A contest committee of the State Democratic Executive Committee heard Albert Turner Jr.’s appeal of his one-vote loss in the Perry County Commission District 1 Democratic primary on June 15 in Montgomery, where the arguments turned largely on whether Turner filed his challenge on time and with the proper official rather than on the vote count itself. The committee did not announce a decision, and its chairman said a ruling would come later.
Donald J. Bennett was certified as the Democratic nominee on June 1, after the county canvassing board’s May 26 count gave him 398 votes to Turner’s 397.
Turner appealed to the state committee after the county party declined to take further action on his recount request and his contest, with Probate Judge Carlton Hogue, who also chairs the Perry County Democratic Executive Committee, citing Turner’s failure to meet the deadline to file.
Under Alabama law, a contest of a county nomination must be filed with the chair of the county executive committee within 24 hours of the canvass, weekends excluded. Hogue has said the canvassing board signed the official results at 1:30 p.m. on May 26, setting the deadline at 1:30 p.m. on May 27. Turner’s written contest was dated May 29.
Turner has argued that a recount request he submitted on May 26 paused the deadline until a recount could be held, and his attorney, Fred Bell, told the committee the missed deadline was a technicality. Hogue has said no such provision exists in state law and that the recount request was directed to the wrong office.
In an account of the hearing that Turner posted afterward, he acknowledged that his contest was filed with the executive committee’s vice chair rather than with Hogue, the chair named in the statute.
Hogue’s attorney, Asherica Heard, told the committee that Turner had submitted a falsified document as part of his appeal, according to accounts of the proceeding.
Two versions of Turner’s May 26 recount letter have circulated publicly. One, printed on Perry County Commission letterhead, addresses Hogue as “Judge of Probate.” A second, with the letterhead removed, addresses him as “Judge of Probate/DEC,” a reference to his role as executive committee chair. The text of the two letters is otherwise identical.
The distinction matters because a contest must be filed with the executive committee chair, not the probate judge, even though Hogue holds both offices. Heard said she first saw the altered version on June 4, when the state party forwarded Turner’s appeal materials to the other parties. Turner did not address the allegation in his own account of the hearing.
Both versions of the recount letter cite Section 17-16-20 of the Alabama Code, which provides for an automatic recount when a candidate loses by no more than one-half of one percent of the vote. By its terms, that provision applies to general elections.
Turner contends the result should be a tie. In his account of the hearing, he said affidavits from the county Democratic Party secretary and the circuit clerk, along with a certified copy, showed the absentee vote was 141 for him to 131 for Bennett, and that one of his absentee votes was not counted in his official total. Correcting that, he has said, would make the race 398 to 398.
The certified totals give Bennett 398 votes to Turner’s 397. Turner also said four voters submitted affidavits describing irregularities in their voting.
Bennett led by eight votes on election night, 395 to 387. After the canvassing board reviewed 24 provisional ballots on May 26, Turner gained 10 votes and Bennett 3, narrowing the margin to one.
Bennett told the committee that the voters of District 1 had spoken and asked it to uphold the certified result.
Bennett was represented at the hearing by attorney Nikita Gilliam Bibb. The contest committee was chaired by Ben Harris, with members Dr. Joe Reed and Dr. Randy Kelly questioning the parties before the hearing adjourned.
The hearing was held at the Alabama Democratic Conference building in Montgomery, and each party was allotted 15 minutes to present its case.
Either party may appeal a county contest decision to the state committee, which state law designates as the final authority in party nomination contests. If the committee determines it cannot decide who the lawful nominee is, it may order a new primary. The committee did not say when it would rule.
Because no Republican qualified for the District 1 seat, the winner of the Democratic nomination will take office after the November general election.
