Editorial illustration
Sometimes the system tells on itself. On Thursday, the Colorado Department of Corrections disciplinary board ruled that former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters — the woman sitting in a state prison cell for the alleged crime of doing her job — acted in self-defense when she was attacked by a fellow inmate in January. Not guilty. Two words that should apply to far more than just a jailhouse altercation, but we’ll take the small victories where we can get them.
For those who need the refresher, Tina Peters is the Colorado county clerk who blew the whistle on what she believed were irregularities in Dominion Voting Systems machines during the 2020 election. She made copies of election data before a trusted build update she feared would erase evidence of tampering. For that act of conscience — for daring to question the machinery of American elections — a Colorado judge sentenced her to nine years in prison. Nine years. In a state where actual violent criminals walk free on plea deals, a 69-year-old grandmother got nearly a decade behind bars for preserving election records she believed the public had a right to see.
The January incident that led to Thursday’s ruling was captured on video and widely circulated. According to Joe Hoft’s reporting, Peters was inside a maintenance closet filling a water unit when a 29-year-old inmate approached and began striking her. Peters was cornered, outnumbered by age and size, and she fought back. The state, in its infinite wisdom, decided to charge the woman who was attacked. Because of course they did. When you’re Tina Peters, even defending yourself from a beating in prison becomes another opportunity for the system to pile on.
“Today, reason and truth prevailed,” Peters said in a statement released through her team. “I was found not guilty. The Department of Corrections fairly considered the evidence and concluded that I defended myself. I’m thankful that the Board carefully considered the evidence and was not swayed by media coverage.” There were unsubstantiated reports that the inmate who attacked Peters was released on parole shortly after the incident — a detail that, if confirmed, would raise serious questions about whether the altercation was as spontaneous as it appeared.
The broader injustice here is one that the MAGA movement has understood from the beginning. Tina Peters is a political prisoner. That is not hyperbole. It is a plain reading of the facts. She sits in La Vista Correctional Facility not because she harmed anyone, not because she stole anything for personal gain, but because she challenged the narrative that 2020 was the most secure election in American history. The Colorado judiciary — the same state apparatus that tried to remove Donald Trump from the ballot — threw the book at a grandmother who believed transparency in elections was worth the risk to her own freedom.
Every American who cares about election integrity should know her name. Every Christian who prays for the persecuted should include her in those prayers. Peters has maintained throughout her ordeal that she acted out of duty to her constituents and her oath of office. She preserved data that she believed was being deliberately destroyed. Whether you agree with her conclusions about Dominion or not, the punishment does not fit the act. Nine years in a state penitentiary is what Colorado gives to a woman who copied a hard drive. Meanwhile, actual threats to public safety — as we saw in Michigan and Virginia on this very same day — walk among us because the system cannot be bothered to keep convicted terrorists locked up.
There is a scripture that speaks to moments like this. Proverbs 31:8-9 commands us: “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.” Tina Peters cannot speak freely from behind bars. Her voice is filtered through statements and legal teams. But her cause speaks for itself — the right of the American people to trust that their elections are conducted with transparency, integrity, and accountability.
Thursday’s not guilty ruling is a small crack of light in what has been a very dark chapter. It proves that even within the system that imprisoned her, the facts can still prevail when the evidence is clear enough. Peters defended herself from an unprovoked attack, and a board that reviewed the footage agreed. Now the question becomes whether the larger injustice — her imprisonment itself — will ever face the same honest scrutiny.
If a county clerk can get nine years for preserving election data while convicted terrorists get early release, what does that tell you about whose rights this system is really designed to protect?
Providence watches over the bold.
About The Author
