Recent allegations of election fraud in Pinal County’s July 2024 primary election have been investigated and found to be without merit. The independent review, conducted by outside counsel Snell & Wilmer LLP, involved a comprehensive examination of the county’s election procedures, equipment, and security measures.
In his closing statement, Brett Johnson from Snell and Wilmer reported that “based on our review, in conjunction with our retained recognized experts, it is our opinion that Supervisor Cavanaugh’s claims and inferences related to the 2024 primary election have absolutely no merit. There was absolutely no manipulation of the 2024 primary election results. There was no evidence of wrongdoing by any County official or other third party.” Johnson continued “The security that the county has put in place and the significant resources dedicated to the election administration security meet Arizona law standards and are equal to or exceed best practices… we express confidence to the citizens of Pinal County that their vote is secure and the results of the 2024 primary election are accurate.”
Claims and Rebuttals
The claims, initially raised by Supervisor Kevin Cavanaugh in his “Report of Obvious Errors in the 2024 Primary Election,” centered around three main issues: abnormal voting distributions, data manipulation, and premature release of vote totals.
The first claim suggested that the distribution between in-person and early voting totals was “abnormal.” However, an independent analysis conducted by statistical expert Dr. Sean Trende found no validity to these concerns. Dr. Trende’s investigation revealed that Supervisor Cavanaugh’s report contained basic mathematical errors and misunderstandings of statistical concepts.
The second allegation involved potential data manipulation. This claim was refuted by a team of election technology experts, including Ryan Macias of RSM Election Solutions and Michael Walker of Pro V&V. Their on-site investigation found no evidence of data manipulation in the county’s election systems.
The third claim concerned the premature release of vote totals. The investigation determined that the county had deactivated the ability to report results well before the election and only reactivated it after polls closed on July 30, 2024, at 7:01:10 PM – one minute and ten seconds after polls closed. The evidence presented to support this claim was found to be unreliable. It is likely based on a misunderstanding of routine voter turnout information shared by political parties during an election. Voter turnout estimates are not vote counts.
In an effort to maintain full transparency, the county has released the documented accusations along with the results of the independent analysis on their website for public analysis here along with a video report.
