Former Mesa County, Colorado county clerk, Tina Peters, 68, was sentenced to nine years in prison on Thursday for her role in a security breach related to unauthorized access to voting machines. Peters, who was convicted on seven counts in August, addressed the court in a lengthy speech that was largely unapologetic and focused on perceived injustices.
Peters and a deputy were accused of tampering with election equipment and official misconduct. They allegedly allowed an unauthorized third party to copy voting machine hard drives before and after a software update in May 2021. It is believed that a co-conspirator ensured security cameras were turned off in the room where the machines were stored.
During her court appearance, Peters expressed her disappointment at the accusations and anger directed at her for her actions. However, 21st District Court Judge Matthew Barrett was unimpressed, describing Peters as one of the most defiant defendants he had ever seen.
Peters was sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison on counts one and four, to be served concurrently. She received an additional three-and-a-half years for count two, to be served consecutively. For count six, she was sentenced to 15 months in prison, also to be served consecutively. On count eight, she was sentenced to 120 days in county jail, to run concurrently to six months in county jail on counts nine and ten and consecutive to the prison sentences.
Judge Barrett explained that the consecutive sentences were due to the direct impact of Peters’ actions on the community and her breach of oath to the electorate in Mesa County. Despite Peters’ request for probation, citing her compliance with pretrial release conditions, the judge remained unmoved.
Peters maintained her belief in alleged improprieties with Dominion voting machines and claimed that fraudulently cast votes had been uncovered since 2020. However, Judge Barrett countered her claims by referencing a hand-counted audit of ballots that confirmed the accuracy of the voting machines used.
The sentencing hearing was marked by several tense exchanges between Peters and Judge Barrett. Despite the judge’s clear frustration, Peters continued to assert her claims, advising the judge to read the reports she had been citing. The judge confirmed he had read all the reports, leading to further heated exchanges before Peters finally backed down and apologized.