edited 12-22-2024
update: Theft in office charges per ORC 2921.41 A (1) are desired, where Mike Dewine and Kristine Hayes are concerned, but not likely, because, after further review of the applicable statute, it appears that the charge must be brought while the official is still in office, or brought within two years from the date their service ended. So the time to hold DeWine and Hayes accountable has lapsed. That said, there still should be consquences for DeWine and Hayes, if just in the form of sanctions by the Disciplinary Counsel, or if just in the form of having this story told publicly until the end of time. Simply, DeWine and Hayes knew they didnt have standing to bring Ohio vs Mt Zion, but did it anyway, so as to gain control of the church, as well as other companies that are neither named in the complaint nor based in Athens. Moreover, there were a pleathora of errors, including, but not limited to, the fact that neither defendant as named in the complaint is on the deed , so plaintiff ( the state of Ohio) can not sue named defendants to take title. That is, defendant A wasn't even alive when the deed in question was filed , and defendant B (a corporate entity) didn't even exist. And the Chief Legal Officer and his assistant didnt notice that? Of course they did, but they filed it anyway, which raises serious questions about their fitness to practice law.
#
For the record, ORC 2921.41 A (1), reads in pertinent part as follows:
(A ) No public official or party official shall commit any theft offense, as defined in division (K) of section 2913.01 of the Revised Code, when the following applies:
(1) The offender uses the offender's office in aid of committing the offense , or permits or assents to its use in aid of committing the offense;
(note: Ohio vs Mt Zion may not be THEE messiest situtation the state of Ohio has ever gotten itself into, but it is certainly ONE of the messiest situations it has gotten itself into. And the state and its officials know it).