport under an assumed name. Chucky would have committed some kind of offence when signing the application. Do the feds just not give a rats backside?

I'm sure if I applied for a passport under the name "King Island Hops" I'd be up on charges!

It's a matter of law.

I disagree unless you can cite chapter and verse that using a name by which you are known, even if it's not the name on your birth certificate, constitutes fraud.

I would love to know how she got a passport in a name other than her legal name. Once she had that, she was able to use that document to register to vote based on the name on her passport.

I would love to know how she got a passport in a name other than her legal name. Once she had that, she was able to use that document to register to vote based on the name on her passport.

It can be done.
http://www.us-passport-service-guide.com/can-i-get-a-passport-if-the-name-on-my-birth-certificate-does-not-match-the-name-on-my-drivers-license-and-social-secrity-card.html

Thanks for the link. That site is very helpful because it lists documents she probably submitted. She needs to defend herself by explaining the process and documents she used. I guess the AG will do that now, which is a waste of government resources.

I would love to know how she got a passport in a name other than her legal name. Once she had that, she was able to use that document to register to vote based on the name on her passport.

It can be done.
http://www.us-passport-service-guide.com/can-i-get-a-passport-if-the-name-on-my-birth-certificate-does-not-match-the-name-on-my-drivers-license-and-social-secrity-card.html

Well, this opens up other questions - How was a drivers licence and SS card obtained in other than legal name, and was a Form DS-60 Affidavit filed with the passport app?

Unfortunately we'll probably never know. Yet if one was to continue to work the angles to prevent Chucky from being on the ballot - these would be good places to start. l won't believe she's truly off the ballot until I walk into the voting booth on November 8th. Chucky has more political lives and a herd of cats! 😎

The woman and everything about her is a fraud.
Given her nature, however, this will drag on as she won't go down without a fight especially given the salary and benefit incentives on the table.

I heard she's going to have some sort of public address to this "glitch"
at Gertrude's Restaurant at 10:30 this morning where her supporters can indulge themselves in another of her screeching tirades.

She may be legal based on this Wikipedia entry.

"Most states in the United States follow the common law which permits name changing for non-fraudulent purposes. This is actually the most common method, since most women who marry do not petition a court under the statutorily prescribed method, but simply use a new name (typically the husband's, a custom which started under the theory of coverture where a woman lost her identity and most rights when she married).[2] Most state courts have held that a legally assumed name (i.e., for a non-fraudulent purpose) is a legal name and usable as their true name, though assumed names are often not considered the person's technically true name.[3]"

She's not going to be on the ballot as it stands.
She failed on her write in bid in the last else.
Hopefully, she'll fail again.

I haven't read all the articles, but why did she even go.about legally changing her name? She would have been easily elected if not for this controversy. I truly hope she ends up on ballot and wins. It will show what a farce elections are

The last thing we need is "whatever her name is" to be back in the Legislature. We've got enough problems.

She may be legal based on this Wikipedia entry.

"Most states in the United States follow the common law which permits name changing for non-fraudulent purposes. This is actually the most common method, since most women who marry do not petition a court under the statutorily prescribed method, but simply use a new name (typically the husband's, a custom which started under the theory of coverture where a woman lost her identity and most rights when she married).[2] Most state courts have held that a legally assumed name (i.e., for a non-fraudulent purpose) is a legal name and usable as their true name, though assumed names are often not considered the person's technically true name.[3]"

Exactly. The passport requirements reflect this.

Regardless of one's personal feelings about the candidate, the point is that the elections board would have been far better advised to seek a legal opinion before emotionally jumping the gun, removing her from the ballot and creating headline news once again - along with the total waste of money which will now be expended by both sides.

It's a matter of law.

I disagree unless you can cite chapter and verse that using a name by which you are known, even if it's not the name on your birth certificate, constitutes fraud.

You can disagree all you like.
Can't cite chapter and verse as you require but why else, at this late stage of the game, would she go to the trouble she's causing to change her name, legally, except to run for a government office, she needs to do so under a legal name.

Remember, the BOE no longer lets anyone run under any nicknames, etc., and as such, Terrence Nelson had his legally changed, to reflect "Positive", way prior to the last election.

It's a matter of law.

Can't cite chapter and verse as you require

Ahem....

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.

And there you are.

 

She's making Chucky her middle name in addition to the other changes. She supposedly has government issue ID in the name of Alicia Hansen, but nothing in the name of Chucky. That's why Positive legally changed his name.

Yes, she should have done it sooner, too, but she didn't.

She should hold a press conference with her attorney and tell the story and show the documents so that people better understand what constitutes a legal name, because based upon the Wiki entry, it's a little more complicated than most people assume.

We all have the potential to learn something new every day.

I understand she held a press conference today. I'm not going to kill any more brain cells looking at it. It is posted on line somewhere.

If she really loves St Croix she will stay away. She is only embarrassing herself. Bet it has been a hard two years not being able to thief from the coffers........you know we will hear this screech owl for months. Just go away!

I understand she held a press conference today. I'm not going to kill any more brain cells looking at it. It is posted on line somewhere.

Thanks! I'll look for it. I don't like her, but that doesn't mean she shouldn't be on the ballot. If they managed to take people we don't like off the ballot, we wouldn't have a democracy.

Arturo Watlington, Chairman of the Joint Board, disagrees with St Croix. Another example of why the VI needs one Board of Elections.