To the editor:

I read your article in The Record (Republican treasurer's theft case set for trial-again, Sept. 12, 2005) on the theft of monies from the Edwardsville Township Republican Committee. It is a strange case.

An "information" was filed on April 6, 2004, alleging that Forrest Borror committed a theft of money in the amount of $35,404 from the Edwardsville Township Republicans.

On April 21, 2004, another information was filed for an additional theft in an amount of $1,491. This second information concerns a money theft from Borror's full-time employer, the Illinois Secretary of State. He was, at the time, manager of the Granite City facility.

Borror is charged with a total theft in two informations of $36,895. He passed this amount through the Republican bank account.

$4,500 belonged to the Republican Township Committee. As a member of that committee, I agree that the amount $4,500 as stolen from us and related to you by Ms. Rosalie Davis is a good figure.

$1,491 can be accounted for in the second information.

This case is especially odd in that there are unknown victims who have lost $30,904.

I suspect that the $30,904 was also from the Secretary of State, but why keep the secret?

How do you file a charge and not know all the victims? Certainly, two police agencies and the state's attorney are sure significant thefts occurred.

The thefts are alleged to have occurred in Edwardsville, yet the Granite City police, who appear to be without jurisdiction, file the Edwardsville theft charges.

The second information appears filed by Secretary of State investigators whose primary expertise is with vehicle theft.

Who did the follow-up to determine the sources of the unaccounted-for $30,904, and who were the victims that lost this money?

Why wasn't a police agency with greater jurisdictional responsibility and experience in financial theft, i.e., the sheriff or the state police, brought in to coordinate this complex case?

What office or sources did Borror have access to that would have $30,904 lying around which would not have been easily missed?

The obvious and probable victim for the $30,904 is his employer, the Secretary of State.

I am told, but have not seen for myself, that much of the $30,904 deposited in Edwardsville were small checks for vehicle-related fees.

Only access to the deposit history, which the state's attorney possesses, can resolve that question.

I hope you keep pressing for these answers. I know more people than I would like to know the result.

Bob Hulme

More News