The Times and Democrat - Rickenbacker will remain on ballot

Jury selection in the federal corruption trial of suspended Orangeburg County Council Chairman John Rickenbacker has been postponed until Nov. 7 – the same date as the general election in which the veteran District 7 Democrat’s name will appear on the ballot unopposed.

Earl Whalen, Orangeburg County’s director of elections and voter registration, said the governor cannot remove or replace Rickenbacker unless he’s convicted.

“You’re innocent until proven guilty,” Whalen said. “In March, he was the only candidate to file, so he’s unopposed. ... So now, in the general election, there’s no opposition.

“Unless there’s a change between now and then, his name will appear on the ballot Nov. 7. Of course, there will be a write-in position on the ballot, just as there is for any candidate, with or without opposition.”

Tentatively scheduled to begin in September, Rickenbacker’s trial in U.S. District Court has been postponed until November at the earliest to allow defense attorneys additional preparation time.

A federal grand jury indicted Rickenbacker in June on charges of bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds and with extortion. The charges stem from allegations that the chairman solicited money and received bribes from an FBI agent posing as a consultant for a health care company interested in buying or leasing The Regional Medical Center.

Rickenbacker, who has been on council since 1985 and has served as chairman for 11 years, pleaded not guilty. Gov. Mark Sanford suspended him from council after the indictment.

T&D Government Writer Tucker Lyon can be reached at tlyon@timesanddemocrat.com or by calling 803-533-5545.

E-mail this page

Print version

Comments:

confisus sum wrote on September 05, 2006 2:54 PM:"Does not Gov. Sanford have the authority to hold this term over so as to give time to adjudicate this case? I tend to agree with "just wondering". It does appear to be a waste of time and money. If elected, he will not be allowed to serve, and if convicted, we will have to have a "special" election to fill this seat. Why not allow him to keep his seat until this is resolved? Clearly, his district will re-elect him, regardless of the indictment. It does seem to be clever strategy on the part of his counsel. Should make a very good impact on the potential jury pool, that his constituents would re-elect even in the face of overwhelming evidence."

Just Wondering wrote on September 05, 2006 4:49 AM:"I was just wondering how ABSURD this is ... What a waste of time and money!"

Comments:

Add Your Own Comments ?