FirstAlerts
Regulators & Courts

Federal grand jury indicts three over alleged Skid Row petition fraud

Prosecutors say a Victorville man and two others paid people on Skid Row to sign ballot initiative petitions using stolen identities; the case is at the charging stage and undecided.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 10, 2026, 7:26 a.m. ETWritten Sep 10, 2026, 7:53 p.m. ET
A federal grand jury has indicted three people over allegations that they paid people on Skid Row to sign ballot initiative petitions using stolen identities to qualify initiatives for California elections, according to NBC Los Angeles. The alleges that James Brass, 47, of Victorville, and Courtney Price, 49, of Jacksonville, Florida, handed out registered voters' stolen identities and paid petition signers to copy the voters' personal information onto ballot initiative petitions, then fraudulently signed the petitions in those voters' names, NBC Los Angeles reported. A third person, Jateisha Herron, 33, of Boron, is also named in the indictment, the outlet reported. The matter is a case brought by indictment in district court, and it remains at the charging stage. The allegations have not been resolved, and no finding has been made.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 110 Sept 2026, 23:53current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.